What should i get?

Discussion in '2000 Honda S2000' started by rudiedude, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Re: What should i get?

    great car!it has the most powerfull engine, good handling, balance, lightweight, THE BEST CAR I EVER DRIVE.....
     
  2. Re: What should i get?

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Trans Am</i>
    <b>Don't get an S2000 they arn't that fast from a start unless you rev them to 5000+ rpm and drop the clutch. They have no low end torque and they are as slow as a baseline honda until 5000rpm not to fun for the street.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    yet if you keep it below 6000rpm they do 0-60 in 7 seconds thats still quite quick and can't be short on mid-low end torque. from my own experience in a s2000 its just like a normal 2 litre car up till about 5500rpm, it probably makes about the same horsepower too.
    infact the alter ego effect of VTEC is quite fun.<!-- Signature -->
     
  3. Re: What should i get?

    I Will Eat This Car For Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner..anytime...just Bring It!!<!-- Signature -->
     
  4. Re: What should i get?

    First of all, a Trans Am will cook this car. I'm not a fan of Camaros or Firebirds but that new LS1 is an awsome engine. Use the same block in the CR-5 racing vette. Wouldn't suggest you get a Trans Am because famous for all kinds of little problems. Honda is a really reliable car and I bet this engine will take alot of abuse. Has to with a redline so high. Imagine it would be pretty easy for someone who is not experienced with a stick to fry the clutch on the downshift. Not that any of that means anything to me. I'd buy it if I had money to blow. It's cool looking and there's not many of them on the road yet. As for the WRX, it looks like every other car and it's top speed isn't fast enough for America's wide open spaces.
     
  5. Re: What should i get?

    s2000 duh<!-- Signature -->
     
  6. Re: What should i get?

    I'd choose S2000, it has speed, handling, nice looking, and good fuel economy, and it's the cheapest in its class. It's a better deal than WRX becuz S2000 is rarer, in Vancouver, I've seen only 5 of them. But i see 5 WRX everyday. And people tend to look at S2000 when it comes by, but no one looks at a WRX.<!-- Signature -->
     
  7. Re: What should i get?

    S2000. the WRX, from what i've heard, is not great in the handling department. And it does not have the FEEL of a sports car, because it is not. The S2000 has the best performance*fun per dollar of any car in this country (the Lotus Elise might win in Europe) short of a Ferrari 360. and while it is true that the car has no torque at the low end, who cares? if you know how to drive this car, it will perform in spades. the sound of a VTEC 4-cylinder at 9000rpm is absolutely melodoious. this car does not need low-end.
     
  8. Re: What should i get?

    get the s2000 or the rsx
    the mustang lose there value to fast for some reson
     
  9. Re: What should i get?

    s2000
     
  10. Re: What should i get?

    Yeah, the S2000 doesn't lose it's value much. I see used 00' models still going for damn near 30K. And the dealers won't let those who don't put down $1000 first test drive them either. I had a much easier time sliding into a Corvette.
     
  11. Re: What should i get?

    That is because a Corvette has a roomier interior.
     
  12. Re: What should i get?


    S2K Fan,

    A few years back I was looking for a 2nd car, preferably a reliable, well built convertible that would be fast and fun to drive. This combination of attributes (which automatically excluded American cars) led me to buy an S2000 after driving new and used imports. What follows is part of a response I made to a guy who feels American cars are better than imports because they go faster and cost less.

    ".....I will however, summarize what I've said about this car in the S2000 forums for those who might be interested in getting one, and try to add some additional info. This car weighing in at 2,800 lbs. is a really entertaining ride. People who own this car or at least who driven it under different road conditions will appreciate the fact that 1)It does not need a lot of low-end torque, 2)It gets off the line plenty fast enough (a 5.2 to 5.8 second 0-60 is fast, contrary to what a lot of young and somewhat older kiddies that use this site say about it), 3)You don't need to rev it up to 8,000 rpm to get a fast start (clutches are expensive items that car mag testers don't have to pay for); it'll spin easily up to 5,000 rpm which is a great shift point,4) at 5,700-6,000 rpm the hot cam kicks in like a seamless turbo charger) 5)A 13.8 to 14.2 second quarter is a good time, 6)The idea that this car has to be driven continuosly between 6,000 and 9,000 rpm was conceived by people who have never driven a high revving sports cars; the car pulls strongly at 3,000 to 4,000 rpm and is geared to run effortlessly in this range, something I had to get used to after being more accustomed to the low rpm's of the BMW, 7)The tire grip is great, 8) driving the twisters is a blast, 9)In a series of curves and straights it competes very well with the Z3, Boxster, SLK(s) (if you wan't to make this comparison), the Mustang GT, a lot of so called muscle cars, and yes the Vette, 10)the car has been given a high rating by most magazines since 2000 for performance, quality, etc., 11) J.D.Power ratings are always high, 12) it's a Honda, 13)good pricing especially if you can beat the dealer mark-up, 14)25 mpg combined..."

    I'll add that after 2 years, this car is still as fun to drive as the day we got it. Plus nothing has gone wrong with it.

    Good luck with your car search!


     
  13. Re:

    After that post, I have to step in and point out the glaring error in that statement, as perhaps it will aid in your search, s2kman (and since I am that American car fan, evidently).

    The S2000 does NOT respond well to being driven under 6000 RPM; Motor Trend, in their inagural test drive, tried launching it from 5500 rpm and couldn't even manage an 11-second 0-60. Their advice: "drive it like you hate it."

    If you enjoy having to drive a roadster like a motorcycle to get anything out of it, be all means, purchase the S2000; if you're into street racing at all, however, I don't know how long your S2000 will last after all those 8000-rpm clutch drops (which is precisely how Motor Trend got their 14.2/5.8 time figures).
     
  14. Re: What should i get?

    The S2000 does NOT respond well to being driven under 6000 RPM; Motor Trend, in their inagural test drive, tried launching it from 5500 rpm and couldn't even manage an 11-second 0-60. Their advice: "drive it like you hate it."

    Now that's BS. The Prelude has less horsepower and is heavier and nets a 0-60 time of about 7.5 seconds without revving the engine that high and you're telling me a car that weighs 200 lbs lighter plus 40 more horses will get you an 11 second 0-60? My old Plymouth Sundance got better times then that, and that includes ignition time. If you're going to quote articles, at least post something that makes sense.
     
  15. Re: What should i get?

    Nono, i think BrownDoggie is rite. May be MT did say "launching it from 5500 rpm and couldn't even manage an 11-second 0-60." I'm not sure. u know Car magazines' editors like to exaggerate. So of course the S2000 can do better than 11 sec, but the editors just exaggerated.
     
  16. Re: What should i get?

    Thank you, Honda, you are the one of the most respectable gentlemen (or people) I've encountered on this site, period.

    Sorry Steve, Sept 1999 issue, read it for yourself, that's an exact quote.
     
  17. Re: What should i get?

    Did any of the editors even have a driver's license before they drove the car? It's a great quote but it doesn't help matters much if a 12 year old was test driving the car.
     
  18. Re: What should i get?

    Thank you.
     
  19. Re: What should i get?

    Also, I doubt the prelude is running the same tranny and computer set up. Different power curves and different gearing can make a huge difference.
     
  20. Re:

    Steve - that issue of Motor Trend also happens to be the 50th Anniversary issue; read it before you start spouting off uneducated outbursts. The driver of the S2000 in that issue, Chuck Schifsky, has also test driven 22 fully-prepped race cars over his 25 years with the magazine. He even drove a 700-horse IROC car at an average 182.7 mph around Talledega, fast enough to take pole position away from Jeff Gordan. I think he knows what he's doing.
     
  21. Re: What should i get?

    Well, maybe even with his credentials he just wasn't a good enough driver to drive the S2000? When I can easily get sub 7 second times out of an S2000 without revving it up to it's redline and he gets 11 seconds out of it, what does that tell you? Considering that's the only magazine to ever report such a time with that particular car, maybe there's just a little bias, doncha think? Doesn't matter how long they've been around 50 years or 50 days, if they're printing stuff like that obviously they're not a very credible magazine anymore.
     
  22. Re: What should i get?

    Steve - read my damn posts, por favor, before you sound like an idiot. They DID get 5.8 seconds out of it; Car and Driver got 6.2 seconds. In both cases, they launched and shifted around 8000 rpm. Motor Trend then tried PURPOSEFULLY launching at 5500 rpm several times and could not manage an 11 second 0-60 time. That's two credited magazines with two experienced test drivers who had to wrap the motor to it's ends to get a 6 second 0-60.
     
  23. Re: What should i get?

    How bout this, read a review by the British Car magazine, EVO, about the S2000 .
     
  24. Re:

    How about this, YOU read the review, and post your findings.

    Actually, I'll go read it.
     
  25. Re: Re:

    huh?
     

Share This Page