torn...can anyone give some ownership experiences
Discussion
Hi all,
I have recently been looking at 350zs snf s2ks. I've been for test drives in both andthey both have theor own unique merits.
The s2k felt more like a true sports car in every way. However the v6 in the 350 does appeal greatly.
The s2k did put a massive smile on my face something the 350 didnt achieve...would this last?
Have any of you owned both and are able to assist with my headache!
Steve
I have recently been looking at 350zs snf s2ks. I've been for test drives in both andthey both have theor own unique merits.
The s2k felt more like a true sports car in every way. However the v6 in the 350 does appeal greatly.
The s2k did put a massive smile on my face something the 350 didnt achieve...would this last?
Have any of you owned both and are able to assist with my headache!
Steve
what you using it for?
Never driven the s2k but have been driven in one, to get the best out of the s2k you really have to thrash it and its gets a a bit weary after a while - but does handle well.
The 350z is more flexible, does handle well but poss not like the honda
As a daily driver and occasional blast I'd go for the Nissan.
Never driven the s2k but have been driven in one, to get the best out of the s2k you really have to thrash it and its gets a a bit weary after a while - but does handle well.
The 350z is more flexible, does handle well but poss not like the honda
As a daily driver and occasional blast I'd go for the Nissan.
The car will ultimately be used at weekends and maybe evenings. would plan to do some touring.
I am coming from a caterham, and ford focus and want a balance of both worlds not an easy void. From the test drives i feel the 350 suits my driving style more cruisy, however im sure that would change of needed for the s2k, as with most cars you adapt. ultimately i want a good handling car, driving thrills will be on a/b roads so top end isn't vital.
As soon as i sat in the s2, the cabin was snug...although the seats should hug more. And when you hit tht sweet spot it did feel amazing but does feel like an age to get there not so much the case in the 350. However it felt like a reward in the honda.
I guess is be lookin at 05/55 cars as i can't justify the outrageous tax hike. not sure how cars from this period compare to the 08's i drove.
And driver focused is essential which tips me more towards the s2k. its a shame that there isn't a middle ground without breaking the bank.
I am coming from a caterham, and ford focus and want a balance of both worlds not an easy void. From the test drives i feel the 350 suits my driving style more cruisy, however im sure that would change of needed for the s2k, as with most cars you adapt. ultimately i want a good handling car, driving thrills will be on a/b roads so top end isn't vital.
As soon as i sat in the s2, the cabin was snug...although the seats should hug more. And when you hit tht sweet spot it did feel amazing but does feel like an age to get there not so much the case in the 350. However it felt like a reward in the honda.
I guess is be lookin at 05/55 cars as i can't justify the outrageous tax hike. not sure how cars from this period compare to the 08's i drove.
And driver focused is essential which tips me more towards the s2k. its a shame that there isn't a middle ground without breaking the bank.
Edited by sbeang on Monday 14th November 23:47
I've owned both.
S2K:
Positives:
Great engine. Ok, you hear the usual comments about torque - its only a 2 litre after all but has with more character that most engines regardless of configuration.
Amazing gearchange, superslick with perfect location.
Great handling in the dry. LSD. no TC on early models ha ha.
Service costs good.
Dealers usually very good.
Loads of fun on sunny winter or summer days. Top is quick to fold. Great for pootling too.
No major faults apart from suspension bolts
Comfortable cabin for a drop top esp for those less than 6'3" Loads of headroom
Enough boot space for decent long weekend breaks.
Negatives:
Torque - can be frustrating when you don't know a road and get caught in the wrong gear. Great gear change helps of course.
High tax post 2005.
Insurance group 19/20
Watch for ones with rear crash damage (oversteer anyone). This came from a Honda Dealer.
Suspension bolts - always check before purchase.
Need to take care in the wet. Hopeless in the snow. Don't even try.
No TC on earlier models of you feel you need it
Not that comfortable - 2 hours max for me, but then I'm not small.
350Z:
Positives:
Torque. Effortless performance.
Great handling for a heavy car.
TC not to intrusive and can be turned off.
Fuel consumption not too bad when cruising. 30 mpg possible.
Very comfortable. 6 hours OK for me
Servicing costs reasonable
No major faults as far as I know, certainly none with mine.
GT spec very good, Bose, leather, cruise etc.
Better in the snow than the S2K - not by much tho.
Negatives:
300 Kg heavier than an S2K. You can feel every Kg, that's why its a GT.
Engine a little rough over 5000 rpm.
Insurance group 18/19
High tax post 2005.
Cabin plastics a bit cheap.
Alloy corrosion.
A bit thirsy when thrashing it !
I'm sure there's more on both, but it's late.
I loved both of them. I bought the S2K because I loved the looks, my test drive (from an ex circuit racer) and because I wanted a convertible.
I bought the 350Z because I loved the looks the test drive and the contrast with the Honda. I also had got the convertible thing out of my system(missed the S2K on decent days tho).
In your position I would have the 350Z - its a year round car. The S2K isn't great mid winter.
If I had to choose I would have both - they are very different and but it would be difficult for me to decide.
All I can say is get a decent test drive, not 10 minutes round the block...
S2K:
Positives:
Great engine. Ok, you hear the usual comments about torque - its only a 2 litre after all but has with more character that most engines regardless of configuration.
Amazing gearchange, superslick with perfect location.
Great handling in the dry. LSD. no TC on early models ha ha.
Service costs good.
Dealers usually very good.
Loads of fun on sunny winter or summer days. Top is quick to fold. Great for pootling too.
No major faults apart from suspension bolts
Comfortable cabin for a drop top esp for those less than 6'3" Loads of headroom
Enough boot space for decent long weekend breaks.
Negatives:
Torque - can be frustrating when you don't know a road and get caught in the wrong gear. Great gear change helps of course.
High tax post 2005.
Insurance group 19/20
Watch for ones with rear crash damage (oversteer anyone). This came from a Honda Dealer.
Suspension bolts - always check before purchase.
Need to take care in the wet. Hopeless in the snow. Don't even try.
No TC on earlier models of you feel you need it
Not that comfortable - 2 hours max for me, but then I'm not small.
350Z:
Positives:
Torque. Effortless performance.
Great handling for a heavy car.
TC not to intrusive and can be turned off.
Fuel consumption not too bad when cruising. 30 mpg possible.
Very comfortable. 6 hours OK for me
Servicing costs reasonable
No major faults as far as I know, certainly none with mine.
GT spec very good, Bose, leather, cruise etc.
Better in the snow than the S2K - not by much tho.
Negatives:
300 Kg heavier than an S2K. You can feel every Kg, that's why its a GT.
Engine a little rough over 5000 rpm.
Insurance group 18/19
High tax post 2005.
Cabin plastics a bit cheap.
Alloy corrosion.
A bit thirsy when thrashing it !
I'm sure there's more on both, but it's late.
I loved both of them. I bought the S2K because I loved the looks, my test drive (from an ex circuit racer) and because I wanted a convertible.
I bought the 350Z because I loved the looks the test drive and the contrast with the Honda. I also had got the convertible thing out of my system(missed the S2K on decent days tho).
In your position I would have the 350Z - its a year round car. The S2K isn't great mid winter.
If I had to choose I would have both - they are very different and but it would be difficult for me to decide.
All I can say is get a decent test drive, not 10 minutes round the block...
Edited by douglasr on Tuesday 15th November 01:30
The Z is a great every day car, will happily do 10-100mph happly in 4th gear and out drag a S2000 all day long. Having said that the VTEC unit in the S2000 really does sound amazing when it hits 8k RPM, I went for the Z over a S2000 because at the end of the day the S2000 was really no faster than my old Integra type R, and I wanted to try something with a 6 cylinder lump
Haven't had an S2000, but I'm selling my 350Z after just under 2 yrs.
Why?
- Practicality. Small and shallow boot means not much luggage space. Wasn't an issue when I bought the car but it is now.
- Comfort. Stiff suspension is all very well when you're pressing on and need control and good feedback, but I rarely drive that hard so a more softly-sprung car will suit me better.
- Mileage. I've done less than 5,000 miles this year, most of it to and from work (less than 2 miles each way) so the car's wasted on me!
In the time I've had it the rear washer jet motor has failed and I've had to replace the air freshener. That's it. Otherwise the heated seats have been a godsend on a chilly day and the Bose stereo is excellent. The car turns lots of heads, especially with a loud exhaust, and there are a few other owners near me who always wave back!
Fuel economy is just as you'd expect: 19-23 mpg on short journeys and 25 mpg or so on longer journeys/fast A-roads, even when pushing on. I've had 37mpg out of it on a motorway journey at the speed limit. Fast cruising is usually around 27-28 mpg. I've always used V-Power, which apparently can improve economy slightly.
I will miss 3rd gear though: walking pace to 90 leptons in one long surge is fantastic!
Why?
- Practicality. Small and shallow boot means not much luggage space. Wasn't an issue when I bought the car but it is now.
- Comfort. Stiff suspension is all very well when you're pressing on and need control and good feedback, but I rarely drive that hard so a more softly-sprung car will suit me better.
- Mileage. I've done less than 5,000 miles this year, most of it to and from work (less than 2 miles each way) so the car's wasted on me!
In the time I've had it the rear washer jet motor has failed and I've had to replace the air freshener. That's it. Otherwise the heated seats have been a godsend on a chilly day and the Bose stereo is excellent. The car turns lots of heads, especially with a loud exhaust, and there are a few other owners near me who always wave back!
Fuel economy is just as you'd expect: 19-23 mpg on short journeys and 25 mpg or so on longer journeys/fast A-roads, even when pushing on. I've had 37mpg out of it on a motorway journey at the speed limit. Fast cruising is usually around 27-28 mpg. I've always used V-Power, which apparently can improve economy slightly.
I will miss 3rd gear though: walking pace to 90 leptons in one long surge is fantastic!
I've never really 'got' the S2000 thing, but came from a two seat, full-fat, properly fast sports car to the Zed, a TVR Griffith.
For me, the Zed wins pretty much everywhere, except all-out performance.
I have one of the later, 2007 uprev GTs. The cabin's a far nicer place to be than the earlier models though you pay for it with the extra tax. It cannot be stressed enough - the stowage is ridiculously poor - not even a glovebox in the cabin; just a couple of next-to-useless tiny 'cupboards' and a comically small and shallow boot. If you want to go for more than a long weekend, send the luggage ahead by DHL.
I struggle to get more than 21 mpg overall - pretty much consistently 20.6 mpg. Decent sized tank though so range is not as bad as it may've been.
I like to play with it so the TCS spends a fair amount of time switched off - this makes tyre wear, rears especially, pretty high; maybe 5-6,000 miles for rears.
My 'review' may appear negative, but so long as you accept they ain't cheap to run and a tad impractical, they're fantastic cars. I definitely recommend them.
For me, the Zed wins pretty much everywhere, except all-out performance.
I have one of the later, 2007 uprev GTs. The cabin's a far nicer place to be than the earlier models though you pay for it with the extra tax. It cannot be stressed enough - the stowage is ridiculously poor - not even a glovebox in the cabin; just a couple of next-to-useless tiny 'cupboards' and a comically small and shallow boot. If you want to go for more than a long weekend, send the luggage ahead by DHL.
I struggle to get more than 21 mpg overall - pretty much consistently 20.6 mpg. Decent sized tank though so range is not as bad as it may've been.
I like to play with it so the TCS spends a fair amount of time switched off - this makes tyre wear, rears especially, pretty high; maybe 5-6,000 miles for rears.
My 'review' may appear negative, but so long as you accept they ain't cheap to run and a tad impractical, they're fantastic cars. I definitely recommend them.
Out of curiousity I just went and had a look in the Classifieds at 350z's.
They can be had for a very good price now cant they?! Lots of earlier models with below 40k on them which is good news for a buyer. But is there a reason for this? Is the tax and insurance really dear? Are they good for over 100k miles? Never realised that for a couple of grand more I could have had one instead of my corolla which was a good idea at the time but now has made me a bit upset at seeing what else I could have had!
They can be had for a very good price now cant they?! Lots of earlier models with below 40k on them which is good news for a buyer. But is there a reason for this? Is the tax and insurance really dear? Are they good for over 100k miles? Never realised that for a couple of grand more I could have had one instead of my corolla which was a good idea at the time but now has made me a bit upset at seeing what else I could have had!
mazdajason said:
Out of curiousity I just went and had a look in the Classifieds at 350z's.
They can be had for a very good price now cant they?! Lots of earlier models with below 40k on them which is good news for a buyer. But is there a reason for this? Is the tax and insurance really dear? Are they good for over 100k miles? Never realised that for a couple of grand more I could have had one instead of my corolla which was a good idea at the time but now has made me a bit upset at seeing what else I could have had!
Fuel consumption, tax (which will go up again I suspect), insurance, oversupply, the trade not keen any more(Nissan garages don't really want to stock them, or if they do they have 1 only, lots of competition, consumables - tyres, Brembo disks and pads(I asked out of curiosity - £1000+ - cheaper if you shop around of course).They can be had for a very good price now cant they?! Lots of earlier models with below 40k on them which is good news for a buyer. But is there a reason for this? Is the tax and insurance really dear? Are they good for over 100k miles? Never realised that for a couple of grand more I could have had one instead of my corolla which was a good idea at the time but now has made me a bit upset at seeing what else I could have had!
Also, cars with a "superior" image - BMW Z coupe, BMW coupe etc. Other good choices like a Scooby.
On performance per pound, it ticked all the boxes for me though.
douglasr said:
Fuel consumption, tax (which will go up again I suspect), insurance, oversupply, the trade not keen any more(Nissan garages don't really want to stock them, or if they do they have 1 only, lots of competition, consumables - tyres, Brembo disks and pads(I asked out of curiosity - £1000+ - cheaper if you shop around of course).
Also, cars with a "superior" image - BMW Z coupe, BMW coupe etc. Other good choices like a Scooby.
On performance per pound, it ticked all the boxes for me though.
Hmm cheers for that. I owned a scooby and if I had have known a 350z could have been picked up for just a little more than I paid for mine I probably would have gone for one! Oh well.Also, cars with a "superior" image - BMW Z coupe, BMW coupe etc. Other good choices like a Scooby.
On performance per pound, it ticked all the boxes for me though.
They sound like they have similar running costs to a Subaru as well. Is there really an oversupply on them though? I dont seem to see that many of them around?
Cheers for the info guys, and OP - sorry for going OT.
I've looked at the 350 before but opted to keep the caterham at that moment in tine. The 350 is exceptional value for what you get however i guess that would be another issue come re-sell down the line.
The insurance quotes i got were good, surprising me a little.
Really appriciate everyones input. guess i really must decide what i want from the car. has highlighted a few bits i must consider that i wasnt aware of.
A ready solution would be a lottery win! anyone help with the numbers? mind you that would probably open up an even bigger can of worms!!!
The insurance quotes i got were good, surprising me a little.
Really appriciate everyones input. guess i really must decide what i want from the car. has highlighted a few bits i must consider that i wasnt aware of.
A ready solution would be a lottery win! anyone help with the numbers? mind you that would probably open up an even bigger can of worms!!!
This storage thing is over-played IMHO.
Wife and I toured Germany/Austria/Italy with 1 large and 1 medium suitcase and 3 large hold-alls. The rear cubby is bigger than most passenger cubbys and it has 2 other compartments for documents, CD's etc too. There's also loadsa room in the passenger footwell for another bag/holdall.
My tuppence worth:
I too came from a TVR (Supercharged Chimaera) so the drag experience was always going to disappoint by comparison but in EVERY other way the 'Z' is the superior car and at a reasonable price. Bullet proof engine and other than new 'boots' I've needed nothing other than petrol...plenty of petrol.
Fun car, but TCS off is pushing it a bit in this car unless you are a very 'competent-driver-at-speed' as getting the rear-end out in these things is a piece of cake so it happens frequently - even when you might not expect it to.
Wife and I toured Germany/Austria/Italy with 1 large and 1 medium suitcase and 3 large hold-alls. The rear cubby is bigger than most passenger cubbys and it has 2 other compartments for documents, CD's etc too. There's also loadsa room in the passenger footwell for another bag/holdall.
My tuppence worth:
I too came from a TVR (Supercharged Chimaera) so the drag experience was always going to disappoint by comparison but in EVERY other way the 'Z' is the superior car and at a reasonable price. Bullet proof engine and other than new 'boots' I've needed nothing other than petrol...plenty of petrol.
Fun car, but TCS off is pushing it a bit in this car unless you are a very 'competent-driver-at-speed' as getting the rear-end out in these things is a piece of cake so it happens frequently - even when you might not expect it to.
Gassing Station | Japanese Chat | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff