There is a difference between a basic interior and a crappy interior. S2000 interior does not have any bells or whistles, but it is very ergonomic, well-designed, and has decent materials and built quality. I am 6'1'' and I feel more comfortable sitting in S2000 than a full-size Accord. The C6 I drove had "heads up display", which is a rather fancy equipment. But the door panel had a 1cm play in it (I experienced the same issue in another C6), and shook like it was gonna fall off each time I shut the door. Poor quality plastics, bad design and poor built quality makes a crappy interior, not matter how fancy gadgets it has.

 

S2000 is built by a company who owns F1 technology. They could've easily produced a much nicer car at a much higher price point. They did not opt for aluminum construction. But they decided to give S2000 a screaming engine with higher power per displacement than anything else (until the 2010 Ferrari). They did decide what the S2000 should have or not.

On the other hand, C6 seems like it is produced by a company with whatever they can put together. Don't get me wrong, it is a decent car. They had access to a small block V8, and it worked pretty well, and they went with it. Does it work well in the C6? Yes. Is it the best option for a sports car? No. If Chevy had the technology to build a modern (think double overhead cams), reliable, high revving engine, would they still go with the LS? Of course not. Corvette looks like a good honest try in reaching to build a high performance sports car.

Honda did not have to reach for anything. They had it. They just had to make the right decisions to create an affordable yet competitive sports car, and they did. F20 is a showcase of high technology, not a recycled engine from decades ago. 0-60 times can be had cheap. Refinement, know-how, and technology cannot.

That's why I consider C6 not an upgrade, not at the same level, but a clear downgrade from the S2000.

 

Really? You think chevy couldn't throw some money at people to build that engine? Why bother though. The LS series has gobs of power, and still gets great gas mileage. BTW, the LS7 is governed to 7k rpm, the motor itself has turned 8k repeatedly. No big deal though, that's not what the f22c does or anything.

 

I didn't say the C6 interior was great, but the S2000's isn't anything to write home about either. Obviously I like it, I own one. The S2K is indeed very well built and generally uses quality materials. It is, after all, a partially hand built car. The C6 interior is pretty bad for a car that crests $100k, but it looks like a Bentley compared to the C5. The Z06 may have a hand built engine, but the assembly of the car is very much robotized.

That's just fanboyism, the same as a Vette owners who say S2000's are gutless pieces of crap because they only have a 4 banger. Why don't we try to be better than them? The OHV/OHC cam argument sounds like something off of Honda-Tech circa 1995. Don't dismiss it out of hand just because it's domestic, it's not the 70's and the LS series small block has nothing in common with other small block motors besides the basic architecture. The LS7 has a 7200 RPM redline and plenty of advanced engineering and technology that the S2000 doesn't have. Titanium conrods, dry sump lubrication, titanium intake valves, sodium filled intake valves etc etc are things that very few cars have today. The F20C is not the pinnacle of mankind's engineering talents, please don't kid yourself. It's not a stretch to say that even the K20 is a more advanced engine, although I prefer the rawness and peakiness of the F20C. The performance of the car is astounding (think 747 taxiing for lift off at full throttle), the motor is fantastic, the grip is huge, but it just doesn't put a smile on my face when it's not accelerating or cornering. The S2K puts a smile on my face in 6th gear at 40MPH. Driving the Z06 is much closer to my Accord than my S2000.

The S2000 is a fantastic automobile and I would rather have it in my garage than a C6 Z06 because I find the S2K to be a much more involving and raw machine. But if I was on the starting line of any race track, I'd want the Z06. It's a legitimate performance car that can hang with a new 911 Turbo around a track.

And to say that Honda has better technology than GM is flat out wrong. I work for a Tier 1 supplier that supplies internal engine components to every OEM and Honda has fallen dramatically behind the curve in engine technology and has refused to lead the industry in anything besides safety, packaging and cost cutting for the past decade. They have no DI because they bet against it and now they're scrambling to go HCCI, their turbo development for the K23 was an unmitigated disaster, they can't get their 4cyl diesel EPA approved without tertiary treatment (i.e. urea) and their valvetrain technology hasn't changed much since 1990. You would have had an arguable point 10 years ago, but it's not 10 years ago.

 

Would I rather have a 600hp s2000 or a stock z06? The 600hp S2000 of course, if it actually ran reliably, which.. well I wonder how reliably it'd run with a turbo though. Even on the FI forums, people say that if you want it to be reliable you're much better off staying NA or supercharging than turboing.

What I'm curious is why people would pick the Z06 over a Porsche though. I can totally understand the appeal of the Z06, after all it handles well, has lots of power, performance can't be beat for the price, looks good although it's in need of a refresh in my opinion, and sounds fantastic. But, I bought the S2000 because it was fun to drive, not because it was fast, and I'd like to think that other people did the same. Or at least, they bought it because it was a lot more exciting and special. After all, for the price of an S2000 you can probably get a 350/370z, an Evo, or an STI. There are many other options I'm sure, but those are just the ones I came up with off the top of my head, and those options are all probably faster than an S2000. Well, actually maybe the 350z isn't, but it's also a lot more responsive to mods I'm sure.

So, I would assume that people bought the S2000 because it was just more fun to drive and more special. If that's the case, why not get a used 911 or cayman instead of a C6? I mean it's going to be slower for sure, but it's going to be better to drive I assume. I mean Porsche is known for their amazing driving feel, and the Cayman has incredible handling. I haven't driven either, too poor sadly, but every review of these cars seems to point to the fact that the C6 is super good value for money in terms of performance, and Porsches not so much, but Porsches are all probably the best cars to drive in their class. I would think then, that people who buy the S2000 would seem to fit the Porsche philosophy more then no? I think I probably would rather get the Porsche if given the chance, although I'm sure I'd love a C6 as well. If/When I get the money, I will probably have to test drive them to see for myself! Going to be a long while but I can dream

 

I'd rather have a C6 than a Cayman/911 simply because I can obtain parts and perform maintenance on a C6 far more easily than I can on either of the other two cars.

 

Plus if you want to use this broken logic I could always say "take an S2000 + $25k in mods vs. a C6 + $15k in mods...the C6 would win." It depends on what number you're able to afford. Corvettes respond better to mods than S2000s.
[/quote]


this is the dumbest argument anyone can make... why spend 300+ on a ferrari when you can spend 3g on a honda civic shell and dump 20g into it and make it faster than a ferrari... its the same thing everyone bitches about all the time... vettes are nice and my buddy has a 08 z06 with minor mods and it sounds beastly.... would i take one over the s2000?? HELL YES any day of the week i would haha.... but i don't have the cash to dish out... i forget how much he paid for his z06 but i know it was over 50+ and for that amount of money i'd go out and buy a used db9 aston martin lol... the older generation vettes like the c5 were i dunno not trash but a old mans car? i dunno... the newer vettes have come a long way since then and you can watch top gear and they wil tell you the same thing... i forget what jeremy says, but he says something like its not american shit anymore, but an actual track car or w/e

 

because most people dont want to drive a piece of shit...

You can take a POS and make it fast...but you're still driving a fast POS. The new Corvette, by most general standards is NOT a POS...everyone keeps judging it on past history and reputation. I say go drive one and then form your opinions [thus, quit talking out-yo-ass ]

 

because you dont have an ap2.

 

I am in disbelief of 90% of the sk2i owners, all of you drive the S yet you talk shit about it and suckle on vettes gonads. Sounds like you bought the wrong car for the wrong purpose then, if you want a vette so damn bad why not just go trade your s in for an older vette?

Another major point missed by all of you s2k bashing vette lovers; let me see s2k was introduced in 1999, means it was on paper much earlier then that... c6 vette was closer to 05-06.

I am done here, going to go drive the car that I bought because I enjoy driving it and not talking shit about it.