What does this have over an S2000?

Discussion in '1934 MG P-Type Midget' started by LanciaDeltaIntegraleS4, Aug 10, 2002.

  1. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    The MG and Honda are very different cars, I have the 135 version of this car not the 160 and its quick enough for me, obviously no-where near as quick as the S2000 but thats another £10grand more.

    As someone has already said this car is definately aimed at the toyota MR2's, peugeot 206CC's etc and not the S2000.
     
  2. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    HI boys i'm a new member and i am from Italy so i am sorry if my english is not correct and i beg your pardon for that, by the way,
    i have a TF 160 (the car of my dreams) from three weeks and before to buy it, i have tried other spider as bmw Z3 2.0,audi tt 180, slk 200 k.evo, alfa GTV and also the honda ns 2000.
    Surly the Honda is the most impressive for acceleration, but when u enter in the MG the sensations are different, the sound of the engine is amazing and the impressions you recive when you drive are indescrivible, pheraps because MG has as a story and a glorious past.
     
  3. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    TF 160 your English is very good, nice to see people outside the U.K like MG's. The sound from my 135 is fairly amazing aswell especially considering its only a 1.8 4cyl, the handling is also something rather special.
     
  4. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    AfterShock, have you noticed that the escaping tube on the right is not alligned (of few centimetres) with the left one?
    Initially i thought that was a problem of my tf, but i have alredy noticed this in another one.
    Do you know the reason of that?

    Greetings, TF160
     
  5. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    As an American I would love to see this car brought here (We get the X80, Qvale car soon i think). It has mid-engine layout over the S2000, I have driven POrsche 911's, Boxster's, and M3's....the boxster was the most confident and sharp handling due to the mid engine layout. Even a 50-50 weight distro in a front engine, RWD such as the M3 or the S2000 doesn't hold a candle to the balance and lower center of gravity of the mid-engine car. Tune the 160 model right, or wait for the turbo version rumored to appear (230-240 hp) and I think you can make comparisons between the two, speed and acceleration-wise, given that, the MG will be the better car. I love the S2k, and I love the MG, but if I had to choose, I would pick the glory and the history of the Abingdon Octagon.
     
  6. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    the tf is sweet looking car, but it packs a weak 118kw engine and thats equivelant to my mums honda ascot. so i think the jap cars would get the better of me, id go for an mx5 sp or an s2000 simply for the power, although there not bad looking cars either. porsche? where did they come into the equation? any how the boxster s is undoubtedly the best of all of the above.
     
  7. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    With petrol prices about to go through the roof i bet s2000 owners are wishing they had brought a TF.
     
  8. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    Audi Guy, what mg's are designed to do they do very well, if you are old enough (which I doubt from your immature comment) to remember when the original mg's where out they where a totally a new idea and great fun, they wernt build for speed but as a everyday cheap sports car for the enthusiast. Which is exactly what they are now.

    With regard to prices us brits have to pay totally stupid prices for cars anyway so theirs really no comparison, if we where talking American prices in the U.K the MG would probably start off at £10000 and end up at £15000.
     
  9. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    this car happens to be a fast enough car and is a eye catching car i like the shape of it and the looks and all MG's r nice cars anyway
     

  10. Re:
    What does this have over an S2000?


    This car is SHIT. and deserves to be burnt.
     
  11. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    This car looks superb an handles well but safely. Like an Elise, it has mild understeer as a basic set up but lift off the throttle sharply mid bend (or even left foot brake) and the back will step out into what I have heard is quite a nice slide. You don't need huge amounts of power to have fun. Plus the K Series is probably the best sounding twin cam out there.

    These are not meant to rival an S2000 although, in the real world (the one where people actually drive cars round corners and aren't just obsessed with how fast something is in a srtaight line) there is probably not much in it (except maybe the bigger luggage space in the Honda). And with a good £7,000 in your pocket, you'd have more fun.
     
  12. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    A person in my family owns one of these cars and i have had the pleasure of driving it. she paid £17,000 for it which i say is a good price. The s2000 how ever would be lucky too find a second hand one for under £22,000.
     
  13. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    Well, what does the Mercedes SLK have over the S2000? They both (MG and SLK) have comfort and luxury at the expense of speed. So this car is for a person that wants a sporty, practical and comfortable car. If you want a car that's all sporty, get the S2000.

    They're both two different cars for two different purposes.
     
  14. Re: What does this have over an S2000?

    The S2000 is in another class, its more expensive and is more powerful. But the question in this thread is What does the TF have over the S2000?, and the answer is: Its lighter, and its MR. This means better handling. Both cars have good looks IMO, which one is better looking i think is a matter of taste.

    For those of you dissing cars like this just because you think the brand is bad, in this case MG, you're wrong. All makes have their ups and downs. Look at Renault, most of the time they make (with all due respect) lame cars like the Twingo, 4, 5, Clio etc. But sometimes they go the whole nine yards and make cars like the 5 turbo II and the Clio V6. They are seen upon as excellent machines by most people, but sometimes the generalising bastards come and say: "No, its a Renault, its gotta suck!" and similar. Also dissing a car because its from a specific country is wrong.

    I think most Hondas like the civic and accord are pretty lame cars. But that does not mean the brand Honda is lame. Look at the Integra type R, NSX, and S2000, all are great cars - in their respective classes.

    Comparing the TF with the S2000 is wrong as they are not aimed at the same market and are not in the same class. The TF does not need 250 hp because its supposed to be modest, and relatively affordable. The S2000 is more expensive and has more power, its more meant to be wild than modest, a reason why its more expensive.
     

Share This Page