wrx vs. s2000 - Subaru WRX Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 67 Old 12-01-2002, 02:15 AM Thread Starter
WRXtuners Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: WEst Covina California
Posts: 5
mrfd3s is an unknown
wrx vs. s2000

Its time for me to buy a car and I am greatly considering a new wrx sedan or s2000. Ive heard great things about both cars and now im stuck on what to get. I really want speed and the s2000 can deliver that right out of the factory, and if i get one im still gonna turbocharge it. I wanted to know for those of you that have a turbo charged wrx what turb kit your using and what times you run on 1/4 mile. I need a very reliable car that will last me a long time. Please help me with you comments and thanks.
mrfd3s is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 67 Old 12-01-2002, 03:21 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
Khaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Yea
Posts: 39
Khaos is an unknown
Send a message via AIM to Khaos
To tell the truth, i have a good friend who owns an S2000, and it honestly has no low end to it. Ive driven it, on 30-70 acceleration and highway runs its really great but it shows no torque numbers - from the factory i think its 153 ft-lbs of torque? The WRX offers 217 im pretty sure and with that torque you get the advantage of all wheel drive. All for much cheaper. If your going pure performance i would say go with the WRX, of course this is a WRX forum. But if you want the more show look scene i would suggest the s2000 because not exactly everyone likes the buy-eyes of the WRX.

"Thats a nice car you got there son, is it a WRX?"
"yes, and thanks"
"Why were you going so fast?, I clocked you at 60 in a 35"
"I was testing out my nitrous oxide.."
"Ok, well i'm still going to have to ticket you, and did you say nitrous oxide?"
"No, i said my carbon monoxide detector"
Khaos is offline  
post #3 of 67 Old 12-01-2002, 03:22 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
Khaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Yea
Posts: 39
Khaos is an unknown
Send a message via AIM to Khaos
And on the reliability issue, both of the cars would be extremely reliable. Hondas and Subarus alike last forever and are designed to run till 200,000+ miles.

"Thats a nice car you got there son, is it a WRX?"
"yes, and thanks"
"Why were you going so fast?, I clocked you at 60 in a 35"
"I was testing out my nitrous oxide.."
"Ok, well i'm still going to have to ticket you, and did you say nitrous oxide?"
"No, i said my carbon monoxide detector"
Khaos is offline  
post #4 of 67 Old 12-11-2002, 07:24 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
REXronald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 603
Images: 12
REXronald is known to be trustworthy and helpful REXronald is known to be trustworthy and helpful
Tend to agree w/Khoas

I definately suggest the WRX over the s2000. As I recall it, the S2000 is no faster in 0-60 time than the WRX. I don't know for sure how they compare in 1/4 mile. Nonetheless, The WRX boasts all wheel drive, great offroadmanship if/when needed, and I think a very unique look. I have cool set of Erebuni ground effects on mine and some STi emblems and people are always staring as they walk by my parked car. Or people turn their heads and point. Some even pull up next to me and put their window and want to know what car is this, or is that really and STi (I tell them "I wish"). But they still appreciate it for its unique look. And on the road you're darn near one the quickest cars against 98% of the traffic you pull up to. Its a damn nice feeling to pull up to the double line red light next to some guy in a tricked out Honda/Audi//MustangGT/RSX/BMW/Lexus IS 3/etc. and whoop the pants off of them. Some guy the other day in a new Tiburon tried to tell me how he could have kept up if he had the V6 Tiburon. I laughed at him and said not a chance buddy, try picking up a Road & Track sometime. Wouldn't even be fair to give the Tiburon a run at the WRX. I sent him home w/his TiburTail between his legs... I felt so bad, I tried to boost his ego a bit w/"Tiburon's a cool looking car". . . and i believe the new one is cool looking. But why'd they make it such a pansy. Give that V6 a turbo and intercooler and then it might compete. ANYWAYS, I'll get off my highhorse now. I've had my WRX since OCT 01 now, and as you can see,,, the only vehicle that will replace it in my garage is a 2005/2006 Subaru Impreza STi. (Planning to see it sold on U.S. market by then)... and hopefully should be able to afford it by then. . . I hope they just make it more expensive and do some rediculous modifications to it... Hell, by that time, i may have dropped all my money boosting this WRX. I'd be happy w/280hp... What gets me there..? CAI, irridium spark plugs, catless uppipe, turbo back exhaust, elec. boost control w/unichip and turbo timer? think that could add 53 hp? me not too sure. gotta be close though, i'm thinking.

GET THE WRX, as you can see, I'm speechless... not.
REXronald is offline  
post #5 of 67 Old 12-17-2002, 10:06 AM
WRXtuners Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 55
angel is an unknown
well, I own both.....

and I must say that it really depends on what you are looking for. The S2000 is BY FAR, a much more fun car to drive but it is one of the MOST impractical cars you can own. If you can afford a beater plus the S2000 then go w/it.

I am sorry, but all this "lack of torque" is true but by NO means affects on how you will perceive this car. It really comes alive after 6,000 rpms (what, the Subaru only has another 1k to go while the S has 3k more).

I have owned Supras, VR4's, RX7s and even a 500hp 300ZX...the most fun car to date is this S2000 that I have.

NOOOOOOOOOOW, if you can only afford one car, then by all means get the WRX. I have owned mine for about 1 week and it is my daily driver. You will NOT get as many looks as driving the S and chicks might not be climbing all over you but hey, it makes a great daily driver and looks ok, yet is is highly tunable.

Stock for stock the S2000 is quicker and faster than the WRX and it will also outperform it in cornering and handling.

Fun/Quick vs. Practical...you decide.

Angel
----------------------------
00' Honda S2000
02' Subaru WRX
00' Yamaha R1
01' Honda 929RR
93' 300ZXTT (510hp)...sold :-(
-----------------------------

-----------------------
00' Silver S2000
02' Blue WRX
00' Blue R1
01' White/Red 929RR
93' Nissan 300ZX TT - 510 hp (sold)
------------------------
angel is offline  
post #6 of 67 Old 12-17-2002, 05:55 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 81
Zullard is more helpful than not
that may be somewhat true in stock form

that might be true (parts) in stock form but not once you hit the aftermarket, if you want to build a car get a WRX you can go insane with performance parts with all-wheel drive and a turbo your power possiblities are endless plus if you get a wrx (26k) and get 5-6k worth of parts since the S2000 is (32k) you will have 400+ horsepower in a daily driver and other goodies. An S2000 looks nice but I would like the look on a vette owners face more when you smoked him. vette smoking fun v. quick fun If you are looking at these 2 cars you might what to look into the 350z too especially since there are two twin turbo kits coming out for it (one from greddy) making it 450+ with a tt kit plus they are in your range 26-35k
Zullard is offline  
post #7 of 67 Old 12-17-2002, 05:59 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 55
angel is an unknown
Re: that may be somewhat true in stock form

Quote:
Originally posted by Zullard
that might be true (parts) in stock form but not once you hit the aftermarket, if you want to build a car get a WRX you can go insane with performance parts with all-wheel drive and a turbo your power possiblities are endless plus if you get a wrx (26k) and get 5-6k worth of parts since the S2000 is (32k) you will have 400+ horsepower in a daily driver and other goodies. An S2000 looks nice but I would like the look on a vette owners face more when you smoked him. vette smoking fun v. quick fun If you are looking at these 2 cars you might what to look into the 350z too especially since there are two twin turbo kits coming out for it (one from greddy) making it 450+ with a tt kit plus they are in your range 26-35k
hehe....good luck w/the warranty....

-----------------------
00' Silver S2000
02' Blue WRX
00' Blue R1
01' White/Red 929RR
93' Nissan 300ZX TT - 510 hp (sold)
------------------------
angel is offline  
post #8 of 67 Old 12-17-2002, 06:40 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
Khaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Yea
Posts: 39
Khaos is an unknown
Send a message via AIM to Khaos
Yes true, the S2000 has a 9k RPM redline, but do you know the reason for this? The 153 MAXIMUM torque number dosent even come till about 7-8k RPM? The honda engineers had to find a way to make more power with the f20, so they decided to allow the engine to rev higher. The 217 MAXIMUM torque on the REX (dont know exact numbers please someone fill in) comes probably at 4-5k. And the S2000 dosen't have the low end grunt like the WRX, ive driven both and I'm completely impartial. Mind you, the s2000 has very stunning looks and it handles amazing, you don't the get the feeling of AWD pushing and pulling you through corners at the same time. And also, the s2000 comes equipped with a 6-speed another advantage. But last point: S2000: 35k brand new bone stock WRX: 23k brand new bone stock... This is the critical issue. A WRX with 12K invested could be made to beat most of any cars on the road, plus AWD and much better off/road ability as forementioned. Anyways, It is your choice but consider everything said and make your OWN decision.

-K

"Thats a nice car you got there son, is it a WRX?"
"yes, and thanks"
"Why were you going so fast?, I clocked you at 60 in a 35"
"I was testing out my nitrous oxide.."
"Ok, well i'm still going to have to ticket you, and did you say nitrous oxide?"
"No, i said my carbon monoxide detector"
Khaos is offline  
post #9 of 67 Old 12-17-2002, 06:41 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
Khaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Yea
Posts: 39
Khaos is an unknown
Send a message via AIM to Khaos
Restated: Your best bang for the buck is the WRX. Period.

"Thats a nice car you got there son, is it a WRX?"
"yes, and thanks"
"Why were you going so fast?, I clocked you at 60 in a 35"
"I was testing out my nitrous oxide.."
"Ok, well i'm still going to have to ticket you, and did you say nitrous oxide?"
"No, i said my carbon monoxide detector"
Khaos is offline  
post #10 of 67 Old 12-17-2002, 09:29 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
REXronald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 603
Images: 12
REXronald is known to be trustworthy and helpful REXronald is known to be trustworthy and helpful
Khaos, I'll drink to that (but not drive after), ha ha.

And glad to see we've got some people talking about this... I was beginning to think no one was paying any attention... I had no idea the S2000 was so expensive... and was beginning to think that Angel had me w/the S2000 argument... but, thanks to the faithful WRX enthusiasts, i felt much better after reading on down the line... Last I heard, Road & Track stated WRX does 0-60mph in 5.4 seconds and 1/4mile in 14.1 seconds... that's right out of the article as tested, bone stock... Anyone have printed figures on the S2000??? could have sworn i heard from reliable source that it was no faster in 0-60 and slight bit faster in 1/4 mile... which would make sense, since little juice from S2000 until its up and roaring away in the high RPM range...? anyways, put the ground effects on WRX and people will stare, i guarantee it,,, proof is in the pudding... i never expected as much attention as my car has drawn... keep in mind, i live in a city called "Reminderville" in Ohio. Not too many are driving much more than tricked out Honda civics/preludes and occasional really nice sports cars (summer only). So, !Cry! your heart S2000 owners, you all got ripped off (only my opinion of course, and some lovely factors to back that up, of course)he he... Drive on, I say,,, hope to pull up next to ya at the next red light... You can bet I'll drop the hammer while 5000 is reading on my tach (oooh that's bad for the clutch !Cry! ) but hey, that's what it takes to briefly sqeal all fours.
REXronald is offline  
post #11 of 67 Old 12-17-2002, 09:35 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
REXronald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 603
Images: 12
REXronald is known to be trustworthy and helpful REXronald is known to be trustworthy and helpful
I should really re-phrase that...

Thats what it takes to CHIRP all fours, ground grabbing is nearly instant.

another thought-- add 300hp to juice the S2000 and see how much rubber you can still stick to the pavement. What's that car wiegh in at? Gotta be quite a bit less than our WRX, i'm thinking.
REXronald is offline  
post #12 of 67 Old 12-18-2002, 09:08 AM
WRXtuners Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 55
angel is an unknown
Quote:
Originally posted by Khaos
Yes true, the S2000 has a 9k RPM redline, but do you know the reason for this? The 153 MAXIMUM torque number dosent even come till about 7-8k RPM? The honda engineers had to find a way to make more power with the f20, so they decided to allow the engine to rev higher. The 217 MAXIMUM torque on the REX (dont know exact numbers please someone fill in) comes probably at 4-5k. And the S2000 dosen't have the low end grunt like the WRX, ive driven both and I'm completely impartial. Mind you, the s2000 has very stunning looks and it handles amazing, you don't the get the feeling of AWD pushing and pulling you through corners at the same time. And also, the s2000 comes equipped with a 6-speed another advantage. But last point: S2000: 35k brand new bone stock WRX: 23k brand new bone stock... This is the critical issue. A WRX with 12K invested could be made to beat most of any cars on the road, plus AWD and much better off/road ability as forementioned. Anyways, It is your choice but consider everything said and make your OWN decision.

-K
Like I said, the S2000 is VERY (I said this before) impractical but an absolute hoot to drive and putt around. You can actually purchase a new S2k out the door for less than $ 30K if you shop right. I totally agree, the Rex is MUCH more tunable so AAAAGAIN, it depends on what his plans are.

As far as what Honda engineers were thinking of, come on man, give them some credit....look at all the F1 machines they produce and the 929/954/etc........enough said.

To date, the S2000 is the FASTEST (torque or not) 4 cylinder NA car available...and topless.

The WRX....a hell of a car imo....enough said!

-----------------------
00' Silver S2000
02' Blue WRX
00' Blue R1
01' White/Red 929RR
93' Nissan 300ZX TT - 510 hp (sold)
------------------------
angel is offline  
post #13 of 67 Old 12-18-2002, 09:13 AM
WRXtuners Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 55
angel is an unknown
Re: I should really re-phrase that...

Quote:
Originally posted by REXronald
Thats what it takes to CHIRP all fours, ground grabbing is nearly instant.

another thought-- add 300hp to juice the S2000 and see how much rubber you can still stick to the pavement. What's that car wiegh in at? Gotta be quite a bit less than our WRX, i'm thinking.
The only way to get 300rwhp out of an S2K is by FI it. Turbo S2ks are running only high 11's/low 12's and you would have to invest around $ 7-10K to get that performance....however, traction is NOT that big of an issue. They weigh right around 2600-2700.

Keep in mind the S was made for road coarses and not really for straight acceleration....

The S will kill the WRX on the roadcourse but as soon as you go agricultural...well, let's not go there


-----------------------
00' Silver S2000
02' Blue WRX
00' Blue R1
01' White/Red 929RR
93' Nissan 300ZX TT - 510 hp (sold)
------------------------
angel is offline  
post #14 of 67 Old 12-18-2002, 07:49 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
REXronald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 603
Images: 12
REXronald is known to be trustworthy and helpful REXronald is known to be trustworthy and helpful
Ok angel, i'm trying to see your point...

I tend to be bit closed-minded about this topic,

but i think i'm beginning to see your point Angel... Your getting at the S2000 being a HOOT to drive because it is fun to scoot around gripping into the curves and scooting out of them... I can begin to remeber the fun when i think about driving my buddies 1998 BMW M3... (recently totalled in drunk driving incident)... but the memories.... that car seemed to be stuck to road w/super glue,,, he had chip technology high flow exhaust and CAI, tons of fun... and that car not only stuck to road incredibly on the curves, but seemed like it had mad torque available at any time, any RPM... So I concede,, I'm sure the s2000 is barrels of fun... Guess it doesn't matter what you're driving, as long as its got some decent juice, and a manual transmission...

Botton line.... Its the driving part that's fun, and the sound the engine makes when sucking up cold air and spitting it out extra hot.
REXronald is offline  
post #15 of 67 Old 12-20-2002, 10:16 PM
WRXtuners Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 150
QuickShift is an unknown
S2000 stock aint got anything on a wrx stock simple as that

I drove my freinds S2000 it was stock and it aint got nothing on my Wrx he even admited it , the low end torque , the high rev just takes to long that why it has a 0-60 in 6 sec . car and driver tested the wrx at 5.3 sec 0-60.



just my 2 cents
QuickShift is offline  
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On