Cure for the S2000's lack of torque/power

Discussion in 'Asian Forums' started by Spyder757, Sep 8, 2007.

  1. The Z3 has always had less power than the S2000, the Z4 only in 2006 did they had more than 240 bhp. The Boxster only received more power than the S2000 in 2007. The TT still has less power than the S2000. The S2000 is/was the cheapest of these three. Take note that I'm not taking into consideration the Z4 M, the Boxster S nor the TT 3.2 quattro, which are way more expensive than the S2000.
  2. So you've just compared it to horribly overpriced European cars(which are "nicer" to boot)... Way to go. That doesn't mean it's amazing just because it's slightly less horribly overpriced. By your logic I could just say that the Solstice GXP/Sky Redline are clearly better since they're notably cheaper and more powerful, if a bit less refined.
  3. You'd have to do the same upgrades to an s2k making the same power this car is making, so it would pretty much come out the same.
  4. Why didn't he just buy a Vette?
  5. His logic is spot on since all those cars are in the same class. It's surprising that you're taking this stance on the S2000 while you have a completely different opinion about the Z06 and its competitors.
  6. I'm not comparing prices, I'm comparing the S2000 power with it's competitors. Even today it has more power than a few of it's competitors, and the ones that have more power only recently achieved it. The Solstice GXP, Sky Redline, Opel GT are more powerful than the S0000, but the S2000 is a car from 1999, the Solstice is from 2006 and the other two are from this year. When the car was launched it was one of the best cars of it's class, and for some reason it's engine won 5 times in a row in the international engine of the year in it's class.
  7. The S2000 is one of the best ever.

    And no,it doesn't consume more fuel than the redneck V8.Stop lying you idiot.
  8. Much respect to the guy that dropped that motor in that S2000. Honda has never put a motor under the hood of any of its sports cars which actually had some real balls.
  9. No no no no no no

    The S2000 has no torque and the Solstice/GXP is better.Get over it.
  10. Honda is shit.
  11. In terms of HP, yes. But in terms of torque, not even close.
  12. He can probably take the S2000 off some pretty sweet jumps at 200 mph now.
  13. I never debated that he shouldn't be comparing them to those cars, because clearly the S2000 is in that league not the Miata/Soltice/Sky/whatever league. My point was merely that just because the European competition is inferior in power and stupid expensive doesn't make the S2000 the best thing since sliced bread.

    I happen to think the S2000 is a sweet car, however IMO it suffers from the same issues all of Honda's performance vehicles do... they lack toque(which is merely a personal preference I'll admit) and are overpriced. Looking at how close the lower echelon sports cars have been in terms of power I see no justification for the price of the S2000, even when it was released and especially not now.

    As for the Z06 I never say it's a full on competitor with the Euros, it merely competes in terms of pure performance as it is clearly lacking in refinement. I personally don't care about the refinement, but I acknowledge that with most people it puts it a notch down from the Euros as an overall package.
  14. See above post. As for it's engine being such a masterpiece... I don't care. It might be a wonderfully engineered engine but I could give a shit. I like engines based upon how they actually perform in the real world, not based upon if it's NA or uses forced induction. High strung NA engines DO NOT impress me in the least. I'd rather have a turbo 4 with some grunt than an NA 4 that wins international awards.
  15. The only difference like I said is that the Solstice is on the market for little more than one year, the S2000 is almost eight years old. Sure it's already showing signs of its age, but when the car was new what would you buy of the same class of the S2000. At that time both Pontiac and Saturn didn't even had a roadster. The TT, Boxster, Z3, SLK had less power and almost every one of them was slower.
  16. I was being sarcastic.The S2000 is an awesome car.It doesn't look outdated and it still performs well.
  17. The correct answer would have been to buy and mod a Miata!
  18. The F430/most Ferraris don't impress you?
  19. Unless you want to autox in a stock class.
  20. Sure I'm impressed by many Ferrari's, but they don't impress me because their engines make power in a specific way. They impress me because overall they're fantastic cars. If every Ferrari ever made had a lower revving twin turbo version of what they came with I'd still be just as impressed.

    I don't see why people find it impressive to make an engine rev high to make its power. People talk about how turbos are cheating and I don't see how. You can spend a budget on putting turbos on a car, or putting internals that rev unnecessarily high... Either way it gets you to the same goal. If anything turbos are better than strung out engines IMO because they tend to add bullocks to the low end compared to high strung engines with similar peak power.

    You guys act like making a high revving engine is some amazing feat of engineering that shows how amazing the design is... not so much. Rednecks in their back yards build old SBCs and SBFs that rev to 8/9/10K. If a "primitive" American engine designed half a century+ ago can be made to rev to those ASTONISHING RPMs by some hill billy in their garage then I don't think it's all that impressive.
  21. Well there is that... But in AutoX the power isn't as important as handling(or the drivers skillz) anyway, and I bet a Mazdaspeed Miata would do you just fine given their power and lighter weight <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
  22. The rednecks in their backyards don't build reliable and service friendly engines like the S2000 engine which is one of the most reliable engines out there.
    The 3 years/90'000 miles warranty in 1999 for an engine that revs to 9000 rpm is very impressive.Btw those are 'real world' things.
  23. And those redneck engines had to conform with noise and emission regulations, not to mention that the engine must be reliable.
  24. <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/disappointed.gif"></A>

Share This Page