If the S2000 never existed
08-18-2011, 11:32 AM
#91
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Hartselle, AL
Posts: 2,162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never come into car talk but if it's always a battle like this I will be back! I think if I didn't own a S I would have bought a MK IV supra. I've owned my S for five years and got it with a warranty; the only reason I didn't get one back then. I still kick myself.
08-23-2011, 03:42 AM
#95
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 711
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RC 94' timestamp='1313533812' post='20884418
[quote name='WolfpackS2k' timestamp='1313515831' post='20883278']
To me the comparison between the S2000 and 350Z has always been obvious. When they first came out they had almost identical price tags and performance numbers. How is that not obvious to most people?
However I never considered one due to the weight, styling and build quality.
To me the comparison between the S2000 and 350Z has always been obvious. When they first came out they had almost identical price tags and performance numbers. How is that not obvious to most people?
However I never considered one due to the weight, styling and build quality.
[/quote]
I'd consider most of the people on this site at least an enthusiast of some sort to take a look at that stuff. I guess that's why I thought it was odd that so many people on this site almost got one/had one.
08-31-2011, 10:24 AM
#96
I really just wanted a reliable convertible, but I also wanted something less common that would stand out if I could afford it. The S was the perfect choice. If there were no S's, I'd probably have a Z4 or a TT convertible. 350Zs, Miatas, Vettes, and Stangs were too commonplace for my personal taste
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
WRS2K
Pacific Northwest S2000 Owners
40
11-10-2005 09:19 PM