370 Z
03-28-2009 | 08:42 AM
#61
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 48,203
Likes: 10
From: Lewisville, TX
Originally Posted by Eastwind2005,Mar 28 2009, 02:05 AM
Lets face it, the new 370z pwns the s2000 in every performence catagory.
S2k is a 10 years old design car now, it needs some serious mod or it cannot keep up with the 370.
S2k is a 10 years old design car now, it needs some serious mod or it cannot keep up with the 370.
You must be a freeway jockey!Take a new 370 and a new S2000 and head over to the Shenandoah Circuit at Summit Point. I'll wait for your report.
03-28-2009 | 08:22 PM
#63
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Fairfax County, Virginia
Originally Posted by FF2Skip,Mar 28 2009, 08:42 AM
You must be a freeway jockey!Take a new 370 and a new S2000 and head over to the Shenandoah Circuit at Summit Point. I'll wait for your report.
I was more interested in touge when I was in my early 20s. FYI, I came from the Suby family 
Recently I drove the G37 coupe, and I have to say those VQ37s are quite impressive in terms of power and smoothness. I know u guys probably gonna hate me saying this, but there are times I wish s2k got a engine like Sti's EJ257 or Evo's 4g63.
370 is well armed right out of the box. The responsive 332hp engine, massive 19x10 rear tire, and 14" brake....I say this car deserve to beat s2k in track (its a 10 years newer design). I wont be surprised if Best Motoring's test said that the 370 owns s2k in Tsukuba.
The S2k got its own taste. I think it will be a classic like the NSX or DC2 ITR. Whenever I saw those cars make me smile and remind me the good old times. I think my s2k will do the same to others 10 years from now
03-29-2009 | 05:52 AM
#64
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 48,203
Likes: 10
From: Lewisville, TX
Like I said, take the two to Shenandoah, not Japan. And everyone here already knows, I'm not an Asian import fan... at all. What I like/don't like has no bearing on my comment though. Hell, a prepped Miata(still NA) beats a lot of cars on the track mentioned.
Even comparing a 370 to an S2000 seems a little ridiculous to me. I know in the past that magazines have done so, but comparing a 'vert to a coupe? That's a testament to the excellent job Honda did with the S2000.
Do I think the S2000 is "sexy?" No, I don't- not in stock form. There are a few parts that can be added that do enhance its appearance, but more often than not, folks end up making their Honda looking worse, not better. The 350, and now the 370, are definitely "sexier" out of the box if you're looking at just appearances. The 350 convertible is butt-ugly. It should never be allowed to be seen with the softtop up.
The S2000 does not suffer from the same hideousness when the top is up. Overall, I'd definitely say the sweeping lines on the 350 coupe are masculine, yet give the impression of some refinement. Build quality can still be questioned though. FTR, I would have owned a first-year 350Z had my local dealership not had a 3-month wait.
I didn't purchase the S2000 because of its power or looks. There are other cars that exceed the Honda in both categories, but for the price new(paid MSRP and was happy), you could not find a car that handled better than the S, let alone a convertible(our original criteria). By the time I went from the showroom floor to the onramp of I-495, I knew this was the car I had to have. A month and a half later I sold my bike- didn't need it for my adrenaline fix.
As for the big-powered, econo-box-styled sedans, they can be truly impressive on the track, but they're still ugly not matter how you slice it and their handling, while confidence-inspiring, does not mirror anything close to the razor-sharp, precision maneuvering that the S2000 provides effortlessly. We will not address the American's drivers' driving inabilities that lead some to think otherwise of the Honda's handling.
End game, I like the new model Z. Said so in the initial post in this thread. But I can't help but laugh at folks and car companies continuously comparing the S to their newest machines.
Even comparing a 370 to an S2000 seems a little ridiculous to me. I know in the past that magazines have done so, but comparing a 'vert to a coupe? That's a testament to the excellent job Honda did with the S2000.
Do I think the S2000 is "sexy?" No, I don't- not in stock form. There are a few parts that can be added that do enhance its appearance, but more often than not, folks end up making their Honda looking worse, not better. The 350, and now the 370, are definitely "sexier" out of the box if you're looking at just appearances. The 350 convertible is butt-ugly. It should never be allowed to be seen with the softtop up.
The S2000 does not suffer from the same hideousness when the top is up. Overall, I'd definitely say the sweeping lines on the 350 coupe are masculine, yet give the impression of some refinement. Build quality can still be questioned though. FTR, I would have owned a first-year 350Z had my local dealership not had a 3-month wait.I didn't purchase the S2000 because of its power or looks. There are other cars that exceed the Honda in both categories, but for the price new(paid MSRP and was happy), you could not find a car that handled better than the S, let alone a convertible(our original criteria). By the time I went from the showroom floor to the onramp of I-495, I knew this was the car I had to have. A month and a half later I sold my bike- didn't need it for my adrenaline fix.
As for the big-powered, econo-box-styled sedans, they can be truly impressive on the track, but they're still ugly not matter how you slice it and their handling, while confidence-inspiring, does not mirror anything close to the razor-sharp, precision maneuvering that the S2000 provides effortlessly. We will not address the American's drivers' driving inabilities that lead some to think otherwise of the Honda's handling.
End game, I like the new model Z. Said so in the initial post in this thread. But I can't help but laugh at folks and car companies continuously comparing the S to their newest machines.
03-29-2009 | 11:50 AM
#65
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Fairfax County, Virginia
Originally Posted by FF2Skip,Mar 29 2009, 05:52 AM
Like I said, take the two to Shenandoah, not Japan. And everyone here already knows, I'm not an Asian import fan... at all. What I like/don't like has no bearing on my comment though. Hell, a prepped Miata(still NA) beats a lot of cars on the track mentioned.
Even comparing a 370 to an S2000 seems a little ridiculous to me. I know in the past that magazines have done so, but comparing a 'vert to a coupe? That's a testament to the excellent job Honda did with the S2000.
Do I think the S2000 is "sexy?" No, I don't- not in stock form. There are a few parts that can be added that do enhance its appearance, but more often than not, folks end up making their Honda looking worse, not better. The 350, and now the 370, are definitely "sexier" out of the box if you're looking at just appearances. The 350 convertible is butt-ugly. It should never be allowed to be seen with the softtop up. The S2000 does not suffer from the same hideousness when the top is up. Overall, I'd definitely say the sweeping lines on the 350 coupe are masculine, yet give the impression of some refinement. Build quality can still be questioned though. FTR, I would have owned a first-year 350Z had my local dealership not had a 3-month wait.
I didn't purchase the S2000 because of its power or looks. There are other cars that exceed the Honda in both categories, but for the price new(paid MSRP and was happy), you could not find a car that handled better than the S, let alone a convertible(our original criteria). By the time I went from the showroom floor to the onramp of I-495, I knew this was the car I had to have. A month and a half later I sold my bike- didn't need it for my adrenaline fix.
As for the big-powered, econo-box-styled sedans, they can be truly impressive on the track, but they're still ugly not matter how you slice it and their handling, while confidence-inspiring, does not mirror anything close to the razor-sharp, precision maneuvering that the S2000 provides effortlessly. We will not address the American's drivers' driving inabilities that lead some to think otherwise of the Honda's handling.
End game, I like the new model Z. Said so in the initial post in this thread. But I can't help but laugh at folks and car companies continuously comparing the S to their newest machines.
Even comparing a 370 to an S2000 seems a little ridiculous to me. I know in the past that magazines have done so, but comparing a 'vert to a coupe? That's a testament to the excellent job Honda did with the S2000.
Do I think the S2000 is "sexy?" No, I don't- not in stock form. There are a few parts that can be added that do enhance its appearance, but more often than not, folks end up making their Honda looking worse, not better. The 350, and now the 370, are definitely "sexier" out of the box if you're looking at just appearances. The 350 convertible is butt-ugly. It should never be allowed to be seen with the softtop up.
The S2000 does not suffer from the same hideousness when the top is up. Overall, I'd definitely say the sweeping lines on the 350 coupe are masculine, yet give the impression of some refinement. Build quality can still be questioned though. FTR, I would have owned a first-year 350Z had my local dealership not had a 3-month wait.I didn't purchase the S2000 because of its power or looks. There are other cars that exceed the Honda in both categories, but for the price new(paid MSRP and was happy), you could not find a car that handled better than the S, let alone a convertible(our original criteria). By the time I went from the showroom floor to the onramp of I-495, I knew this was the car I had to have. A month and a half later I sold my bike- didn't need it for my adrenaline fix.
As for the big-powered, econo-box-styled sedans, they can be truly impressive on the track, but they're still ugly not matter how you slice it and their handling, while confidence-inspiring, does not mirror anything close to the razor-sharp, precision maneuvering that the S2000 provides effortlessly. We will not address the American's drivers' driving inabilities that lead some to think otherwise of the Honda's handling.
End game, I like the new model Z. Said so in the initial post in this thread. But I can't help but laugh at folks and car companies continuously comparing the S to their newest machines.
03-30-2009 | 05:29 AM
#66
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
From: Columbia, MD
Originally Posted by FF2Skip,Mar 29 2009, 08:52 AM
Like I said, take the two to Shenandoah, not Japan. And everyone here already knows, I'm not an Asian import fan... at all. What I like/don't like has no bearing on my comment though. Hell, a prepped Miata(still NA) beats a lot of cars on the track mentioned.
Even comparing a 370 to an S2000 seems a little ridiculous to me. I know in the past that magazines have done so, but comparing a 'vert to a coupe? That's a testament to the excellent job Honda did with the S2000.
Do I think the S2000 is "sexy?" No, I don't- not in stock form. There are a few parts that can be added that do enhance its appearance, but more often than not, folks end up making their Honda looking worse, not better. The 350, and now the 370, are definitely "sexier" out of the box if you're looking at just appearances. The 350 convertible is butt-ugly. It should never be allowed to be seen with the softtop up. The S2000 does not suffer from the same hideousness when the top is up. Overall, I'd definitely say the sweeping lines on the 350 coupe are masculine, yet give the impression of some refinement. Build quality can still be questioned though. FTR, I would have owned a first-year 350Z had my local dealership not had a 3-month wait.
I didn't purchase the S2000 because of its power or looks. There are other cars that exceed the Honda in both categories, but for the price new(paid MSRP and was happy), you could not find a car that handled better than the S, let alone a convertible(our original criteria). By the time I went from the showroom floor to the onramp of I-495, I knew this was the car I had to have. A month and a half later I sold my bike- didn't need it for my adrenaline fix.
As for the big-powered, econo-box-styled sedans, they can be truly impressive on the track, but they're still ugly not matter how you slice it and their handling, while confidence-inspiring, does not mirror anything close to the razor-sharp, precision maneuvering that the S2000 provides effortlessly. We will not address the American's drivers' driving inabilities that lead some to think otherwise of the Honda's handling.
End game, I like the new model Z. Said so in the initial post in this thread. But I can't help but laugh at folks and car companies continuously comparing the S to their newest machines.
Even comparing a 370 to an S2000 seems a little ridiculous to me. I know in the past that magazines have done so, but comparing a 'vert to a coupe? That's a testament to the excellent job Honda did with the S2000.
Do I think the S2000 is "sexy?" No, I don't- not in stock form. There are a few parts that can be added that do enhance its appearance, but more often than not, folks end up making their Honda looking worse, not better. The 350, and now the 370, are definitely "sexier" out of the box if you're looking at just appearances. The 350 convertible is butt-ugly. It should never be allowed to be seen with the softtop up.
The S2000 does not suffer from the same hideousness when the top is up. Overall, I'd definitely say the sweeping lines on the 350 coupe are masculine, yet give the impression of some refinement. Build quality can still be questioned though. FTR, I would have owned a first-year 350Z had my local dealership not had a 3-month wait.I didn't purchase the S2000 because of its power or looks. There are other cars that exceed the Honda in both categories, but for the price new(paid MSRP and was happy), you could not find a car that handled better than the S, let alone a convertible(our original criteria). By the time I went from the showroom floor to the onramp of I-495, I knew this was the car I had to have. A month and a half later I sold my bike- didn't need it for my adrenaline fix.
As for the big-powered, econo-box-styled sedans, they can be truly impressive on the track, but they're still ugly not matter how you slice it and their handling, while confidence-inspiring, does not mirror anything close to the razor-sharp, precision maneuvering that the S2000 provides effortlessly. We will not address the American's drivers' driving inabilities that lead some to think otherwise of the Honda's handling.
End game, I like the new model Z. Said so in the initial post in this thread. But I can't help but laugh at folks and car companies continuously comparing the S to their newest machines.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
HiPER
New York - Metro New York S2000 Owners
16
07-10-2008 06:11 AM