Reasons why this car sucks

Discussion in '2000 Honda S2000' started by SHOboy, Apr 7, 2003.

  1. 1. Torque less car...OHHHH....153 lb.-tq.@7300 rpm. WOW!!!!
    2. My $18,065 Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V has 180 lb.-tq. @ 4000 rpm.
    3. Its peak hp. is at 8000+ rpm.
    4. Why would you want to have to wait until you hit 7000+ rpm to hit your powerband?
    5. Either way its STILL a Honda.
    6. VTEC blows! As well as this over priced car! VTEC is by far the most over rated car thing out there. ESPECIALLY in the drag racing circuit.
    7. It made it into the Top 25 Lemon cars of 2002. Congrats on spending $30k+ on a lemon!!!
     
  2. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    1.)Torque doesn't affect its MAXIMUM performance, does it not? Look at the boxster, it's lighter than the S2000, and with more than 200lb/ft of torque, but isn't slower than S2000?

    2.)Same reason as above.

    3.)Well, wut's wrong with that? Look at the Ferrari 360, its peak hp is at 8500 rpm, is it not fast? Remember, for most cars, the powerband is between the peak torque and peak hp. And plz, look at the S2000's torque curve, its powerband is between 6000rpm - 9000rpm.
    Which, although, not good for city driving, but it's great for racing.

    4.) Again, When u race, don't u shift to the higher gear just before the redline? DOn't tell me u shift to the next gear at 2000rpm when u race.

    5.) This statement makes no sense.

    6.)VTEC never meant for drag racing; in fact, when Honda designed its cars, it didn't think about drag racing. Just becuz some people take their Civic EX's and go drag racing, it doesn't mean every civic's owner does that, rite?

    7.) What is the Top 25 Lemon cars of 2002? Haven't heard about it. All i know is that its engine has been rated as the best 1.8L - 2.0L engine in the Best engine Awards. And car and driver voted it as one of the 10 best cars.

    PS: I know there are many grammatically mistakes, as I'm not an English speaker, sorry.
     
  3. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Car and Driver has had it on their top 10 best list 3 years in a row now, JD Power & Associates has pretty much voted it the same for the past two years.

    This car would also blow your Sentra away.

    VTEC has its advantages and its disadvantages, it's an excellent way to make a daily driver that can offer amazing performance when you want it to, but it also has its drawbacks, i.e. short powerband, but at least it can perform just as well as any other car for the power rating, so obviously with the high redline the low torque doesn't affect it much.

    You're in the third camp huh? People like you have been referred to as "People who like to think they hold a vast repertoire of technical automotive knowledge, but in reality have difficulty performing such simple things as an oil change", by a vast majority of automotive engineers working for virtually ALL car manufacturers. At least other manufacturers respect the advancements made by Hondas creation of V-Tec, which is similar to VVT, but actually better.
     
  4. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Actually I dont think the S2000 made the 10 best list this year. Not that making it the previous two years is not an acomplishment.
     
  5. #5 SHOboy, Apr 8, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  6. #6 Honda rulez, Apr 8, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  7. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    lol....that has to be the most stupid argument I have ever seen on this forum! Who the hell cares about peoples "opinions" on the car! That has nothing to do with the fact that it is a lemon and is over priced! Like I said before, the Spec V is a lot better of a deal then the S2000. With the money I saved from getting my Spec V compared to a S2000 I would have enough money to be keeping up or stomping on NSX's in the 1/4. Once you get a clue that Honda and that you are VTEC blind then come and talk to me. But don't bother wasting my time with something as stupid and pointless as people opinions on cars!
     
  8. #8 SHOboy, Apr 8, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  9. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    actually torque does play a part in performance. hp sells the car but torque wins the race. they both have their place but torque is the main factor in quickness. hp attributes more to speed. i think i am correct. correct me if im wrong.
     
  10. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Well. Do u eman that only tets drivers vuy cars, and consumers like us, don't buy cars? DO u mean our opinions are not important?

    I think u forgot something taht the S2000 has while teh Spev doesn't. ANd don't argue with ,me about this point, since it has been proven by many test drivers. You forgot that Sentra is uninspiring to drive and probably not a good basis for hot conversion - unless what you pursue is 1/4 miles acceleration or skidpad g-force.

    Certainly, the Spec V is fast, actually, it can keep up with the Civic Type R on the straight. But, despite of Helical LSD, wheelspin and torque steer are not thoroughly sorted out. Thus, the Sentra is still no driver's car because of uninspiring steering and rubbery shift action.

    So, if ur just looking for speed, the Spec V is quite a good choice, but in terms of driving fun, it's not all that great.


     
  11. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Torque is important for city driving,; u can speed up easily with torque at low rpm. But for racing, Hp counts. High hp means that the car produces a signicant amount of torque at high rpm. ANd in racing, drivers tend to keep the rpm high. And just look at ferrari 360, and BMW M3, 2 sports cars that are well praised. The 360 makes "only" 275/ft of torque, yet, has 400hp, is it not faster than the skyline GTR that weighs about the same, but with 14 more lb/ft of torque, and 100 less hp.
     
  12. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Both torque and HP are important. Even in a race car you still need torque for getting out of the pits and taking off from the corners. However as you said horsepower is still one of the deciding factors. For drag racing torque, in my opinion, outweighs horsepower. But both are still need. I would say for the street a nice mix of the two with a flat torque curve and a nice long power band is my favourite set up.
     
  13. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Your source was determined by opinions as well, nimrod.
     
  14. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    How so nimrod? Its no determined on opinion its determined on actual statistics. One one hand you have a car that is $30K plus and run's the 1/4 in high to mid 14's. On the other hand you have a car that is $18K that run's low 15's. The S2000 is a car to have just to say you have it. Its a 2 door, over priced car. Your paying for the name pretty much. Then you have the Spec V, 6 speed manual, HLSD, 4 doors, variable valve timing, etc. that does low 15's, can fit more people in the car, better for driving around town, and costs half as much as the S2000. So based on price alone if you STILL say the S2000 is better it proves that you have no idea as to what you are talking about! If you want to match the S2000 up a car for the same price pretty much line your S2000 up to a 350Z and then see how awesome your S2000 is and watch as the 350Z eats you alive. Is that my opinion? Yes it is, and it is also the truth. As for drag racing and hp vs. tq. Being as it is that my gf's dad has a 1969 Camaro SS as is dragster torque is the most important thing to get you down the track. A good example as to why torque is more important then hp. Look at your typical school bus, or any huge truck like an 18 wheeler. The thing has a god awful amount of torque but next to no hp. Because torque is what gets the thing moving. When you go to the drag strip and you see a car do a wheelie but it looks like its being twisted *the frame* why is that? Not because of hp its because of the serious amount of torque going through the thing. So as I stated before this car blows, its over priced, you get nothing for your money but looks. But to most of you thats all you want the car for. Same as why people buy Ferrari's, and Lambo's. Its not because of their speed. Its because you want to say you have one and to make yourself feel like your the man.
     
  15. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Sorry all, but the S is a bad ass car. I'll admit, no, it won't win a drag with a 350z, but it will only loose by a car length or two... or three. My personal 1/4 mile times are 13.9-14.2, and thats with 18'' SSR GT-1 rims. W/ stock rims i'd be running at least 13.7, possibly better. I'm bias, but facts are facts. The Z is an awesome package, but anyone who fails to see the sports car the s2000 is would have to be a fool. Its a lightweight, high revving, low "ammenity"(no creature comforts except for a radio/cd, heater and AC), naturally aspirated car that can take on most cars with engines twice or two and a half times it size. Some back up plz.

    Brandon
     
  16. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Umm, I didn't compare the S2000 to a car that costs half the price, YOU did. And I didn't say the S2000 is better either. YOU'RE the one who's claiming that the Spec-V is better, which ALSO shows YOU "have no idea as to what you are talking about!"


    Seeing as you brought it up though, if you have a family and want to go a decent speed on your way to the grocery store, sure, the Nissan is better.

    But if you want a small, quick roadster, that feels great when you drive it, that you can rev the hell out of, and that looks good as well, with the best 2.0 litre I4 engine EVER made, then the S2000 is the better car for you.

    Don't you get it? They're two ENTIRELY different cars that have NOTHING up on the other one as they are designed for two ENTIRELY different purposes, don't be such a fukin moron.

    The BEST thing about the S2000 is that it's a blast to drive...that is, IF you know how to drive it.

    Ok, so now you're comparing a small two seater roadster to a sports car...smart, Shit for brains. Roadsters get compared to roadsters, and the S2000 annhilates them all, by either completely outperforming them, or just barely outperforming them and costing tens of thousands less.

    If you think the S2000 is too slow, then you don't understand the first thing about the car.

    Why don't you compare the 350Z to a car in its class? like the Subaru Impreza WRX STI, completely blows the 350Z out of the water, and yet it has more interior space (it's a retarded argument, but hey, you used it<A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/disappointed.gif"></A>) and costs less (well, the current STI does anyway).

    For drag racing (and anything else) Torque is important to get a good start, but it's irrelevant once you get into the higher rpm's.

    This car does not blow, you're just looking for the wrong things in it, it outperforms all other cars in its class, but it costs $10,000+ less than all the other cars in its class (except the Mazda Miata), so it is most definitely NOT overpriced. It's a unique car, in the driving experience as well as the look. Most people who like roadster's but prefer looks, go for the Z3 or the Boxter - which is the one car in its class that outhandles it.

    BTW - you've never really driven one, have you<A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/disappointed.gif"></A>

    Well, I assure you, the pleasure you get from shifting it at 9000rpm FAR surpasses the good looks of the car. And Ferrari's and Lambo's are far more than just looks, otherwise, people would be buying Bugatti's, and Benze's, etc. instead.

    So go take your presumptuous asshole attitude elsewhere, you're only looking like an idiot participating in nonexistent arguments in which you claim all sorts of BS, egads r u schitzophrenic? Here you are arguing things that were never even said. Please, end your misery, or seek professional help, I can't stand to know someone is suffering so horribly.
     
  17. Re: Reasons why this car sucks
     
  18. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Well first off the best 2.0 I4 ever made is the SR20DET, that first off. Second off the 350Z is a perfect matchup with the S2000. Both are 2 seaters, and 2 doors. The STi is a 4 door jack ass. I was comparing your awesome S2000 to a car that is fair competition to the S2000 which would be the 350Z. Just because the S2000 is a roadster doesn't mean jack. And yes I have driven one and it didn't impress me in the least. But the thing I don't understand is why would you actually want to drive a car that blows for driving around town? When you are always talking about, "I CAN SHIFT AT 9000 rpm!!!!" Big friggin deal! Are you actually happy you have a rev happy engine? What benefits do you get from a car that you can shift at 9000 rpm? The car sux for normal everyday driving. I'm sure its quite good in the AutoX circuits and all but we are talking about everyday driving. And as for a stock S2000 doing 13's is a bunch of crap. My dad has a modified Caddy running 14.2's and he's raced about 4 of them at Atco and spanked them all with the best S2000 getting a 14.7. And wtf you talking about schitzophrenia for? I'm taking what people have said and arguing it. I think your the one who is't reading the posts all the way through and start babbling off with the mouth. So going back to your 350Z vs. the STi comment.....I think you need to do some research before you start making comparisons. You were saying how my Spec V vs. S2000 comparison is so stupid because they're different cars? And then you come right around and compare the 350Z to a 4 door STi? lol......and you say I'm the idiot!? Atleast I know the STi has 4 doors dipshit! And another reason you can't comapre the cars is STi= AWD, 350Z=RWD. But my S2000=RWD vs. 350Z=RWD comparison is the dumb one right? i feel bad for you because I hate to see yet another person on this website making stupid comebacks and stupid comments on shit they know they are wrong on but yet trying to find a way to make it sound right.
     
  19. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Oh yeah and the Spec V is lighter then the S2000 and gets better gas mileage and the Spec V is a 4 door car compared to your roadster and the roadster is still heavier
     
  20. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    the number of doors has absolutely nothing to do with the class of the car retard, and look anywhere, the STI's class includes the 350Z

    LOL you're so lame, but I'll get to your above post later, I have an exam to go write.
     
  21. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    What your problem SHO Boy? I mean if your going to criticize this car dont compare it to your Spec V. New C&D just arrived and the Spec V finished dead last to the SVT focus, Mazda Speed Protege, and SRT-4. Yes to cars that are actually in its class.

    As far as you hating on this car goes, it has a compressed powerband and thats really the only major complaint about it. Its a very good car over all.
     
  22. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    I ain't hating on the car. I hate the people who think this car is the best car every made when it is not. All i am saying is that it maybe an alright car and all but for the money you get nothing. You can spend just as much on a 350Z or a G35 coupe or a WRX STi, etc. and get a lot more for the money. I am trying to point out that Honda isn't the best car company out there like everyone claims it to be. People who buy this car think they own a Ferrari or something. God only knows why that is, but they do. As for the Spec V I know it isn't the best car by far. As for magazines and all they are so biased its not even funny so I never look at their little matchups and actually take them seriously. All i look at the magazines for is for info on up coming cars, some stats and thats about it. Every car magazine hated the Spec V's lava colored interior. I love it. And all they managed to do with the Spec V is find so many things about it to shit on. They had a shoot out awhile back with the VW GTI, Civic Si, Spec V, Mazda MP3, Ford Focus, and the Hyundai Tiburon. They had interior pics on all of them and the Civic they had was the most hideous looking thing I had ever seen. It was just all black! nothing else to it and they gave it the best interior rating out of the bunch. I could have shit a brick when i read that. Ever since then I can't take car magazines shootout's seriously. i mean if I had $30k+ to spend on a caer the last thing I would be looking at would be an S2000. I just fail to see why everybody seems to think VTEC is god's gift to the automobile. When all it is is their cool little way of saying variable valve timing. Big friggin deal! All Honda's engine's are the same, rev happy little engines that produce no torque. I like having some torque steer, it makes it seem like the car has some balls to it *which the Spec V does* but my main point I was stating here was that for the money of an S2000 you could get a Spec V and mod it up and have an NSX killer. I'm just naming the Spec V because its a car I own and which I know the potential of. I'm sure you can do the same with a SVT Focus, and so on. But the new car that is a prime example of this is the new SRT-4. I can't stand that car. It is butt ugly. But you cannot mess around with its performance though. The car will eat up a S2000 stock no problem and for a hell of a lot less money. All I am saying here is that the S2000 maybe a nice car and all but for the price......its not worth it. Sorry for the long post
     
  23. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Actually, the S2000 is faster than the SRT-4 in 0-100km/h (by .3 seconds) and runs the 1/4 in the same time (14.1)

    V-tec isn't just vvt, it does a fair bit more than that, from air intake to air-fuel mixture to cam phasing, etc. Of cours it's not in any way superior, however it is a great alternative way to design engines, and is by no means inferior.

    The Spec-V would have to be modified to extremes before it could be an "NSX Killer"

    I'll discuss more later.

    Believe in fiction - thanks for the backup
     
  24. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    I don't give a $hit what anybody compares this car with. This car is a blast to drive. Like Password Please said you do have to know how to drive the thing. Not always an easy feat for devoted stump pullers. If you wan't an excellent high revving sports car don't overlook it. If you wan't a torque steer mobile get an SHO. You remember, the shortlived piece of crap that was replaced with an equally shortlived, anemic 3.2L V-8 that not even taxi drivers wanted.

     
  25. Re: Reasons why this car sucks

    Yep, I had a helluva (difficult) time driving this car the one time I drove one, but once I learned the balance between the clutch and gas, started keeping it above 4000, and shifting at about 7000+ it wasn't that difficult, and at 6000+ it was exhilarating, taking it up to 9000 briefly, was enough to leave my legs unsteady once I got out of the car. It was definitely one of the most enjoyable cars I've ever driven, and speaking as an amateur rally driver who's had the opportunity to drive a few rally modded Impreza's, and even an Audi TT rally edition, that's saying a lot (IMHO).

    I'd definitely consider purchasing this car if I had the 'flow', that is of course, after a couple other cars in the same price range that are just as fast, but more practical (gotta be able to toss the snowboard somewhere, right?).
     

Share This Page