Love your cars.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: Scottsdale
Love your cars.
Im a regular over at my350Z.com and am very happy with my Nissan.
That being said I was so close to buying the S2000 simply because...like I tell the guys over there.....probably the funnest car I've ever driven.
It just didn't seem practical to me because of its size. The reason I stopped in is because my g/f is looking for a new car and Im trying to steer her towards an S2000 so that I can steel it whenever I want.
What I need to know is if there is a significant difference in driver feel between 04 and 03 S2000s. I personally loved every 10th of an RPM on the tach and want to know if I will be giving a noticable amount of that up for more TQ. T
The Z is a TQ monster but capped too short at 6600 RPM so Im wondering if the difference between the 03 and 04 is significant.
What are the redline differences?
Is the engine more durable?
What about compression ratio?
Id rather ask here than read some byased review in a mag. Any opinions/facts would be very helpful.
Thanks,
Tom
That being said I was so close to buying the S2000 simply because...like I tell the guys over there.....probably the funnest car I've ever driven.
It just didn't seem practical to me because of its size. The reason I stopped in is because my g/f is looking for a new car and Im trying to steer her towards an S2000 so that I can steel it whenever I want.
What I need to know is if there is a significant difference in driver feel between 04 and 03 S2000s. I personally loved every 10th of an RPM on the tach and want to know if I will be giving a noticable amount of that up for more TQ. T
The Z is a TQ monster but capped too short at 6600 RPM so Im wondering if the difference between the 03 and 04 is significant.
What are the redline differences?
Is the engine more durable?
What about compression ratio?
Id rather ask here than read some byased review in a mag. Any opinions/facts would be very helpful.
Thanks,
Tom
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 12,843
Likes: 1
From: Toronto & FnF ssauga
a widely discussed topic on our board..
pre 04- 9k rpm, less low end torque
04' - more low end torque, easier daily driveability, tach reads 8k rpm..
engine durability ? - too soon too tell ? IMO bulletproof
regardless
compression ratio - have to talk to the techeez on that one..
pre 04- 9k rpm, less low end torque
04' - more low end torque, easier daily driveability, tach reads 8k rpm..
engine durability ? - too soon too tell ? IMO bulletproof
regardless
compression ratio - have to talk to the techeez on that one..
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
From: SF Bay Area
I've driven both, own a '04, and couldn't point to either engine and confidently say that it's the one to have.
My '04 definitely feels like it has more power all the way from 3k to redline. As a powerplant it's much more fun for 90% of the driving that I actually do. I love it.
But, 6k to 8k comes far too quickly. With the '02s I've driven there's a greater rush, more breathing room, less shifting (to get to where you want to be), more room to recover from shifting mistakes, all pretty much due to the 9k redline. That's definitely a downside to the '04.
Overall I prefer the '04 because my S is a daily driver and the '04 does run quieter and feel more powerful for what I use it for the most: accelerating between 3k and 5k rpm. If this were a weekend canyon carver or race track car, however, I think I'd prefer the 2.0L. Sacriligious as it sounds, I don't spend enough time over 7000rpm to feel that strongly about the powerplant. To me the chassis and braking are far more impressive than the engine. Therefore I'm OK if Honda wants to "soften" the engine a bit... as long as they don't soften the chassis and braking, I'll be content.
My '04 definitely feels like it has more power all the way from 3k to redline. As a powerplant it's much more fun for 90% of the driving that I actually do. I love it.
But, 6k to 8k comes far too quickly. With the '02s I've driven there's a greater rush, more breathing room, less shifting (to get to where you want to be), more room to recover from shifting mistakes, all pretty much due to the 9k redline. That's definitely a downside to the '04.
Overall I prefer the '04 because my S is a daily driver and the '04 does run quieter and feel more powerful for what I use it for the most: accelerating between 3k and 5k rpm. If this were a weekend canyon carver or race track car, however, I think I'd prefer the 2.0L. Sacriligious as it sounds, I don't spend enough time over 7000rpm to feel that strongly about the powerplant. To me the chassis and braking are far more impressive than the engine. Therefore I'm OK if Honda wants to "soften" the engine a bit... as long as they don't soften the chassis and braking, I'll be content.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,115
Likes: 0
From: Devil's Island
It's always nice to see someone that can respect the S. I love the Z and think it looks sweet.....I would love to check it out SC'd too!!! However I bought the S because it kept me grinning ear to ear when I got back
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,951
Likes: 0
From: was CT, now NJ
the Z is nice, but the S is just 
I park next to a new Z at work, a co-workers. It just looks so much better than the Z. Then the fact that we have a power convertible top
and the Z convertible is Fugly ! 
I park next to a new Z at work, a co-workers. It just looks so much better than the Z. Then the fact that we have a power convertible top
and the Z convertible is Fugly !
