Back to back Test Drive + Analysis: 350z Vs S2000
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Maine
Back to back Test Drive + Analysis: 350z Vs S2000
Yesterday I was fortunate enough to find an 02 S2000 & an 03 350z for sale on the same street (different dealerships). I test drove both, and here is my personal analysis.
2003 Nissan 350z Base, Red, 55k Miles
Power - Plenty of torque, was pretty fun on the straight aways. Seemed to have good power response in most gears. Overall, I think stock power would get boring after a while, and would need to be compensated for with modding.
Handling - The car doesn't handle as well as I'd hoped, it's heavy of course, and to me it felt heavy. It didn't feel like a boat, but definately could feel the weight difference between this and the S2000. Overall, aftermarket suspension is a must.
Clutch / Shifter - Didn't mind the clutch, but didn't particularly care for the shifter. Seemed rough and notchy, not what I am looking for out of a "nice" "sports car".
Interior Fit & Finish - Though the interior looks nice, it just feels very cheapy. The plastic pieces of dash and what not have an expensive look, but a cheap feel.
My final Answer: I like the 350z, it is a fun car, plenty of torque and great styling. I however, don't believe I could put up with the heavyness of it, it's lack of inexpensive modability, and the handling in stock form. I could see myself falling into the mod money pit with one of these.
2002 Honda S2000, Suzuka Blue, 63k Miles
Power - Definately doesn't feel as fast as the Z (because it's not), and obviously we all know this car (and all hondas) lacks torque. This is the car's biggest downfall.
Handling - The car's lack of power is made up for by it's handling. Throwing this car through turns is a blast to do, and the car does it well. It has a very tight suspension and a tight feel. Turning radius is Superb, I pulled a quick U-turn and only needed 1/2 the road to do it.
Clutch / Shifter - Stock clutch & shifter feel great, the gearbox in this car has an amazing feel. I don't think you could really ask for more.
Interior Fit & Finish - I liked better than the Z. Though smaller on the inside, the S2000 feels more refined, more solid. It has more of a "cockpit" feel (which may be subjective, im sure some hate that feel).. But this car makes you feel like it was designed to fit you.
My final answer: Though slower in the straight line compared to the Z, and many other cars, I feel that the S2000's handling, solidness and phenominal gearbox makes this an amazingly fun car to drive.
Final Result: S2000 takes the cake for me.
2003 Nissan 350z Base, Red, 55k Miles
Power - Plenty of torque, was pretty fun on the straight aways. Seemed to have good power response in most gears. Overall, I think stock power would get boring after a while, and would need to be compensated for with modding.
Handling - The car doesn't handle as well as I'd hoped, it's heavy of course, and to me it felt heavy. It didn't feel like a boat, but definately could feel the weight difference between this and the S2000. Overall, aftermarket suspension is a must.
Clutch / Shifter - Didn't mind the clutch, but didn't particularly care for the shifter. Seemed rough and notchy, not what I am looking for out of a "nice" "sports car".
Interior Fit & Finish - Though the interior looks nice, it just feels very cheapy. The plastic pieces of dash and what not have an expensive look, but a cheap feel.
My final Answer: I like the 350z, it is a fun car, plenty of torque and great styling. I however, don't believe I could put up with the heavyness of it, it's lack of inexpensive modability, and the handling in stock form. I could see myself falling into the mod money pit with one of these.
2002 Honda S2000, Suzuka Blue, 63k Miles
Power - Definately doesn't feel as fast as the Z (because it's not), and obviously we all know this car (and all hondas) lacks torque. This is the car's biggest downfall.
Handling - The car's lack of power is made up for by it's handling. Throwing this car through turns is a blast to do, and the car does it well. It has a very tight suspension and a tight feel. Turning radius is Superb, I pulled a quick U-turn and only needed 1/2 the road to do it.
Clutch / Shifter - Stock clutch & shifter feel great, the gearbox in this car has an amazing feel. I don't think you could really ask for more.
Interior Fit & Finish - I liked better than the Z. Though smaller on the inside, the S2000 feels more refined, more solid. It has more of a "cockpit" feel (which may be subjective, im sure some hate that feel).. But this car makes you feel like it was designed to fit you.
My final answer: Though slower in the straight line compared to the Z, and many other cars, I feel that the S2000's handling, solidness and phenominal gearbox makes this an amazingly fun car to drive.
Final Result: S2000 takes the cake for me.
Evolving Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: US
Yesterday I was fortunate enough to find an 02 S2000 & an 03 350z for sale on the same street (different dealerships). I test drove both, and here is my personal analysis.
2003 Nissan 350z Base, Red, 55k Miles
Power - Plenty of torque, was pretty fun on the straight aways. Seemed to have good power response in most gears. Overall, I think stock power would get boring after a while, and would need to be compensated for with modding.
Handling - The car doesn't handle as well as I'd hoped, it's heavy of course, and to me it felt heavy. It didn't feel like a boat, but definately could feel the weight difference between this and the S2000. Overall, aftermarket suspension is a must.
Clutch / Shifter - Didn't mind the clutch, but didn't particularly care for the shifter. Seemed rough and notchy, not what I am looking for out of a "nice" "sports car".
Interior Fit & Finish - Though the interior looks nice, it just feels very cheapy. The plastic pieces of dash and what not have an expensive look, but a cheap feel.
My final Answer: I like the 350z, it is a fun car, plenty of torque and great styling. I however, don't believe I could put up with the heavyness of it, it's lack of inexpensive modability, and the handling in stock form. I could see myself falling into the mod money pit with one of these.
2002 Honda S2000, Suzuka Blue, 63k Miles
Power - Definately doesn't feel as fast as the Z (because it's not), and obviously we all know this car (and all hondas) lacks torque. This is the car's biggest downfall.
Handling - The car's lack of power is made up for by it's handling. Throwing this car through turns is a blast to do, and the car does it well. It has a very tight suspension and a tight feel. Turning radius is Superb, I pulled a quick U-turn and only needed 1/2 the road to do it.
Clutch / Shifter - Stock clutch & shifter feel great, the gearbox in this car has an amazing feel. I don't think you could really ask for more.
Interior Fit & Finish - I liked better than the Z. Though smaller on the inside, the S2000 feels more refined, more solid. It has more of a "cockpit" feel (which may be subjective, im sure some hate that feel).. But this car makes you feel like it was designed to fit you.
My final answer: Though slower in the straight line compared to the Z, and many other cars, I feel that the S2000's handling, solidness and phenominal gearbox makes this an amazingly fun car to drive.
Final Result: S2000 takes the cake for me.
2003 Nissan 350z Base, Red, 55k Miles
Power - Plenty of torque, was pretty fun on the straight aways. Seemed to have good power response in most gears. Overall, I think stock power would get boring after a while, and would need to be compensated for with modding.
Handling - The car doesn't handle as well as I'd hoped, it's heavy of course, and to me it felt heavy. It didn't feel like a boat, but definately could feel the weight difference between this and the S2000. Overall, aftermarket suspension is a must.
Clutch / Shifter - Didn't mind the clutch, but didn't particularly care for the shifter. Seemed rough and notchy, not what I am looking for out of a "nice" "sports car".
Interior Fit & Finish - Though the interior looks nice, it just feels very cheapy. The plastic pieces of dash and what not have an expensive look, but a cheap feel.
My final Answer: I like the 350z, it is a fun car, plenty of torque and great styling. I however, don't believe I could put up with the heavyness of it, it's lack of inexpensive modability, and the handling in stock form. I could see myself falling into the mod money pit with one of these.
2002 Honda S2000, Suzuka Blue, 63k Miles
Power - Definately doesn't feel as fast as the Z (because it's not), and obviously we all know this car (and all hondas) lacks torque. This is the car's biggest downfall.
Handling - The car's lack of power is made up for by it's handling. Throwing this car through turns is a blast to do, and the car does it well. It has a very tight suspension and a tight feel. Turning radius is Superb, I pulled a quick U-turn and only needed 1/2 the road to do it.
Clutch / Shifter - Stock clutch & shifter feel great, the gearbox in this car has an amazing feel. I don't think you could really ask for more.
Interior Fit & Finish - I liked better than the Z. Though smaller on the inside, the S2000 feels more refined, more solid. It has more of a "cockpit" feel (which may be subjective, im sure some hate that feel).. But this car makes you feel like it was designed to fit you.
My final answer: Though slower in the straight line compared to the Z, and many other cars, I feel that the S2000's handling, solidness and phenominal gearbox makes this an amazingly fun car to drive.
Final Result: S2000 takes the cake for me.
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Maine
The 350z and the s2000 are on par with each other in straight line performance... they would exhange wins with similar drivers. The 350z does have a rough shifter, lots of vibration in it and the clutch which to me is annoying. If you think the 350z interior is "cheap" you will love that of a C5 Corvette (sarcasm)...
The S2000 on the other hand, handles Amazing, has an Amazing gear box, Amazing turning radius. Though it lacks in straight line, at least it makes up for it with everything else that's good about it.
Evolving Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: US
I drove a 98 C5 with 24k miles on it, I had no complaints about the interior. One thing you must realize, is that with a C5, you're getting so many things - a car that is legendary, 345rwhp stock, a car that handles just as good if not better than a Z. A C5 is amazing in a lot of ways, the 350Z isn't amazing at anything. It's decent in power, OK in handling, sub-par in fit & finish.. but doesn't do anything Amazing.
The S2000 on the other hand, handles Amazing, has an Amazing gear box, Amazing turning radius. Though it lacks in straight line, at least it makes up for it with everything else that's good about it.
The S2000 on the other hand, handles Amazing, has an Amazing gear box, Amazing turning radius. Though it lacks in straight line, at least it makes up for it with everything else that's good about it.
Curb Weight:
2003 350z: 3,197 lbs
1998 C5: 3,240 lbs
700ft Slalom speed:
2003 350z: 70.1mph
1998 C5: 62.5mph
Braking Distance: 60mph-0mph
2003 350z: 113ft
1998 C5: 118ft...
I am also going to source this information:
- http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=1001
- http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/fe...50z/index.html
Enjoy...
Do not gripe about fit and finish, and then use Chevrolet as the "better" example... also do not say a car does nothing amazing when it just so happens to have done quite a bit better than the competition you are comparing it to. KTHNXBYE
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Maine
You say that the Z is "heavy"...
Curb Weight:
2003 350z: 3,197 lbs
1998 C5: 3,240 lbs
700ft Slalom speed:
2003 350z: 70.1mph
1998 C5: 62.5mph
Braking Distance: 60mph-0mph
2003 350z: 113ft
1998 C5: 118ft...
I am also going to source this information:
- http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=1001
- http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/fe...50z/index.html
Enjoy...
Do not gripe about fit and finish, and then use Chevrolet as the "better" example... also do not say a car does nothing amazing when it just so happens to have done quite a bit better than the competition you are comparing it to. KTHNXBYE
Curb Weight:
2003 350z: 3,197 lbs
1998 C5: 3,240 lbs
700ft Slalom speed:
2003 350z: 70.1mph
1998 C5: 62.5mph
Braking Distance: 60mph-0mph
2003 350z: 113ft
1998 C5: 118ft...
I am also going to source this information:
- http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=1001
- http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/fe...50z/index.html
Enjoy...
Do not gripe about fit and finish, and then use Chevrolet as the "better" example... also do not say a car does nothing amazing when it just so happens to have done quite a bit better than the competition you are comparing it to. KTHNXBYE
Evolving Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: US
I drove a 98 C5 with 24k miles on it, I had no complaints about the interior. One thing you must realize, is that with a C5, you're getting so many things - a car that is legendary, 345rwhp stock, a car that handles just as good if not better than a Z. A C5 is amazing in a lot of ways, the 350Z isn't amazing at anything. It's decent in power, OK in handling, sub-par in fit & finish.. but doesn't do anything Amazing.The S2000 on the other hand, handles Amazing, has an Amazing gear box, Amazing turning radius. Though it lacks in straight line, at least it makes up for it with everything else that's good about it.
Of course, but it was you that brought a C5 Corvette into the equation. And as far as I am concerned the post quoted looks to be an indirect comparison of the two cars...
The Z isn't up to par, but what IS... the C5 Corvette
You say the 350z does nothing amazing, and imply that the C5 Corvette is just so much more and in so many ways... so I provided some specs.
If you are going to make a car out to be "ok in handling, sub par in fit and finish, but doesn't do anything amazing"... then when providing an example car and then imply (this is how it's done) kind of statements... be sure to use an example car that indeed DOES actually do it better.
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Maine
Of course, but it was you that brought a C5 Corvette into the equation. And as far as I am concerned the post quoted looks to be an indirect comparison of the two cars...
The Z isn't up to par, but what IS... the C5 Corvette
You say the 350z does nothing amazing, and imply that the C5 Corvette is just so much more and in so many ways... so I provided some specs.
If you are going to make a car out to be "ok in handling, sub par in fit and finish, but doesn't do anything amazing"... then when providing an example car and then imply (this is how it's done) kind of statements... be sure to use an example car that indeed DOES actually do it better.
The Z isn't up to par, but what IS... the C5 Corvette
You say the 350z does nothing amazing, and imply that the C5 Corvette is just so much more and in so many ways... so I provided some specs.
If you are going to make a car out to be "ok in handling, sub par in fit and finish, but doesn't do anything amazing"... then when providing an example car and then imply (this is how it's done) kind of statements... be sure to use an example car that indeed DOES actually do it better.
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Maine
Sounds about right, a lot of 350z guys think they are the shizzz, when in reality, they're only a 1/2 a second faster in the quarter mile than the all new V6 Accord coupe
Evolving Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: US
There is nothing fan boy about it, umm I was just pointing out that you implying the corvette was amazing while the 350z sucked at X,Y and Z... was ignorant. Considering as stated before that the Z did all those things better than the C5.
what does the quarter mile time have anything to do with me proving you wrong?
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: NC
Shouldn't have driven a BASE model Z. Try a higher model with the Viscous lsd. It feels much better and closer to a s2k. S2k will always "feel" better stock vs stock with the Z..handling wise. These were my two choice when buying a car last year.
Last edited by superblack350z; Feb 18, 2008 at 12:55 PM.
Evolving Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: US
Not a great deal. Sure the s2000's can be had for $15,000 or so but with low miles that is more than likely going to be a 2000 or 2001 (AP1) maybe a 2002, more than likely NOT an 03. The price increase to have a different trim 350z is minimal ($1,000-2,000 at MOST) for a 2003 or 2004 with low low miles.
Evolving Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
From: US
Sorry but find a car that isn't "too normal" and "mediocre" for $17,000 bucks... that's only 3-4 years old with 40,000 miles... RWD or AWD, 13's with mild bolt ons and handling/braking similar or better that is appealing to the eye too...
This was an analysis... not a, lets throw out some dumb ambiguity