Z4 vs s2000

Gumbo

Riche670 wrote: »

In the same class and price range (roughly) you could get the Audi TT 3.2 DSG 2003. That would give you the comfort of the automatic in traffic, but the Top Gear team concur that it's a tad on the boring side when you put the foot down.. also the tax might be in the higher band, not sure on the emissions.

makes no difference at all riche, as its a 2003 car it will be taxed on engine cc so that means €1491 per year against the €590 for the 2.0 on the S2000 and of course the €1231 for the bmw.

my opinion is the S2000 is a better drivers car but if im completely honest i would take the Z4 over it with the 3 litre (231bhp engine) and auto box.

Ferris

kceire wrote: »

makes no difference at all riche, as its a 2003 car it will be taxed on engine cc so that means €1491 per year against the €791 for the 2.2 on the S2000 and of course the €1231 for the bmw.

my opinion is the S2000 is a better drivers car but if im completely honest i would take the Z4 over it with the 3 litre (231bhp engine) and auto box.

Yeah I drove a 225 TT a long time ago and it just felt like a fast golf, my last car was a golf so I'm not interested in one.

Isn't the s2000 a 2L? It does win on the tax front alright but that only works out at 50euro difference a month if you annualise the cost difference.

cpoh1

RobAMerc wrote: »

It depends on what you'd be doing with it.

The S2000 is no doubt a class act - but it would probably drive you nuts if you've to take it on long spins and just day to day living. And the interior is pure "computer geek" special.

The BMW would probably be a better all rounder - easier to live with but less of an out an out blast at the weekends sports car, although its probably close and its gonna have a 6 pot for the aura drama ( it really matters in a drop top )

The S2000 is likely to depreciate less too.

But I am sure the BMW vs Honda brigade will make this one run and run.

I dont think you can sum it up much better than that! Best to go out and drive both ferris.

To the other poster wiith the s2k and heavy clutch, check your clutch master cylinder for any leaks (in engine bay and above pedals in cockpit), otherwise it could be the clutch release bearing, the s2000's i drove had lovely soft clutches.

Gumbo

Ferris wrote: »

Yeah I drove a 225 TT a long time ago and it just felt like a fast golf, my last car was a golf so I'm not interested in one.

Isn't the s2000 a 2L? It does win on the tax front alright but that only works out at 50euro difference a month if you annualise the cost difference.

its a 2.0 DOHC 237bhp engine tucked away in there.

it is indeed a 2 litre thats even better as it drops the tax to €590 per year....happy days!

Ferris

kceire wrote: »

im sure its a 2.2 DOHC 237bhp engine tucked away in there.

Nope, 2L:-

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/index.htm?md=146&

Biro

kceire wrote: »

im sure its a 2.2 DOHC 237bhp engine tucked away in there, i could be wrong though!

if it is indeed a 2 litre thats even better as it drops the tax to €590 per year....happy days!

Nope, it's a 2 litre 4cyl DOHC 237bhp engine. You're thinking of the US version, 2.2 and I think less power. Everywhere else got the proper 2 litre engine, not the de-tuned bigger thing.

Kamili

Ferris wrote: »

Good point, 90% of my driving is in Dublin traffic.

Yup, it is actually quite annoying in the S as the car doesn't like first gear at all and the clutch is quite sportsy so doesn't handle as well.

Comparison here might be of use...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_S2000
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_Z4

Seems there are more horses in the s2000 but at more revs, that said the z4 has more torque.
The Honda will rev forever too which with the vtec is great fun! I must say I really do adore my S, which is absolute great fun to drive, just wish I didn't have to drive it in Dublin!

Kamili

cpoh1 wrote: »

To the other poster wiith the s2k and heavy clutch, check your clutch master cylinder for any leaks (in engine bay and above pedals in cockpit), otherwise it could be the clutch release bearing, the s2000's i drove had lovely soft clutches.

Its not that the clutch is massively heavy, just annoying in heavy traffic.
Have had it checked and no leaks!

TCP/IP

Ferris wrote: »

Unbelievable, it looks to be a nice car alright. Did you trade it in to them or was it passed on from a main dealer?

I sold it to a trader as I needed rid of it with a Boxster S been delivered. Very tidy car. I put a brand new soft top on it in Jan as the old one was marked at a cost of 3k.

When i traded it car needed a service so make sure that was done on it. Always hand washed by me and waxed and I am also a non smoker as well. Super car. If you want any other details please feel free to PM me.

JHMEG

People seem to be recommending the 3L Z4 with auto box. A few things strike me about that:
a) Am I the only one who thinks an auto box in a sports car isn't a sports car?
b) The 3L doesn't produce a lot of power (less than the S2k actually) but you are paying a lot on road tax.
c) A 3L engine is going to be very heavy, relatively speaking, and pulling on the nose
d) Z4 is American-built (I think). Put it all together: heavy, front engined, 3L automatic, American-built. More of a tourer than a sports car?
e) Bangle styling is controversial. It's growing on me from most angles, but not the front. Never mind me tho.

HashSlinging

The BM produces a lot more "Torque" than the S2K

BMW - 300 N·m (220 ft·lbf) @ 3500

Honda - 207 N·m (153 ft·lbf) @ 7500 rpm

JHMEG

HashSlinging wrote: »

The BM produces a lot more "Torque" than the S2K

BMW - 300 N·m (220 ft·lbf) @ 3500

Honda - 207 N·m (153 ft·lbf) @ 7500 rpm

Which again would support the relaxed tourer hypothesis...

Ferris

JHMEG wrote: »

People seem to be recommending the 3L Z4 with auto box. A few things strike me about that:
a) Am I the only one who thinks an auto box in a sports car isn't a sports car?
b) The 3L doesn't produce a lot of power (less than the S2k actually) but you are paying a lot on road tax.
c) A 3L engine is going to be very heavy, relatively speaking, and pulling on the nose
d) Z4 is American-built (I think). Put it all together: heavy, front engined, 3L automatic, American-built. More of a tourer than a sports car?
e) Bangle styling is controversial. It's growing on me from most angles, but not the front. Never mind me tho.

a) Appearantly its a good auto but I take your point
b) true, performance is the same relatively speaking, same could be sai of the porsche boxster.
c) M54B - series is one of the lightest 6cyl engines ever produced, see wikipedia.
d) By repute it has too much grip and stiff suspension, not american really.
e) Hated the styling when they came out but I like it now.

s2000 is the more focused sportscar alright. Basically I have to drive a Z4 pretty soon to see which one I like.

JHMEG

Ferris wrote: »

c) M54B - series is one of the lightest 6cyl engines ever produced, see wikipedia.

Can't find anything about weight in the wikipedia M54 page, but this made me smile!:)

The S54 used to be known as the Engine of Damocles because of the tendency of early production M3s to explode spectacularly at elevated engine speeds.

Z4s don't seem to come with the M54 engines any more. An all new lighter engine series is now used.

JHMEG

Z4, S2000 and Boxter on Top Gear. For entertainment purposes only!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M--kAu6XpKY

Victor_M

Hilariously you pick and choose (as usual) out of context quotes and examples to reinforce your bias. eg you forgot to quote this

"The S54 won the International Engine of the Year award overall for 2001, and also claimed the "Best New Engine" that year as well as won the 3-4 L category for six straight years in a row from 2001 through 2006 - so far. The S54 was also on the Ward's 10 Best Engines list for 2002 through 2004."

Anyhoo, the op needs to test both and decide whether he wants a more relaxed civilised motoring experience with plenty of horses and torque or a high revving needs to be pushed all the time to get anything out of it high power low torque experience.

As I mentioned earlier I had a good run in the S2000 a few weeks ago and although it's not for me it was fun for a short while, but at the end of the day it's a bit like those new golf 1.4 GT's knocking around they are ringing a small CC'd 4 pot engine to within an inch of it's life to get the performance out of it, and that is not for everyone.

By the way, Clarksons main defence of the S in that clip Jhmeg* linked was the €7.5 price difference which is no longer the case, as they seem to be in or around the same price the only thing left really was the slightly faster roof.

*the patron saint of Honda

HashSlinging

please lets not go down the route of bmw winning awards, its a panel who pick that. Base it on recent racing and bmw wins are thin BTCC?

Victor_M

HashSlinging wrote: »

please lets not go down the route of bmw winning awards, its a panel who pick that. Base it on recent racing and bmw wins are thin BTCC?

I only chose that example to offset Jhmegs selectivity, couldn't really care about those awards TBH, sure the fiat panda won loads!

Bottom line OP, the fanboy(s) (well only one really, thanks for showing up, again! Jhmeg) are out in full force, drive both yourself and let us know what you think, either way you are choosing between 2 great cars.

HashSlinging

+1

JHMEG

Victor, your little obsession with me is leading me to conclude only one thing...



Anyway, you're going on the Ignore list and there you shall stay.

Mayshine

There is an S2000 group meet in the Dublin area the weekend after next.

This might be your opportunity to ask real s2000 owners what the car is like to live with long term rather than engaging in the banter here which won't really tell you anything.

PM me if you want details

I will say about the s2000 is it does take time to appreciate. Your first impression might be deceptive. It is also not for everybody so some people will never like it

Ferris

Mayshine wrote: »

There is an S2000 group meet in the Dublin area the weekend after next.

This might be your opportunity to ask real s2000 owners what the car is like to live with long term rather than engaging in the banter here which won't really tell you anything.

PM me if you want details

I will say about the s2000 is it does take time to appreciate. Your first impression might be deceptive. It is also not for everybody so some people will never like it

I've driven the s2000 and I liked it, they're a very quick car no matter what the revs to be fair.

I'll go and drive a Z4 3L I think.

peasant

JHMEG wrote: »

Victor, your little obsession with me is leading me to conclude only one thing...

JHMEG, your continued abrasive posts, your constant borderline trolling despite several warnings and now this personal insult leads me to the following conclusion:

You're taking a break from this forum for a week

Henry Ford III

I've no idea which car is better, as I've driven neither.

Marcus.Aurelius

If the OP is planning to hold on to the car for three or four years, or longer, I'd go for the Honda, (I would anyway!) for reliability at least.

The BMW is a nice car, but to me screams hairdresser, sorry :pac:. as for reliability, I'm not convinced by BMW yet.

Both are really good looking cars, and if its just the driving experience you're going for, its a hard match, but the reliability and image of the Honda would swing it for me.

Cyrus

Marcus.Aurelius wrote: »

If the OP is planning to hold on to the car for three or four years, or longer, I'd go for the Honda, (I would anyway!) for reliability at least.

The BMW is a nice car, but to me screams hairdresser, sorry :pac:. as for reliability, I'm not convinced by BMW yet.

Both are really good looking cars, and if its just the driving experience you're going for, its a hard match, but the reliability and image of the Honda would swing it for me.

i dont think the z4 is a hairdresser chariot, in fact i think its a more masculine car than the s2000 but thats just my opinion. no major reliability issues either? Marcus Aurelius what do you mean you arent convinced by bmw yet :Dwant to wait another 50 years see how they pan out

RobAMerc

Marcus.Aurelius wrote: »

If the OP is planning to hold on to the car for three or four years, or longer, I'd go for the Honda, (I would anyway!) for reliability at least.

The BMW is a nice car, but to me screams hairdresser, sorry :pac:. as for reliability, I'm not convinced by BMW yet.

Both are really good looking cars, and if its just the driving experience you're going for, its a hard match, but the reliability and image of the Honda would swing it for me.

I don't mean to be mean - but you dont come across as much of a car nut - I mean your opinion is based on a) looks and b) reliability. Neither car would be considered bad for either. Although Honda has a growing scanger rep.

On another note:

The hairdresser tag is generally only used by enthusiasts who are talking about a car that looks good but is crap to drive - I think its been misused by those without a clue to describe anything they feel would threaten their self image or masculinity.

Biro

RobAMerc wrote: »

I don't mean to be mean - but you dont come across as much of a car nut - I mean your opinion is based on a) looks and b) reliability. Neither car would be considered bad for either. Although Honda has a growing scanger rep.
On another note:

The hairdresser tag is generally only used by enthusiasts who are talking about a car that looks good but is crap to drive - I think its been misused by those without a clue to describe anything they feel would threaten their self image or masculinity.

It's hardly fair to criticise someone for not being a car nut because they're worried about reliability or looks or hairdresserness, and then in the same breath worry yourself about "scanger rep".

RobAMerc

Biro wrote: »

It's hardly fair to criticise someone for not being a car nut because they're worried about reliability or looks or hairdresserness, and then in the same breath worry yourself about "scanger rep".

I don't see why - if a motor is fugly but is a cracking drive would it stop a car nut driving it ? I doubt it. Nor would its reliability.

As for image - I was pointing out the Honda's image - I never said it bothered me.

Biro

RobAMerc wrote: »

I don't see why - if a motor is fugly but is a cracking drive would it stop a car nut driving it ? I doubt it. Nor would its reliability.

I agree.

RobAMerc wrote: »

As for image - I was pointing out the Honda's image - I never said it bothered me.

Pointing it out with an "Although" or "However" suggests that it's something to be considered, which a true car nut wouldn't!