You misunderstand me. The Boxster would also shift at 2/3 of redline (probably about 4500 rpm), and therefore also be denied the use of its power band. I believe that in this kind of "old farts' quarter" the S2000's lower gearing would compensate for its lower torque at the flywheel, and it would be no worse than equal. And if you raced a Prelude this way, you'd win handily.

 

I can understand how someone who's used to the WRX could feel that it is faster. I have both cars and the first time I rode in the S2000 I felt that it didn't have the urge - that push in the back - of the Subaru. Over time I've come to realise that even with the VTEC transition the S2000 delivers its power in a very linear fashion and that is deceiving. You don't really feel it take off like a WRX does when the boost comes on. The WRX also accelerates hardest in the midrange around 4000rpm which is a completely different feeling. The S2000 definitely has a stronger top end, but never gives the feeling of sheer thrust that you can get from the Subaru.

 

Hi Tox, no I don't think Sev missunderstood. Z3 3.0 has up to 50% more power than the S2000 at anything bellow 6k revs. Even taking the S2000's lower gearing into account, that is not substitute for all that torque at lower revs. Same goes for WRX - all it's power is delivered between 3 - 5k rev range (mid range) so at 1/2 the rev range the WRX has got good 50% more power of the S2000 at 1/2 rev range.

Though, Boxtser2.7 you'll more or less keep honest and Boxster2.5 you should take (by a small margin).

 

having just taken my 3rd test drive in a wrx yesterday (friend just bought one), it's a damn nice feeling to have that much torque coming at such low rpms. and even though it handles great, it's not quite the same as when you're rippin around in the s2k, winding out the engine. i wish i could have both, but for now i'll have to live vicariously through my friend

the first scooby dealership we went to even went as far to start listing the pros and cons (well, it was more like all pro's for the wrx) between the wrx & s2k as part of his sales pitch. not a very smart thing to do since they cater to 2 different markets. needless to say, my friend didn't give him a 2nd chance to score those commission dollars from him...

 

Humanatek,

Love that exchange with Porsche salesman!

 

Waiting for the '02 S 2000 has turned out to be a dangerous thing for me--especially after the recent article in SCC about the modded WRXs pulling ~13s in the 1/4. I actually found myself at the dealer (scooby) standing in front of a few WRXs--one black, one blue and one silver--trying to convince myself which color disguises its looks the most. On the contrary, it took several trips to different dealers to find the color of the S that brought out the shape of the Honda the most.

Don't get me wrong--looks aren't a sufficient criteria, but they are a necessary one for me. I commend the guys who are die-hard enough about performance to own a WRX at the expense of getting dates.

 

Humanatek, please call that guy's manager and explain to him why you won't be buying a car from them. Then tell him to be sure to let the salesman know that the offer for Calaveras Canyon still stands, to bring his Boxster if it's such a definite ace over the S2000. Provide your name and telephone number to be handed to the salesperson...

When he calls you, tell him to kiss my ass too!

 

Too bad you don't have an SC. An SC'd S2k has more power, less weight and better handling than that 911! Should kill it in the straight too.

Gotta drive it like you stole it, eh? ... too bad you gotta steal the 911 to drive it!!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nobody
[B]
Don't get me wrong--looks aren't a sufficient criteria, but they are a necessary one for me.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nobody
[B]Don't get me wrong--looks aren't a sufficient criteria, but they are a necessary one for me.