For those who thought C&D's comparison test between a S2K (with a hardtop), the 350Z, Mustang, etc. was mindless. . . Leave it to Motor Trend to add new meaning to mindless.

Whereas I don't mind when car mags write about different types of cars within the same general segment of the market, I do have a problem when these same mags attempt to make comparison tests with vehicles that aren't really similar.

In its March '04 issue, MT compares a 2004 S2K, 350Z and Mazda RX-8. In the article, MT declares the RX-8 the winner not because it out performs its competition, but because it is "competitive in every performance test. . .the least expensive, most-accommodating. . .[with] room for four adults."

MT lists "noise intrusion from wind, road and engine", and the fact that the S2000 "seems a bit pricey for a weekend two-seater" in its "What's Not" [to like] about the S2K in the summary.

Last time I checked, the S2000 is a convertible. . . Other than a SLK, SL500/600 or SC 430 (with their tops up) name a convertible that doesn't have noise from the wind and the road. . .

And MT should probably look at the price of the Boxster, SLK, Z4, TT, etc. to get better perspective on what "pricey two-seater" really means. . .

 

I Totally agree
thats pretty senseless that they place the S2K in comparison with those hardtop vehicles and then complain about the wind noise etc. DUH, thats expected with a convertible, and thats what they make the radio for
I belive it was Car n Driver who did the best comparison when they tested some 5-6 two-seater convertibles, all of which were priced much higher than the S2K and the S2K was thier pick for best "bang-for the buck" That makes me feel that much better about having bought this car. I have less respect for Motor-Trend now

 

That's why when I read most articles from these magazines I take them with a grain of salt.

Who are they to tell you which is a better car, lol. If you love it, screw em!

 

Yea... the S2000 lost because it didn't have a back seat and it was a convertible.

The last time I checked... that's EXACTLY why I bought the damn car.

They should put the RX-8 against the G35 Coupe, BMW 325ci, and Honda Accord V6 Coupe 6SMT and then lets see who comes out on top then.

 

I wonder what the guys over at the RX8 forums are saying about this.....

oh wait, there aren't any because NO ONE WILL BUY THIS CAR!! Anyone else noticed the 10-15 RX8's sitting on every Mazda lot?

They should have added in the RX8's "What's Not":

"Poor sales will contribute to product extinction, thus eliminating aftermarket and 3rd party maintenence support"

 

I read another comparison a while back where the woman did the same thing. Said the S2000 was a lot of fun but just wasn't a good all aroung family car. HELLO!!! Dumb @$$

 

I, personally, do not see a problem comparing the cars. They are all sports (sporty) cars in the same approximate price range. I think they also could've included the EVO and STI. When shopping for a car, I look at how much $ I am willing spend and what is the best drive that I can buy for the $ (of course, a lot of people need to consider the practicality of a vehicle). That being said, I think their criticisms of the S are unfair. Of course a convertible will be louder. We don't need a magazine to tell us that. Similarly, I think it would be unfair to criticize the EVO and STI for being ugly were they to be included in the comparo. We also don't need a magazine to tell us that (and, beauty is in the eye of the beholder after all). Also, depending upon point of view, the 350Z and RX-8 could have just as easily been criticized for having hard-tops. In the end, I think that when comparing sports cars, the magazine should just pick the most satisfying drive as the winner. We can reach our own conclusions on their respective trade-offs.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PMantis24

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ash

 

Very true Ash
and thats what ive begun to do