06Estukay

Yep. Wouldn't even call VTEC true variable valve timing.... It's a 2 stage camshaft, and not really variable cam timing. I think the guys meant variable valve timing, as in VVT, iVTEC, etc...

fernando.

It's not fair to directly compare the two cars, you can't compare a 50k (when new) S2000 vs a 25k FRS, just doesn't work. I was given an FRS to film for a day and I really enjoyed the car, if the S2000 didn't exist I would totally be driving a FRS.

The FRS has a wicked chassis and is super fun to drive right out of the box, just like the S2. Part of that has to do with the boxer engine, since it's wide and low it can be mounted lower in the chassis reducing the center of gravity. Sure it has a little less power and the powerband is very linear so it doesn't "pull" that hard, but around town it's great. I love the interior, it's really comfy and everything is well positioned, I spent a few hours on the highway and my back didn't hurt like it does in the S, LOL.

As far as looks go, in my opinion, I think it's a fantatic looking car from all angles. They dropped the ball a little with those hideous rims but that's the first thing people usually change anyways.

Few things I didn't like were the gear box, it's too sloppy and notchy all at the same time, and I hate how soft the clutch is, but apart from that I really like the car.

Looks great with a drop and wheels.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ghostchild/7640837922/http://www.flickr.com/photos/ghostchild/7640837922/ by http://www.flickr.com/people/ghostchild/, on Flickr


Put it like this, for 25k you're either buying an FRS, Civic Si or a 2.0T Genesis. I've driven all 3, not sure about you guys but the FRS is my choice.

iDomN8U

We'll put.

Wait until the development aspect is done. By the time you take the difference between the costs of the two cars and add that to the "upgrades" you can do with the FRS (10K?). The FRS could potentially beat out the s2000 in every category.

Himura357

No need to compare because the S2000 is a roadster. having no roof is a quality that puts it in a different catagory. Most people buy an S2000 for the open top. If you just want fast there are so many other options. Apples and oranges.

I think the BRZ FR-S look average. All the cars in that price range do. RWD and LSD is nice but at the end of the day nothing special. Hell, at least I can get Ikea furniture in the back of my EP3

Fuman

compare apples to apples, lets compare the FR-S 2.0L vs S2000 2.0L.

The Redline of the FRS is 7400rpm where the s2000 is at 9000rpm.
The S2000 has a more aggressive high-rpm Cam than the FR-S, leading to more power at a higher RPM.
(Similar to a F1-engine making a insane power at 18,000 rpm).


The FR-S is a great car, especially at its price point. A suppose a video is more convincing than words: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaArJZOMCpI

What would be more interesting is to see the reliability of the FR-S & BR-Z in the long term.

FluKy15

The frs has potential to be faster than the s2000 from mods, so says the RC forum guys anyhow. Thats whay made me want one, but after seeing how many are around now i wouldnt want such a common car.

starchland

Does the brz have a high/low cam profile? I didnt think so- the motor kinda sounds like a compromise. I was under the impression that peak hp is limited due to the motors inability to rev safely past 7500- for whatever reasons cost, design, materials.

fernando.

Design.

Boxer engines aren't known to rev high.

2000AP1

I would wait for subie to come out with BRZ STI then it would be a different story.

Again, S2000 cannot be compared to anything on the market. It's a very unique vehicle IMO.
Everytime I take it out for a joy ride, the feeling lingers.

Jinderv

BRZ looks like a nice car overall. Anyone buying a NEW car today can't go wrong with it. Would be my first choice if I needed a affordable sports car today.