Really? I've beaten a couple e46 and all I had done at the time was i/h/e. Now that I have my 2.7 stroker and my supercharger I run down just about anything
yep the 103 hp shows in the end. But the m3 also does have more weight. Still excellent for a 4 cylinder, but as a 330i owner, gotta love the noise of the straight 6 screaming at 8000rpm. Shame mine only does 6500. But both are nice cars.
Wow keeping the power difference in mind, that m3 took a while to pull away. Stock s2k are not drag cars anyway, Chuck a turbo in there, and then its a different story.
Fair enough. Thats your opoinon. But the RX7 is a far nicer looking car than both the 350Z or S2000. Even if its a 15+ year old design. The S2000 & 350z look a bit bland alongside an RX7. Id nearly chose an RX8 over those 2. Other cars sexy Jap cars would be the LFA of course,R35 GTR,Supra & NSX.
damn im surprised the s2k kept up like it did.. pretty close race i expected the bimmer to take it easier.. yes i see it won.. but was close at the beginning. vtakkk
@AbrahamLopezSJ Its fun losing and making the s2k look bad all the time?? I would leave the drag racing to the boosted s2ks lol at least they are actually beating alot of good cars out there...just saying.
@AbrahamLopezSJ Its fun losing and making the s2k look bad all the time? I would leave the drag racing to the boosted s2ks lol at least they are actually beating alot of good cars out there...just saying.
Dont mind the S2000 or 350Z. If you really want a fast Jap RWD car that would beat the M3. I would chose an FD3S RX7 or Supra RZ Twin Turbo. Real M3 KILLERS.
@265justy yea but your comparing getting 1990s cars vs getting 2003-2007 relative cars...sure the JDM OGS are the better and faster cars but they are old, and specially a rotary engine, thats going to need a good mechanic to be right by your side lol. Plus people go for the looks more than the power, in comparison the m3 and s2k look far more better....in my opinion ofcourse.
In a straight line race a stock M3 would monster a stock S2000. Ive been in both cars, you can't compare them to each other in a straight line, there is a big price difference between the two so it's abit unfair.
Still, both are amazing cars and id love an S2K or M3
You might have to put oil in a high reving Fiat all the time, but not the JDM cars as much. I had a few high reving JDM cars & i never had to top them up every 3000Km like you said. I dont think your familiar with the cars im talking about,
Absolutely correct! Both cars are fun, but there's a reason BMW has won on the track over 8 or 9 years straight until audi paid more attention to there cars it sure caught BMW of guard. People usually make comments knowing what there talking about it's best you don't make any of your not sure. M3 driver 550hp please excuse me!
@Wolfox360 Sorry but i think Japanese cars are known to be more reliable than the Germans. Where i come from we import high reving JDM cars . Honda aint the only producers of high reving 4 pots . Mitsubishi have the MIVEC engine found in FTOs & Mirages, Nissan have the VVL found in N15 Pulsar VZRs & Toyota have the VVTi. I had both the JDM Pulsar VZR & Mirage (Colt) Mivec both 1.6L with 180 BHP stock & i pissed all over a shit load of 6 pot BMWs. No Euro car in there class would touch em .
Don't worry a motor that has high RPM deteriorates faster than one with less RPM. You can't make magic!!!
At 100000km your engine will run perfectly but you have to put 1 liter of oil every 3000km, but a 3000cc that gives torque at less RPM, more than a S2000, at 100000km you put 1 liter of oil every 20000km. GOT MY POINT....
@leeson660 Bah? Really? Damn... Still, extra litre point 2 like a fifth of a gram. Hahaha naw jk, but still. A 350z would prolly smoke em both! NUFF SAID PAYCE
@dicktp just find that quite hard to believe to be honest. On way back from Goodwood a few weeks ago raced an S2000 from 40mph rolling start in my friends Seat Leon FR Tdi (180bhp) and stuck right on the back of it up to 130mph then the guy backed off. You could hear he was giving it the full beans. Must have been a poorly s2000! What's the M3 0-60 5 sec? Surely an intake and an exhaust wont put the s2000 under 5 seconds? Cheers
@dicktp Ref the 350z a 350 wouldnt touch an M3 in a straight line or anywhere in fact. Most 4wd cars like the S3 bog off the line and then suffer in a straight line due to the 4wd drivetrain so I'm not suprised that an s2000 with 260bhp. M3 though is a different ball game - 343bhp RWD.
All in my opinion of course! :) buying one in January so I'll be able to find out for myself :)
its not just hp, its gearing and gear ratios, power to weight ratio, etc.... My gf has an mr2 spyder with full exhuast which has around 148hp, with falken 912's that thing can launch at 5k rpm since its mid engine, and weight of driver with weight of engine is center balance, and close 2 the back wheels where it will not spin at a 5k launch. It ran a 14.8 1/4 mile and 0-60 is 6 secs. Car has 148hp and and 140 trq, but weighs 2100 lbs just to prove a point. A new si runs 15.2 1/4 0-60 @ 7.2 secs.
@sharkriup i raced s2000 with big exaust in my 238hp 330i and s2000 got shited on twice. This BMW driver is just a knoob or an ideot. M3 will rape s2000 like it wasnt racing at all.
@aleksankazakov Na, bet the s2000 wasn't even trying, just because u beat it doesn't mean it was trying, 238bhp is modified then... more than standard, do same to s2000 and not even close then, its a lighter car by about 150kg, the s2000 even standard would is faster 0-60, s2000 6.0-6.3 for bmw maybe not top end though but 2.0 vs 3.0, bmw fail, thats why im selling mine, then again my old b18c4 wouldve beat both from a roll 45-100 was 200bhp per ton, side by side with 297bhp mr2 turbo 45-100
@Markyboi1992 I beat it twice, and it is a light car, but you dont count that you deal with an engine which is a liter larger in displacement and has 2 more cylinders with vanos. Has more torque and better gear ratios. Not even speaking of German HP is always under rated by factory. If they say it has 240hp it is not equal to Japanese 240 hp. Usually German 240 show better performance than Japanese 240hp. The whole dyno system is not relavent to anything and is not a good measurement of power.
@aleksankazakov Like i said my 175bhp Civic EG which weighed approx 930kg was very similar to a 330ci if anything was pulling away to 100, he couldn't show his apreciation enough towards my car when i turned off, that was 1.8, engine is almost irelievent its power to weight.
@Markyboi1992 175hp civic will not pull away from any 330. Not even under 100. Only tuned civics can do it. I raced so many Hondas. A brand new which comes with 175 hp lost to right after we reached 40mph. Another new civic lost to me on the high way he showed his thumb up. The only civic was close to me was , tuned DX , no cat's engine mods, no interior, lightened weight. and even then I was starting to pull on him after 80mph. Not bad, but still not a standard 175hp.
@aleksankazakov Car was running approx 175bhp being very modest, it was one of the fastest N/A cars around, it was modded with DC2 camms and box, cermaic manifold, chipped ecu to 9k, amongst over things, it was one of the best in the country and i was an idiot to dell it, guy after me later striped it to bones (around 900kg) and made it look even better just with wheels and spoiler, truly great car i loved it and will try buy it back some day.
Who gives a SHIT.. The M3 is double the price tag.. It was built to go faster than the s2000, and the s2000 is meant for track.. while the m3 is meant for drag racing against corvettes, and vipers.. Nonetheless the m3 is still slower than these cars. American just makes more muscles... tahts why they are the most powerful country ever.. GERMAN is SHIT
@MrCho604 Wrong, the M3 is in no way a drag car. I own a 2002 E46 M3, It has full IRS, meaning rear axel shafts, which are NOT meant for drag. An s2k is a very stout car for what it is. But when you put it up against something like an M3, which has over 340hp stock, then of course you know what will happen. These cars are not in the same class as each other, so it isn't going to be a "fair" race. And it;s the same for putting an M3 in the class of a corvette.
I agree with alot of the comments. The s2k isn't about drag racing. I have an 07 and the car itself is just fun as hell to drive. It's really hard to try and explain it to someone who has never driven the car. It's like a go-kart but legal to drive on roads lol
to bad this s2k has to be worked up bahaha. that m3 is a low 13 second car with a 0-60 in 4.8 seconds. your shit ricer honda is 0-60 in 6.4 on edmunds, motortrend, top gear, etc with a 14.3-14.5 1/4 mile. bahaha its called shitty drivers. if hondas were so fast, everyone would be buying them instead of bmw m3's and vettes etc. damn idiot.
@StevenBTT i have seen many 0-60 times for the s2k some even as low as 5.5. having said that i own an s2000 and i would not call it shite. if i had wanted a stop light a dragster i would have spent my hard earned money on a much cheaper WS6. i know the purpose of the s2k and it's not drag racing, most car enthusiasts an s2k owners know that, besides this car is over a decade old. a 4 cyl. producing 120 bhp/litre was an engineering feat at the time and still is.
@bubbyj the lack of torque does not detract from the over all driving experience or the quality of the car. read reviews and i encourage you to test drive an s2000, you would not be so quick to criticize it. nice analogy by the way.
@19danflo I have driven them and they are very impressive, but not straight line. This is a track car. Hearing people brag about the HP just pisses me off because it is NOT what is impressive about this car.
@bubbyj i think most car enthusiast and s2k owners "brag" about the hp in this car from an engineering stand point, they don't actually brag about the 240 hp itself, but the fact that it's from an 2.0 l engine, not many cars can achieve this, and that is something impressive and maybe even "brag" worthy. 240 hp is not a lot compared to today's standards, but in a lightweight-decade old car it's still very respectable even today.
@bubbyj Why isn't impressive? Name me one car besides the Ferrari 458 Italia that has accomplished this? Is it Chevy, Ford, BMW, Audi? That's right, there's none! It took a FERRARI to break the record. Don't you go telling me that's not impressive. Besides, this is a NATURALLY ASPIRED engine, meaning no force induction (turbo) unlike those evo's, sti's, srt-4's you see around. Imagine if Honda had put a turbo? Pshh. You must be mechanically inclined to appreciate this, you sir, lack this trait.
@freddy4sure First, its naturally "aspirated", not "aspired", mr MECHANICALLY INCLINED. If you read the comments I posted before then you would see why I don't find it that impressive: The utter lack of a torque curve. As I stated, a 9 inch penis that is half an inch wide isn't cool and you shouldn't brag about it. The car is incredible at handling and is meant for curves, not straight line. You don't know me and clearly did not read the previous discussion so please, sir, fuck off.
@bubbyj I actually did read your previous post were you mentioned the lack of torque and your little wenier, talk about a weird comparison. Anyway, you're basing your judgement of the car on torque, and once again with all due respect sir, will let you know that torque is just one factor out of many that contribute to the car's performance. These include the tranny, differential, gearing, weight, hp, aerodynamics etc. But I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and assume that you are just a s2k hater.
@freddy4sure Lol you didn't read the posts if you think I am a S2k hater haha. You just mentioned all the things I was saying is what was amazing about the S2K, least of which is "power". HP without torque is not impressive. lololol wow man. You suck extra hard at trolling.
@bubbyj You can't really call it "little torque" until you drive the car. I think you're just looking at a data sheet and trying to judge it off of that. You have to take into consideration the weight of the vehicle. Think about it, even with "little torque" it's able to beat a lot of other cars in a straight. I wonder why? ;) But I will say it's not built to be a dragster. It's an all-around sport car with great handling and honda wanted to prove that they are the NA king.
@r6rider562 I've driven them. I drive a MkIV 1.8t with a big turbo set up (over 300 wheel torque) and the s2000 feels a little deprive but thats because I drive a 3000lb car with over 300hp so I am a little biased. It handles like a beast, though and still launches like mad thanks to its awesome diff and RWD. My other ride is an 09 yammy R6. Everything feels slow after riding that thing though haha.
Whats all the discussion about.. last time I checked the M3 cost around $160K on road and the S2000 was about $80K on road, so please dont compare German car 0-100 in 5.1 secs, that can track all day, with some japanese piece of shit with highlights such as "nice gearbox" and "great for a 2.0ltr".
I believe the S2000 stock does 0-100 in 6.5secs.. WAAAAAyyy different cars.. and there is that extra $80 thousand dollars you'll need for a taste of the M-Power.
@dicktp Sorry mate the S2000 just does not do the 0-100 dash in anything starting with a 5. Not wanting a massive argument or anything, but I have been in it and driven and owned a ton of different cars.
No way I say. But this is just my opinion and if you say you got a 5.7 you got a 5.7, all good.
@bugeye2003 -- Dude, If I want a straight line car.... Id get a straight line car... this is where people don't know what each cars are made for.... NOTHING and I mean NOTHING will dominate what the E30 M3 has.
World Touring Car Championship.... thats all I have to say....
The only reason you buy a older BMW is because you couldnt afford the brand new one. The only reason you get a M3 is because you couldnt afford the M5. Put the S2000 on the track (with turns) and see it shine... in this case Honda>BMW....
@ccweed18 Honda has no reason to fear in this case. But I am thinking about buying an E36 model though. Cheap and I'm planning on dumping some money into it and having a go on my take of the 2003 M3 GTR.
@ccweed18 no your an idiot you buy an m3 because its better balanced then an m5 and is more of a track car you idiot, m5's do not handle whatsoever , trust me i had an m5 traded for an m3, much better handling car, just stfu u have no clue what ur talking about
@tuugfo Sorry, i just don"t look at beasts that weigh over 3200 lbs as being the best choice when it comes to handling... if you really want balance why not just get a S2000 ? No need for name calling. just pointing out that here (in the US), with the steep prices for German engineering, if what your idealizing is performance in your track car why break your bank on luxury
That S needs some boost :D I want to find an 04 S2000 and do a 2.4L stroker kit with a good sized supercharger among other things. only really looking for 400-500 at the wheels I don't think that will be too hard.
The S2000 has around 130-145 hp at the wheel when stock, while the e46 has about 220-250 hp at the wheel, its 103hp diffrence at the crank, not the the wheel (which is what matters). With numbers like that no one should be arguing, there is no doubt that s2k has balls.
@HeyMan096 130-145? a 99-00 civic si puts down those numbers to the wheels with it´s stock b16a 160hp. the s2000 is somewhere in the 200-210hp@wheels.
Sorry about that. My freind thinks he knows shit about cars and has been commenting like crazy all over youtube, hacked my account as a "joke" to make me look like a dumbass.
@HeyMan096 The S2000 has a a descent amount of Kilowatts, no one should dispute that (170-something KW's I think?).
But its problem is it has no torque AT ALL. Think toyota corolla or Nissan SSS. And torque is what pulls you there. This is why this car is so slow depsite power claims etc.. My mates mum bought one and so we went out in it, just nothing even on a flat road.. Fun if your used to no power.. not if you are though..
And it oversteers big time, well documented in many mags.
Idiots! Always arguing. Like the the person who posted the video said 103hp difference. Two those 103 on the Honda and I can guarantee that there would be a big difference.
There is just one problem, at the end of the day, one owns a beautiful M3 and the other an ugly supra..... I mean hey come on, the interieur of the honda looks like shit.
Every time Honda is selling a car their laughing at you behind your back , HAHA trapped :D
@enta2k Both are fun cars. As long as you live in a place where u can actually drive a car you want (unlike Wisconsin), any of this stuff is fun. S2k, M3 z06(my car). Rear wheel drive with real transmission and with athletic driving in mind, you cant go wrong.
@enta2k Both are fun cars. As long as you live in a place where the weather allows you to actually drive a car you want (unlike Wisconsin), any of this stuff is fun. S2k, M3 z06(my car). Rear wheel drive with real transmission and with athletic driving in mind, you cant go wrong.
Kum on nw, we all cn b civilized bout dis. nw lets b serious. I also have a friend who owns on 02 e46 330 which I have drivin among multiple occations. & no offence 2 him, bt wen I gt out im only thnkn bout gtn bak n my S. BIMMERS (correct spelling haha) are amazing cars, tru, bt dey r 2 diff creatures & it all depends on ur own drivin preference. Besides for da price of dat bimmer, da S2k shuda been seein tail lites dats my 2 cents, thnx
Kum on nw, we all cn b civilized bout dis. nw lets b serious. I also have a friend who owns on 02 e46 330 which I have drivin among multiple occations. & no offence 2 him, bt wen I gt out im only thnkn bout gtn bak n my S. BIMMERS (correct spelling haha) are amazing cars, tru, bt dey r 2 diff creatures & it all depends on ur own drivin preference.
@bstarx An early model S2000 is usually always going to be cheaper than an e46 M3. An e36 M3 is priced similarly to an S2000. And what exactly is so bad about a go kart? Handles better than anything I've ever driven. 240hp is more than enough for a car that small and light. Seems like people just hate on it because they want ridiculous amounts of power to compensate for bad driving.
@AP1HondaS2000 sorry man but thats not true... s2000 are way cheaper than m3s. if you check on autotrader you will see all e46s m3s are over 20 000 dollars. You could say that the s2000 is in the same price range as the e36 m3. which ranges from 10 000 to 20 000. I would much rather have a s2000 than an e36 but now i own a e46 m3 chipped, with exaust and carbon fibre intake. Shes a tank but hard on gas. If yea cant afford a bmw buy an s2000 they are great cars that love to scream.
That was a really good race. I'm surprised the S2000 did that well. It's definitely a car for the turns though. I drove both the e36 m3 and S2000. Went for the S2000. It was more fun, felt a lot more rigid(even though its a convertible they're more rigid than some non-convertibles) and responsive. Both great cars though, I'd still love an M3. Especially e46
I have had a s2k and it didn't impress me, mind you I did have a sti before it. I'd still prefer m3, s2k is a sick car but that m3 emblem is a vagina magnet. Gotta cover all angles here... Lol :)
@fifafan1 doubtful i have an ive owned 3 s2000s and i also have an auto 330ci and im positive that the 330 waxes the s around a corner granted my 330 has a 1300 dollar set of treads but still bimmers are amazing in corners. a first gear 35 roll is the best for the s in my opinion i really think the added torque gives the m an advantage at the low end
@radarh8er I've driven and gone for a ride in a 330ci and I didn't think the 330ci even compares to the S2000 in handling. I've never even heard people compare them. They're definitely good cars, and they're very nice, but they're completely different cars. The S2000 is a purpose built sports car and the 330ci is a comfortable luxury car.
people are saying s2k's are SO much cheaper but in all reality in the used market they are not really that much cheaper, also the s2k is over 400lbs lighter, is a 2 seater, and comes with and almost stripped interior.
i have driven both and i can say they are both very impressive but in day to day normal driving the m3 feels worlds faster mostly because the s2k has about 140 torque.
@FinalBossWTMN but the S2K isnt an M3. And theres no way in hell a stock SK will keep up with a stock M3 like that unless the M3 driver was doing something wrong. My buddy seems to think that bcause his S2K CR is abo 350 bs lighter than my 370z he could keep up. Wrong, dead wrong.
@XKageOokamiX Instead of going off of magazines why don't you go to the track, walk around and look under the hood of the car's waiting inline to run and see the times for your self.....It's no big secrete that S2000's run 13's
S2000 far lighter what M3. Or M3 heavier than S2000. М3 won in any case
privetkaban 1 month ago
serious fast gear changes from the s2000 driver
numba1drummab01 1 month ago
Really? I've beaten a couple e46 and all I had done at the time was i/h/e. Now that I have my 2.7 stroker and my supercharger I run down just about anything
patrickryan814 1 month ago
best 2.0L 4 cylinder engine ever made..
NeckPeck 1 month ago
Honda 4ever.try race with 320bmw!!
gabor707 2 months ago
ap1 or ap2? are both cars stock with no modifications?
meandyanyan 2 months ago
@meandyanyan Thats an AP1, if you look at the rev counter it revs to 9k :-)
rhauri 2 months ago
Never mind the bhp difference, what about the $ difference?
RickinHK 2 months ago
HONDA KILLER BABY!
drvenhrd46 3 months ago
yep the 103 hp shows in the end. But the m3 also does have more weight. Still excellent for a 4 cylinder, but as a 330i owner, gotta love the noise of the straight 6 screaming at 8000rpm. Shame mine only does 6500. But both are nice cars.
tomsailas 3 months ago
Also a 1k weight difference
vr6hondaeatervr6 3 months ago
@vr6hondaeatervr6 not even close. only around 450lb difference
SIIKAP1 3 months ago
was that 1 buslength or 2?
yonkersracing 4 months ago
Wow keeping the power difference in mind, that m3 took a while to pull away. Stock s2k are not drag cars anyway, Chuck a turbo in there, and then its a different story.
panekoh 4 months ago 3
Fair enough. Thats your opoinon. But the RX7 is a far nicer looking car than both the 350Z or S2000. Even if its a 15+ year old design. The S2000 & 350z look a bit bland alongside an RX7. Id nearly chose an RX8 over those 2. Other cars sexy Jap cars would be the LFA of course,R35 GTR,Supra & NSX.
265justy 4 months ago
damn im surprised the s2k kept up like it did.. pretty close race i expected the bimmer to take it easier.. yes i see it won.. but was close at the beginning. vtakkk
aceasarsalad 4 months ago
why the hell do people drag their s2ks??
ovariesniper 4 months ago
@ovariesniper because its fun!!!!
AbrahamLopezSJ 4 months ago
@AbrahamLopezSJ Its fun losing and making the s2k look bad all the time?? I would leave the drag racing to the boosted s2ks lol at least they are actually beating alot of good cars out there...just saying.
ovariesniper 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AbrahamLopezSJ Its fun losing and making the s2k look bad all the time? I would leave the drag racing to the boosted s2ks lol at least they are actually beating alot of good cars out there...just saying.
ovariesniper 4 months ago
Dont mind the S2000 or 350Z. If you really want a fast Jap RWD car that would beat the M3. I would chose an FD3S RX7 or Supra RZ Twin Turbo. Real M3 KILLERS.
265justy 4 months ago
@265justy yea but your comparing getting 1990s cars vs getting 2003-2007 relative cars...sure the JDM OGS are the better and faster cars but they are old, and specially a rotary engine, thats going to need a good mechanic to be right by your side lol. Plus people go for the looks more than the power, in comparison the m3 and s2k look far more better....in my opinion ofcourse.
ovariesniper 4 months ago
In a straight line race a stock M3 would monster a stock S2000. Ive been in both cars, you can't compare them to each other in a straight line, there is a big price difference between the two so it's abit unfair.
Still, both are amazing cars and id love an S2K or M3
HEKTIC458 4 months ago
You might have to put oil in a high reving Fiat all the time, but not the JDM cars as much. I had a few high reving JDM cars & i never had to top them up every 3000Km like you said. I dont think your familiar with the cars im talking about,
265justy 4 months ago
i would rather keep the s2000 than the m3
tturb0b0y 5 months ago
Absolutely correct! Both cars are fun, but there's a reason BMW has won on the track over 8 or 9 years straight until audi paid more attention to there cars it sure caught BMW of guard. People usually make comments knowing what there talking about it's best you don't make any of your not sure. M3 driver 550hp please excuse me!
whateverwiththis 5 months ago
Moejoe you are wrong no way in the world will a s2k best a 350z stock. You must be kidding
Sclassmercedes 5 months ago
super 2.0l vs 3.2............. idioten
k20buki 5 months ago
///M 3
KARL1T0X666 5 months ago
Wolfox i 'll tell only one letter.. ///M
ni19852011 5 months ago
U telling me that 350z will smoke m3 power ? Only it will happen when m3 is parked
pavel1599627 5 months ago 20
Remeber that engines with high RPM don't last long.That m3 at 300000km will still have the same performance ;-).
Wolfox360 5 months ago
@Wolfox360 Sorry but i think Japanese cars are known to be more reliable than the Germans. Where i come from we import high reving JDM cars . Honda aint the only producers of high reving 4 pots . Mitsubishi have the MIVEC engine found in FTOs & Mirages, Nissan have the VVL found in N15 Pulsar VZRs & Toyota have the VVTi. I had both the JDM Pulsar VZR & Mirage (Colt) Mivec both 1.6L with 180 BHP stock & i pissed all over a shit load of 6 pot BMWs. No Euro car in there class would touch em .
265justy 5 months ago 2
@265justy
Don't worry a motor that has high RPM deteriorates faster than one with less RPM. You can't make magic!!!
At 100000km your engine will run perfectly but you have to put 1 liter of oil every 3000km, but a 3000cc that gives torque at less RPM, more than a S2000, at 100000km you put 1 liter of oil every 20000km. GOT MY POINT....
Wolfox360 5 months ago
@519garage are you retarded? Its a well known fact that a s2000 always beats a 350z (both stock), and I'm saying that as a big 350z fan....
moejoe987654321 5 months ago
103 hp difference and also about 1000lbs in weight difference........... don't complain. honda eats shit
09ster 6 months ago
@09ster eats ur mom's pussy
Shuffle3956 6 months ago
Isn't the M3 twin turbo V6???? Lmfao That's not fair bro, good try tho. S2K for life
519Garage 6 months ago
@519Garage no its a straight 6 n/a 3.2!!
leeson660 6 months ago
@leeson660 Bah? Really? Damn... Still, extra litre point 2 like a fifth of a gram. Hahaha naw jk, but still. A 350z would prolly smoke em both! NUFF SAID PAYCE
519Garage 5 months ago
@519Garage
A very close minded comment. Goodluck bringing your knife to a gun fight... M Power > Nismo
yochickwantsme 5 months ago
@yochickwantsme Uhh okay. M5 and M6 lose in drag race and 0-60, 1/4 mile, everything to the GT-R.
519Garage 4 months ago
Sounds great!
fasthonda 6 months ago
i dont think that s2000 was stock!
leeson660 6 months ago
@leeson660 a "modified" s2000 with only proper exhaust and intake is ahead from a m3 e46 from a dig for at least 700-800 meters....
dicktp 6 months ago
@dicktp just find that quite hard to believe to be honest. On way back from Goodwood a few weeks ago raced an S2000 from 40mph rolling start in my friends Seat Leon FR Tdi (180bhp) and stuck right on the back of it up to 130mph then the guy backed off. You could hear he was giving it the full beans. Must have been a poorly s2000! What's the M3 0-60 5 sec? Surely an intake and an exhaust wont put the s2000 under 5 seconds? Cheers
leeson660 6 months ago
@leeson660 S2000 is a difficult car to drive proper even on a drag race. The engine performs well only at 7k to 9k RPMS.
that means at 30~40 mph the driver must have 1st gear, or at any other gear the car will respond extremely slow.
Dont forget, the car weights more than 300kg less than the m3 e46.
Furthermore, it has great weight distribution (is is considered front-mid engined 50:50), good Torsen Diff, good Gerbx and engine till 9k RPMS.
Please check my videos with modified 350z, or S3 265
dicktp 6 months ago
@leeson660 For ex that 350z is about 320 hp.
Its an US version with 300 hp + single exhaust and intake.
My car has single exhaust, intake, puleys and lightened flywheel.
It is about 260hp and even from a rolling start its a ahead from a v6 3.5 liter car with 320 hp.
Also, on this race my clutch was slipping 1st to 2nd...
Now it has a 6 puk ACT clutch on.
Check the videos with my friends AWD S3 265hp..
See what happens from a standing start.
What makes you think the M3 will be ahead from a dig??
dicktp 6 months ago
@dicktp Ref the 350z a 350 wouldnt touch an M3 in a straight line or anywhere in fact. Most 4wd cars like the S3 bog off the line and then suffer in a straight line due to the 4wd drivetrain so I'm not suprised that an s2000 with 260bhp. M3 though is a different ball game - 343bhp RWD.
All in my opinion of course! :) buying one in January so I'll be able to find out for myself :)
Cheers mate
leeson660 6 months ago
@leeson660 I hope January comes fast for you, so you can enjoy it!
Its a great car after all :)
dicktp 6 months ago
its not just hp, its gearing and gear ratios, power to weight ratio, etc.... My gf has an mr2 spyder with full exhuast which has around 148hp, with falken 912's that thing can launch at 5k rpm since its mid engine, and weight of driver with weight of engine is center balance, and close 2 the back wheels where it will not spin at a 5k launch. It ran a 14.8 1/4 mile and 0-60 is 6 secs. Car has 148hp and and 140 trq, but weighs 2100 lbs just to prove a point. A new si runs 15.2 1/4 0-60 @ 7.2 secs.
MrBruce1337 7 months ago
240hp manual at 2,850 lbs, and 333hp automatic at 3,450 lbs. Can't say I'm impressed or surprised at the outcome.
850wagonT5 7 months ago
>103 hp difference
>not a big distance between both cars
>not bad for a 2l 4cylinders
sharkriup 7 months ago 64
@sharkriup not a stock car also...m3 stock dut s2000 no....;)
k0rkis 6 months ago
@k0rkis of course you know that because you're the owner of the S2K
sharkriup 6 months ago
@sharkriup s2000 is a light 2 door sports car, that m3 probably has 1000 pounds of luxury in it.
aleksankazakov 5 months ago
@sharkriup You forgot the difference on the price ...
Saki2407 5 months ago
@sharkriup that is correct, well said sir!
pilsener13 5 months ago
@sharkriup not that big of a difference my ass
335boosted93 3 months ago
@sharkriup i raced s2000 with big exaust in my 238hp 330i and s2000 got shited on twice. This BMW driver is just a knoob or an ideot. M3 will rape s2000 like it wasnt racing at all.
aleksankazakov 3 months ago
@aleksankazakov Na, bet the s2000 wasn't even trying, just because u beat it doesn't mean it was trying, 238bhp is modified then... more than standard, do same to s2000 and not even close then, its a lighter car by about 150kg, the s2000 even standard would is faster 0-60, s2000 6.0-6.3 for bmw maybe not top end though but 2.0 vs 3.0, bmw fail, thats why im selling mine, then again my old b18c4 wouldve beat both from a roll 45-100 was 200bhp per ton, side by side with 297bhp mr2 turbo 45-100
Markyboi1992 3 months ago
@Markyboi1992 I beat it twice, and it is a light car, but you dont count that you deal with an engine which is a liter larger in displacement and has 2 more cylinders with vanos. Has more torque and better gear ratios. Not even speaking of German HP is always under rated by factory. If they say it has 240hp it is not equal to Japanese 240 hp. Usually German 240 show better performance than Japanese 240hp. The whole dyno system is not relavent to anything and is not a good measurement of power.
aleksankazakov 3 months ago
@aleksankazakov Like i said my 175bhp Civic EG which weighed approx 930kg was very similar to a 330ci if anything was pulling away to 100, he couldn't show his apreciation enough towards my car when i turned off, that was 1.8, engine is almost irelievent its power to weight.
Markyboi1992 3 months ago
@Markyboi1992 175hp civic will not pull away from any 330. Not even under 100. Only tuned civics can do it. I raced so many Hondas. A brand new which comes with 175 hp lost to right after we reached 40mph. Another new civic lost to me on the high way he showed his thumb up. The only civic was close to me was , tuned DX , no cat's engine mods, no interior, lightened weight. and even then I was starting to pull on him after 80mph. Not bad, but still not a standard 175hp.
aleksankazakov 3 months ago
@aleksankazakov Car was running approx 175bhp being very modest, it was one of the fastest N/A cars around, it was modded with DC2 camms and box, cermaic manifold, chipped ecu to 9k, amongst over things, it was one of the best in the country and i was an idiot to dell it, guy after me later striped it to bones (around 900kg) and made it look even better just with wheels and spoiler, truly great car i loved it and will try buy it back some day.
Markyboi1992 2 months ago
@sharkriup Horsepower isn't everything the s2000 is a LOT lighter than the m3.
SilentSlayer90 1 month ago
lol somebody doesnt know shit about car racing hahahaha
omhl 7 months ago
Rice burner trying to race a European beauty. lol
fourlokoJoker 7 months ago
lol s2000 is totally shit car, haha.
DRP996 7 months ago
@DRP996 your not the inteligents , or ? the BMW have 100HP more, a doubled Engine SIze and much problems to run up^^ ....YOur only LLOOOLLLLLL
diegohnx 7 months ago
@DRP996 Lol your like the most dumbass man i saw this year.
minigreat1418 7 months ago
Who gives a SHIT.. The M3 is double the price tag.. It was built to go faster than the s2000, and the s2000 is meant for track.. while the m3 is meant for drag racing against corvettes, and vipers.. Nonetheless the m3 is still slower than these cars. American just makes more muscles... tahts why they are the most powerful country ever.. GERMAN is SHIT
MrCho604 8 months ago
Comment removed
DUSTINxCLARK 7 months ago
@MrCho604 Wrong, the M3 is in no way a drag car. I own a 2002 E46 M3, It has full IRS, meaning rear axel shafts, which are NOT meant for drag. An s2k is a very stout car for what it is. But when you put it up against something like an M3, which has over 340hp stock, then of course you know what will happen. These cars are not in the same class as each other, so it isn't going to be a "fair" race. And it;s the same for putting an M3 in the class of a corvette.
DUSTINxCLARK 7 months ago
I agree with alot of the comments. The s2k isn't about drag racing. I have an 07 and the car itself is just fun as hell to drive. It's really hard to try and explain it to someone who has never driven the car. It's like a go-kart but legal to drive on roads lol
r6rider562 8 months ago
it was a close race...i think the beemer won tho
pimptydimp 8 months ago
Comment removed
19danflo 8 months ago
to bad this s2k has to be worked up bahaha. that m3 is a low 13 second car with a 0-60 in 4.8 seconds. your shit ricer honda is 0-60 in 6.4 on edmunds, motortrend, top gear, etc with a 14.3-14.5 1/4 mile. bahaha its called shitty drivers. if hondas were so fast, everyone would be buying them instead of bmw m3's and vettes etc. damn idiot.
StevenBTT 8 months ago
@StevenBTT i have seen many 0-60 times for the s2k some even as low as 5.5. having said that i own an s2000 and i would not call it shite. if i had wanted a stop light a dragster i would have spent my hard earned money on a much cheaper WS6. i know the purpose of the s2k and it's not drag racing, most car enthusiasts an s2k owners know that, besides this car is over a decade old. a 4 cyl. producing 120 bhp/litre was an engineering feat at the time and still is.
19danflo 8 months ago 30
@19danflo 120hp/liter with very, very, very little torque...hp without torque is like a 9 inch penis that is half an inch wide...Good luck with that!
bubbyj 8 months ago
@bubbyj the lack of torque does not detract from the over all driving experience or the quality of the car. read reviews and i encourage you to test drive an s2000, you would not be so quick to criticize it. nice analogy by the way.
19danflo 8 months ago
@19danflo I have driven them and they are very impressive, but not straight line. This is a track car. Hearing people brag about the HP just pisses me off because it is NOT what is impressive about this car.
bubbyj 8 months ago
@bubbyj i think most car enthusiast and s2k owners "brag" about the hp in this car from an engineering stand point, they don't actually brag about the 240 hp itself, but the fact that it's from an 2.0 l engine, not many cars can achieve this, and that is something impressive and maybe even "brag" worthy. 240 hp is not a lot compared to today's standards, but in a lightweight-decade old car it's still very respectable even today.
19danflo 8 months ago
@bubbyj Why isn't impressive? Name me one car besides the Ferrari 458 Italia that has accomplished this? Is it Chevy, Ford, BMW, Audi? That's right, there's none! It took a FERRARI to break the record. Don't you go telling me that's not impressive. Besides, this is a NATURALLY ASPIRED engine, meaning no force induction (turbo) unlike those evo's, sti's, srt-4's you see around. Imagine if Honda had put a turbo? Pshh. You must be mechanically inclined to appreciate this, you sir, lack this trait.
freddy4sure 7 months ago
@freddy4sure First, its naturally "aspirated", not "aspired", mr MECHANICALLY INCLINED. If you read the comments I posted before then you would see why I don't find it that impressive: The utter lack of a torque curve. As I stated, a 9 inch penis that is half an inch wide isn't cool and you shouldn't brag about it. The car is incredible at handling and is meant for curves, not straight line. You don't know me and clearly did not read the previous discussion so please, sir, fuck off.
bubbyj 7 months ago
@bubbyj I actually did read your previous post were you mentioned the lack of torque and your little wenier, talk about a weird comparison. Anyway, you're basing your judgement of the car on torque, and once again with all due respect sir, will let you know that torque is just one factor out of many that contribute to the car's performance. These include the tranny, differential, gearing, weight, hp, aerodynamics etc. But I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and assume that you are just a s2k hater.
freddy4sure 7 months ago
@freddy4sure Lol you didn't read the posts if you think I am a S2k hater haha. You just mentioned all the things I was saying is what was amazing about the S2K, least of which is "power". HP without torque is not impressive. lololol wow man. You suck extra hard at trolling.
bubbyj 7 months ago
@bubbyj You can't really call it "little torque" until you drive the car. I think you're just looking at a data sheet and trying to judge it off of that. You have to take into consideration the weight of the vehicle. Think about it, even with "little torque" it's able to beat a lot of other cars in a straight. I wonder why? ;) But I will say it's not built to be a dragster. It's an all-around sport car with great handling and honda wanted to prove that they are the NA king.
r6rider562 8 months ago
@r6rider562 I've driven them. I drive a MkIV 1.8t with a big turbo set up (over 300 wheel torque) and the s2000 feels a little deprive but thats because I drive a 3000lb car with over 300hp so I am a little biased. It handles like a beast, though and still launches like mad thanks to its awesome diff and RWD. My other ride is an 09 yammy R6. Everything feels slow after riding that thing though haha.
bubbyj 8 months ago
@19danflo I totally agree. But an M3 isn't a dragster by any means either. :)
jcadlols 3 months ago
@StevenBTT oh ann m3's and corvettes are not direct competitors to an s2k. you wouldn't compare a new z06 to a new srt-10 viper would you?
19danflo 8 months ago
best of luck comparing cars which were truly engineered vs cars which we all know how they are put together!!
fadykool 9 months ago
@fadykool Lol which one of these cars isn't "truly engineered"?
bubbyj 8 months ago
the bmw flyes,honda can't touch it :D
TheDarkbeatz 9 months ago
Go for a 0-400 drag and kill that bastard :)
dicktp 9 months ago
Whats all the discussion about.. last time I checked the M3 cost around $160K on road and the S2000 was about $80K on road, so please dont compare German car 0-100 in 5.1 secs, that can track all day, with some japanese piece of shit with highlights such as "nice gearbox" and "great for a 2.0ltr".
I believe the S2000 stock does 0-100 in 6.5secs.. WAAAAAyyy different cars.. and there is that extra $80 thousand dollars you'll need for a taste of the M-Power.
Honda should stick to enviro cars
Mailme81 9 months ago
@Mailme81 S2000 does 0-100 in 5.7 stock on stock tires on road tarmac.(proper road tarmac)
Checked a few months ago with a friends Vbox.
Check my videos.
dicktp 9 months ago
@dicktp Sorry mate the S2000 just does not do the 0-100 dash in anything starting with a 5. Not wanting a massive argument or anything, but I have been in it and driven and owned a ton of different cars.
No way I say. But this is just my opinion and if you say you got a 5.7 you got a 5.7, all good.
Mailme81 9 months ago
@Mailme81 Its not about having my opinion, numbers are numbers, u cant go wrong with it.
I'll try to send you my Vbox video with the counter on it.
Till then, search Fastestlaps com and see what i tell you.
Ap1 0-100 5.9
Ap2 0-100 5.7.
Both cars hit 1/4 mile in 13.9 secs.
Those are recorded times...
dicktp 9 months ago
@dicktp Are you sure thats not 0-60???
uwysh2 9 months ago
@uwysh2 Im from Europe..
we have 0-100KMH times here :)
I think 0-60 is 5.5 for stock S2000. I must have read it in the same site.
Its making sense, S2000 is a very light car, RWD, with good LSD differential. It just needs high revs and good tarmac to launch properly.
Check my channel to see some drag races with a good friends AWD S3 the mk2 version (265hp)
At second gear he is already falling behind ;)
dicktp 9 months ago
S2000 handle really well too
MaddDogg81 9 months ago
@bugeye2003 -- Dude, If I want a straight line car.... Id get a straight line car... this is where people don't know what each cars are made for.... NOTHING and I mean NOTHING will dominate what the E30 M3 has.
World Touring Car Championship.... thats all I have to say....
dpgc9 10 months ago
i saw a slow bmw runnin' in front of a fast honda . m3 is too slow for that engine , honda is too fast!
yamahaua 10 months ago
nice comparison!
081588101 10 months ago
E46 M3 is going to bring home the hot girl in the club. The S2000 will get you her fat, ugly girlfriend everyone is avoiding.
ccline84 10 months ago
@ccline84 most likely the hot girl has shitload of stds. the s2000 will not get you the fat chick because she cant fit in an s2000. duh
gFdeathunlimited 10 months ago
The only reason you buy a older BMW is because you couldnt afford the brand new one. The only reason you get a M3 is because you couldnt afford the M5. Put the S2000 on the track (with turns) and see it shine... in this case Honda>BMW....
ccweed18 10 months ago
@ccweed18 Honda has no reason to fear in this case. But I am thinking about buying an E36 model though. Cheap and I'm planning on dumping some money into it and having a go on my take of the 2003 M3 GTR.
therookie93 10 months ago
@ccweed18 no your an idiot you buy an m3 because its better balanced then an m5 and is more of a track car you idiot, m5's do not handle whatsoever , trust me i had an m5 traded for an m3, much better handling car, just stfu u have no clue what ur talking about
tuugfo 10 months ago
@tuugfo Sorry, i just don"t look at beasts that weigh over 3200 lbs as being the best choice when it comes to handling... if you really want balance why not just get a S2000 ? No need for name calling. just pointing out that here (in the US), with the steep prices for German engineering, if what your idealizing is performance in your track car why break your bank on luxury
ccweed18 10 months ago
@ccweed18 - Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd the only reason you buy a Honda is cause you can't afford a BMW ;) just smoke another joint ccweed18
dpgc9 9 months ago
That S needs some boost :D I want to find an 04 S2000 and do a 2.4L stroker kit with a good sized supercharger among other things. only really looking for 400-500 at the wheels I don't think that will be too hard.
ABreathless0blivion 11 months ago
The S2000 has around 130-145 hp at the wheel when stock, while the e46 has about 220-250 hp at the wheel, its 103hp diffrence at the crank, not the the wheel (which is what matters). With numbers like that no one should be arguing, there is no doubt that s2k has balls.
HeyMan096 11 months ago
@HeyMan096 130-145? a 99-00 civic si puts down those numbers to the wheels with it´s stock b16a 160hp. the s2000 is somewhere in the 200-210hp@wheels.
h1coupe 10 months ago
Sorry about that. My freind thinks he knows shit about cars and has been commenting like crazy all over youtube, hacked my account as a "joke" to make me look like a dumbass.
HeyMan096 10 months ago
@HeyMan096 Good one :)
h1coupe 10 months ago
@h1coupe Not really lmao, last time I lend my computer to anyone.
HeyMan096 10 months ago
@HeyMan096 The S2000 has a a descent amount of Kilowatts, no one should dispute that (170-something KW's I think?).
But its problem is it has no torque AT ALL. Think toyota corolla or Nissan SSS. And torque is what pulls you there. This is why this car is so slow depsite power claims etc.. My mates mum bought one and so we went out in it, just nothing even on a flat road.. Fun if your used to no power.. not if you are though..
And it oversteers big time, well documented in many mags.
Mailme81 9 months ago
Idiots! Always arguing. Like the the person who posted the video said 103hp difference. Two those 103 on the Honda and I can guarantee that there would be a big difference.
Ryousuke10 11 months ago
There is just one problem, at the end of the day, one owns a beautiful M3 and the other an ugly supra..... I mean hey come on, the interieur of the honda looks like shit.
Every time Honda is selling a car their laughing at you behind your back , HAHA trapped :D
enta2k 1 year ago
@enta2k Both are fun cars. As long as you live in a place where u can actually drive a car you want (unlike Wisconsin), any of this stuff is fun. S2k, M3 z06(my car). Rear wheel drive with real transmission and with athletic driving in mind, you cant go wrong.
joeympower 1 year ago
@enta2k Both are fun cars. As long as you live in a place where the weather allows you to actually drive a car you want (unlike Wisconsin), any of this stuff is fun. S2k, M3 z06(my car). Rear wheel drive with real transmission and with athletic driving in mind, you cant go wrong.
joeympower 1 year ago
BMW all the way
2JZSupra626 1 year ago
I love both cars, but if i have the choice to pick one, hands down! M3 such beautiful car.
youwannafanta 1 year ago
at the end of the day the s2k has 10 left over to spend, and ride with no top :]
Fiji1234 1 year ago
@Fiji1234 and the m3 attracts more girls lets not forget that
yuyusuck 1 year ago
Kum on nw, we all cn b civilized bout dis. nw lets b serious. I also have a friend who owns on 02 e46 330 which I have drivin among multiple occations. & no offence 2 him, bt wen I gt out im only thnkn bout gtn bak n my S. BIMMERS (correct spelling haha) are amazing cars, tru, bt dey r 2 diff creatures & it all depends on ur own drivin preference. Besides for da price of dat bimmer, da S2k shuda been seein tail lites dats my 2 cents, thnx
StewieTopless 1 year ago
@StewieTopless Bro, your words are frustrating to read
vkotis 1 year ago
Kum on nw, we all cn b civilized bout dis. nw lets b serious. I also have a friend who owns on 02 e46 330 which I have drivin among multiple occations. & no offence 2 him, bt wen I gt out im only thnkn bout gtn bak n my S. BIMMERS (correct spelling haha) are amazing cars, tru, bt dey r 2 diff creatures & it all depends on ur own drivin preference.
StewieTopless 1 year ago
The price tag means bullshit ! You can buy used M3's cheaper than s2000's.
S2 is an overpriced/under powered go-kart
bstarx 1 year ago
@bstarx An early model S2000 is usually always going to be cheaper than an e46 M3. An e36 M3 is priced similarly to an S2000. And what exactly is so bad about a go kart? Handles better than anything I've ever driven. 240hp is more than enough for a car that small and light. Seems like people just hate on it because they want ridiculous amounts of power to compensate for bad driving.
AP1HondaS2000 1 year ago 47
@AP1HondaS2000 Thnk u, thnk u, thnk u, I mean any mo hp b4 I do sum suspension & id probly put mine n a tree hahaha
StewieTopless 1 year ago
@AP1HondaS2000 168bhp does the job superbly in my e30
jlubez 1 year ago
@AP1HondaS2000 AMEN!
ciboalien 11 months ago
@AP1HondaS2000 Lay the truth on them pimpn!!!
BoogieMain17 11 months ago
@AP1HondaS2000 sorry man but thats not true... s2000 are way cheaper than m3s. if you check on autotrader you will see all e46s m3s are over 20 000 dollars. You could say that the s2000 is in the same price range as the e36 m3. which ranges from 10 000 to 20 000. I would much rather have a s2000 than an e36 but now i own a e46 m3 chipped, with exaust and carbon fibre intake. Shes a tank but hard on gas. If yea cant afford a bmw buy an s2000 they are great cars that love to scream.
integraballa97 10 months ago
@integraballa97 Did you mean to respond to me? You basically just agreed with everything I said.
AP1HondaS2000 10 months ago
@bstarx Where? kus I may need a refund, id love 2 own an M3
StewieTopless 1 year ago
At the end of the Day, one owns a M3 and one an old crappy car.
enta2k 1 year ago
Beemers are gay!
robquilter 1 year ago
gonna have to spend way more money to keep up with the big boys dude!
mdtf2685 1 year ago
at least the S2k stayed with the M3 for a few seconds, rather than getting totally raped.
ImportDreams500 1 year ago
That was a really good race. I'm surprised the S2000 did that well. It's definitely a car for the turns though. I drove both the e36 m3 and S2000. Went for the S2000. It was more fun, felt a lot more rigid(even though its a convertible they're more rigid than some non-convertibles) and responsive. Both great cars though, I'd still love an M3. Especially e46
AP1HondaS2000 1 year ago
i knew the outcome of this race when i saw the excuse "Remember that is 103 hp diference..." lol, ///M3
myuzz 1 year ago
I have had a s2k and it didn't impress me, mind you I did have a sti before it. I'd still prefer m3, s2k is a sick car but that m3 emblem is a vagina magnet. Gotta cover all angles here... Lol :)
MortonLane 1 year ago
take it to the track and the s2k will perform better and most likely win but in a drag from a roll the m3 has it
but from a dig idk who would win
fifafan1 1 year ago
@fifafan1 doubtful i have an ive owned 3 s2000s and i also have an auto 330ci and im positive that the 330 waxes the s around a corner granted my 330 has a 1300 dollar set of treads but still bimmers are amazing in corners. a first gear 35 roll is the best for the s in my opinion i really think the added torque gives the m an advantage at the low end
radarh8er 1 year ago
@radarh8er beamers are good cars my friend has a 330 n he took me for a drive in it but i just think stock vs stock a s2k has better handling
fifafan1 1 year ago
@radarh8er I've driven and gone for a ride in a 330ci and I didn't think the 330ci even compares to the S2000 in handling. I've never even heard people compare them. They're definitely good cars, and they're very nice, but they're completely different cars. The S2000 is a purpose built sports car and the 330ci is a comfortable luxury car.
AP1HondaS2000 1 year ago
people are saying s2k's are SO much cheaper but in all reality in the used market they are not really that much cheaper, also the s2k is over 400lbs lighter, is a 2 seater, and comes with and almost stripped interior.
i have driven both and i can say they are both very impressive but in day to day normal driving the m3 feels worlds faster mostly because the s2k has about 140 torque.
both awesome cars though
masterymatty 1 year ago
not to mention the bmw is 10x nicer inside, quiter, more room and doesnt look like a midlife crises car :P
masterymatty 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
nice try tho
icMarkycuh 1 year ago
get a standing start and smoke that fucking m3 ;)
dicktp 1 year ago
The M3 is a race car, but not made to go "fast" in straight line.
salut151 1 year ago
S2000 still looks like shit.
Kevsonkip 1 year ago
@Kevsonkip Its a beautiful looking car, stop sniffing glue
2SmokingBarrelz 1 year ago
This isn't even a contest....the massive extra price tag on the M3, dumped into mods on the S2k....and the M3 would be completely ravaged.
FinalBossWTMN 1 year ago 23
@FinalBossWTMN M3 seats 5 people, s2k seats 2. just reminding you.
JeffroGymnast 1 year ago
@JeffroGymnast So? RX8 seats 4.....ties M3 on the track stock to stock. Same price range as S2k, a bit cheaper actually.
FinalBossWTMN 1 year ago
@FinalBossWTMN So, comparing the M3 to the S2k isn't quite apples to apples. The RX8 is a much closer comparison
JeffroGymnast 1 year ago
@FinalBossWTMN but the S2K isnt an M3. And theres no way in hell a stock SK will keep up with a stock M3 like that unless the M3 driver was doing something wrong. My buddy seems to think that bcause his S2K CR is abo 350 bs lighter than my 370z he could keep up. Wrong, dead wrong.
psmTARDCORE 1 year ago
@psmTARDCORE Actually both car's are low to mid 13 sec car's so it would really come down to the driver
M3TurboE46 1 year ago
@M3TurboE46 the S2K NEVER, EVER, EVER hit low 13 bone stock. It barely traps 100mph.
psmTARDCORE 1 year ago
@psmTARDCORE I NEVER EVER EVER said the S2K ran low 13's........when I said low 13's I meant the M3 and the MID 13's is for S2K.
M3TurboE46 1 year ago
@M3TurboE46 I have yet to see an S2K hit mid 13's stock. In fact I am going to search for one even posted as a bullshit thread on a forum.
psmTARDCORE 1 year ago
@psmTARDCORE I seen one run a 13.60 at the track I run at
M3TurboE46 1 year ago
@M3TurboE46 Try 14. That's the correct time.
XKageOokamiX 1 year ago
@XKageOokamiX With you driving.....With me I would hit 13's
M3TurboE46 1 year ago
@M3TurboE46 Take that up with Car and Driver.
XKageOokamiX 1 year ago
@XKageOokamiX Instead of going off of magazines why don't you go to the track, walk around and look under the hood of the car's waiting inline to run and see the times for your self.....It's no big secrete that S2000's run 13's
M3TurboE46 1 year ago
@FinalBossWTMN dumb you could say that about any car
jlubez 1 year ago
@FinalBossWTMN the s2k and this series of m3 dont even have that much of a price difference
TheRiseagainstfan 1 year ago
@FinalBossWTMN
In my area:
2004 M3 E46 goes around $16,000
2006 Honda S2000 goes around $14-18,000
That is not a "massive extra....."
kthnxbye
24thebeast 1 year ago
@24thebeast 2004 M3 repair cost and other useless parts goes around 1500+ 2006 Honda S2000 repair cost and other useless stuff goes around 800+
kthxbye
Fiji1234 1 year ago
@Fiji1234 Do we need to argue?
BMW > Honda
24thebeast 1 year ago