The regret will come a few years from now when your s2k is worth half of what you paid. While the older NSX that you passed on has only dropped 5-10 percent in value, or maybe not changed at all. In my opinion the S2K will depreciate at a much higher rate than an NSX.
It's been fun...
- Thread starter WannabeNSXr
- Start date
The regret will come a few years from now when your s2k is worth half of what you paid. While the older NSX that you passed on has only dropped 5-10 percent in value, or maybe not changed at all. In my opinion the S2K will depreciate at a much higher rate than an NSX.
The regret will come a few years from now when your s2k is worth half of what you paid. While the older NSX that you passed on has only dropped 5-10 percent in value, or maybe not changed at all. In my opinion the S2K will depreciate at a much higher rate than an NSX.
----------------------
I totally agree with that, with exception of the "regret" part.
Another reason I chose the S over the NSX is that it has to be my daily driver. There are few cars that I do not think I would put through Toronto winters (which are not that bad actually), but the NSX is one of them. The only other would be a Ferrari, any Ferrari. All Porsches, M3s, whatever else, Id drive. Not an NSX. I see new 911 Turbo's everyday, M3s, new Maseratis, and the like, but not a single NSX. Although the age thing was probably the biggest factor in my choice, honestly, I believe that I would have "regretted" buying the NSX as the thought of a crap covered NSX parked in an outside lot at work would have precluded me owning it. Ive also got a new Volvo, but who wants to drive that daily? Not me.
When I was speaking about "not in the same league", I was approaching the topic from a performance perspective only. I totally agree that NSX's are dreamcars (no matter which year), and that S2000s are not. BUT IMO, the performance of early year NSXs and current S2000s ARE in the same league. Thats all I meant.
----------------------
I totally agree with that, with exception of the "regret" part.
Another reason I chose the S over the NSX is that it has to be my daily driver. There are few cars that I do not think I would put through Toronto winters (which are not that bad actually), but the NSX is one of them. The only other would be a Ferrari, any Ferrari. All Porsches, M3s, whatever else, Id drive. Not an NSX. I see new 911 Turbo's everyday, M3s, new Maseratis, and the like, but not a single NSX. Although the age thing was probably the biggest factor in my choice, honestly, I believe that I would have "regretted" buying the NSX as the thought of a crap covered NSX parked in an outside lot at work would have precluded me owning it. Ive also got a new Volvo, but who wants to drive that daily? Not me.
When I was speaking about "not in the same league", I was approaching the topic from a performance perspective only. I totally agree that NSX's are dreamcars (no matter which year), and that S2000s are not. BUT IMO, the performance of early year NSXs and current S2000s ARE in the same league. Thats all I meant.
- Joined
- 18 October 2002
- Messages
- 172
I apologize for the subtle dig at the S2000, but my point was more about using the displacement of the engines as a clue to the origins of each car...... The 2.0 liter S2k is very close in build and spec to the 2.0 liter Civic type R motor. While the 3.0 & 3.2 is quite a bit bigger than the 2.0, although power isn't representative of the size difference, torque figures are! SO comparing displacement, TORQUE, HP's, AND engine DNA (haa haa), puts the S2000 very close to a Civic Type R....It's one step down the model chart from the Nsx to S2k, but my point is that it is a substantial step in price (new), layout (mid engine), and displacement/torque.
I love the S2000 and have always considered owning one, but I am going to wait for the coupe version, or pick up a G35....if only Nissan had the details straightened out like Honda. They have great engineers & some hit or miss styling (and use that V6 in darn near every car) but I don't like the fit and finish of my wife's Maxima.
I agree with you SPA_S2000. Both the s2000 and nsx are hondas, and follow company philosophy of smaller displacements, and no forced induction. I don't think we will see a V8 anytime soon. As a stock holder, I think an 8 cyl. would help RL and NSX sales, and would love to drive a V8 NSX.
If we care, let us talk about it. If you don't care don't respond.
nsxtacy, we all agree with you that Civic Type R's, S2k's, and NSX's are all great cars, and all three have their own identities. But it's still fun to talk about and compare (to some people).
I think the Civic comparisons to the S2000 have been fostered by many reviews in many magazines. The comparison only exists because of the engine performance. Nothing else can be compared.
It's a pretty much universal criticism that the S2000 suffers from low torque and a peaky engine. While track and all out performance is to be commended the every-day around town driving of the S2000 is...well...it's like a Civic. OK, maybe a Civic Si, but it's certainly no NSX or even close to a 350Z.
I personally think that Honda should retune or modify the S2000 to make it a better balanced car. Increasing the displacement by adding more stroke to the engine would do wonders. They might even be able to keep the peak HP rating that way. Otherwise, some ECU and VTEC mods might do the trick. Drop the 9K redline to 8K if they must.
There's a reason why certain cars with less peak power than the S2000 are able to be amazingly fun to drive.
-Jim
It's a pretty much universal criticism that the S2000 suffers from low torque and a peaky engine. While track and all out performance is to be commended the every-day around town driving of the S2000 is...well...it's like a Civic. OK, maybe a Civic Si, but it's certainly no NSX or even close to a 350Z.
I personally think that Honda should retune or modify the S2000 to make it a better balanced car. Increasing the displacement by adding more stroke to the engine would do wonders. They might even be able to keep the peak HP rating that way. Otherwise, some ECU and VTEC mods might do the trick. Drop the 9K redline to 8K if they must.
There's a reason why certain cars with less peak power than the S2000 are able to be amazingly fun to drive.
-Jim
SPA_S2000,
I wouldnt completely knock off a pre 97 NSX.
I have a 93 NSX with bolt-ons. I tell ya, "Im confident I can give a post 97 NSX a run for their money".
just food for the thought
I wouldnt completely knock off a pre 97 NSX.
I have a 93 NSX with bolt-ons. I tell ya, "Im confident I can give a post 97 NSX a run for their money".
just food for the thought
- Joined
- 10 January 2003
- Messages
- 7
That made coffee come out my nose.
Ow.
Originally posted by spartan2-3:
SPA_S2000,
I wouldnt completely knock off a pre 97 NSX.
I have a 93 NSX with bolt-ons. I tell ya, "Im confident I can give a post 97 NSX a run for their money".
just food for the thought
Spartan, [somewhat OFF TOPIC] have you ever been in a 333SP?
kgb_agent
I sat in one but never rode in one
I'd give my left $%* to ride in one
Originally posted by spartan2-3:
kgb_agent
I sat in one but never rode in one
I'd give my left $%* to ride in one
I hear ya. I missed a few laps in one by 10 minutes last year at a F-car track event. I was pouting for weeks! You cannot beat that sound!
