Nissan 370Z or Honda S2000: Which Would You Choose?

370Z for me too, but is this really fair? Hasn't the S2000 been out for ages? As far as toys go, it would be the S2000 since it HAS to be cheaper, but for a real-use car, of course the 370Z. But if you're looking for something at the 30k to 35k range, how about an E46 M3?

Ceteris Paribus, I'd choose the 370 just because it has an actual roof. I'm taller, so when I'm sitting in the s2k, I feel like the pet dinosaur from the Flintstones. If I'm not careful I'm catching bugs in the face.

Although I've never driven a 370, I did drive a 350 and I found the S2k to actually be the easier one to drive at the limit. Go figure.

This isn't even a fair fight. The 370 over the S2K every time but as for the tougher question. 370 or Miata? I think I'd go with the Miata because Mazda doesn't confuse the term sports car with muscle car like Nissan. The driving experience is just so much purer in the Miata.

It depends on how much the S2000 is. If the question is new vs new, I'd agree with Scott. If it's new 370Z vs used S2000, it could be the S2000.

If the S2000 has those wheels however, it will always be the 370Z. Eww.

Z!

I also like the 2000, but among other reasons, I don't fit in the 2000. I sat in one once at a dealer and literally was stuck - almost couldn't get out.

I hate Honda so I'm going to have to go with the not so reliable Z

Assuming I could fit in either of these (which I don't), I'd go with the torque and 6 cylinders of the 370Z.

@ 94_gsr_cpe

I hear you... I have a 94 GSR bad in the day (before it was stolen). I totally missed the torque. It actually made it difficult to drive in the city.

The Z just because it has a roof. Any problems with it performance wise the aftermarket can probably help make up for it.

I'd go with the S2000 because it's a convertible. If I have to live with a fixed roof, I'd prefer a more practical design over the 370Z.

Are the wheels on the Honda as horrifyingly tacky and awful as they appear to be?

Wouldn't buy either, but I always thought the S2000 was kinda cool.

Although much can be said for a bantam weight ride that revs up to 9 grand, my rides have been lacking anything resembling torque for years. Something to throw me back into my seat every now and then would be nice.

srlracing:
"The driving experience is just so much purer in the Miata."

The "pureness" of the driving experience in an S2000 is hard to match while staying under 6 figures.

This really isn't a fair comparison though. The 370Z is 10 years newer than the S2000! Now if you compare the 350Z to an S2k - well the S2000 will easily out satisfy.

If given a choice I'd pick the 370Z too, but only because of the decade of engineering progress. The fact that the 370 sounds like garbage above 4500RPM while the S2000 sounds like an audio-orgasm at 8500rpm will always keep my heart with Honda. It has a beautiful Jekyll and Hyde personality.

And to the Integra owners, there's a staunch difference between your cars and an S2000. I have never had a problem driving/passing in city traffic (6 perfectly spaced gears)

*Disclaimer - There's an S2000 in my garage.

S2000's engine = sewing machine

'nuff said.

@stoppre75: I had a S2000 for a short period. It was supposed to replace my aging Miata. I didn't like it. Brand new it rattled more than a 15 year old Miata and I did not find canyon carving as gratifying in the S2k as the Miata. Guess which one I still have.

I'd take the Z too. Although the S2k's shifter is very tempting...

stoppre75 - Honda is still selling the S2000 as a 2010 model so it is fair game to compare it to the 370Z. Blame Honda for not fully updating the car for 10 years.

My friend dreamed of owning a S2000 for a while and finally bought one. He put on a full race suspension and wins at autocrosses, BUT he admits he would like an engine with more torque though.

Give me a stock AP2 S2000 in GPW with a hardtop with the soft top + motor removed.

I am a Honda fan and I don't need the extra 400 pounds. And even though the S2000 is 10 years old, it doesn't look like a 10 year old model. It's simplistic design makes it a great looking car compared to the Z.

If they kept the S2000 in their lineup for another 10 years, I'd still buy it 10 years later.

I'll keep my 2000 S2000 with 80k miles. Yeah, so the S2000 was sold in 2009-2010. It's still an old car. Mine still doesn't rattle. It has the original top (if you're gonna compromise and only have 2 seats, might as well have a convertible - especially in SoCal) and the original rear window is still clear on the rare occasion the roof goes up.

It still sounds awesome, the shifter is pure bliss, the chassis is instantly responsive and it feels as though it is hard wired into your brain. The Z doesn't sound as good (not a deal breaker IMO), the VQ shifters suck, and the additional mass of the Z is a detriment (lighter is better).

But what about the modern chassis and power advantage of the Z you say? The Z is substantially faster (almost a second in the 1/4 for most people), right? And more forgiving too (the FM chassis is very predictable). Well, so what, the beauty of a well established performance vehicle is lots of performance parts. Why buy a new S2000 when you can buy a low mileage, good condition model for under $20k and spend the rest on a supercharger and suspension upgrades? My car is making 400 whp and still passes emissions and I'm using the stock exhaust and stock block. Last time out with only 360 whp on street tires it ran a 12.4@116 mph. Can you get a turbo or supercharger for a Z? Sure, and there will be more and more of them as time goes on. But the stock VQ motors aren't particularly robust under boost. The VQ35s are sketchy over 400 whp, but the F20/F22C has fully forged internals and can handle 500+ whp on the stock block.

Am I an S2000 lover? Absolutely, I actually own two. I am biased? Hell yeah. But I have owned VQ FM cars from Nissan. I like them (I would even say I miss my G35C). But the S2000 is something special.

The S2K is a classic. In 20 years, the S2K will still be a classic. As nice as the 370Z is, I don't see it standing the test of time. Already the 350Z looks dated.

If you're looking for a commuter, then sure, stay away from the S. In fact, you should probably stay away from the Z. The S2000 is intended for serious enthusiasts anyway.

* - S/Ced S2000 owner

m_thrizzle: Its being sold as a 2009 model, and that will be its final year in production.

You can compare these two cars - but its an obvious choice at this point. The Nissan was JUST redone. The S2000 was meant to be an homage to celebrate Honda's 50 year anniversary with a two year production run (2000-2001).

The S2000 was built with purpose - to be a great sports car. It does it better than anything else remotely close to its price. Its a no compromise, love it or hate it car. And I'll let that thing sing from 6-9k rpm every day before i give a s**t about torque.

"It's funny how that good ol' feeling of TQ don't mean s**t in the real world. It just boosts the ego until HP steps in and stomps the living s**t out of you."

-Guy walks into a Nissan Dealership looking to buy a 350z...Dealer asked the guy, "Do you wanna go fast in a straight line or do you wanna go fast all the time?' Buyer says, "All the time!" Dealer replies, "Buy an S2000!"

S2000 for me without question. The responsive/focused chassis, tight steering, snickety snick shifter and high string engine are enough to keep my attention. Everything is so race car like.

To add to that the 2.0L (AP1 S2000)is smoother at 9000RPM than the Z's big fat V6 regardless of RPM.

In the end the Z may provide more comfort, more torque, more civility and easier access to its performance but the purity of the S2000's performance delivery is more important to me. Numbers aren't everything as the S2000 was, is and will always be a PURE SPORTS CAR!

If I want torque Ill just simply add a GT35R turbine and associated parts, which I plan to do anyway.

I agree with estreka. The S2000 will be a classic roadster. As for the 370z? I doubt it. The GT-R surely will though.

I'd take an S2000 over the 370Z...only if I could fit into it without my knees hitting the steering wheel.

Gimme a pre-owned Z4 M Coupe with 20k and I'm happy.

I hate droptops, and the 370Z seems like a tool-car.

Struggling with that right now, a new 370Z or a used S2K.

Might go for the honda to save ~10K

The Z blows that high strung Honda into the weeds.

Jaeger1: 16? 17?...18 years old?

This debate isn't about being the first to 60; its about having fun with the car, that doesn't mean you have to be the fastest, but the most satisfying.

AP1 S2000 + Kraftwerks high boost kit + clutch = bye bye 370Z, and its still cheaper. It wont eat its transmission like Edmunds IL 370 did, it gains torque while still staying true to its pure sports car mission.

AP2 S2000 w/Kraftwerks high boost kit 10PSI vs modified 490hp Pontiac GTO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB-Ll0jQlnI\

Who says S2000's have no torque:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c49McBCqFNM

Boosted S2000 "from hell" on stock internals:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emwrIVZ9gA4

Adavis, I don't like droptops either but believe it or not top down motoring in an S2000 adds to the driving experience significantly. Throw some boost in the mix and its in a league of its own. Ill never sell mine.

Neither, I picked an Rx8 :). Did not fit in an S2000, didn't want a convertible anyway. Felt like the Z(350) was not connected to the driver.

Torque good. I'd take the Z (even the earlier 350). Of course, I'd have to put up with its truckish sounds at high RPM, but would rather have the brute force.

Other than both having 2 seats and 4 wheels, they aren't comparable.

I am definitely a Honda fan -- I will concede that my Integra Type R was not an ideal daily driver due to a lack of torque and general noisy-ness.

That said, I doubt I will ever own a car that is more fun to drive hard and that is so seemingly bullet-proof. I would expect the S2000 would be all the same and more (RWD rocks) PLUS it features the most amazing gearbox I have ever experienced (got a quick drive in a 2004 model year).

If you are looking for a daily driver, neither of these cars would be particularly well-suited. I would recommend buying a used S2000 for 20-25 and a used Accord V6 for 7-10 -- that, I feel, would be the best $30-35K solution.

"Other than both having 2 seats and 4 wheels, they aren't comparable. "

Of course they are. Both are fun toys that people buy for the fun of driving. Neither one is a good practical choice but that's not really the point.

They are different takes on a rear wheel drive Japanese sports car... how could they not be comparable?

370Z. I can actually fit in the bloody thing. I love the S2000. I just wish I could get my tall lanky ass to fit in it.

I am thorn between those two and 2 more cars so I am not sure if I could answer this question but maybe I can get some answers from all of you.
The cars that I am looking at are: S2000 CR, NISMO 370Z, 93 – 98 Supra Turbo and 1991 – 1997 Acura NSX.

S2000 CR; I know it is the slowest of the 4 but by far the most pure sports car of the group or in general. I think the only two cars more pure then it are Atom and Elise.
RELIABLE (+)

NISMO 370Z; This is a great looking car. I have not driven it. I have only driven the 370Z and I liked it. The throttle response is great the handling is good but not up to par with S2000.
RELIABLE (?)

Supra; Classic, beautiful even after 16 years. Amazing performance, oh what the hell am I doing there is way too many things that I love about this car. I actually lust after it or have since it came out.
RELIABLE (+)

Acura NSX; Again great looking car. First all aluminum construction (This is a big plus. It will never rust). Great engine, not as powerful as Z or Supra but much lighter then those two and great balance with the engine being located in the middle.
RELIABLE (+)

Let me know guys it looks like everybody here has plenty of opinions.

NSX ftw.

But you gotta remember that fixing it, even routine stuff is gonna be expensive and as time goes, more and more difficult to find. Coolest car of the bunch though.

1. NSX
2. Supra turbo
3. S2000
4. 370Z Nismo

I must agree, the Z isn't a very cool car. I had an overweight 65 year old female professor own a 350Z. It was an automatic.

@b_cvijasiu
I'd get a normal S2000 and do the mods myself over the CR. Ditto the Z (although I'd never choose a Z).

"But you gotta remember that fixing it, even routine stuff is gonna be expensive and as time goes, more and more difficult to find. Coolest car of the bunch though."

Stoppre, given the NSX's direct competition (Ferrari) and level of engineering that went into the NSX, one should expect repairs and maintenance to be higher than average. On the contrary, the NSX has proven to be ultra reliable regardless of mileage and its still cheaper to purchase/own vs its European competition. Give me a 1999 Silverstone/black NSX-T 6MT any day.

3.2 NSX-T should be the next Edmunds IL used sports car.

NSX's aren't _that_ cheap hondacura4. Try pricing out a clutch change. And if you have an early model(pre-93 I think), make sure its had the transmission snap ring fix done, otherwise you could be in for a high $$$ repair.

I do agree that they are pretty darn reliable compared to most supercars of their era (or even today), but the running costs are not Civic like.

When I think of the 4 cars here's what pops into my head:

NSX -- collectible and a looker
Supra turbo -- tuner's dream
S2000 -- a pure driver's car and not a daily driver
370Z Nismo -- a decent GT

Which one you pick depend on what you truly want.

If I had the funds, I would want the NSX.

370z- I really tried hard to buy a S2000 but it's too brutal for me and the engine sounds like an evil sewing machine. It would get old.

I've owned my NFR AP2 for 5 years now and it would take a lot more than horsepower to pry my keys away for something else. What the S lacks in torque, it more than makes up for in steering feel, weight, balance and the best damn 6-speed gearbox out there. It's a raw, no-frills roadster that reminds me of an old Triumph TR-6 where the 370 is more like a Sunbeam Tiger where big torque is nice, but it's more of a handful in the corners.

I appeciate having to work for the power and that sweet VTEC note is pure bliss.

370Z...don't get me wrong both r fun 2 drive but the Z has more features, more power, & is better overall imo

S2000...no question...

My buddy has an S, I have a Z. We both drool over each other's car. Perhaps the grass is greener?

Both carve corners, both pull like demons in their own way, both have looks that are polarizing. As for the Z having "loads of torque" - though 270 lbs of torque is more than the S, it doesn't compare to the larger muscle cars (Camero SS: 400lbs of torque). Yet it still outruns the Camero in a straight line. I'd wager that the S would out corner both on a razor sharp course.

For me, the Z was the best of both worlds: a good helping of torque relative to the S and 500+ lbs lighter and faster through the corners than the Camero. Gotta give the S2000 its due: amazing handling, shifting, road feel & drop-top experience. The looks of the S weren't cutting enough for me - I wanted something that had a bit more zing.

I'd take the Z.

I'd take the S2000. It is a classic purpose built sports car.