...the Boxter S and M Roadster, when both cars are almost $20K more expensive?

wouldnt it make more sense to compare the S2000 to the Boxter, and Z3 2.5i, wich are still more expensive, but a little closer to the S2000's price.

 

it in my opinion is better to compare cars on a performace level vs a price level.

the point is that now you don't have to spend 50K just to do the quarter mile in 14.7 seconds anymore.

The S is in that wierd "no man's land" of being an all round better vehicle in stock form compared to anything below and equal to nearly everything above within reason.

 

In my experience, sports car enthusiasts don't buy a car by setting a price point of X dollars, then go looking for a car they like in that range. Rather, they find a car they like then see if they can afford it. Hence, two sports cars with similar performance yet different prices (S2000/Boxster S, NSX/C5, 911TT/Viper) will always get compared.

Price isn't important - speed is.

 

JoeD,

You raise an important and significant point. While comparisons on an absolute scale will always be made: hence the comparison to Boxster S, M Coupe and so forth. But another important comparison has to be VALUE. That is, which car represents a better value - which delivers that combination of things a driving enthusiast is looking for: speed, handling, performance, styling, driving fun and so forth at the best price.

Many drivers agree that the S2000 delivers on both kinds of comparisons. On an absolute scale the S2000 is a very respectable sports car which can hold its own against many sports cars irrespective of price. When looked at from the VALUE point of view, "bang for the buck" so to speak, the S2000 is far and away the best value in the market.

While there are many drivers who will buy what they think is the best sports car irrespective of price, it is not true that there are no drivers who consider value. Honda as made it possible for those of us who want to drive a first rate sports car but cannot spend $50l to $100k to get one.

This is the real achievement of Honda. They produced a first rate, truly competitive car at a remarkable price. As a driver's car, most would agree that nothing comes close under $40k or $50k.

Enjoy!

 

Why not? They are roadsters.

 

When ytou get VALUE into the equation then why stop as S2000? Isn't MX5 (Miata) or MR2-S a better "value" car? I'm sure there are cars that are 1/2 of S2000's price that can be argued a better 'value'.

In terms of 'value' the S2000 is better than a 911 Turbo, Lamborghini, Viper or any Ferrari .... what does it really prove? As I still would rather the Ferrari despite it's "poor value".

What you (or I do) is look for the car that suits my needs best and I can afford.

 

In the case of the kind of cars we're talking about some of the evaluation criteria will be subjective to signficant extent. So performance, handling, speed, styling etc will be in the eye of the beholder. I'm sure that there are those who will argue that the Miata is a better value . . . . clearly it is to some, look at how many they sell. One care argue, however, that the Miata, while a fun roadster to drive is not a track based performance roadster in the same league as the S2000. That doesn't make it, the Miata, a poor value, just a different kind of car.

I'm sure there are those who will argue that a 911 Turbo, Lamborghini, Viper or Ferrai are better VALUE than the S2000, but I would guess that many more will argue that in favor of the S2000.

Your last sentence tells all:

"What you (or I do) is look for the car that suits my needs [or wants] best and I can AFFORD." That's the whole point. What is the package you get for the dollar you spent.

 

I sometimes wonder that too. Human nature I guess. Makes you feel good if you believe you got the best deal for your hard-earned bucks.

 

Yes it would, but everyone knows which car is clearly faster between the S2000, Boxster, and Z3 (3.0). The Boxster S and M roadster/coupe are more identical in terms of speed.