MsPerky

with this. There just isn't any comparison, IMO. The S is in a class by itself!

BEASTMODE

I traded my 350z for my S this past year. I really liked the Z and would still like to have it back, but I'd rather have the Honda. The Z was GREAT on long trips and just getting around town w/ occasional fun. The S is definately more of a factory built, purpose built track car w/ the street still in mind.

thebig33tuna

i looked for used S2ks and used Zs at the same time. I managed to not once find a Z that was configured in a way that would attract me. most were the base or touring model, and almost ALL were autos

s2k is pure performance and less compromises. it suits me personally better.

bottom line though, thats what its all about... finding a car that suits *you* better... threads like this serve little purpose imho

pyrocpu

Let's see here... My 2005 Z brochure tells me the base vehicle was 3188 lbs. A 2003 base Z likely weighed less. LSD? Sure. Add 9 whole pounds to the vehicle for Enthusiast trim.

Is it a small car? Not compared to an Elise/Miata/S2000, no, you're right. In a garage though, it sure is a helluva lot shorter than your average Camry/Accord/Altima though. It also becomes apparent when washing the Z--there's a lot less to wash. Not as little as the S2000 for sure, but it's not like we're talking about an F-250 here either.

Base G35 Coupe with cloth weighed 3416lbs. My abacus tells me there's a 228# difference at the very least. And good luck trying to find a G35C w/o a moonroof that likely adds another 50lbs.

Sure, 0-60 is but one aspect of performance. Name another car in the segment that had, at the time, forged aluminum suspension F & R, and aluminum rear subframe. Skidpad over 0.90g's for $26K? I suppose one could buy a 1992 Civic for $1500 and add another similar amount on some fancy suspension setup w/ R-comps and run over 1.0G, right?

Corvette and Camaro references are called up, with respect to mass and such. Corvettes then, as now, cost more than 240Z/350Z. While Camaros are closer in terms of price, they're known more for in-line speed, as we're all pretty much aware. Federal government regulations on safety does drive up vehicle mass. Crash any 1970s vehicle into a brick wall at 38mph, and then crash a 200x model year car into a brick wall. Common sense would indicate that modern cars crash better. By that measure, yes, I'll take an 800lb increase to, well, live. I'd suffice to say Americans weigh more now than in the 1970s too! I'd also counter that consumers nowadays require a quieter vehicle. Taking the measures necessary for NVH isolation also adds mass. As "light" as the S2000 is, I wished it could have been lighter, somewhere around the 2500lbs my 99 Civic was. It's smaller than the Civic inside & out (save for width, perhaps); why does the S weigh 300lbs more than the Civic?

Minimalistic vehicles don't do squat for a manufacturer's bottom line. Carving out such a tiny niche--where's the ROI on that? Perhaps that's why I got my S--it was such a niche vehicle, I loved it. With the way that the US and Japanese car manufacturers are squeezing every last penny out of their vehicles, it is no surprise that some things are commonized. Sure, Honda did it with the S2000s we have now, but as someone mentioned before, the 350Z has far better sales. Venture to guess which company made more money: the one selling the S2000 or the one selling the 350Z?

In the year and a half I had my Z, track days were definitely rewarding, considerably more so than the G coupe I had. I also highly appreciated the ease at which one could drive quickly on the track--predictable as mentioned, and forgiving at the limit. Having said that, I've loved both the Z and the S I have now; both have its merits. I, for one, feel that the Z is an excellent interpretation of a past inspiration. People change, markets change. So do cars.

1nate7

Well said, I also went from G35 to 350Z to S2000. The Z was a good car, and it's relatively easy to drop 100 lbs from it, albeit mostly from the wrong end.

Wildncrazy

If you get the opportunity park your S next to a Z. This is a view I'd never done before and you really get a appreciation for the differences in the cars that you don't see by walking around the cars on a lot or seeing one come at you on the road.

Yesterday, for the very first time I parked my S next to one of my Zs. I aligned the rear axles to get a good comparison.

OMG!! I was amazed at how much bigger the Z was than the S!!

You can see exactly where all 500 pounds is. It would appear to be 1,000 pounds heavier.

The waistline is almost a foot higher on the Z and the front tires shows all of the 10" longer wheelbase as the front tire of the Z extends way beyond the front tire of the S.

The Z just looks heavy and massive, but interestingly they were both just about the same overall length.

Next to the S the Z definitely looks like the porker it is and the S looks lean and lithe.

There's 19" between the driver's butt and the rear wheel on the Z and 10" on the S. This is using my butt of course.

The Z's footwell is 1" wider than the S's.

The Z's engine is 4" wider and 2" longer. It also looks to be more top heavy. It sits across the front axle line - Midship engine my butt!!

Of course the engine is heavier and with is sitting further forward that accounts for a lot of the 53/47 weight distribution vs. the S's 50/50.

trinis2001

Yeh, the one selling the S, but not because of it

s2kdriver80

Agree - they didn't develop the S2000 to earn a bundle. It was a 50th anniversary celebratory elemental sports car with minimal compromises. They did this knowing full well the car would attract only a handful of buyers. The Accords and Civics are the bread and butter of Honda.

JackS

I think the bottom line is-
If you are truely on the fence between these two cars, get the Z.
The S2000 attitude has to be a "I know I want this car".
The added daily utility of the Z should appeal to more buyers for many good reasons and probably the best choice for the majority.
Want and need are two different things. You must want a S.

pyrocpu

Hahah... you're right. You know, maybe I should have reread that after I wrote it...

Of course, what I meant to say was that the 350Z is much more likely to have been more profitable than the S.