Swap old S2000 for....
- Thread starter 413x
- Start date
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
That is steep. I will have to look I to the intervals and everything involved
The s2000 has been a gem in terms of service etc
Oh dear, I wish I could buy now
This is the only one I've seen I like the look of
That one has been ruined by those awful wheels. What a shame.
If you just want some bling bling buy a 2 litre and ruin that
The service costs (inspection 1/2) are quite high, 2 being the most expensive. But the oil change is around 150ish if I remember correctly. But they are not very often, for example mine is now coming up to 40k and the next service is an oil change. And so far its had 3 oil services, 1 inspection 1 and 1 inspection 2 which I had done before I picked my car up. So as a guess I will of had the car two years before I pay for an inspection 1 and 3/4 before I pay for an inspection 2.
Parts can add up but then that's the same for any BMW I would imagine.
Parts can add up but then that's the same for any BMW I would imagine.
Not too bad really. I guess any car at this level is going to incur a more hefty service cost.
Not enough to put me off.
I think in the new year I will get myself a test drive (although as said I don't really get much out of these) as it takes me a while to learn a car
Saying that when I drove the chevy camaro in USA I picked it up quite quickly
Does the Z4M keep you on your toes? And can it always put a smile on your face? My s2000 always makes me happy to drive
The S54 engine is rather unique in its bizarre and expensive servicing cost - for example the more powerful V8 in the E39 M5 has lower servicing costs than the S54 in the Z4M and E46 M3.
Every other service is an Inspection service at which point the valve clearances are checked - this is labour intensive and is the reason for the high servicing costs.
I'd imagine that similar cars have lower costs - I cannot imagine the SLK55 having such expensive servicing requirements for example.
How heavy is an mx5?
funny that you think s2000 is too fast. I think it's about right for being able to drive hard without getting ridiculous. Unlike something like a e90 M3.
I'm more concerned about people saying the S2000 is too fast but that the handling is the same as an mx5. As Simon has mentioned, speed isn't a problem. 240BHP is fine for a car of that size and weight and it never feels too much for the road.
This really isn't the case. After driving a mk2.5 and mk3.5 mx5 for considerable time, I would say that claiming their handling is the same as an S2000 is as far from the truth as possible.
The mk3.5 has a nice low down shove but runs out of power quickly and the suspension feels very wallowy on long corners and a little too bouncy in quick direction changes. This is with the bilstiens on a black edition.
The mk2.5 was more to my liking in terms of handling with a flatter cornering feeling and much more responsiveness in direction changes. The feedback from the whole chassis of this car was great for me but I felt the damping a little soft for my liking and there was too much body roll for me. Something I would have addressed immediately if the car was my own.
Neither of these hold a candle to a properly set up s2000. Suggesting they are the same suggests that you haven't had any time.in one.
This really isn't the case. After driving a mk2.5 and mk3.5 mx5 for considerable time, I would say that claiming their handling is the same as an S2000 is as far from the truth as possible.
The mk3.5 has a nice low down shove but runs out of power quickly and the suspension feels very wallowy on long corners and a little too bouncy in quick direction changes. This is with the bilstiens on a black edition.
The mk2.5 was more to my liking in terms of handling with a flatter cornering feeling and much more responsiveness in direction changes. The feedback from the whole chassis of this car was great for me but I felt the damping a little soft for my liking and there was too much body roll for me. Something I would have addressed immediately if the car was my own.
Neither of these hold a candle to a properly set up s2000. Suggesting they are the same suggests that you haven't had any time.in one.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 11,726
- Location
- Northampton
Without sounding like I'm defending the MX5 because the S2000 is a superior car but you can compare a well setup S2K to a standard albeit on factory Bilsteins MX5. Likewise you could stick some Ohlins, frame rails and Flying Miata ARBs on an MX5 and a standard S2K wouldn't hold a candle to it in terms of handling.
They're both great cars, in both stock and modified form. Ultimately unless its a turbo or supercharged MX5 it isn't going to keep pace with a S2K but you can explore an MX5s capabilities on the road due to the lack of outright power.
That's what I'm comparing it to though. A bilstiens equipped mx5 black edition (factory fitment = stock) against a stock S2000 with the correct geo settings is a big difference. I'm comparing stock to stock otherwise there wouldn't be a point posting. Both cars I drive regularly. I preferred the handling of the mk2.5 to the 3.5 but ultimately neither of them are on the same level as an S2000. The handling is good and the cars are exciting but they don't feel as rigid or offer the same level of feedback
My point was that a comment was made saying that the only difference between the mx5 and the s2000 was power and that handling was too close to call a difference. Which isn't true at all.
My point was that a comment was made saying that the only difference between the mx5 and the s2000 was power and that handling was too close to call a difference. Which isn't true at all.
Yeh it does still, it is my daily (done 10k since Feb in it where as the previous owner did 28k since 07) so most of my driving is normal non traffic town driving and motorways, but when I do take it out for a real drive either on my own or with the guys off here it is great fun, if not slightly scary at times. Think I get too used to it doing normal driving so when I do get a chance to stretch its legs it almost surprises me slightly still (difference between revving to 4k instead of 7k). That's not to say its boring doing normal driving but its another level when you get a chance to stretch the engines legs, something mrk with his M3 will agree with I'm sure
900kg vs 1200kg from what I gather.
I think the S2000 takes you out of acceptable levels just a little too quickly when driving it hard, in something like the Z4M your very concious because your pretty much breaking the law as soon as you turn the ignition and its much more of an event.
The step up from MX5 to S2000 just wasn't enough for me to make the change.
How heavily stripped out was the MX5? my mk2 is around 1050kg with an interior and buckets?
Having owned a s2000 for many years, and currently owning a mx5 track car. The jump between the two is massive, driving experience wise they're not even comparable.
You are going to have to explain how an S2000 is 'too quick' yet an even quicker Z4M is not because currently it makes no sense.
[TW]Fox;28881064 said:
Where did I say it wasn't?
They both do, but in the Z4M "you are very concious because your pretty much breaking the law as soon as you turn the ignition and its much more of an event"
As Conanius said, the S2000 and MX5 are both great drivers cars, how ever the S2000 is not enough of a step up from the MX5 to warrant that breaking of the fun Vs dangerous barrier imo. If you are going to be making that leap, you should do it properly. The S2000 is a fantastic car and I'm disappointed I will probably never own one.
I'm confused as to what is being suggested?
That the s2000 is dangerous?
My car is an Ap1 (apparently more fiesty?). And although it can scare you, that's only you want to be scared. I've really never had a problem with it. Sure it's stepped out at the back off a roundabout or around a corner that's caught me out, but that's what I like. I'd rather be on the limit with power to spare than not enough to scare me!
That the s2000 is dangerous?
My car is an Ap1 (apparently more fiesty?). And although it can scare you, that's only you want to be scared. I've really never had a problem with it. Sure it's stepped out at the back off a roundabout or around a corner that's caught me out, but that's what I like. I'd rather be on the limit with power to spare than not enough to scare me!
That an S2000 is too fast to enjoy without being in license losing territory but not fast enough to be 'an event' when not going fast. I think.
Ah. I suppose not everyone lives in windy 'not even B Road' territory where 60 is the technical limit.
Last edited:
Yea there or there abouts.