why you would choose one over the other, not trying to start a bash thread or anything. Of course they are completely different cars on different platforms and ends of the kliris rod. But which would you guys choose and why please give me something like a ben franklin list the + and - of each and I guess I will kinda help me decide which to choose. If this topic has been discussed thousands of times prior, please give me some links.
Thanks cunem moret pootsa!

Maman kunem, yesem bozzzzzzza hotel lobby mech nstatsem,ari koshikneres haknemmmmm, hahaha subliminally grumem stegh vor es gyotere che hanen postes. hahahha. ban chunem anelu ekelem vor es forumi berane norits cunem. vrejjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj. vrejjjjjjj. De uremen hajogh.

 

well i think you answered your own question..... .. it's two completely differnt cars...

but as for the other things... do you need a back seat? do you like a convertible? is it your daily driver? yada yada yada..????

i would chose the S......
1. i like it better
2. it looks better in my eyes
3. it's more fun to drive
4. it only has 2 seats..
5. it's a convertible (it's my first convertible and i love it, never thought i'd get one but i did and like i said, i love it.. )
6. the S is a roadster
7. by having an 03 i can brag about a couple of things..
7a. the fact that it's a 2.0L and still has 240bhp
7b. it has a 9000rpm redline
7c. it's the fastest 2.0L car in the world (from factory)
7d. it has a push button start

and yes i drive it everyday... it's my daily driver... i also have a darango but umm i never drive the damn thing.. i can't put my keys to the S down....

 

if you want more power then go with the evo. i think im satisfied w. the s. 03s2kblue mentioned most of the +. a major plus for me is the hardtop.



i know my post wont be so helpful since im in a hurry. im off too the s. like 03s2kblue said
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 03s2kblue &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">"i can't put my keys to the S down.... "</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

barev lol. My bro has a Mr. and a Mr is much better then a stock evo. Faster. I got my s2k and he kicks my *** all day long. But a evo wont be too much better. Only thing u can do vs. a evo is keep up with one on the freeway. What i always say is....its my taste, its conv. and id pick it over the evo anyday. And isnt a evo 8 5speed? lol. So its all your taste. They both are good sports cars. But dont forget, its a honda.... It should last longer. lol .

 

yes i also like the hardtop.. but i dont' have one yet.. but will have the mugen..

 

All lancer evo's have 5 spd transmission except the MR edition has a 6spd. That is the only major difference betwen the MR and the regular trims. THere are some things like shiftknob aesthetics and then the special *fins ligther in weight i believe as well.

In terms of handling the EVO all wheel drive is nice. The car is rigid and the tranny feels nice, pretty short and solid shift feelin'.

However with the s2k you get the compact size great handling as well similar price tags, the honda tranny feel and a great overall car.

For someone in the market for a 30-40K car its mainly just preference.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 03s2kblue &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
7c. it's the fastest 2.0L car in the world (from factory)
</TD></TR></TABLE>

i don't think so

Evo, JDM/Euro Sti, Lotus Elise/Exige (ok it's a 1.8 but its still fast)

maybe the fastest N/A 2.0, but not fastest 2.0

 

i think we all know what he meant

 

i would choose the evo because it is...

1. All Wheel Drive (has front, center, rear diffs)
2. Turbo, and built to handle boost
3. Way more space, fit more people and stuff inside
4. More Torque at lower RPMs
5. Funner to drive, yes Turbo and AWD is funner imo.
6. With an Evo you can actually mess with super cars and possibly win
7. Big gains from simple modifications
8. More practical
9. Better in the rain or in bad weather

If the S2k was turbo, it would have much more torque, and it would be a lot funner to drive. some people on here are just too honda biased.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CWESTINDC2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i would choose the evo because it is...

1. All Wheel Drive (has front, center, rear diffs)
2. Turbo, and built to handle boost
3. Way more space, fit more people and stuff inside
4. More Torque at lower RPMs
5. Funner to drive, yes Turbo and AWD is funner imo.
6. With an Evo you can actually mess with super cars and possibly win
7. Big gains from simple modifications
8. More practical
9. Better in the rain or in bad weather

If the S2k was turbo, it would have much more torque, and it would be a lot funner to drive. some people on here are just too honda biased. </TD></TR></TABLE>

my opinion
1. yes. very nice.
2. very true and turbo sounds very pleasing too.
3. it sure does...but dont care too much about more space when you have a nice SUV beater.
4. Torque...s2k does lack little bit of that.
5. not for me. evo is pretty boring to drive.
6. who cares if you beat super car or not. just have fun with your car.
7. very very true. wish s2k have that same effect.
8. indeed.
9. awd own s2k in bad weather any day.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CWESTINDC2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
5. Funner to drive, yes Turbo and AWD is funner imo.
6. With an Evo you can actually mess with super cars and possibly win

</TD></TR></TABLE>

5. Not finished school yet?
6. Possibly? No.. Not unless it has just as much money invested as an S2000 would need to keep up.


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CWESTINDC2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
If the S2k was turbo, it would have much more torque, and it would be a lot funner to drive. some people on here are just too honda biased. </TD></TR></TABLE>

I would think people are Honda biased... It is an S2000 forum.
Once again, funner?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LSHatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

5. Not finished school yet?
6. Possibly? No.. Not unless it has just as much money invested as an S2000 would need to keep up.


I would think people are Honda biased... It is an S2000 forum.
Once again, funner?</TD></TR></TABLE>

have you driven the evo before? have you driven the s2000 before? if not don't make any retarded comments LS boy. Evo's with their stock turbo's have been able to break 11's and also can achieve 400hp on a stock block with the stock turbo. For an s2k to do that, you would have to spend at least 4k on a turbo setup, fuel upgrades, engine management, and ect which can be be expensive, easily more costly to fix up than an evo.

 

if you plan to have fun with it and want to circuit race than a s2000 is a much better choice, it is bred to race. im not so biased towards honda, but just 9000 rpm's of natrual aspiration

 

i have the same problem as u gogorally, i can't decide either. Coming from owning a turbo car, I dont like the lack of potential of the s2000.

I dont understand why all the stock turbo cars these days are all 4 door sedans which are either fwd or rwd. Its really a shame

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CWESTINDC2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

have you driven the evo before? </TD></TR></TABLE>
Yes, quite a few. And I have yet to really, really be impressed. Driven a 12 second DSM and an 11 sec DSM also.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CWESTINDC2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

have you driven the s2000 before? if not don't make any retarded comments LS boy. </TD></TR></TABLE>

I own an S2000.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CWESTINDC2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Evo's with their stock turbo's have been able to break 11's and also can achieve 400hp on a stock block with the stock turbo. For an s2k to do that, you would have to spend at least 4k on a turbo setup, fuel upgrades, engine management, and ect which can be be expensive, easily more costly to fix up than an evo.</TD></TR></TABLE>

For an S2000 to hit 11's it will cost over 4k? No. Try going to the track and driving the car to it's full potential. I'm working on hitting that mark with less than 4k invested. And you know what, it will happen. Spray is a good friend. It may blow up, so can any car.

Is the Evo easier to make fast? Yes, but it's no god by any means.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by trancemaster &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I dont understand why all the stock turbo cars these days are all 4 door sedans which are either fwd or rwd. Its really a shame</TD></TR></TABLE>



RWD?

 

evo w/ 18" TE37's and Tein Coilovers. no other mods yet.

 

post whoring.....

 

Well Scot, we can't all have everything.


You can give me your hardtop though.

 

it is completely gutted........and it mounts a different way since you can't have "latches" in a race car.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LSHatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
You can give me your hardtop though. </TD></TR></TABLE>

 

did anyone see that TopGear episode where the evo kept closing the gap against that lambo in the corners? They also raced an evo against the euro equivilent of a geo or some **** both starting in 5th gear and because of the evo's turbo lag the little pos pulled 5 or 6 cars on it.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by trancemaster &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i have the same problem as u gogorally, i can't decide either. Coming from owning a turbo car, I dont like the lack of potential of the s2000.

I dont understand why all the stock turbo cars these days are all 4 door sedans which are either fwd or rwd. Its really a shame</TD></TR></TABLE>

"I don't like the lack of potential of the s2000" ????? what are you talking about?? are you saying the s2000 has no potential??? cause if you are... i know of a few s2000's that will blow the doors off of an evo...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Scot &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">it is completely gutted........and it mounts a different way since you can't have "latches" in a race car.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

We can cut the welds and hopefully be able to weld it back on to mine.

I need a friggin' hardtop to get rid of the soft top.

 

I drove a stock s2k with an f20c, the old motor, and i loved it. It drove smooth as hell.
these pics are all i have to say.
http://www.we-todd-did-racing....D.jpg
http://www.we-todd-did-racing....D.jpg

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LSHatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Yes, quite a few. And I have yet to really, really be impressed. Driven a 12 second DSM and an 11 sec DSM also.

I own an S2000.

For an S2000 to hit 11's it will cost over 4k? No. Try going to the track and driving the car to it's full potential. I'm working on hitting that mark with less than 4k invested. And you know what, it will happen. Spray is a good friend. It may blow up, so can any car.

Is the Evo easier to make fast? Yes, but it's no god by any means. </TD></TR></TABLE>

I have been to the track and if you have also, you would know evo's kick *** on the track. as for 4k invested to get 11s good for you, you can do that in an evo for even way cheaper.



this hks evo holds the lap record at Tsukuba and no s2000 can touch its lap time. no baby bottles on this hks evo, just pure boost.