11Past9

You're wasting your money. The s2000 is the better car I don't care what anyone says. I have had plenty of seat time in both. It wouldn't be "trading up". If you were looking at a C5 zO6, or an E46 M3 then that would be trading up. But not a Boxster. But the Canadian will beg to differ eh?

JonBoy

Define "better". Objectively (by the numbers), it's not. So, you're left with something subjective to make it "better".

S2Krence

JonBoy, I dunno if your comment was directed at me or 11past9, but either way here are some motor specs (objective) of the Honda motors and their Nissan counterparts of the time. All N/A of course.


B16B (Type R) Civic:
Power: 185 PS (136 kW@ 8200 rpm & 118 ft

Jacques79

LMAO

An E46 M3 cannot be compared to a 2003 Boxster S or an S2000.

The M3 is a heavy GT type car with a great engine and good chassis.

Yes it posts fast lap times but in terms of driving pleasure it doesn't compare to a 986S or an S2000.

I had a Z4M which is 10X more fun than an E46 M3. Now that is comparable even though it has the same S54 engine.

Jacques79

[QUOTE=JonBoy,Sep 18 2009, 07:25 AM] Define "better".

JonBoy

[QUOTE=S2Krence,Sep 18 2009, 12:58 PM] JonBoy, I dunno if your comment was directed at me or 11past9, but either way here are some motor specs (objective) of the Honda motors and their Nissan counterparts of the time. All N/A of course.


B16B (Type R) Civic:
Power: 185 PS (136 kW@ 8200 rpm & 118 ft

JonBoy

Yes to the first part, no to the second. The S2000 is very quick around a track, running with some cars that are quite a bit more powerful, especially if the track is relatively twisty/tight and the power disparity is not so easily noticed. Auto-x is one area the S2000 tends to dominate more powerful cars (in the stock class).

The S2000 has a lot of subjective things that make it fun. It's still a quick car, it handles extremely well, and it's very agile. Those are all objective and subjective.

Problem is, the Boxster handles as well or better and is just as agile overall. It's also a roadster, looks decent (the new ones more than the old ones), is quicker, has better steering, more torque, and is also faster/quicker than an S2000.

Aside from a more "raw" feel and arguably better looks, the S2000 loses to a Boxster S in just about everything except price.

rnye

Of course a VW guy has already done it... I spoke too soon. LOL

weneversleep

I've always had a soft spot for the C4. Got serious about buying one about a year ago, concentrating on the LT1 (92-95, 96 auto only) or an LT4 (96, manual only).

Interestingly for Vettes, most were very high mileage--guess their garage queen days were over. $8-10K seemed to be the sweet spot for a manual with around 100K miles. Add another $1-2K for a decent 96 LT4 manual.

I still troll Craigslist & eBay occasionally for C4s...

--michael

565565

Honestly check this out. Personally I'd spend a couple extra grand and get this over the C4. Similar performance, way way more modern chassis.

http://boston.craigslist.org/gbs/cto/1377349927.html

2003 Infiniti G35 coupe - $9,500








I was just looking at a 6 speed 2004 Sedan with 67k, clean title, no accidents, good condition as a daily beater. Got them down to 10k, but changed my mind (I'm thinking I'm in no rush and they will get cheaper as the weather turns cold and snowy).