ive got about 37k to spend on the car,so it wouldnt be a new m coupe but it would have the 320hp motor not the 240 one. as for girls i have a c43 amg rite now (benzes answer to the m3 ) and most girls i ask say they like suv's with rims and system better (dumb bitches!!!!) i dont care, a cars purpose is to put a smile on my face, not please stupid girls.i will never own a suv. all my friends tell me go for m coupe kuz it has torque and it a bmw, but i cant get off the s2000. i always thought it was another honda (i have always loved euros) but the moment i got into the s2000 i fell in love, i havent driven a m coupe but i know i need to, can anyone who has driven both give me the ups and downs of both. it will come down to which one is more fun to drive on a windy road.

 

Why not an M Roadster to make it a fairer comparison?

 

because the m roadster is more $$$$ im on a budget (if u can call 37 a budget) the roadster is about 3k more

 

I have not had the chance to drive one but I hear the M Coupe is a very fun car to drive. I think one car magazine considers it their favorite car when they want to drive like a hooligan. Lots more torque, great handling and very distinct looks. I think its beautiful, but the M Roadster is damn ugly, if that makes any sense. Some day I would like to own one, but for now, I am completely happy with my S. Especially when I drop the top.

 

 

My buddy just bought a 2001 z3m roadster w/ 315 hp w/ 7,500 mi for $35.5K and I've driven it for past 5 days, so that's the only comparison I can provide. But I do know that 3 series M suppose to have more power than z3m. I almost convinced him to buy a new or used 2002 S, but he always wanted a z3 since they first came out, and his is the z3m.

z3m: felt faster, more torque (felt it). Great discount if bought used (sticker $48K); 10 speaker cd stereo (we're still looking for all of them; I really like the rear speakers behind the seat, so I just ordered LUCID's for my S ); Great bmw service/free service/free rental w/ service; better comfort w/ bumpy road, etc.; "M" envy/respect from fellow bmw owners; status quo; quad exhaust tips; M coupe w/ more powerful look; fun factor 9/10. Expensive $$$ mods/accessories.

my S: Red start button ; 9000 rpm (must state the obvious); better suspension/control; glass rear (sorry pre-2002 owners), great discount if bought used (check forums for price); cheaper insurance for DC metro area (1/2 price, different ins agents, but we're both military); tons of affordable $$$ mods/accessories (everytime I put on a new mod/accessory it's like a brand new car w/ different personality ); great ideas and assistance through s2ki (as you can tell from the forum); z3m isn't no way near as pretty and is outdated, coupe looks better; better gas mpg; "S" envy/respect from just about everyone; fun factor 10/10. Convertible vs. coupe: if you want a coupe, buy the optional hardtop; want more power strap on a supercharger/turbo charger (best of both worlds ). If only my S came w/ the same service plan as bmw (our only downfall).

You must test drive both, and I would do it on the same day to compare. What do you really want: a comfortable status quo sport coupe or a real sports car that can convert into a coupe? I like my friend's z3m, but I love my S.

Hope this helps,

LT

 

Betweeen the S2000 and the M Coupe? I'm quite a bit biased, but I absolutely love my M Coupe. I had my S2000 for about a year and a half, traded it in on an M, and have never looked back.

For one, you'll never see many M Coupes around. It's a simple numbers game. There were only about 2000 produced over a 4 year run, and that's it. No matter where you go, you'll turn heads... and yes a lot more than an S2000. There is absolutely nothing out like an M Coupe, and there won't be for a long time.

The interior is (IMHO) vastly superior. Comfortable Napa leather seats, chrome gauges, more gauges, etc. The stock HK stereo sounds decent, and with new speakers, it sounds a lot better. The 99-2000 has the bulletproof E36 M3 motor, and there a whole lotta mods out there. For the person who says that aftermarket parts are way expensive, they are no more expensive than parts for the S.

Is it quicker than an S2000? 99-2000 yes. 2001-2002? Hell yes? Better handling? Depends on the driver. Don't let people give you the "outdated suspension" line. Sure it's not the most cutting edge, but it works extremely well on the car. People who track their M's constantly outperform S2000s.

So, since you're comparing an M Coupe to an S2000, I'd say go with the M. M Roadster or S2000? That'd be a little tougher. If you have any questions, feel free to email me. I'll go more into it at length.

No flames, please.

 

LT'S S2K your post is not only off base in that you are not comparing the two cars that he is asking about but you are also misrepresenting the cost of aftermarket pieces and insurance rates for the BMW. I would also question how one calls the BMW a status quo sports coupe and the Honda a real sports car when the BMW kicks the living shit out of the Honda in every measure of performance (for more money).

Having gotten that out of the way -- I currently own both, and in fact just today drove both.

As others have mentioned, you can't drop the top in the coupe, so if that is a requirement it's an easy choice.

As to which is more fun to drive, that too is a toss-up. Both cars have their inherent strengths and weaknesses.

The S2000 has bump-steer and a twitchy nature near the edge. It could also use a bit less body roll. The BMW has way too much suspension travel, it rolls and pitches like a Buick out of the box.

I fixed those issues with the M (new shocks/springs/camber) and would give it the nod these days, but then that's unfair because my S2K is stock.

Funny you mention this. I would personally like to boot the Car and Driver author in the ass who had nothing bad to say about the car and thus used this statement. Put simply it is not true. Their is nothing inherently wrong with the setup. As consumers we are taught to desire the latest and greatest. What's funny is that no one has told this to all the early 70's 911 owners out there tracking their cars and outrunning newer designs left and right...

Wrong. The S52 coupes will put a couple to a few lengths on S2000's at any speed and run quicker lap times. Why am I so sure? Multiple 1/4 races, multiple track days.

Before you decide on an S54 drive both back to back. For me at least I prefer the power delivery of the S52 (I guess three years of conditioning may have done this) and will spend money adding horsepower to it before I will buy a newer S54. (surprising but true -- the newer motor lacks torque down low and was a turn-off for me -- although it does pull like a beast to redline).

Anyhow both the S2000 and the M coupe are excellent cars. The decision should only be made after you have driven them both long enough to get acquainted with their different personalities.

 

First off, I was in no way commenting on which car is faster. I know first hand that stock for stock, the S52 coupe is a lot faster in a straight line than an S2000, and a little faster on the track given equal drivers.

BUT, in my PERSONAL opinion, the S2000 is a lot more fun to drive than the S52. The suspension is more firm and the car feels a hell of a lot more tossable. Also, I know you're going to have a bitch fit about this, but the S2000 even feels more rigid than the M coupe, supposedly the most rigid BMW ever (which is by the way, a complete myth). The steering on the S2000 feels a hell of a lot more precise and the shifter kicks the M Coupe's ass. You can't argue with that.

That being said, the M Coupes with the S54 overides all these shortcomings with its awesome motor.
Keep in mind, these are personal opinions.

So if I had a choice, I would choose an S2000 over a pre 2001 m coupe in a second. But 2001+, its all M coupe.

 

Agreed the shifter in the S2k is sublime.

However the chassis of the M is noticeably stiffer and the turn-in response of the M is leagues above the S2k. Tossable is a debatable trait, the cars are within 100 pounds of each other. With the stock suspension I think the M wallows a bit too much and would give the nod to the S.

Unknown as to why you would say the M coupe's stiffness is a myth, unless of course you have some inside BMW info that we all lack, or maybe this comment is similar to the Michael Moore documentary I saw tonight, full of personal opinion and completely lacking any factual basis.

-Steve (who considers himself damn lucky to drive either car)