S200 or C5
Team Owner
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 24,987
Likes: 26
From: Kerrville, Texas USA Hook 'em Horns!
CentralTX Events Coordinator
St. Jude Donor '03-'04-'05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17
Originally Posted by viper8u2
get rid of the wife and call it good
Seems like a no brainer to me.
Drifting
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 52
From: Colorado Springs CO
Originally Posted by BltByKrmn
On what track? How much faster were your lap times? You better of lapped them, "bub".
Honda S2000 - 237hp, 2.2l.......HORRIBLE torque (162 lb-ft at 6800 rpm) and curb weight of about 2750lbs.
It's competitors (self-proclaimed on their own website) are:
- Porsche Boxster
- Mazda MX5
- BMW Z4 Roadster
- SLK350
All of which are "fun" to drive, but hardly competition for a C5 on the straight-aways. Great on the turns, though!
I'm not negating the fact that it is fun to drive, so is a GSX-R, but fact to fact, you wouldn't compare the GSX600 to the CBR 900 (or even the GSX 750!), so don't compare the Honda S2000 to the C5.
You're really bent out of shape over this one, I suggest an evening of rest and maybe a break from the computer for a couple of days.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 874
Likes: 0
From: Bonita CA
I have a vette(a mans car) and my wife drives a S2K (a chicks car). I don't think you will be happy selling the S2K because when it is gone then your wife will be taking up YOUR driving time driving YOUR vette! The S2K is a fun car to drive tho! Keep both and deal with it!
Drifting
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,372
Likes: 0
From: Chesapeake Va
really depends..
would you rather have a quick car and go ***** out all the time...
or a fast car and only really get on it every so often.. yeah you can floor it everywhere in the vette.. but you will prob get tickets every other day..
would you rather have a quick car and go ***** out all the time...
or a fast car and only really get on it every so often.. yeah you can floor it everywhere in the vette.. but you will prob get tickets every other day..
Pro
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by _supra_
I can actually see him wanting real opinions on this. IMHO, I say get rid of the vette. It's higher insurance, gas isn't exactly the most inexpensive thing in the world
The S2000 only gets marginally better gas mileage around town (may 21-22 vs 18-20 in the 'vette).
I think they're both great cars and both look great (and contrary to many opinions, I think the C6 is a great-looking car too).
But if it were me, I'd keep the 'vette simply because it's a slightly more practical car. You can get more stuff in it.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Pro
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Bounty Hunter 6
All of which are "fun" to drive, but hardly competition for a C5 on the straight-aways. Great on the turns, though!
Racer
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Bounty Hunter 6
You can't seriously still be debating this. Here, let me help you out:
Honda S2000 - 237hp, 2.2l.......HORRIBLE torque (162 lb-ft at 6800 rpm) and curb weight of about 2750lbs.
It's competitors (self-proclaimed on their own website) are:
- Porsche Boxster
- Mazda MX5
- BMW Z4 Roadster
- SLK350
All of which are "fun" to drive, but hardly competition for a C5 on the straight-aways. Great on the turns, though!
I'm not negating the fact that it is fun to drive, so is a GSX-R, but fact to fact, you wouldn't compare the GSX600 to the CBR 900 (or even the GSX 750!), so don't compare the Honda S2000 to the C5.
You're really bent out of shape over this one, I suggest an evening of rest and maybe a break from the computer for a couple of days.
Honda S2000 - 237hp, 2.2l.......HORRIBLE torque (162 lb-ft at 6800 rpm) and curb weight of about 2750lbs.
It's competitors (self-proclaimed on their own website) are:
- Porsche Boxster
- Mazda MX5
- BMW Z4 Roadster
- SLK350
All of which are "fun" to drive, but hardly competition for a C5 on the straight-aways. Great on the turns, though!
I'm not negating the fact that it is fun to drive, so is a GSX-R, but fact to fact, you wouldn't compare the GSX600 to the CBR 900 (or even the GSX 750!), so don't compare the Honda S2000 to the C5.
You're really bent out of shape over this one, I suggest an evening of rest and maybe a break from the computer for a couple of days.
Have fun with your highway pulls.
Instructor
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
From: Auburn Hills Mi
Originally Posted by BltByKrmn
Some people will never get it, you're obviously one of them.
Have fun with your highway pulls.
Have fun with your highway pulls.
The S2000 is bad ***. I have a C5, but I can honestly say that the only reason I choose it over a S2000 is because it was available with an auto (the wife likes to drive). Let's face it... you can talk numbers all day... tourque this, horsepower that... but you really need to drive a S2000 to appreciate it. I was an old school muscle car guy until I did. Changed my perspective real quick.
This is not to say the vette is inferior. I love my vette and think it is a beautiful car.
Pro
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
From: Houston TX
Originally Posted by Craig Wagner
I had an '02 S2000 before getting my '03 'vette. The S2000 was more expensive to insure.
Supposedly, the suspension was retuned on the new ones though.
Pro
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Ducman69
I wonder how many have bit the dust due to that tendency to snap oversteer. Supposedly, the suspension was retuned on the new ones though.
Supposedly, the suspension was retuned on the new ones though.I think the "snap oversteer" thing was an excuse used by guys coming up from Honda Civics and other FWD cars. They didn't understand the physics of RWD and would punch it coming out of corners. They'd hit VTEC, the kick would hit, and whoops, the ***-end would come around and they'd blame "snap oversteer" for the wreck.
I found the tail on mine to be very controllable if you paid attention. And mine was before the suspension retune (which took place in the '04 model when they went to the 2.2 litre, IIRC).
Or maybe I'm just too conservative a driver. Nah, that's not it.
On the insurance thing, I'm totally guessing, but it is probably a more expensive car to insure. There were a lot fewer made than C5s, so parts are probably less plentiful and more expensive. Also, because there are relatively few of them on the road (compared to the C5), each wreck is a bigger percentage of the population, and as we all know, insurance companies love to use skewed statistics to jack up their rates.
Last edited by Craig Wagner; May 19, 2006 at 12:05 PM.
Team Owner
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 24,129
Likes: 1,038
From: The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
St. Jude Donor '05-'06-'07-'08-'09, '14-'15-'16-'17-'18
Originally Posted by sdnet
On second thought, I think you should sell the Corvette. If you really have to ask this question, then you don't appreciate owning a Corvette nearly enough to keep it.
Enjoy your Honda.
Enjoy your Honda.
Why is there even a question about this?
Racer
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Craig Wagner
Let me preface the following by saying that I have always driven rear wheel drive cars.
I think the "snap oversteer" thing was an excuse used by guys coming up from Honda Civics and other FWD cars. They didn't understand the physics of RWD and would punch it coming out of corners. They'd hit VTEC, the kick would hit, and whoops, the ***-end would come around and they'd blame "snap oversteer" for the wreck.
I found the tail on mine to be very controllable if you paid attention. And mine was before the suspension retune (which took place in the '04 model when they went to the 2.2 litre, IIRC).
I think the "snap oversteer" thing was an excuse used by guys coming up from Honda Civics and other FWD cars. They didn't understand the physics of RWD and would punch it coming out of corners. They'd hit VTEC, the kick would hit, and whoops, the ***-end would come around and they'd blame "snap oversteer" for the wreck.
I found the tail on mine to be very controllable if you paid attention. And mine was before the suspension retune (which took place in the '04 model when they went to the 2.2 litre, IIRC).
The same was done to the Toyota MR2 in 1993. Too many people don't know how to deal with RWD and a properly sorted suspension.
Pro
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
From: Houston TX
It may not be a problem with the car, but insurance is all about statistics, and this isn't too uncommon to see on earlier S2Ks regardless of the reason:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dNUoeILgPBE&search=S2000
I've driven my neighbors S2000, but not particularly hard. Sometimes the suspension setup can be very unforgiving though, even for a half-decent driver. Cobra was rediculous after getting the Kenny Brown suspension on, and turned out it had crazy toe on the rear. But anyway, still prefer a big GT car like the Corvette.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dNUoeILgPBE&search=S2000
I've driven my neighbors S2000, but not particularly hard. Sometimes the suspension setup can be very unforgiving though, even for a half-decent driver. Cobra was rediculous after getting the Kenny Brown suspension on, and turned out it had crazy toe on the rear. But anyway, still prefer a big GT car like the Corvette.
Pro
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Ducman69
It may not be a problem with the car, but insurance is all about statistics, and this isn't too uncommon to see on earlier S2Ks regardless of the reason:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dNUoeILgPBE&search=S2000
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dNUoeILgPBE&search=S2000
BltByKrmn is right, it's not the car, it's the people who can't be bothered to learn how to drive it.
Here's my theory on why you see that on earlier S2Ks. The price has dropped on the '00 through '02 S2Ks to well under $20k. That means the 16-18 year-old crowd (the FWD folks) can now afford them, and they don't understand the "brake before the corner" concept. Combine that with the smaller quantity of them on the road, and as I said in a previous post, the stats appear as if the car is at higher risk for a wreck (statistically speaking).
I should also mention that the car is very sensitive to tire selection. The S03s that come as OEM tires have an exaggerated stagger for their size. If you go with almost any other tire as a replacement you have to go +1 on the rear to keep the same front to rear width ratio. That gets overlooked a lot. When I got my car is came with these $80 'performance' tires that the dealership put on. The car was squirrely and unpredicatable. I replace them with Toyo T1-Ses and it made a world of difference.
Last edited by Craig Wagner; May 19, 2006 at 01:25 PM.