350Z vs S2000

Home  \  Asian Imports  \  350Z vs S2000

Which one do you think would win in a 1/4 mile?

posted by  IwantaSti

:laughing: , I cant believe you posted this because it was brought up to you in the other thread that the 04-06 S2000 is just as fast as the coupe 350Z. You know, you CAN discuss it in that thread, you dont have to make a whole separate thread.

The answer is in the other thread, a coupe 350Z and 04-06 S2000 run about the same exact high 13 second 1/4 miles, while the roadster 350Z is a little slower than both. The 00-03 S2000's run about the same times as the roadtser 350Z due to bad launches that usually cannot be helped. I myself couldn't do better than 14.1's in a 2001 S2000, but when I tried a buddie 04 S2000 I was doing 13.9s easily.

posted by  thunderbird1100

Also, they upped the engine size from 2.0 to 2.2L so it probaly had a broader power band. The 04-06 S2000 runs around the same time as the 350z because the weight to power ratio is around the same. The S2000 is around 800 pounds lighter. Although the 350z has a lot more potential on the drag track, it does not stand a chance against the S2000 in any race that involves moderatly curvy corners.

posted by  aerith

Depends who is driving them. Just like any other car, the driver plays a bigger role than the car itself.
P.S. Why the hell did you make this thread? Because someone said the S2000 is the same of faster?

posted by  newyorker

Yeah, so if I drove an Enzo and Schumacher had a Pinto, he'd win. Right.

posted by  jedimario

If you didnt know how to even get the car started, then yes. Plus you dont have to take it to that extreme. :banghead:

posted by  newyorker

Just pointing out that the best driver doesn't always win.

posted by  jedimario

This is especially true with automatic. Right Nissan_Altima? I handle my car a lot better than him (could be because it just has better handling, but I do have a little bit of wheelman skill), but his car is more powerful so he beats me even with people in it.

posted by  newyorker

The skill of the driver is really important, but the car is important as well. I'm just saying if you put the same driver on the same curvy course with the 350Z vs the S2000. The S2000 will get better times, this is normally how comparisons are done; less factors to affect performance. Even though with different cars you take different styles of cornering, at least the skill of the driver is constant.

posted by  aerith

i thought we all agreed on not doing this vs this threads for a really long while?

posted by  Inygknok

We did?

posted by  jedimario

I dont remember any agreements like that either.

posted by  newyorker

My 5 fingers approaching your face.

posted by  importluva

LOL! Is that why you have 2 accidents on your record? This includes you "handling" a car on a wet road. :laughing:

posted by  Nissan_Altima

S2000 isn't built for the 1/4 mile, so probably the 350z. I'd still take the s2000 over the 350z though......

posted by  GreekWarrior

From what I found, the S2000 has a quarter mile time of 14.2, and the 350Z has a 14.1 second 1/4 mile...but the roadster is at 14.3

So pretty much the same, but I'm not sure of the accuracy of this site, although I have seen many accurate results on it...

posted by  chris_knows

While the S2000 isn't built for the 1/4 mile at all (just drive an 00-03 and you figure that out REAL quick), the 04-06 S2000 runs the exact same 1/4 miles a 350Z coupe does (high 13s).

posted by  thunderbird1100

Am I missing something? Honestly, I didn't look through the whole thread, but...

A Honda S2000 has a 2.2L engine, giving out about 240 hp while a 350Z has a 3.5L engine giving out about 287 hp. Both are convertibles and RWD. The Z also comes with an anti-theft system, optional side airbags and better front-end crash test results. The price is pretty similar. That being said, the 350Z wins outright.

Although this is only a comparison between a 2005 Honda S2000, and a 2005 Nissan 350Z Roadster, 6 speed manual (to make the trans equal). Maybe if I used different models, something would change?

posted by  Nissan_Altima

Yea but the Z doesnt just come in Roadster format. Hes talking about racing, and the S2000 is a LOT lighter than the Z. If youre speaking features, then Most of the posts here are useless.

posted by  newyorker

Alright, let's ignore the features. I'll check up on it, I forgot to factor in weight. :doh:

posted by  Nissan_Altima

And torque. The original question was

Weight, power, torque, and such arent the only features. 1/4 mile measures the car's power, but not performance.

posted by  newyorker

The 2.2L has closer to 250hp, according to dyno pulls. You forgot two major factors, weight and handling. The 350Z roadtser weighs 3600lbs, a big pig. The S2000 comes close to 2800lbs. Handling isn't even questionable, the 350Z Roadster is not a sports car, rather a grand tourer.

posted by  thunderbird1100

Even though the Z has more features, its interior pales in comparison to teh S2000's. The interior feels Hyundai like, which is not what i would want for a car that costs so much. Ugly ass interior door panels, and dash.

The S2000 has less features, because its a hardcore sports roadster not some glorified tourer with a open up top. Not to mention all the extra reinforcement they have to put into the chassis because its a roadster; which is just plain dead weight. That's why the S2000 fans were psyched when they heard about the possiblity of a hardtop S2000.

posted by  aerith

The roadster Z does weigh alot, but the base coupe is 3,339 pounds. Still 500 more than the honda, but down by 300. I would never get the roadster Z over the coupe myself. The convertible is just plain butt ugly in my opinion.

edit: just saw the latest post: I would LOVE to see a s2k come as a coupe.

posted by  Vlad

So, would I, too bad they're axing the S2000 soon. Or at least they're rumored to. They are either going to axe it or introduce the next gen one. Or axe it for now and reintroduce it, i have no idea.

posted by  aerith

I think the s2ks are great. If they do axe it though, then we know that when it comes back (if it does) then it'll even be better than the current one, and that would be sweet.

An s2000 is seriously on my list of cars i am considering getting once i get out of high school and get a good job. I'll just stick with the lude for now. The only thing about the s2000 is i dunno if i would fit in it. My friend who is about 2 inches taller than me said he test drove one, fast as hell, but he was cramped the whole time. Anyone here 6feet tall and drove an s2000? how is the driver seat room?

posted by  Vlad

Yeah, i have, and im 6 feet. I found it kind of cramped, but its much more comfortable then a miata MX-5, at least from my experience. I think its a great car, but its not that economical for daily driving. But thats my view, and you know i love big cars; hence one of the main reasons TL>TSX.

posted by  aerith

Both the 2-door enthusiast roadster and touring roadster (what's the difference?) come with 274 torque, while the S2000 has around 162. Since we're talking about a 1/4 mile, handling isn't really an issue, and the Z has both more HP and Torque. Although it weighs more, it should still be faster, right?

posted by  Nissan_Altima

id take a s2000

posted by  Aondor

Lmfao, he's a wheel-man alright, in his own mind. :laughing:

posted by  Pythias

Yea..but think of it this way. 2 people. One has a bit more strength than the other. But the stronger man has to pull 3600LBS, while the slightly weaker man has to pull 2800. See what I mean. Its basically like you running your car for example in the 15-16s stock, and then filling the trunk and cabin with an extra 800lbs of cement and such. Weight will really slow you down, but in this case, im sure it would be close. I havent taken the time out to check the standings on either car, but I loved the S2000 from the moment I sat in it at the Honda Dealership we got on Haldeman and Bustleton.

posted by  newyorker

Not neccessairly, We're not talking about a difference of a hundred pounds, the S2000 is lighter by up to 600 pounds. Thats a lot of extra weight to haul around. Whats most important in straight line speed is not how much power/torque each car puts down, its the power to weight ratio. The power ratio for the Honda S2000 is 0.084 hp/pound of weight, and the 350Z's is 0.083 hp/pound of weight. That means for each horsepower the S2000 puts down, it has to pull less weight, which means it can be used to increase the speed more efficiently. And since you don't launch at low RPM's, low end torque wouldn't make a difference. Lets compare, a 5.3L V8 GMC Savanna Van has around 295 horsepower, and a bucket load of torque. An Acura TSX has a 2.4L I4 with 205 horsepower and a lot less torque. Who do you think is going to win the quater mile? Weight is actually more important then how much horsepower a car has.

Specs;
S2000;
240 HP
162 lb of tq
2855 lbs Curb Weight

350z Roadster
300 HP (MT) 287(AT)
260 lb of tq.
3578-3602 lbs Curb Weight.

(I used 240HP for the S2000, because Nissan hasn't modified their horsepower numbers after the "new" horsepower rating yet, i know its not a new rating system; its just easier to call it this way: i don't want to get into the explaining thing.)

posted by  aerith

Your Message