Honda S2000 or Boxster S????
03 October 2003, 04:30 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A powerslide near you
Posts: 10,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They may not know what a S2000 is (which is half the appeal!) but when they see one in the flesh they go Wow, what's that, I want one. Besides it's a good conversation point to see if the recipient knows anything about cars. If they don't know what one is, then you can conclude that they don't know much about cars. If they do know, then you know you're that they're salt of the earth 
.
RE: Porsche Boxster. Badge snobs would never say 'I've got a Boxster' as as much people know what a boxster is as do a S2000. However what they DO say is 'I've got a porsche'. And it's a 'poor mans porsche' at that! (very rich poor man though!) And NO-ONE thinks 'tosser' when you say Honda, they DO when you say porsche
I couldn't give (too much of) a hoots for branding (although you won't get me buying a vauxhall - although the car I'm after will probably have a vauxhall injun in it! but I'll keep that bit quiet
Anyway, brand image joking aside, both cars are fab. The Boxster is however at least £10,000 more expensive once you've specced it up to the same levels as the S2000. Basically drive both and judge for yourself whether you want to pay the extra £5/10k for the boxster if that's the one you prefer.
.RE: Porsche Boxster. Badge snobs would never say 'I've got a Boxster' as as much people know what a boxster is as do a S2000. However what they DO say is 'I've got a porsche'. And it's a 'poor mans porsche' at that! (very rich poor man though!
) And NO-ONE thinks 'tosser' when you say Honda, they DO when you say porsche I couldn't give (too much of) a hoots for branding (although you won't get me buying a vauxhall
- although the car I'm after will probably have a vauxhall injun in it! but I'll keep that bit quiet Anyway, brand image joking aside, both cars are fab. The Boxster is however at least £10,000 more expensive once you've specced it up to the same levels as the S2000. Basically drive both and judge for yourself whether you want to pay the extra £5/10k for the boxster if that's the one you prefer.
04 October 2003, 10:10 AM
#33
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to point something out, DON'T BET ON BULLETPROOF DEPRECIATION, I know a few guys and they have been stung with the depreication on very nice Boxsters and Boxster S.
So be warned dnt bet that much, and don't believe the story of unbeatable depreication, there are a fair few in nice nick which have been kicking about round here and aren't shifting for ****.
Boxster is the superior car though and it will in any case bring better depreication just not as good as you may be lead to beleave!
S2000 has got the push start button tho! Such fun it is!
So be warned dnt bet that much, and don't believe the story of unbeatable depreication, there are a fair few in nice nick which have been kicking about round here and aren't shifting for ****.
Boxster is the superior car though and it will in any case bring better depreication just not as good as you may be lead to beleave!
S2000 has got the push start button tho!
Such fun it is!
04 October 2003, 03:06 PM
#34
Scooby Senior
I have just come back from LOOKERS Honda in Nottm.. asked for a S2000 catalogue.
Like the look of the car.. don't know anything about it!
Asked what they cost!.. he said about £27k!!!!!!!
'BlUUdy Hell i said... can get mi a all singin dancing WRX for that'
The sales man said back... 'Ah but these are better than a WRX'
In my head i was saying.. 'You wish!'
He follows on with....
'I've had Impreza drivers take these out and say how much better/Quicker it is than their car'
Car looks nice.. better looking than the Boxter.... but at the end of the day.. like said earlier... its a Honda!
Don't think I want to change to a S2000 now... I'd rarther have a 2/3year old low mileage STi RA Spec C WRX with 310bhp out the can for £18K... and have a load of cosh left to drive down to the Monaco GP/WRC.. holiday in Nice with mi car! lol
Phil
Like the look of the car.. don't know anything about it!
Asked what they cost!.. he said about £27k!!!!!!!
'BlUUdy Hell i said... can get mi a all singin dancing WRX for that'
The sales man said back... 'Ah but these are better than a WRX'
In my head i was saying.. 'You wish!'
He follows on with....
'I've had Impreza drivers take these out and say how much better/Quicker it is than their car'
Car looks nice.. better looking than the Boxter.... but at the end of the day.. like said earlier... its a Honda!
Don't think I want to change to a S2000 now... I'd rarther have a 2/3year old low mileage STi RA Spec C WRX with 310bhp out the can for £18K... and have a load of cosh left to drive down to the Monaco GP/WRC.. holiday in Nice with mi car! lol
Phil
06 October 2003, 04:37 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As has been said both cars are fantastic - you can not go wrong.
I drove both over a period of time and went for the 2.7 Box (I always wanted it but thought I had better try the Honda). For me it was an easy decision - I had the budget worked out and for me the superiority of the Box in the areas that mattered for me clinched it. I found the Porker had better torque, a fabulous snarl from the flat six, a magnitude more superior handling and an overall engineering supremecy lacking in the Honda.
The S2000 does have 6 speeds, a totally different but just as addictive scream from the engine and a glass rear window (DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE HOW PANTS THE PLASTIC JOBBIE IN THE BOXSTER IS).
I think that most S2000's are driven by people who know a bit about cars, but sadly most Boxsters are driven by people who would drive a bag of spuds with the right badge on it.
The thing that worried me was an article in Car Mag that compared the S2000 against the 225 TT Quattro (they drove them around the wet lanes of Norfolk) and they said the S2k was too edgy and unpredictable for UK roads. The Box with PSM has been fantastic.
I suggest you give the 2.7 a go. The S is quicker but you will not be in the "nearly car" in the 2.7 - it is a magnificent car and one that most mags will rate abouve a 3.0 Z4 6 years after launch.
The only thing that I can think of to replace mine would be an S and then a 911.
I drove both over a period of time and went for the 2.7 Box (I always wanted it but thought I had better try the Honda). For me it was an easy decision - I had the budget worked out and for me the superiority of the Box in the areas that mattered for me clinched it. I found the Porker had better torque, a fabulous snarl from the flat six, a magnitude more superior handling and an overall engineering supremecy lacking in the Honda.
The S2000 does have 6 speeds, a totally different but just as addictive scream from the engine and a glass rear window (DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE HOW PANTS THE PLASTIC JOBBIE IN THE BOXSTER IS).
I think that most S2000's are driven by people who know a bit about cars, but sadly most Boxsters are driven by people who would drive a bag of spuds with the right badge on it.
The thing that worried me was an article in Car Mag that compared the S2000 against the 225 TT Quattro (they drove them around the wet lanes of Norfolk) and they said the S2k was too edgy and unpredictable for UK roads. The Box with PSM has been fantastic.
I suggest you give the 2.7 a go. The S is quicker but you will not be in the "nearly car" in the 2.7 - it is a magnificent car and one that most mags will rate abouve a 3.0 Z4 6 years after launch.
The only thing that I can think of to replace mine would be an S and then a 911.
06 October 2003, 05:38 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A powerslide near you
Posts: 10,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S2200 will still be called S2000 and will be sold in the U.S, NOT in the UK. The UK will get the minor visual updates but not the engine. U.K models will still have the super 9000rpm red line current engine and the US will get the rather pathetic 8000 red line one 
8000 red line one
06 October 2003, 06:59 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 2.7 Boxster is far too slow and not even in the same league in performance terms to the S2000
Yet you still claim the same performance as a Boxster S with 20bhp less!
id
06 October 2003, 09:44 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The figures don't tell the true tale, if it did I wouldn't be able to stick to the back of the Boxster S like I do, would I?
It should leave me for dead. The sum of the parts of the S2000 is greater than the whole(same with the NSX also, it's only got 280 BHP and is really rapid). The boxster is a great car, but to slow for that sort of money, the Boxster S is better but to pricy for the package/performance. You know it's true!
It should leave me for dead. The sum of the parts of the S2000 is greater than the whole(same with the NSX also, it's only got 280 BHP and is really rapid). The boxster is a great car, but to slow for that sort of money, the Boxster S is better but to pricy for the package/performance. You know it's true!
07 October 2003, 08:26 AM
#40
Ordered my S2000 this morning (silverstone with red leather)
Would have loved the Porker, and maybe Ill still have a Boxster in the future, however at the moment, I cant afford THE one I want ie S with 18s, good spec etc - So till then Ill be staying Japanese, which is no bad thing either as I can still go to all the max power type shows and maybe even doing some mods. Also I got 3 grand off a brand new un
(silverstone with red leather)Would have loved the Porker, and maybe Ill still have a Boxster in the future, however at the moment, I cant afford THE one I want ie S with 18s, good spec etc - So till then Ill be staying Japanese, which is no bad thing either as I can still go to all the max power type shows
and maybe even doing some mods. Also I got 3 grand off a brand new un
07 October 2003, 11:30 AM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well I've taken a look at the Boxster, now I've hankered after one since they came out but I fear that I've kind of become bored of the car before even owning one
I can't say I've ever really noticed before now but they are everywhere round here and I mean everywhere. Hardly what I'd call exclusive. I am beginning to wonder if I should wait for a 996 or get used 993, i.e get 'the real thing'
Having looked at the Box again close up I was ever so slightly underwhelmed by them, I fear that familiarity has dumbed the car down for me
Checked out the S2000 and to give it it's due it does having something about it, I may or may not test drive one. Again I looked out for one this morning and not a dickie bird?
I can't say I've ever really noticed before now but they are everywhere round here and I mean everywhere. Hardly what I'd call exclusive. I am beginning to wonder if I should wait for a 996 or get used 993, i.e get 'the real thing'
Having looked at the Box again close up I was ever so slightly underwhelmed by them, I fear that familiarity has dumbed the car down for me
Checked out the S2000 and to give it it's due it does having something about it, I may or may not test drive one. Again I looked out for one this morning and not a dickie bird?
07 October 2003, 11:52 AM
#42
IMO you are heading in the right direction - forget the Boxster and go for a used 993. Demand for these is very high, which should keep residuals strong. It is the last of the air-cooled 911s, which makes it almost a classic already. Of course, not everyone likes them, but there are very few people who do not instantly recognise a 911. If a Porsche is the car you have always aspired to, then buy one. If you dont like it (very unlikely) then sell it and buy the Honda.
Steve
Steve
07 October 2003, 01:28 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love 993 coupes.
I would have chosen one but I figured that it would probably cost more to run than a Boxster based on 15k miles per annum and as I live in a mountains, I wanted PSM.
993 fuel economy, insurance and servicing is more, as are parts.
Plus, adding 'big miles' to the mint 993 that you have just paid a premium for could easily cost you as much in depreciation as running a new Boxster.
I'd still love a 993 if I could garage it and keep the mileage down to 5-10k per annum.
There some good information here on the Adrian Crawford site...
http://www.performance2and4.co.uk/guides993_n.htm
...but you have to pay for his 40 page buyers guide.
I would have chosen one but I figured that it would probably cost more to run than a Boxster based on 15k miles per annum and as I live in a mountains, I wanted PSM.
993 fuel economy, insurance and servicing is more, as are parts.
Plus, adding 'big miles' to the mint 993 that you have just paid a premium for could easily cost you as much in depreciation as running a new Boxster.
I'd still love a 993 if I could garage it and keep the mileage down to 5-10k per annum.
There some good information here on the Adrian Crawford site...
http://www.performance2and4.co.uk/guides993_n.htm
...but you have to pay for his 40 page buyers guide.
08 October 2003, 01:34 PM
#44
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'm driving a Boxster 2.7 Tiptronic this week.
Have driven a Boxster S and a 2.5 before too for a few hundred miles.
The 2.7 feels a fair bit faster than the 2.5 and not far off the 3.2 once on the move but at 'higher' speeds it is more noticably slower than the 3.2. The only thing tha ruins it is the tiptronic 'box. Its awful, i could change gear faster with cogs and my bare hands. You cant turn off the gearbox 'safety' features either which basically means if the box thinks you're doing something silly or it shouould change up or down it will.
Example - accelerating down a 'B' road out of a tight corner, short staight then anohter tight corner. Engine reves to about 6-6500rpm then you lift off and brake, obviously wanting to stay in 2nd for the bend. But as you lift off the box puts you into 3rd gear, totally messing you up for the corner. It also dosnt change down quickly or smoothly. If you press the downshift button 3 times when in 5th you'll usually end up in 3rd not 2nd. I cannot stress how bad the tiptronic box is. It also uses a lot more fuel than any other Boxster i've driven.
Dont like the brakes on the 2.7 either, the ABS cuts in too easily, even on smmoth, dry tarmac, and they dont have anywhere near the stopping power of the 'S' stoppers.
The spec of standard boxsters is terrible as well. This ones got leather seats, air con, and cruise i think as extras. The standard stereo is pretty bad, just some little speakers on the top of the dash that dotn sound quality at all. Its a disgrace that a £30k+ car has such low spec as standard (its on 16" wheels too!).
I'd go for the S2000 unless you can stretch to a Boxster 'S' which really is a much much better car then the standard 2.7 imho.
Have driven a Boxster S and a 2.5 before too for a few hundred miles.
The 2.7 feels a fair bit faster than the 2.5 and not far off the 3.2 once on the move but at 'higher' speeds it is more noticably slower than the 3.2. The only thing tha ruins it is the tiptronic 'box. Its awful, i could change gear faster with cogs and my bare hands. You cant turn off the gearbox 'safety' features either which basically means if the box thinks you're doing something silly or it shouould change up or down it will.
Example - accelerating down a 'B' road out of a tight corner, short staight then anohter tight corner. Engine reves to about 6-6500rpm then you lift off and brake, obviously wanting to stay in 2nd for the bend. But as you lift off the box puts you into 3rd gear, totally messing you up for the corner. It also dosnt change down quickly or smoothly. If you press the downshift button 3 times when in 5th you'll usually end up in 3rd not 2nd. I cannot stress how bad the tiptronic box is. It also uses a lot more fuel than any other Boxster i've driven.
Dont like the brakes on the 2.7 either, the ABS cuts in too easily, even on smmoth, dry tarmac, and they dont have anywhere near the stopping power of the 'S' stoppers.
The spec of standard boxsters is terrible as well. This ones got leather seats, air con, and cruise i think as extras. The standard stereo is pretty bad, just some little speakers on the top of the dash that dotn sound quality at all. Its a disgrace that a £30k+ car has such low spec as standard (its on 16" wheels too!).
I'd go for the S2000 unless you can stretch to a Boxster 'S' which really is a much much better car then the standard 2.7 imho.
08 October 2003, 11:27 PM
#45
Guest
Posts: n/a
Checked tyres, decent tread all round, all matching contis.
It hasnt been happening this afternoon/this evening though (over 150 miles mostly cross country) and i think i know why. When i picked it up it had been valeted, tyres nice n black n shiny i remember.......i reckon the tread had been 'blacked' partially too
It hasnt been happening this afternoon/this evening though (over 150 miles mostly cross country) and i think i know why. When i picked it up it had been valeted, tyres nice n black n shiny i remember.......i reckon the tread had been 'blacked' partially too
09 October 2003, 01:17 AM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hear hear !!!
Excellent advice Nat ! the 2.7 is however a great car and not that far off the 3.2 (even if I do say so myself).....
It was a dilemma for me going for the last of 2002 model 3.2 (plastic window) or a brand spankers 2.7...
I just wanted the power
Gastro
Excellent advice Nat ! the 2.7 is however a great car and not that far off the 3.2 (even if I do say so myself).....
It was a dilemma for me going for the last of 2002 model 3.2 (plastic window) or a brand spankers 2.7...
I just wanted the power
Gastro
09 October 2003, 10:27 AM
#47
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nat21 - you are right the spec on a 2.7 is a disgrace. When I bought mine, my girlfriend was looking at a Polo Gti 16v - that had metallic, Xenon gas discharge lights, air con, BBS alloys and CD player as standard - those options would add over 4 grand to the price of the Boxster!
Also, I have never experienced the ABS issues you highlight (mines on Conti Super Contact Sport N1's and 17") though I do agree that the tiptronic is very much second best to the 5 or 6 speed manuals.
As ever, drive them all before you decide.
As an aside, I must say the ownership experience of a Porsche has been second to none. The dealers, the aftersales support, everything has exceeded my expectations.
Also, when I finish washing the car and stand back and look at it, it all makes sense.....
Also, I have never experienced the ABS issues you highlight (mines on Conti Super Contact Sport N1's and 17") though I do agree that the tiptronic is very much second best to the 5 or 6 speed manuals.
As ever, drive them all before you decide.
As an aside, I must say the ownership experience of a Porsche has been second to none. The dealers, the aftersales support, everything has exceeded my expectations.
Also, when I finish washing the car and stand back and look at it, it all makes sense.....
09 October 2003, 11:55 PM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only just seen this thread..
Obviously as an S2000 owner I'm biased, but what I will say is of the cars I've owned I've never had a car that meets with such a universally positive reaction.
It's also the most fun car I've owned by a huge margin...and I've owned 2 scoobs, 2 lotuses and various other "performance" cars. Driven Boxsters too, but they don't really float my boat.
PMSL at Salsa King... it's a honda ... like subarus have a good image ... yes well, let's go to Nice then and see who pulls more birds..me in the S2000 or you in the scooby
Obviously as an S2000 owner I'm biased, but what I will say is of the cars I've owned I've never had a car that meets with such a universally positive reaction.
It's also the most fun car I've owned by a huge margin...and I've owned 2 scoobs, 2 lotuses and various other "performance" cars. Driven Boxsters too, but they don't really float my boat.
PMSL at Salsa King... it's a honda ... like subarus have a good image ... yes well, let's go to Nice then and see who pulls more birds..me in the S2000 or you in the scooby
12 October 2003, 12:00 PM
#50
lol like it, Boxster is a poor mans Porsche, though I still like em.
Spec on the S2000 is great - Xenons, climate, full leather, CD, etc etc............oops I slipped an ordered one, turns up Nov
Spec on the S2000 is great - Xenons, climate, full leather, CD, etc etc............oops I slipped an ordered one, turns up Nov
03 November 2003, 12:25 AM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But then you are comparing an extra £6k and 0.7 litre extra which is basically a Smart car on top
It'd be really interesting IMO if Honda came up with a direct competitor for the Boxter/Z4/TT etc. Now shoe-horning the NSX's 3.2 V6 into the S2000's body would be an interesting proposition.
It always amazes me how Honda seem to be able to keep up with (and be compared with) many larger/costlier engined cars with their 2.0 litre 4 pots. Fab engineering I reckon but then I am biased
It'd be really interesting IMO if Honda came up with a direct competitor for the Boxter/Z4/TT etc. Now shoe-horning the NSX's 3.2 V6 into the S2000's body would be an interesting proposition.
It always amazes me how Honda seem to be able to keep up with (and be compared with) many larger/costlier engined cars with their 2.0 litre 4 pots. Fab engineering I reckon but then I am biased
03 November 2003, 12:50 AM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone who bangs on about the sexuality of guys who drive these cars can't be very secure with their own sexuality I think.......they probably don freddie mercury moustaches and leather caps/lipstick at the weekends........hahaha
03 November 2003, 09:13 AM
#55
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bumcrack said:
Oh really? and what do you base your findings on?
LOL @ far too slow
LOL @ not even in the same league
id
The 2.7 Boxster is far too slow and not even in the same league in performance terms to the S2000
LOL @ far too slow
LOL @ not even in the same league
id
03 November 2003, 10:06 AM
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A powerslide near you
Posts: 10,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the wet there's obviously not a lot in it. In the dry the S2000 is firmly faster than the 2.7. The boxster S, however, is almost exactly the same performance as the S2000 in all stats (0-60, 0-100, 30-70, etc.).
Anyway, you're getting great cars whichever you choose. However the S2000 is £6000 cheaper and that's with the boxster being base spec! To spec the Porker up to S2000 levels it'll cost £10k more and £13k ++ more if you get the Boxster S. So on value for money terms the S2000 is tremendous value.
Anyway, you're getting great cars whichever you choose. However the S2000 is £6000 cheaper and that's with the boxster being base spec! To spec the Porker up to S2000 levels it'll cost £10k more and £13k ++ more if you get the Boxster S. So on value for money terms the S2000 is tremendous value.
03 November 2003, 11:51 AM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was my money I'd be looking out for a Z3 M Roadster. There are still a few 2002/2003 cars floating around if you look hard enough with <10K miles fully loaded. The latest ones had the engine out of the E46 M3. Absolutely mad nutter mobiles.......extremely fast, good handling, looks good, good amount of space, engine to die for.....the list goes on. Would leave a Boxter S/S2000 standing performance wise.
03 November 2003, 12:23 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
only thing that puts me off a boxter was someone nearby was car jacked in his own home after threatening his kids for the keys.car was found 2 days later in an industrial estate a few miles away.too nickable i.m.o.
04 November 2003, 05:07 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: £1.785m reasons not to be here :)
Posts: 6,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hm..nice connundrum to be in
Mate of mine had an early Boxter 2.5 that owed him nearly 50k
Yes, £50K
Fancy wheels, sports suspension, leather, alloy trim, sports seats, Xenons, metallic black, fancy stereo, etc.
Nice car, but not for £50k..... Took an absolute dive when he sold it.
In my opinion, the S2000 is the more focused of the two.
LOL @ phil. An S2000 is a different league to a WRX. The dealer is right. An Sti would be fairer comparison, but very different beasts.
Drive on mate, rather than just looking at them, then come back on here extolling the virtues of your glorified farmers van....
Current S2000's don't have the wayward handling of the original cars. Every mag thats tested one says they are much better, and a cracking bit of kit.
I know where my money would go. But if posing is important to you, buy the Porshe, cos you don't deserve the Honda
Mate of mine had an early Boxter 2.5 that owed him nearly 50k
Yes, £50K
Fancy wheels, sports suspension, leather, alloy trim, sports seats, Xenons, metallic black, fancy stereo, etc.
Nice car, but not for £50k..... Took an absolute dive when he sold it.
In my opinion, the S2000 is the more focused of the two.
LOL @ phil. An S2000 is a different league to a WRX. The dealer is right. An Sti would be fairer comparison, but very different beasts.
Drive on mate, rather than just looking at them, then come back on here extolling the virtues of your glorified farmers van....
Current S2000's don't have the wayward handling of the original cars. Every mag thats tested one says they are much better, and a cracking bit of kit.
I know where my money would go. But if posing is important to you, buy the Porshe, cos you don't deserve the Honda