# S2000 or keep the TT??



## DeanTT (Sep 11, 2006)

Oh dear, I'm in a right quibble at the moment. I love my TT to bits, the looks, the quattro, the comfort. But its missing soul, theirs no character to the engine note, you can't feel anything through the steering and you can't tell where its limits are.

Here, this is what I posted over on s2ki.co.uk. can anybody that has ever owned an S2000 help me?

I'm contemplating on trading my TT 225 Coupe (be nice!) for an S2000. I consider myself a petrol head, and I want more out of my car's than what the TT offers (The TT was bought after an S3). OK, its great looking, comfortable and fast (when remapped), its also fantastic in the wet, but it lacks the overall buzz of driving. This is why Im looking at an S2k, Its a proper car that talks to you when you drive, you can feel what its doing, you tell it what to do. Whereas the TT, just drives you, and when driving "fast" you just can't tell where the limit is , you can make them better, but its big bucks!

Has anybody made this change? I know they are completely different animals and so was wondering if I'd miss the security/ergonomics/Comfort levels and high specs, if I was to swap over to the dark side?

My main concerns are these:

Are they as bad say, as a TVR (although I guess the lack of torque means it won't be as bad)in the wet, do they just snap out of control, I've heard horror stories of aquaplaning.
Comfort levels. Not ever driven an S2k but I imagine on long journeys its not as "supple" as the TT and wind noise could be a big factor here (roof up).
Spec. I'm really going to miss my heated leather, BOSE stereo etc
Build Quality and Ergonomics. You have to hand it to the Germans, the interior on the TT is fab compared to the S2k
Service prices and intervals, what are they liked compared to Audi? I'm guessing cheaper, Â£400 for a 95k service anybody(not inc cambelt)?
Consumables. Tyres, Oil etc etc. What are people seeing?

I have searched the forum to see if anybody has made the swap, but I couldn't find any useful info, so I'm sorry if this has been asked before!

Cheers

Dean

Ps: I'd be looking at an early (read Â£10k max early) model, if this makes any difference.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

s2K=drivers car. Honda reliability and fantastic engine.

Not really a wet winter car. Or one for the ham fisted (or footed)

KMP had one after his TT. Sure he'll be along soon....


----------



## mw22 (Aug 15, 2005)

If cost is a concern check insurance....

When I was looking for something - which ended up being the TT, the S2000 quotes were 3 to 4 times as expensive!! That ruled it out for me.

Mike


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

mw22 said:


> If cost is a concern check insurance....
> 
> When I was looking for something - which ended up being the TT, the S2000 quotes were 3 to 4 times as expensive!! That ruled it out for me.
> 
> Mike


I found that, it's beacuse they tend to end up facing the wrong way down the road quite often  and are stolen.


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

DeanTT said:


> can anybody that has ever owned an S2000 help me?


I'll try my best. 



DeanTT said:


> I consider myself a petrol head, and I want more out of my car's than what the TT offers (The TT was bought after an S3). OK, its great looking, comfortable and fast (when remapped), its also fantastic in the wet, but it lacks the overall buzz of driving. This is why Im looking at an S2k, Its a proper car that talks to you when you drive, you can feel what its doing, you tell it what to do. Whereas the TT, just drives you, and when driving "fast" you just can't tell where the limit is , you can make them better, but its big bucks!


You have answered your own question!  You have summarised exactly what I was looking for when I moved from the TT to the S2K. If that's what you require then the S2K is the logical step for you and you will have no regrets. 



DeanTT said:


> Are they as bad say, as a TVR (although I guess the lack of torque means it won't be as bad)in the wet, do they just snap out of control, I've heard horror stories of aquaplaning.


Yes they snap, and yes they give no prior warning, however 99% of the time they will do this only if you are not respecting the conditions. 240bhp through the rear whels without traction control is always going to bite, so if it's damp or wet treat corners with respect and don't in any circumstance take it into VTEC zone through a bend!



DeanTT said:


> Comfort levels. Not ever driven an S2k but I imagine on long journeys its not as "supple" as the TT and wind noise could be a big factor here (roof up).


Surprisingly the S2k is a very comfortable ride. It's a little 'snug' for the larger gent, but because you are sat so low down in the seat, it is very comfortable. The gear stick is raised on teh centre console, so you will find a wonderful driving position, a position that I have yet to better in the cars I have bought.



DeanTT said:


> Spec. I'm really going to miss my heated leather, BOSE stereo etc
> Build Quality and Ergonomics. You have to hand it to the Germans, the interior on the TT is fab compared to the S2k


You will miss the BOSE! Stereos in S2K's are to put it mildly... crap! Build quality though is brilliant and you will find no dashpod problems or squeeks etc in a S2K!



DeanTT said:


> Service prices and intervals, what are they liked compared to Audi? I'm guessing cheaper, Â£400 for a 95k service anybody(not inc cambelt)?
> Consumables. Tyres, Oil etc etc. What are people seeing?


Fuel consumtion is about the same as my old TT's, but if you rag it to 9k all day long, you will notice it will use more! S2K 2.0 n/a engines are very highly tuned (240bhp, 120bhp per litre), so they take extra care. If you buy from a Honda dealer you will get the extended warranty, which is defo peace of mind. Servicing is due every 5000 miles and will cost on average about Â£200. Oil is key to the life of the engine and you will need a top up ltr every 500-1000 miles.

Your biggest cost though will be insurance! Beleive it or not the S2000 was more expensive to insure than my TVR!



DeanTT said:


> I'd be looking at an early (read Â£10k max early) model, if this makes any difference.


Yes it will. Early ones have got the original suspension which many regard as the best (including me!), but it is very unforgiving and is the highest 'snapper' of all the S2K's. Revisions were made in 2001, 2004 and 2006.

HTH
Kevin


----------



## DeanTT (Sep 11, 2006)

Kevin,

bloomin' marvellous, thank you very much!

Looking at running costs, service every 5k  , oil every 500-1000, and the insurance being mental, I might give it a miss for a year 

If I didn't rack up 15k a year I think I'd go for it.

Thanks ever so much for the speedy and detailed reply!!

Cheers

Dean


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

having moved from a celica vvtli to a TT, the driving characteristics of the celica is simlar to the s2k, with high revving engine, top end power in the rev's, great steering, but the s2k is rwd.

i do miss the celi, it's more involving drive, from steering wheel, pedals, gearshift, the TT does lack something, but it's a confident drive.

if it's time for a change and you can, go for it. if it ain't right, you could always come back to a TT.

if i had the chance (money being main factor), i would like to own many more cars in a similar price bracket for say 6 months a time, with mini cooper s, s2k, 350z, rx8, r32 mkiv etc. etc. but as i can't the TT seems the best one to own


----------



## TT2 Brilliant Red (Nov 1, 2006)

I would definately stick with the TT. Whilest the Honda is very good and well engineered with a cracking engine, the overall quality can never compare to the TT.

And lets be fare, if you wanted an out and out drivers car you wouldn't be considering either the TT or the S2000.


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

TT2 Brilliant Red said:


> I would definately stick with the TT. Whilest the Honda is very good and well engineered with a cracking engine, the overall quality can never compare to the TT.
> 
> And lets be fare, if you wanted an out and out drivers car you wouldn't be considering either the TT or the S2000.


Utter b*llocks. I would wager you have never even set foot inside a S2000, let alone driven one.

If you knew anything about them you would know that the S2000 has a race derived specific chassis, an engine which produces 120bhp per litre, RWD, one of the slickest & best manual gearboxes put in any production car, steering that has intense feedback, a proper driving position, and when treated with respect - sublime handling.

.... characteristics that a TT can only dream of. Take it from sombody who has owned both - a TT is for posing in when you pop down to the shops, it is NOT a drivers car in any sense of the word and cannot be compared to the S2000. The MK2 TT has gone a long way to fix the TT 'image', but it's 2007 now and IMO too little too late for Audi.


----------



## TT2 Brilliant Red (Nov 1, 2006)

But the body panels are made from cardboard and when compared with the likes of the exige and elise the S2000 is very sublime.


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

TT2 Brilliant Red said:


> But the body panels are made from cardboard


Are you on drugs?



TT2 Brilliant Red said:


> and when compared with the likes of the exige and elise the S2000 is very sublime.


That's like comparing chalk with cheese, but putting the ridiculous comparison to one side, do you know what the word 'sublime' means?!?

:?


----------



## TT2 Brilliant Red (Nov 1, 2006)

Why such a ridiculous comparison. Everything aside, for an ultimate drivers car the S2000 is now where near the same league as the Exige or for that matter Elise.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

From the sublime to the ridiculous. :lol:

How's yer lima KMP? And hows the R32 going? We must be due for running report.


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

TT2 Brilliant Red said:


> Why such a ridiculous comparison. Everything aside, for an ultimate drivers car the S2000 is now where near the same league as the Exige or for that matter Elise.


That's my whole point! The S2000 isn't in the same catagory (as in target group) as an Exige or Elise (which are stripped out sports cars), so you cannot compare them. The S2000 is however aimed in the 2 seater convertible catagory where the TT sits. So it is only fair to compare the TT with the S2000. However...... that doesn't mean the S2000 cannot be a drivers car. Two of the very best 'drivers cars' (Boxster and S2000) come from this catagory, a catagory which allows everyday use, but still reaps the sporting characteristics required e.g. feedback, handling etc



garyc said:


> How's yer lima KMP? And hows the R32 going? We must be due for running report.


Lima?!? :?: As for the R, it's running great, but I had a bit of a health scare over the festive break (still having tests now and on the pills), so haven't really had time to write up my thoughts as of yet. I will do though.


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

TT2 Brilliant Red, FYI










_sublime -adj 
supreme or outstanding_

Well, you got something right.


----------



## eko (Nov 5, 2006)

Interesting topic.

I also had a S2000 for a while, I now own a Mk2 TT.

Comparisons?

Both are good, but put it like this, there have been occasions where the TT has been in my garage and I've had a couple of days off. I would take it out for a drive and be back in a couple of hours or so.
When I had the S2k I would have been out for the whole day, it's a more intense car and gives more of a buzz when driving. I drove it every chance I had.

By the way, I remember the service intervals being 9K miles not 5K, is that not so? It will still require more services than the TT, but then each service will likely cost less.


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

eko said:


> By the way, I remember the service intervals being 9K miles not 5K, is that not so? It will still require more services than the TT, but then each service will likely cost less.


According to the service book, my 51 plate (pre facelift) required an 'optional' oil service every 5k miles and a proper service every 9k. It was optional according to the book, but with a car like that I had it done, as did the previous owner.

Echo your sentiments about wanting to get out and drive it too! I had a bespoke Mugen/Spoon induction kit on mine which made it growl.


----------



## NaughTTy (Jul 9, 2003)

kmpowell said:


> eko said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, I remember the service intervals being 9K miles not 5K, is that not so? It will still require more services than the TT, but then each service will likely cost less.
> ...


Growl? It screamed like a banshee :twisted: :lol:


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

NaughTTy said:


> kmpowell said:
> 
> 
> > eko said:
> ...


OK, it growled but then screamed like a banshee when it hit VTEC!


----------



## kenny ken (Oct 22, 2006)

Brilliant write up KMP. Considering the S2000 myself at the mo.


----------



## digit (Apr 28, 2007)

So what was the outcome after? Im debating between the s2000 or the tt 225 soft top right now! Hard work.


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

digit said:


> So what was the outcome after? Im debating between the s2000 or the tt 225 soft top right now! Hard work.


depends on what you want from the car

for something to use for the whole year round and not having to think about each movement the TT, but if you want more of a rewarding drive i would say the s2000.


----------

