rai

I bought my AP1 S2000 sixteen years ago for $33,000 (no options) but I did add a hardtop for $2400. I am not going to include the cost of new wheels or mods but I adding the cost of the hardtop because to me that was a key option and I loved the hardtop almost as much as the convertible top and used the hardtop almost half the year. I am adding the cost of the hardtop into the purchase price $35,400 *this was in 2002 dollars. Now16 years ago become more value when you factor inflation and cost of living. Such that $35K is around the same as $47K in today's money. I am not saying straight across the board that all things cost more today than in years past, for instance at one time a calculator cost $2000 while today I can buy a calculator for $2 at Walmart. Computers as well have come down in price, TVs as well.The average car in 2002 was selling for $26K today the average selling price is $36K. So back in 2002 the S2000 was above the average price. I'm not saying it was totally out of wack, it was a nice car but a Boxster cost $42K+ back then while today a Boxster starts at $57K (that's $15K additional price for the same car although we'll agree the new Boxster is well more powerful.

This is my baseline when I was buying my new car. I wanted to get something in the spirit of a S2000 but I didn't want to get another S2000. I had a tight fit in the S2000. I did technically fit and drove the car 38K miles. I always regret selling my S2K but at the time having two cars to my self was not idea. So, I wanted to buy a spiritual successor to my S2K (yet not buy another S2K) and I didn't fit on the new MX5 (is smaller than my S2K and I'm 6-2). I figured all the cars, Cayman, Mustang, Corvette, M2 or any BMW. I ruled out the German cars because I wanted to keep the costs/repairs to a minimum (having owned 2 BMW in my life, I swore never to buy another one). The Cayman was great but again didn't want to spend $40K on a 2-3 year old one and didn't want to spend less on an older one still. I know there is value on depreciated cars like the Cayman, but I do like new cars and I also sometimes am less sure if an old car might be more in need of service and maintenance than a new car. I am aware that new cars depreciate and thus are worse money pits than a well cared for used car. But time is money and I didn't want to potentially be spending a lot of time at the service station also they all say P-car tax (meaning the cost of parts are higher like I found with my M3). Mustang (just too heavy) plus I don't want high power. I had high power in my M3 and while it's great, to me I find more fun on a small car where I can wail on it and not really be in go to jail speed that much. I'm not saying I wanted a 90hp Prius but I wanted something that was ok fast not something that was hella fast.

Corvette (same as Mustang in hella fast) plus costs more like a Cayman.Eventually, I decided on a BRZ. I know, have read a hundred reviews saying “it's too slow” or “it needs a turbo” or “it's got a torque dip” or “it's too slow”. Doug DeMuro who I usually like, did a hatchet job on the BRZ/FR-S when he compared it to his 25 year old Skyline. He claimed to be doing a drag test and when take off the Skyline takes off normally and the FR-S takes off like 0-60 in 40 seconds. I know it was supposed to be funny but really that's kind of silly when in reality the two cars are probably close enough in time. I mean the BRZ is tested on C&D like 6.4 seconds. Sure it's not blazing saddles but it's not a Prius with 4 people on board.

I thought the BRZ was nice, drove well, had decent room inside for my frame. It's not a SUV by any means but it's better than MX5 by a mile. Initially was going to get the Limited with Performance Package (wheels, Brembo brakes). But got to thinking of the tS. Initially I was hating on the wing said it was stupid, said I'd get the tS if it didn't have the stupid wing, said it was ricer wing. All that stuff. But then I looked at it and the side skirts and the front lip and the wing and the black wheels and the improved suspension and the interior accents and somewhat better material, it all added up to a good bit of kit for a not horrible $5000 extra. Particularly the tS comes with excellent Michelin Pilot Sport 4 (all other BRZ come with Primacy tires which do better at slipping than they do at gripping). I know tire swap is cheap but factoring in all the other kit with the tS and the fact that when I looked at it the whole package looked good to me even the wing. So I ended up buying a new Crystal white pearl tS with short throw shifter.

Total price was $33,600 which is the same as I paid for my S2000 back in the day, actually less when I got the hardtop. I know it's not as powerful as the S2000 was 240hp (BRZ 205hp) with TQ around the same and weight around the same. I can't say which car weighed more. But they are likely within 50 pounds of each other. But in fact are probably the same weight (when I factor in the hardtop which was not all that heavy but probably 50 pounds I estimate). The S2000 has just 3 less torques but revs 1500 higher which is how it makes more horsepower. Both at 2.0L naturally aspirated engine. I will say the S2000 was faultless (no issues in almost 6 years of ownership). S2000 was great fun, was quick as heck (if you rev it). I am just breaking in the BRZ can't say anything yet.

I did test drive three other BRZ that were broken in. Twice with a passenger once solo. I can say unequivocally the S2000 was faster, felt faster, but it's not like night and day. I mean the S2000 would out drag a BRZ (I don't doubt that) but it's a close race and given several tries the BRZ could probably get the edge sometimes. Neither one is a 414hp M3 or 430hp Mustang or Corvette. But if I go back in magazine times, the 2002 Mustang GT (V8 automatic) put up same exact time as 6MT BRZ. I could compare it to some early Cayman cars. Basically the BRZ would have been somewhat fast 20 years ago. Today it's kind of buried in the crush of Hellcats and Tesla's and Civic Type R and any number of quicker cars. But daily driving it's more than fine. I am just breaking it in so keeping the revs under 4000 (try) but most likely keeping the revs under 5K. So I'm not feeling 205hp anyway, but it's fine. I don't want high power car, had that in the M3 and it was great but half the time felt like I was just driving a normal 3 series because I needed to keep slow for traffic as well as speed laws. So I said it was like a killer whale in a 2 million gallon swimming pool. It's just too much more than I need, and truth is that I enjoy less powerful cars just as much as high power cars.

-Interior, I think BRZ is better than S2000. Better seats, better steering wheel reach (tilt and telescope) has real push button start (S2K needed to turn the key then push button). Has better radio (although neither is going to win any awards). BRZ has heated seats, Bluetooth, Apple Car Play, navigation, home link, remote entry, LED headlights, more storage, USB outlets.

-Power the S2000 has a better engine no questions asked 120hp/L is amazing and 8500 reline. 6MT I'm calling that a tie. Technically the S2000 is better (haven't driven one in 10 years but it was a dream like the MX5 that I drove), but the BRZ is just about as good. I have the short throw shifter and that's still not as short as the S2000 but I love it just as much. If I had to say (yes) the S2000 is slightly better.

-Feeling of weight I'm calling that a tie as well. I think the S2000 might have felt a pinch less but that may have been my imagination and the S2000 has a much shorter wheelbase (7 inches shorter) so that might lend the impression for me of being lighter. Also S2000 had 16” wheels and my tS had 18” wheels. But not sure if that was any effect on unsprung weight plus I did replace my wheels on the S2000 to larger (but still lightweight forged wheels).

-Steering both are electric but I feel like the BRZ is a lot better. The tS particularly was set up extra special suspension and the tires and that is one of the big take thing that some people have said was improved with the tS in particular.

-Road handling. I have not really pushed the BRZ but to me it's a lot nicer. It feels planted, I believe the longer wheelbase helps, it has a lot of stability control that S2000 doesn't but to me the stability control is well judged. I never feel like it's reining me in. Plus there is a track mode and you can disable it completely but overall the BRZ just handles great. I am not saying S2000 was poor but to me it's clear the BRZ is better (maybe it's the tS suspension). Again take this with a grain of salt because I have not pushed the BRZ hard at all. Also on the highway the BRZ is very stable the wing is functional with down force once you get past 70 mph (I believe). When you hit 90 mph in the S2000 you are fully aware of it, I touched 90 in the BRZ and you can take your hand off the wheel and it's just stable. Again can't say yet as the BRZ has just one week old. But I have a strong feeling the BRZ will be better IMO.

-Usability the BRZ has fold down rear seats so you can fit 4 wheels/tires. I think the S2000 can fit one tire in the trunk (not sure) but much more usable room with the BRZ.

-Looks. This is hard, the S2000 has aged well, but to my eyes the BRZ (especially the tS) looks better. I mean to my eyes the BRZ looks better.

-Value this is hard, the S2000 was expensive but it was also built like a block of metal. It was 100% bulletproof and had a great engine maybe the best four cylinder NA engine ever. The BRZ (to me) is a great value. As I said it costs $33K when the average car/truck/suv is $36K. I know Trucks and SUVs and Minivans all push the cost of vehicles up and more SUVs sold today than 16 years ago. But to me just $33K for the limited edition tS seems like a good deal. Plus it's got so many features that the S2K doesn't have (many were not even out 16 years ago).

Sum up, the BRZ is not the S2000 but it's pretty darn close and to me it's a great car. Maybe it's not a great value if you look at Mustang with 2x the power for not too much more. But taking the small power away, and just looking as a fun little car it's really not bad. Plus I like Subaru cars still drive my 2007 Legacy Wagon and we have a 2018 Outback as well.

PS side note, the BRZ is 4 inches longer than the S2000 and 6 inches shorter than the new Cayman but has a longer wheelbase than both. All three are close to the same wight but the new Cayman is actually 100+ pounds heavier.

Aron9000

Redline is 9000rpm if you had the AP1 S2000. I've driven both, and as far as the engine goes, IMO there is no comparison. The BRZ is a gruffy, course feeling lump that never really comes alive IMO, the S2000 engine is perhaps the best 4 cylinder I've ever driven. Its Dr Jeykle/Mr Hyde, once you pass 4500-5000rpm, it becomes a completely different animal, it takes off and sounds awesome. You do have to beat the **** out of it and trust that it won't fly apart, cause it makes all the power well past where you shift in a normal car. Kind of feels like a motorcycle engine.

But congrats on the BRZ, I've heard that Ts package makes a world of difference in how it handles, that there is a A LOT more grip than a base BRZ/86. Its also a lot more usable package day to day, the S2000 is a hell of a lot of fun to take out and rip around on a Saturday morning, but yeah its tight inside and loud.

blacksc400

iTrader: (4)

huy33

Love my S2K; I honestly can't see myself giving it up.

mmarshall

Congratulations. From what you wrote, sounds like you made the right decision. Enjoy it....but I wouldn't recommend trying to drive it in the snow or on slippery roads. Light weight, moderately high power for its size, RWD....even with traction/stability control and winter tires, it could be marginal or inadequate in those conditions.

RNM GS3

rai

I agree, should have said 9K redline must have got confused with the 8300 rpm power peak.

It's not that I think the BRZ engine is the best engine out there, but what are my options for a new RWD car that doesn't weigh 3600 pounds priced in the low $30K range? (also I can't fit in a MX5). If they had put the S2000 engine in the BRZ that would be great but the didn't and likely newer emissions and EPA fuel economy ratings are hard to meet today and also Subaru and Toyota are building to a price. I mean the twins start at $26K whereas all S2000 cars started above $30K in 1999 dollars.

Also, I am looking at results and the BRZ engine is only down 35hp to the S2000 and the acceleration times are not worlds different.

Here is 2000 S2000
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.8 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.4 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 32.7 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 7.3 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 10.3 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 10.2 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.1 sec @ 96 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 146 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 159 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.90 g


Here is 2017 BRZ (not the tS which hasn't been tested)
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 6.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.3 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 7.2 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 10.6 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 8.6 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.8 sec @ 95 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 134 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 164 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.90 g

That BRZ was the limited without the Brembo brakes and with the 'Prius tires' so likely all the braking and roadholding will be better with the tS (and could be the acceleration because the tires break loose lots of wheel spin was the quote from Car and Driver, maybe better tires could hook up and get a tiny bit better acceleration).

Rolling start is the same between the BRZ and S2000.
Top gear acceleration is slightly better in the BRZ

Of course this is just one test, I've seen S2000 do quicker acceleration tests but I can't find it this instant and these are both from C&D with the same standards and measured data, just pointing out that the two engines are not worlds apart. I think I've seen the S2000 tested as quick as 5.8 so that was likely a slower car than others or not broken in fully. It's not like we are talking the difference between a BRZ and a Mustang GT which is twice of everything the BRZ has (power, Torque, displacement).

rai

Thanks,

No worries I still have my trusty 2007 Legacy wagon (the beater) so I'm using that for winter. Plus I was driving the S2000 for years with snow tires and that had no stability or traction control. I probably won't go with snow tires on the BRZ because I have a dedicated winter car and I don't want to get all the salt on my new car.

pbm317

Congrats! I still have soft spots for my S2000 and BRZ. One day I'll pick up another one or something similar if any automaker has the guts to make something in that mold again.

UDel

It really depends how you launch a S2000 and what surface you do it on, if you can get a little wheel spin you can get them under 6 seconds. If you don't launch them right you don't get very good times, the later S2000's with the larger engine were able to do 0-60 in 5.3-5.4 seconds.

https://www.0-60specs.com/honda-s2000-0-60-times/

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

Congrats! I have always preferred the BRZ front clip more than the Toyota/Scion one. Enjoy!

rai

I agree. This is one area where C&D has a good test called a street start where they are in first gear at 5 mph and they accelerate from there to 60. It takes away the 'great launch' effect and instead is more about the rolling engine power, weight and gearing of a car.

C&D said about the BRZ launch (their best time) was 5000 RPM clutch drop lots of wheel spin. I know for sure that I wouldn't be doing that nor did I with the S2000 so I was not really able to get the sub 6 second times. I do feel like my M3 with DCT was more close to what the car mags were getting, no I didn't do launch control starts but it was fairly easy to rip off from a start.

Currently, I am trying to break in the BRZ which is supposed to be keep it under 4000 rpm. I can't say that I'm doing that 100% of the time, but that I am keeping it fairly under powered. I mean that I'm not exploiting the top third of the rev range so that when I do upshift I'm also in the bottom half of the rev range. In other words currently I'm playing with much less than 200hp. It still feels ok to me. I don't mean to say it feels fast, but it's not a super slow car (not as bad as some people like to point out).

I believe some people who review performance car are jaded because they have driven 600hp Lambo and 700hp Ferrari. Of course the BRZ is not those cars, heck the BRZ cost around as much as 4 tires for a Bugatti Veyron. It's almost unfair the way the BRZ is pitted against other cars like WRX or Mustangs because they cost the same. The BRZ is not trying to be a WRX or Mustang, it's more like a bigger MX5 or a Civic Si (if that was RWD).

mmarshall

4500 is generally OK is you can't keep it under 4000. Just don't get it at or near redline for the first 500 miles or so. And don't use the brakes hard or make any panic-stops during that period unless you have to, in an emergency, to avoid an accident.

rai

here's one of my favorite GT 86 videos, shows how it's not really a powerful car but it is a fun car to drive. Also points out that it's something of a retro feel car like from the 80's and 90's.

I believe we are headed to Tesla 3, Tesla S, Tesla minivan's, SUVs in the future (not only Tesla but other car makers will be pushing the digital cars on us) and I wanted to get a proper RWD, lightweight, 6MT car, and I didn't want to pay a fortune. I have looked at Porsche cars and owned BMWs and while you can still find 6MT or 7MT cars they are not the focus, and cars like Lexus, Ferrari etc going away from MT cars. I even read that Subaru (at least in US) wants to have all automatic cars because they can put the eyesight and safety features like that that can not fit with MT cars and I think they want to be the car company that is touted as the all safety car. I believe the new Supra has been rumored to be just twin clutch. It's not a final decision but I see far more electric and automatic cars (heck even Mustangs while still selling majority MT cars, I can see this being more focused on their new 10 speed AT). The S2000 was truly only a 6MT car. I realize they do make AT in 86/BRZ but truly believe the MT is the preferred choice.

here is the cool video especially where he points out how some things in the interior are not the greatest, but they work fine and they make the car feel retro.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

The AP1 is one twitchy car from the factory. The later model feels noticeably more stable at high speed, but still not as stable as the Twins.

I'd like to see a comparison between the BRZ tS and the S2000 CR, aero for aero. Non-CR S2000s have ridiculous lift at high speed and it desperately needs a wing.

One thing great about the S2000 is the engine: it’s built like a tank. Factory forged bottom-end and high flowing cylinder head. It's not uncommon to see 400whp S2K running around (reliably) with the valve cover never been taken off. There aren’t too many engines that will let you to beat on it daily and still survive 200k+ miles.