S2000 v civic type r

[davey68]

If you had around 12k to spend which would be more fun to drive? I'm talking the fn2 most recent model type r. I know Mr Clarkson disliked it but alot of road testers rated it and a later model gets xenons, LSD etc. I'm just wondering if the S2000 is much quicker/better in real world driving. Top down obviously makes the car feel quicker but as a daily driver anyone got any experience/thoughts?

[fwaggie]

Boxster S 986.

[MarJay]

The debate is not Type R versus S2000, the debate is FWD vs RWD.

Even a 'Good' FWD car like a Type R isn't a patch on a mediocre RWD car.

S2000 every time.

[lauda]

MarJay said:

The debate is not Type R versus S2000, the debate is FWD vs RWD.

Even a 'Good' FWD car like a Type R isn't a patch on a mediocre RWD car.

S2000 every time.

That's right. I'd much rather have a 118d than a Megane R26R.

[Smike]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSHm97xrVCA&fea...

[750turbo]

Will you get a later model FN2 with LSD for 12K though?

As for the debate between the 2, surely they are doing 2 different types of jobs, so cannot really be compared?

<flame suit on, and popcorn at the ready>

[JFReturns]

Assuming you don't need the space and practicality, then S2000 all the way.

[S3000]

S2000 is difficult to drive on rainy days.. just saying.

[wackojacko]

I'd go for an S2000 personally they are great fun to drive and really come alive when thrashed.


If I were to go for a CTR I would go for an EP3 as all I hear are great things about the EP3 opposed to not such great things about the FN2.

If I were spending that much as to get an FN2 I'd buy a 3.0 Z4

[Kozy]

MarJay said:

The debate is not Type R versus S2000, the debate is FWD vs RWD.

Even a 'Good' FWD car like a Type R isn't a patch on a mediocre RWD car.

S2000 every time.

In this case, you're only correct because you have a mediocre FWD vs a 'good' RWD.

As much as I like my Hondas, I would never buy an FN2. Horrible horrible things.

[Mr Sparkle]

S3000 said:

S2000 is difficult to drive on rainy days.. just saying.

That's just a myth, before I got mine I herd this a lot but its not that difficult at all, no more so than an M3 and much easier to drive than a kit car or I would imagine a TVR (not driven a TVR). It does let you know when its sliding and there is plenty of time to correct it if you wish.

[Jurgen]

S3000 said:

S2000 is difficult to drive on rainy days.. just saying.

No it isn't. It's just a RWD car with no electronic aids and a reasonable amount of power. As long as you have decent tyres and don't drive it like a FWD it will be fine. It's definately very easy to get the tail out on wet days if you floor it coming out of a corner though (but that's part of the fun ). Besides, for 12k you're looking at the later ones which aren't as setup for oversteer as the early ones.

[Mastodon2]

The S2000 was always hailed as a pretty damn good RWD fun car though, and the FN2 was generally received as being bloated, and flat and dull to drive, so it's hardly like for like. An older EP3 would have been a better comparison.

[carmonk]

MarJay said:

Even a 'Good' FWD car like a Type R isn't a patch on a mediocre RWD car.

So a mediocre car is better than a good car?

[Chodosh Corvette]

Having owned an S2000 and driven a civic, I would say S2000 all the way. So long as you can stand the exorbitant difference in insurance prices, the car is definitely worth it.

The kick you get at 6000rpm in the S2000 is so much more noticeable that the civic. With only two seats, invariably you get to choose the girl who is best looking also

[s3fella]

MarJay said:

The debate is not Type R versus S2000, the debate is FWD vs RWD.

Even a 'Good' FWD car like a Type R isn't a patch on a mediocre RWD car.

S2000 every time.

Utter bks.

[750turbo]

s3fella said:

Utter bks.

I am with you S3fella.

[fuchsiasteve]

If its an all year round driver FWD CTR everytime. If however its for summer days go S2K. The early S2Ks were very twitchy (especially the 1st revision on 16" wheels).

The S2K has a fantastic engine, gearbox and brakes though. The handling is very sensitive to Geo setup and good tyres are a MUST (Yoko AD08 in particular on 17" rims will give you fantastic handling/grip).

There are ways of taming the shrew though. Fitting fully adjustable racelogic on the earlier cars is a definate thumbs up for those slippery days. Otherwise if its the later revision with stability control you are fine.

Word of warning though. Get some insurance quotes as others have mentioned as they can be a nightmare to insure.

Major downsides for me is the steering in the S. It really is awful and completely devoid of feel being electrically assisted. Its also short of lock so when you do loose the back you are going to spin. Non height adjustable steering wheel is a pain as well along with Kajagoogoo eighties style digital rev counter (naff!).

I'm not anti S2k though. Looks wise it wins over the CTR everytime.

Either car is Honda though so it will run forever and never let you down unlike anything french or italian

[davey68]

Thanks for all the info guys. Looks wise i really like the S2000 especially the later models with 17 inch alloys. It actually still looks good with the top up unlike some convertibles. Regards insurance the S is double the price of the civic so a bit pricey! For those that have driven them, is the S alot quicker? The car would be a daily driver and not a summer/weekend car. I actually like the fn2 although i hear the ride is stupidly harsh on our roads. Not sure if the S is equally uncomprimising?

[N88]

MarJay said:

The debate is not Type R versus S2000, the debate is FWD vs RWD.

Even a 'Good' FWD car like a Type R isn't a patch on a mediocre RWD car.

S2000 every time.

Never has the word noob been more applicable.