All are fine cars, and fine track/autocross cars.

An S2000 won A stock at nationals this year, and the CR is probably a better car for autocross (it's been put in A stock for next year) than the regular version. But if modding is what you want, it's hard to get much more out of the engine than stock. It's also an excellent track car, but a bit twitchy if you drive it wrong. However, with a bigger front bar, and driven well, it's a true pleasure. The CR won't be a lot of fun in daily driving, I suspect (said by a guy whose S2000 is his daily driver).

The 350Z is a good autocross car, but the RX-8 dominates B stock. I suspect that the 350Z can be a good track car, but I almost never see them on the track, and I almost always see S2000s out there.

While I think that the Evo is a truly exceptional car, I wouldn't buy a Mitsubishi, simply because of their habit of voiding the warranty of those who actually drive their cars.

 

Note his forum name; apparently it's well-earned.

 

Hmmm AWD pisses me off, alot... ... then again so do automatic transmissions

Downside to evos are:

1) the motor's usually go round 20-30k once you start adding boost but 2.3L stroker kits are only 1800ish? ...

2) transfer case is weak.

3) dont get an MR... the 6spd tranny is housed in the same case as is the 5spds except with thiner gears to fit that extra one in.


But, its AWD =P

BUTTT, 15lbs of boost in an evo garbage ... 15lbs in an s2000 yeahh... thats what i thought haha.

 

Well, I just took my S2000 out after being off the track for over a year (had a 2nd kid, wife asked me to "take it easy" ). I took the year off to add KWV3, comptech bar (set to softest ~62% stiffer than stock), and Comptech Supercharger with Aftercooler, 225/255 tires on lighter rims.

Last time I ran stock was Homestead, and first time since the mods was Homestead (yesterday). I'm still a novice and will be for a while...but the car was awesome on the track. I'd say a big step up from stock, basically very neutral and demands smoothness throughout the entire course. For me, the mods made the car more settled and easier to feel on the edge - when the back started to step unintentionally, very easy to correct with throttle and small steering input. Predictable, stable, and let me be more agressive with turn-in.

Brakes are insanely good - first time running full race pads (cooked the old GT-Sports last outing) - now running Spec VR front and Spec C rear. Instructor - who runs a 911 Carrerra - complimented the cars braking ability (not mine - that I need to work on ) as better than almost anything else out there.

Overall, if you invest a bit into the car, you can create a car that is absolutely "pure pleasure" - and that describes my last two sessions on the track yesterday...but - the car will bite you if not cautious as the backend is loose and you need to get comfortable controlling that and never forget. The grunt of the SC let me come in a bit too hot, rotate and get a bit of push while feathering the throttle without being tempted to mess with the gears. Instructor does this in his 911 much much better but technique is very similar - and when done right can be fast...

So - S2000 is a lot of fun and will demand more from you. If you really want to have fun, after tracking the stocker for a bit add some mods. The SC does change character, but the best mods for quickness were the suspension / tire changes. The SC adds a complicating factor you need to respect on the track. With the SC, mods and a good driver - the S2000 will hang with most cars out there except the racers. As always comes down to the driver - and the S will make you a much better driver ( or you'll pay with a 4x4 excursion )

 

AWD garbage, 300+ Hp garbage?

I have had an EVO VII, M3 (46), and now the S2000. The evo was easily the fastest with minor mods and completely reliable. The M3 was the best touring car bar none (and great fit and finish). The s2000 was the cheapest, slowest, and to me the most fun.

But I could run circles around the S2000 in the Evo in the dry, rain, snow, and at at high speed. Everything but low speed corners. I still miss the raw power of both the M3 and the Evo, but I love how the S2000 has such perfect handling.

 

Then he has to ask himself if he wants to learn how to drive, or if he wants to go half a second quicker per lap.


In all the instructing I've done, the Evo/STi drivers are the worst, most ham-fisted and clumsy ass-clowns out there. They would back into the first wall they came to if they were driving an S2000, or any properly set up RWD car. They get away with this behaviour because their cars are fool-proof to drive. Evo's/STi's understeer horribly, and you have to try very hard to do something really stupid to make it oversteer or spin. There is almost no car control skill needed to make an Evo/STi go fast: just point & shoot. It's literally like playing playstation.

An S2k, on the other hand, requires good car control and a good understanding of the fundamentals of vehicle dynamics & weight transfer in order to go fast.

To the OP: If you want the outright fastest lap times, you should probably stick with an Evo or whatever. But if you want to learn as much as possible about car control, become a much better driver, and have way more fun... get the S2.

 

A car must be difficult to drive at the limit in order to be a good car? That's an odd perspective, even for a fanboi.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion; why does it make you feel better to bash great cars, though?

I happen to prefer a light, tossable two-seat roadster. The S2000 is the closest thing to that out there with a little bit of power, so that's what I bought. But that doesn't make the S2000 an inherently "better" car than an Evo (or a 350Z). Hell, especially in the Pacific Northwest, where it rains an awful lot. Ever autocrossed an S2000 in the rain? Ever autocrossed a good AWD car in the rain?

When picking a car for track and/or autocross (as the OP is doing), one is picking a tool. Different tools can get the same job done, and it's often a matter of personal preference.

 

I partially agree.

I've seen horrible drivers in Evo and STI's with good lap/autox times. But I've also seen good Evo/Sti drivers with great times.

I think driving the S2K to it's full potential is more of a challenge than it is in an Evo. But both are extremely capable cars that are not easily mastered. The only difference is when you #### up in a S2K, you spin, and when you #### up in a Evo, awd saves you.

 

I think the point S2kretard is trying to make is this:


IF you want to learn how to become a great driver the EVO will not teach you. It will do the hardwork for you and it will not punish you for your mistakes.

The S2000 is a car which requires good/great teqnique in order to drive fast. Therefore you will learn more about proper driving dynamics in an S2000 and ulitmately become a better driver at the end of the season.

 

I have no problem with someone asserting that if one masters an S2000, one may have learned more about car control than if one masters an EVO. But a lot of that is that the S2000 is not the most stable car out there, which is not, IMO, an inherently good trait. Again, I don't agree that a car that's harder to drive well is "better" than one which is more stable; one might more logically assert the opposite.

But that's not even what he said. He merely bashed the Evo as a dumb, fast car. Stupid. One might even call him an S2kretard.