Pub talk ;-)

[Dakkon]

My mate has an S2000 and I have my 3.2 Carrera, he is obviously of the opinion that he would blow my doors off round a track, but I reckon it would be much closer.

Mine weighs less and 911's get very good traction out of corners, just wondered if anyone knows how good S2000's are round tracks, i.e Castle Combe compared to older 911's.

As you can tell im working hard this afternoon

[verysideways]

S2000 is okay on track, quite quick overall.
Trouble is you have to keep it above 7.5k rpm, and red's at 9k rpm. Lots of stirring, and often lots of waiting.
Bit twitchy on the limit too, and limit is not that high in my experience.

Straight line drag at the Pod he'd win, but round somewhere like castle combe? Think it would depend on how well you know your 911.... any idiot can drive an S2000 at nine tenths, not so with a Carrera 3.2

IMHO of course

VS

[BCA]

Theres one way to find out

[soir]

I don't know a great deal about 911's but I have a 2.5 boxster & my friend has an s2000 - his s2000 is only very slightly quicker than mine. Surely the 3.2 would beat it??

[ICSD]

One thing the S2000 will be quicker on and that's depreciation

Tell him to put that in his pipe and smoke it

[turbobloke]

There appear to be more crashed S2000s on the roads than just about any other car, common scenario seems to be exit roundabout, back overtakes front, hello armco. Is the car's handling a bit iffy or is it the drivers? No disrespect intended to any 2000 owners on here.

[speedyellow]

I've been round Rockingham infield with my 89' 3.2 club sport and destroyed two S2000's. They have to wait ages on the long corners before they can put the power down whilst the 3.2 is just powering away... and if they pick the wrong gear they just stop!!!

On the long straight they pull back a little but no where near enough!

[sfl993t4]

Having driven both (admittedly only for a couple of laps), I would guess that its close but put the S2000 ahead. That said its hard to tell without times and the driver makes an enormous difference on track.

[800]

Had a hoon in the 996 C4 with an S2000 on Saturday. I was surprised that we were very evenly matched on a straight road (up to a certain speed). However, despite Honda quoting no failures of vtech engines, the Honda was putting out HUGE amounts of black smoke on every up shift - very uncool.

[dcw@pr]

soir said:

I don't know a great deal about 911's but I have a 2.5 boxster & my friend has an s2000 - his s2000 is only very slightly quicker than mine. Surely the 3.2 would beat it??

EVO put the boxster S against the 996 (I think) C2 and the boxster was actually quicker around Bedford

[Ork]

I've owned both - a 1987 G50 3.2 Carerra and a new Honda S2000.

I bought a new S2000 because I got sick of looking at crap old 911's that were tired, shagged out, worn out and just POOR. I consider the S2000 to be an "enthusiasts" choice - it revs to 9200rpm and is solid and well built.

In pub talk - I'd say the S2000 is quicker in a straight line and in utter cain it mode, but it has little torque and (apart from the very latest versions ) is very nervous - I never really trusted it around the bends at press on speed - too stiff.

Of the 2 - the 911 is more special (but try finding one worth owning for sensible money) but the S2000 is a marvel - it seems like a bespoke product to me in a mass consumer age - isn't that what Porsche used to be about?

Ork.

[iguana]

Hmmm interesting one, so for this pub chat I shall sup a pint & ponder-

-Coombe is an ace track for a 911 for a start, however if you are a skilled driver an S2000 is quite a weapon, tho coombe is a bit bumpy & it will be pretty twitchy- esp from Camp to Quarry, however many early 3.2s are tired baggy bit down on power & really are not all special anymore.

So im gunna say assuming same reasonably track skilled driver in each- S2000 vs average say average 3.2 = victory to the S2k

But lovely proper 3.2 Clubsport vs S2k= victory to the 3.2CS

[roshambo]

About 2 years ago me & 2 mates went to Castle Combe for a day of hoofing around the track.
I was in an STi Subaru (320bhp), the other 2 were in an S2000 & a 996 C2 (3.4)

Without going into boring detail, not much in it between the STi & the 996 - similar power, STi lighter. Despite 4WD we were very evenly matched on the corners, the STi able to get the power down quicker out of the bends, but the 996 being slightly faster down the straights from about 85mph+
Sti understeered lots - a trait of the car, while the 996 was very neutral.
The S2000 was the dissapointmentof the day really. Very twitchy, rubbish brakes that faded quickly & a very narrow power band, not that stable under very heavy braking either - all feedback from the driver who was a big S2000 nut.
He took a flying lap in the chaps 996 & afterwards just said "thats how a proper car should feel"
Before the day he was saying how come anyone would spend £60k on a Porsche etc etc but came away amazed by the 996 & wanting one.
Then it rained, & the STi came into its own !

Honda has revised the suspension on the S200 a couple of years ago, earlier cars were prone to throwing you into the nearest hedge. EVO mag has this well documented & say the revised car is much more predictable nearer the limit than the old one.

[Dakkon]

Thanks for the comments, I was hoping that appealing to the PH masses that some people would have experienced both cars, although I am surprised by the comments of brake fade on the S2000, thought they were good with their brakes.

The reason I mentioned Combe is its the track I have driven most as its one of the closest to me.

Thanks again.