9.8m/s/s

Hahahaha

I agree it would not be good for the “instant” composure of the S2000 but I'm thinking a K23A1 like in the RDX (variable flow turbo.)

Benjamin Choi

That would be cool, but I'd like to see that turbo application be done on their coupes/sedans in the Acura line-up. And you know I'd be more trusting of Japanese turbos than German turbos.

Good to have options, ain't it? Good to be a car fan these days.

Ray S

I disagree

At just over 3,000 pounds the 996 is very light by todays standards (keep in mind Porsche made it lighter than the 993 and the 964). In standard form it has none of the characteristics you describe (big, heavy on luxury features, sloppy suspension)

While it is certainly no Miata or Elise like lightweight it matches up well (overall dimensions, weight, etc) with other sports cars like the C5 Corvette, Ferrari 360/430, Audi R8 etc.

I think of a car like the new Nissan GTR, when I think of a Grand Touring car.

arr0gant

I would choose the S2000 just cause it's SO much newer. 99 is going on 10 years old. That said, i don't think you'd fit an S2000 so your better choice would be the 911

Also keep in mind, the S2000 is very slow compared to the 911. If you're looking for car with performance, the Carrera is the only way to go. I'd still recommend a newer 911.

Benjamin Choi

This is the last guy I'd go to for car wisdom especially along this front.

UCrazyKid

0.2 sec 0-60 slower than the 996 mkII is very slow? The S2000 has the same 0-60 as a tip '99 Carrera.

How do you define "performance"? The S2000 has a better suspension and handles better than a stock 996.



Ray S: I was referring not to the 996 curb weight, but rather to its long list of luxury features as "heavy" otherwise the 996 is just "big" in dimensions. I also think the Corvette, Ferrari, R8, Lambo are bloated cars. Perhaps "super cars" is the better term for those. The GTR is definitely a GT car. I think it is easy to argue that anything with a backseat is a GT car.

arr0gant

'04 S2000 0-60 5.9 secs
240 Bhp - 160 Lb-ft Torque
Curb Weight: 2835 lbs.

'99 996 Carrera: 0-60 4.9 secs
296 HP - 258 Lb-ft torque
Curb Weight: 2901 lbs.

SLOW compared to a 911. Better to compare this car against a Boxster. 911 is in a much higher class.

Benjamin Choi

I hate to do this, but since y'all are bringing up the 0-60 stuff... the S2000's figure is pretty conservative whereas the Carrera's is a wee bit aggressive.

The 996 Carrera is faster in the straights, I can personally attest to that, but the S2000 does have go power with a 5.3 - 5.5 0-60 time or more like a 14-sec flat 1/4 mile time.

But, again, this is not where either car shines. It's feel of the car where you get to fully experience the differences in design philosophy manifested in real world driving fun.

donuts

I agree!!! I've had both as well.

phaphaphooey

I am looking to get an 06+ s2000 in a few years to replace my 986 until I have kids at which point it will probably be 997 time. I don't know why but there is something about s2000s that is just intoxicating to me. Btw, I am 5'8, 135 lbs and I thought it was fairly snug in there but in a good way. Much smaller inside than my Boxster. I couldn't see an individual much larger than myself being comfortable in such a small car. I agree with the others however: if you are stretching yourself to buy the Porsche, get the cheaper S2000, enjoy its much lower operating cost, then buy a 996/997 in a few years with the money that you saved.

Ray S

You crazy kid, you'll have more luck selling that story in the Street Racing forum on S2Ki.

The S2K is a fun little sports car but it's no where in the same power league as a 996. It's a 14sec (or high 13 sec car at best) vs the 996 which is a low 13 sec car. That's a big difference (bus lengths at the end of a 1/4 mile). Furthermore, anyone who has ever driven the S2K hard knows to get that time requires a brutal clutch drop to bring the engine up to VTEC right away. In fact, so many kids were breaking diffs with this little procedure that Honda put a clutch delay in the later AP2 cars so people would burn up the clutch rather than blow the diff. An aggressive minivan can embarass a S2k at a light but a 996 has plenty of torque down low to pull away without all the drama that you need in an S2000.

Don't get me wrong, I think the S2000 is a blast to drive at an autocross or when you've got the engine on boil. However, driving around town or trying to scoot into a hole in traffic is a real drag from 1-6k.



LOL a Corvette is no supercar, it's a sports car just like the 996.

You used the specific terms "big, heavy on luxury features, sloppy suspension" to describe these cars. Sorry, but I could not disagree more.

Ray S

Come on Ben, please describe the process necessary to eek a 5.3 0-60 out of an S2k? (It's painful just to think about it)

Better still, how many bus lengths separate a 13.2 sec car vs a 14.0 sec car at the end of the 1/4?

I've got plenty of seat time in both cars and the 996 is just in a different league.

MechanicalEng

I have raced both head to head, (last year in Mexico) and the 996 pulls away from a stop and from a roll everytime, the 996 in 3rd and the S2000 in 2nd gear the S2000 pulls away slowly until the Porker gets back into the 5krmp range..The 996 is faster but will not smoke the S2k like for exaple a GT2 will smoke a civic. Just for the record one of my mexican friends has an 02 986S and we did the same test and for his surprise (and mine) the S2k was always half car ahead until we hit 90-100mph, at those speeds the 986S and the 996 keep pulling like trains while the small 2.2L loses its battle against friction

hwk72

Why don't you get a Boxster? Best of both worlds: good roadster and a Porsche; you get a newer car for the same money as a MK1 996 and don't compromise with a Honda if you really want a Porsche.

arr0gant

He's too big for a Boxster OR S2000... Although, Boxster S > S2000 IMO.

S2000's are great for the track or windy roads when you can keep the revs above 6k. But, for normal everyday driving it's an uninspiring car. Just my opinion of it.