What to go for Z4, Vx220 Boxster or S2000??

[DanL]

Daniel1 said:

... the acredited experts, as such, in original reviews and buyers guides have stated the car is edgy in the wet, hondas own revisions have been implemented to reduce this edginess ...

The early cars were apparently a bit of a handful in the wet - however, for the budget he should get at least an 03 car, and probably a revision 3 on an 04 or later (I've not looked at prices recently, so I'm guessing a little!). Both have been "improved" to sort out the original's handling. Mine's a revision 2 (53 plate), and is very well behaved in the wet - I've never had a moment in it.

It was a little tail happy when I first got it, but that was sorted out by new tires with a decent tread depth - the car seems to be very sensitive to low (but legal) tread on the tires, something that the OP should be aware of should he go for the Honda.

[Xerces]

I had a similar choice about 6 months ago and went for the BMW.

Best looking, best sounding (IMO) whilst being the most practical and most comfortable (apart from maybe the porsche).

Id rather be in the VX on a sunday blast but as an only car to drive 7 days a week (as was my choice) then Z4 all the way.

Better VFM than a similar priced S2000/Boxster also.

Edited by Xerces on Tuesday 4th August 21:48

[havoc]

Daniel1 said:

BUT are you seriously saying that despite all the acredited experts, as such, in original reviews and buyers guides have stated the car is edgy in the wet, hondas own revisions have been implemented to reduce this edginess and you yourself claim to have only had 3 or 4 tank slappers? To the say the car isnt a ford focus but rather 'an agile sports car' is like saying my roof isnt like a normal roof, its an 'elemental' one. It still leaks no matter what you call it. Its just markting tosh.

Yes.

1) I changed the geometry settings to make it more progressive than factory standard
2) I took the time to learn the car. Journos have a car for a few hours and push it.
3) I didn't take the piss. It's a rwd car with no TC.
4) It drives nothing like a Focus. I owned both at the same time.

An 'accredited expert' is just someone with an opinion based on one or two drives. I had 1001 drives...

[snorkel sucker]

having owned a rev 1 S2000 myself, i have to say i agree with havoc in that only when deliberetly provoked does the honda misbehave. i would be interested in driving a newer version to see if there are any noticeable differences, as, i too am considering whether to go for another soft top...

[useyourdellusion]

HereBeMonsters said:

I've been trying to decide exactly the same thing all summer, but complicated my decision by considering an older Elise, a newer MX-5 and a couple of higher-end coupes as well as the 4 mentioned by the OP.
In my opinion the Z4 was best to drive, but I couldn't be seen in one of them. The S2000 was a bit odd, handled more like a GT, but with an engine that belonged in a much lighter chassis. In the end I have decided on a Coxster, currently looking for an early 3.2 around the £10-12 mark.

What are these horror stories you've heard about the Porsche though? From my research it seemed to be the most economical to own for my budget and mileage (about 15,000 a year).

I've had a 2001 Boxster S since May this year. I kind of rushed into the purchase based on the exellent external appearance of it (unmarked Seal Grey with full Literonics light conversion).

So far it has cost me £800 getting it running as it should. That includes a new MAF sensor, Lambda sensor and full four wheel alignment. It's going in again at the end of August for a new clutch (heavy and a bit stodgy at the mo). This will be another £500/600.

All the work done at Porsche indies. These are classic weak spots on these. Serves me right for not doing my research and falling in love with the first one I saw!

Still, it's money well spent as I know it's all been done properly and I've felt the benefits first hand since the work has been done.


I'm not even going to mention I../R.. issues. A touch over-documented on internet forums imo. I just prefer to get in it and enjoy the thing!

[Daniel1]

havoc said:

Daniel1 said:

BUT are you seriously saying that despite all the acredited experts, as such, in original reviews and buyers guides have stated the car is edgy in the wet, hondas own revisions have been implemented to reduce this edginess and you yourself claim to have only had 3 or 4 tank slappers? To the say the car isnt a ford focus but rather 'an agile sports car' is like saying my roof isnt like a normal roof, its an 'elemental' one. It still leaks no matter what you call it. Its just markting tosh.

Yes.

1) I changed the geometry settings to make it more progressive than factory standard
2) I took the time to learn the car. Journos have a car for a few hours and push it.
3) I didn't take the piss. It's a rwd car with no TC.
4) It drives nothing like a Focus. I owned both at the same time.

An 'accredited expert' is just someone with an opinion based on one or two drives. I had 1001 drives...

an accreditaded expert in this case is someone with a far broader driving experience then you, thats why you can more then likely trust their opinion since they drive different cars all the time. My mother has driven some 200,000 miles in her life time but she is no more honed at defining a cars upper echalons of grip then any other regular driver. Quantity doesnt account for quality here.

Your arguement for them pushing it is valid, but must also factor into your arguement that their ability to pick up on a cars faults is far more honed then ours due to the nature of their job.

Your admission of a lack of TC also further adds weight to the arguement of wet handling edgyness.

and changing tyres and geometry makes a difference ill admit but you cant out engineer a cars design. The impreza is an understeerey car. You can change the settings to make it less so, but it is still an understeer biased car, likewise its not as razor edged out as the evo. You have to basically re-engineer the car with different differentials etc to totally transform it. And the fact that HONDA revised the car at least twice to smooth its wet handling proves beyond any doubt that they thought the car was troublesome.

And if the techs at HONDA cant at least make you concede the car is, at the least, twitchy, well then what chance have i or anyone else?

[mikey P 500]

Great read this thread, and a lot of valid points raised, personally I own a s2000, previously had an elise (fairly close to a vx220) and have driven a friends Boxster S, never tried a z4. Although I currently own the s2000 from that list if I had more money I would consider a Boxster S but not the 2.5 or 2.7 as they have high running costs with less performance. I would also love to own a vx220 or another Elise but they are quite hardcore as an only car, (will get another once I can have it as a weekend car as they are much more fun on track). Have no interest in the Z4 mainly due to the aesthetics, and I have never really considered them a real driver’s car for some reason.

[CHIEF]

My mate had a Boxster and straight after a VX 220 na which i drove a fair bit so on them anyway i can make a comparison.

Porsche Boxster:

Pros: Lovely engine note and quicker than you think, very practical for a two seater (loads of boot space as it has two) and surprisingly frugal if you take it easy. Great handling and even standard brakes it stops miles better then my Scooby ever did (which is not hard lol)

Cons: Check, check, check to see if any RMS (rear main seal) issues as this is big bucks to fix. Servicing can be expensive and brakes, pads and tyres especially will make your eyes water - it is after all despite the poor mans porker tag still a Porsche with running costs (apart from fuel costs) to mach.


VX 220: Pros. very sharp roadster with amazing handling (miles sharper than the Porsche) and lovely positive direct steering and gearchange great throttle response, harder than you think to get the back end out as with having skinny front tyres - purposely done by Vauxall after loads of Elise 111s owners threw theirs into ditches backwards, so tends to if anything understeer in the dry. very frugal as it is after all a 2.2 4 cylinder na engine in something that powers a Vectra/Astra rep mobiles but is in something that weighs half as much.
Definetely turns more heads than a Boxster IMO a

Cons: Impractical - Ok the boot aint bad (it will fit a couple of squashy sports bags) but everything else is hardcore, Mate got a new job and did the daily commute 60 miles a day and it ended up him selling it because its too uncomfortable on the daily commute day in day out.
A right fecker to get in and out if yoru a big lad especially with the roof on.

Dont expect great build quality as its hand made - i thought in places it was quite shocking.
For me anyway the brakes need a good shove if your used to over servoes brakes, just need getting used to. heater is terrible and is just a waste of time - unfortunateluy this effects demisting which borders on dangerous. and in downpours it can leak a bit.

So to sum up both are great cars but very different, the Boxster is a better day to day and esier to live with although servicing and consumables are more expensive and the VX is a better handling better looking sharper weekend toy.

[havoc]

Daniel1 said:

an accreditaded expert in this case is someone with a far broader driving experience then you, thats why you can more then likely trust their opinion since they drive different cars all the time.

Agreed. But also the long-term tests are more informative than the short test-drive-reviews.

Daniel1 said:

Your arguement for them pushing it is valid, but must also factor into your arguement that their ability to pick up on a cars faults is far more honed then ours due to the nature of their job.

You're assuming that they are:-
1) Unbiased;
2) Going to the car without any preconceptions (different to 1)
3) Mechanically sympathetic. I've heard of a number of automotive journos who have zero mechanical sympathy...

Daniel1 said:

Your admission of a lack of TC also further adds weight to the arguement of wet handling edgyness.

Once again you're showing your ignorance. I'd suggest the opposite is more likely to be true - that TC/DSC is put on a car to DISGUISE the shortcomings of a chassis. That Honda didn't feel the need for years suggests they had confidence in the chassis.

Why aren't you listening to me? My car, with minimal changes, just WASN'T edgy. You drove it with respect in the wet, but you would with any 200+bhp sports car with no TC (just ask the TVR boys!). And in the dry you'd REALLY have to be pushing hard* to get the back-end out, or you'd have to provoke it by stabbing at the throttle mid-corner or by trail-braking.

Daniel1 said:

And the fact that HONDA revised the car at least twice to smooth its wet handling proves beyond any doubt that they thought the car was troublesome.

See above. They revised it in response to journalists. IMHO the '99-03 OE tyres were as much to blame as anything else for it's early rep - they were awful in standing water.

Daniel1 said:

And if the techs at HONDA cant at least make you concede the car is, at the least, twitchy, well then what chance have i or anyone else?

See above. You're mistaking cause and effect, IMHO.


* OK, this can apply to any of the 4 cars here: Their limits are fkING high - too high for the public road, IMHO - in 3 years of driving the S2000 I think I only found the car's true limits once (see below) - the rest of the time I found my own as a driver. On that occasion I was doing genuinely indecent speeds down a twisty, nadgety B-road - speeds which would have got me in proper legal trouble on any road in the country. So all these journo-reviews about 'on the limit' behaviour should be taken with a pinch of salt:-
- are they really the driving gods you claim that THEY can find the proper limits of a car within one drive?!? Or are they just finding the limits of their own driving style within that car?
- more importantly, is that REALLY relevant to driving in the UK? If someone wants to take a car to its limits, buy a 205GTi or a Caterham.


Note to above: On all but one occasion where the car 'misbehaved', I was either pushing it deliberately, or I wasn't being smooth with my inputs (hence the fault lies not with the car but with me - a bad workman blames his tools, remember!). That last occasion (on the B-road @ :cough: mph) I felt the back-end start to properly 'go loose' (not just start to slide, but feel completely unsettled in general) - a combination of the rapid direction-changes and up-and-down, combined with a bumpy road, had caused the suspension to get out-of-phase with the road - it couldn't keep up! But the key point here is I FELT IT. The car communicated that to me, it behaved progressively, I feathered the throttle slightly...and the car settled back into line. Is that the behaviour of a car that is 'edgy' at the limit?!?


Daniel - with respect, I think you're paying far too much attention to journo's who (in some cases clearly) have their own biases and in other cases aren't the driving gods you claim them to be (if they were, they'd be racing...and please note that ex-racer VBH loves the S2000, as does a certain J Clarkson!). And not enough attention to people who've lived with the car and who DO properly understand it...

Edited by havoc on Wednesday 5th August 07:51

[soprano]

HereBeMonsters said:

What are these horror stories you've heard about the Porsche though? From my research it seemed to be the most economical to own for my budget and mileage (about 15,000 a year).

Where did you do your research?! Presumably not with any Porsche garages?!

[bga]

havoc said:

3) I didn't take the piss. It's a rwd car with no TC.

This sums it up for me.
You have to be driving like a goon in wet conditions to get the car out of shape. The sort of driving that most would consider to be inappropriate for those conditions anyway.

[Hot1]

Excellent info here from what I can conlcude so far the vx220 would be the best drivers car and one of the cheapest to run, but it can be a bit hardcore as a daily driver especially if doing motor way driving and is not the best bulit car.

The Porsche is a lovely car but can be expensive where parts and servicing are concerned.

The Bmw is a great car if you like the looks maybe not thec most responsive?.

The s2000 this one seems to be getting the most attention from what can gather it sounds like a bit of a marmite car some love it some hate.Some seem to think its an edgy car others deny it, to behonest most of the reviews I have seen have been very positive! I read on another thread that some one said the the s2000 is basicly a soft top rx8 is there any truth in that?

[kambites]

Hot1 said:

The s2000 this one seems to be getting the most attention from what can gather it sounds like a bit of a marmite car some love it some hate.Some seem to think its an edgy car others deny it

That might imply that it's very sensitive to suspension geometry. Some cars can handle wonderfully when the geo is set up correctly but be right pigs when it isn't.

[Daz4m]

bga said:

havoc said:

3) I didn't take the piss. It's a rwd car with no TC.

This sums it up for me.
You have to be driving like a goon in wet conditions to get the car out of shape. The sort of driving that most would consider to be inappropriate for those conditions anyway.

Was the original S2000 running Bridgestone RE040's, they are pretty lethal in the wet?

[Crusoe]

The s2000 is edgy, that is what makes it fun but also what will catch you out if you are not paying attention. You can change the suspension to remove some of the built in rear steer and change the geometry to make it more progressive but those are fairly major changes from manufacturer’s spec. As an example just going back a few pages on the s2000 forum brought up a good example, wrong tyre pressures, low tread on cold tyres, or a wheel on a white line can cause power to be sent to the other wheel with grip causing a spin if you lift off. Agree they are mostly driver error but there is a reason it is a very expensive group 20 car to insure (double the cost of a Griffith 500 for me for example)
http://www.s2ki.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=718...

Edited by Crusoe on Wednesday 5th August 10:31

[schmalex]

useyourdellusion said:

HereBeMonsters said:

I've been trying to decide exactly the same thing all summer, but complicated my decision by considering an older Elise, a newer MX-5 and a couple of higher-end coupes as well as the 4 mentioned by the OP.
In my opinion the Z4 was best to drive, but I couldn't be seen in one of them. The S2000 was a bit odd, handled more like a GT, but with an engine that belonged in a much lighter chassis. In the end I have decided on a Coxster, currently looking for an early 3.2 around the £10-12 mark.

What are these horror stories you've heard about the Porsche though? From my research it seemed to be the most economical to own for my budget and mileage (about 15,000 a year).

I've had a 2001 Boxster S since May this year. I kind of rushed into the purchase based on the exellent external appearance of it (unmarked Seal Grey with full Literonics light conversion).

So far it has cost me £800 getting it running as it should. That includes a new MAF sensor, Lambda sensor and full four wheel alignment. It's going in again at the end of August for a new clutch (heavy and a bit stodgy at the mo). This will be another £500/600.

All the work done at Porsche indies. These are classic weak spots on these. Serves me right for not doing my research and falling in love with the first one I saw!

Still, it's money well spent as I know it's all been done properly and I've felt the benefits first hand since the work has been done.


I'm not even going to mention I../R.. issues. A touch over-documented on internet forums imo. I just prefer to get in it and enjoy the thing!

Whilst the clutch is out, get them too look at / replace the RMS at the same time, as it is only a cheap job to do at that time, as opposed to having to take everything apart to do it on its own at a later date

[RobM77]

I test drove all these cars (bar the Z4) before I bought my Elise. I bought the Elise because I wanted the driving experience which none of the cars mentioned here could deliver, and then bought a BMW 328i to carry stuff around in and cope with motorways etc. It suits me well having the two cars. Just my thoughts after those test drives:

S2000: I love the build quality and concept of this car, but just didn't think it cut it with its composure or feedback. The engine is a masterpiece, but admittedly it's a matter of taste whether you like using all those revs or not. I only drove it in the dry, so can't comment on the wet weather handling.

VX220: A sports car, not a GT. Sure, it's better to drive than these, but it would be a pain on long motorway journeys or carrying luggage to the airport. I prefer the Elise.

Boxster: My favourite of them, although the variable ratio steering wasn't to my taste at all.

Z4: Not driven one, so can't comment.

I reviewed the S2000 fully and I think you can google for it against my name (see my profile for my full name), or find the review on Pistonheads.

[bga]

Daz4m said:

bga said:

havoc said:

3) I didn't take the piss. It's a rwd car with no TC.

This sums it up for me.
You have to be driving like a goon in wet conditions to get the car out of shape. The sort of driving that most would consider to be inappropriate for those conditions anyway.

Was the original S2000 running Bridgestone RE040's, they are pretty lethal in the wet?

Mine had RE040's on and as a 2001 model it was pre-suspension geometry revision too IIRC.
The only problem I had in the wet was one time when there was a lot of standing water on the motor way & the fronts were down to 2.5mm tread depth. New front tyres straight after that journey fixed that though.

The rest of the time the car was fine as long as basic laws of physics are kept in mind. My TVR was much easier to get out of shape in the wet but as long as I kept the conditions in mind, everything was OK.

[DanL]

RobM77 said:

I reviewed the S2000 fully and I think you can google for it against my name (see my profile for my full name), or find the review on Pistonheads.

It's available by clicking on your profile, and then choosing the Reviews tab. I must admit, there's not a great deal of feel through the wheel of my S2000...

Edited by DanL on Wednesday 5th August 12:14

[RobM77]

DanL said:

RobM77 said:

I reviewed the S2000 fully and I think you can google for it against my name (see my profile for my full name), or find the review on Pistonheads.

It's available by clicking on your profile, and then choosing the Reviews tab. I must admit, there's not a great deal of feel through the wheel of my S2000...

Edited by DanL on Wednesday 5th August 12:14

Thanks. I should know that I'll read it now - it's been a while. I drove one not long after launch.