At least once a year, this community is set abuzz by rumors that a successor to the S2000 is under development. So far, Honda has instead given us the deeply weird Crosstour and slow but strangely entertaining CR-Z. This has given me time to think about what I believe is essential to build a genuine Honda sports car.
First and most importantly, any S2000 successor should be lightweight. Although by no means slim, the original did manage to undercut most of its rivals in that regard. Materials technology and safety regulations have made opposing progress in this regard, so a curb weight near the original seems reasonable, say 2800lb. Aluminum construction is gradually becoming less cost-prohibitive, and a variety of interesting manufacturing techniques are available, ranging from the Jaguar XJ’s rivet-bonded conventional frame to the bonded-only monocoque underpinning current Loti. I’d like to see an aluminum semi-monocoque attached to separate aluminum or steel subframes, to keep repair costs reasonable. Carefully placed steel structural elements would provide rollover and side-impact protection. Body panels should be primarily steel; it’s less limiting in terms of achievable shapes than aluminum, and far cheaper than composite. Eliminate the power top; the Miata’s manual version works just as well and weighs significantly less. As a corollary, any engineer who mentions a folding hardtop should be dragged outside and shot.
Because of weight goals, a hybrid system should be avoided. Although the additional low-end torque can actually improve acceleration, hauling around several hundred pounds of batteries (or inertial storage) is always going to impair braking and lateral grip.
More broadly, an S2000 successor should be simple. Don’t add any accessories that weren’t present on the old car. In fact, remove power mirrors, cruise control, the electronic throttle, and the silly net pockets. Avoid options – colors only, and there’s no need for painted calipers or wheels over 17 inches. Current regulations demand stability control be fitted to all new vehicles; unlike many other sports cars, I would hope that in the S2000 it could be switched off completely. Deployable hoods for pedestrian safety are acceptable and in fact encouraged; the minimal weight added by the actuating system is more than offset by the aerodynamic and visibility benefits of a lower hood.
This leads us to the trickiest question facing any S2000 replacement, the powertrain. If it is to stay true to the original, the motor must provide performance in a unique way, contain innovative technologies, and stand up to abuse better than any of its rivals.
For these reasons, I believe the next Honda sports car should be a diesel.
Please, bear with me. Increasingly stringent emissions and noise regulations mean high-revving, naturally aspirated motors are a poor choice, both for cost and performance. Turbocharged four-cylinder petrol engines are rapidly becoming the norm in everything from family sedans to sports coupes. They are, almost without exception, characterless, under-performing, and derivative – everything Honda should strive to avoid.
The challenges Honda would need to overcome would stem from the conventional diesel’s unsuitably low redline and high weight, both areas in which other manufacturers such as BMW and Ford have recently made progress.
A turbodiesel of 2.0 to 2.5 liters capacity currently produces between 150 and 200 hp, and 200 to 300 ft-lb of torque. I would challenge Honda to build a motor of no more than 2.5 liters, producing at least 250 hp and 320 ft-lb. To maintain its feasibility for autocross and other motorsports applications, I’d like to see a redline of at least 6,000 rpm with a power peak no more than 750 rpm below that. The powerband of any such unit would be narrow with a somewhat unusual power curve – challenging to drive, compromising acceleration, and perfect in keeping with the spirit of the original.
Because of the tremendous stresses involved in compression ignition motors, they have traditionally been limited to the use of cast-iron engine blocks. These are significantly heavier than their aluminum counterparts. The necessity of turbocharging and urea-based emissions control systems also adds additional weight relative to a similarly sized petrol motor. Fortunately, recent advances in materials technology have yielded Compacted Graphite Iron, which is equally suitable for use in diesel motors, and can yield a weight savings of 10-30% relative to grey cast iron. To my mind, this seems to be a promising time for the advent of the diesel sports car. Lest my fellow enthusiasts think I’m trolling, let me make this clear – if Honda builds a car to the specifications laid out above, I will buy it.
Unless it looks like a Crosstour.
I’m sure many of you disagree with me, so please voice your opinions below. What do YOU want to see in an S2000 successor?
Image: Milos Milosevic via Flickr
Related posts:
- A Reliable Sports Car Owning a sports car that has excellent reliability is a...
on Jun 3rd, 2011 at 5:39 pm
I like your idea of the Turbo-Diesel concept. The mechanics of the diesel engine are far superior to that of a conventional gasoline types. Hondas are all about longevity and reliability and nothing screams that like a diesel. My only other possible inkling would be Ethanol if we were sure of it’s future. But I digress, Diesel makes sense for all the right reasons. The only complaint (if you’d even go so far as to label it as such) about my AP1 is the initial torque at low RPMs and this was slightly improved with the advent of the AP2 but with a diesel… HA! Take this torque and shove it!
I also think that it maybe a wise decision to increase the displacement to 3 liters (Since we’re gonna be adding a lil bit more weight anyways, might as well increase the output). And yes, I love the fact that my car has the best displacement to power ratio of any N/A, mass produced engine but this won’t be able to be beaten with a diesel. We could also play around with the idea of odd-numbered cylindered engines to achieve the increase in output and aid the balancing of the engine.
What do you all think?
[P.S.- We could mount the Engine behind the cockpit transversely thus really utilizing the "trunk" that we had before and we could put our Golf bags in the front! We'd show Porsche how it's really done : ) ]
on Jun 3rd, 2011 at 5:44 pm
very well spoken. especially the part about the folding hardtop. i fully agree that the car should be diesel. wasnt honda developing a “dtec” diesel a few years back? what ever came of that? diesels have awesome amounts of torque reletive to their size so acceleration wouldnt be too bad, especially with a close ratio 6 speed and a helical lsd behind it. as a final idea i tink they should also keep the in wheel double wishbone suspension and go back to a throttle cable
on Jun 3rd, 2011 at 5:46 pm
I like everything mentioned, but the diesel was a little out there. It would definitely be unique, but I just don’t see it happening.
What I don’t want to see is a J35 (or whatever it is called now)…that’s just taking the easy way out.
Considering the K is now over 10 years old, you’d think there would be a newer family coming out. The K is, IMO, still one of the best NA I4s out there, though.
An Inline 6 would be awesome, but I don’t think Honda has the capability to produce one. Why not just a K-derivative with a supercharger?
on Jun 3rd, 2011 at 5:49 pm
A Turbo would be more efficient, less stressful on the engine and allot for more overall output.
on Jun 3rd, 2011 at 5:53 pm
Andrew! Very well written sir and i love the picture! I think someone hacked your article and changed some things though becuase the article said it should be a diesel. Ill be sure to pick your brain tomorrow at the track to figure out why in the hell you said a diesel.
on Jun 3rd, 2011 at 6:44 pm
I agree with the light weight and simple for obvious reasons, but I have to disagree with other points you make. Diesel is not a sports car engine, and you can’t make the emissions and noise argument very well in the case of the F20c or F22c, they qualified as low emissions vehicles (I believe Super Low emission vehicles). If you want more power and torque, why not look at a tuned version of the v6 from the accord? Its much more likely they’d use an existing basis for the car for cost reasons, like they’re supposedly considering for a NSX (reversing the accord v6 drive train). You mention the drive train should be innovative like the original, but that doesn’t mean hugely different like a Diesel, the F series is old for Honda, they just heavily tuned it for performance. The reason they can take a beating better than the competition is because Honda sticks to what they do best: engines that are sedate at low rpms, but have good pop when you get on them, and are absolutely reliable.
In fact, Honda has stated they are not developing new diesel technologies (http://www.autoblog.com/2010/07/16/report-honda-to-abandon-clean-diesel-development-focus-on-hybr/).
To me, you’re dead on on the simple styling (although I’m not a fan of the rear engine placement–again, not classic sports car to me), weight saving, etc. But I’d love to see similar techniques to the F20c used in a v6–can you imagine a 3 liter, high revving Honda engine making on the order of 360+ hp? I’d love to see something like that, if not in a future S, then at least in a future NSX.
To me, you can look at Honda’s past and current lineup and know what they should/will do. They make very few turbos/supers, have made very few diesels and don’t plan to make more, but they have, and continue to produce the best, most reliable NA engines around, and know how to get power out of the without making them heavy polluters or to fuel inefficient. It’s their wheelhouse, and it works. I say stick to it.
I see definite plans for a S3000 or similar, or even an NSX that returns to its true form, I’ll start saving my pennies
on Jun 3rd, 2011 at 8:16 pm
Seems rather utoopian. A street car needs to have convenience items like the secret compartment, cupholders and storage nets.
You appear to be describing the Lotus Elise with a diesel. Now exactly how liveable are the Lotii on a daily basis. Given a chance Danny Bahar would make them very compliant and liveable but I digress.
Ask Honda to design a car for the street and a more extreme Club Racer version so it makes business sense for them and that way people get to pick their choice for street/track. Not everyone that drives an S2000 lives on the track or can put up with the demands of an extreme machine like say the Ariel Atom.
That said, great wok on the article. Props to the news team
on Jun 3rd, 2011 at 8:32 pm
Sorry, but many of your ideas just seem plain silly in today’s market.
A manual top on a car that would most likely be in the 40k dollar range? Please. I’m all for weight-savings, but a manual top’s minor weight benefits would be outweighed by the drastic drop in consumer demand.
And even though you were joking around, saying “any engineer who mentions a folding hardtop should be dragged outside and shot” was simply in bad taste.
on Jun 3rd, 2011 at 10:34 pm
I agree with failwheeldrive. This writer is off his rocker.
on Jun 3rd, 2011 at 10:38 pm
Wow, this dude is out in left field! Don’t get me wrong, a manual top is okay, and keeping the options low is great, but I need my cruise control. haha
In all seriousness this guy was probably high off his rocker thinking about diesel. Sure they are reliable and with a decent turbo provide a nice kick in the pants, but all of the power is normally down low and they are very low-revving comparatively.
Honda excels at 4 cylinder engines, but they also make some amazing V6′s that get overlooked because of the drivetrain and car they are connected to. In the right chassis and with the right manual transmission, they can be stellar. The 90 degree C series engine in the Legend (6 spd) and NSX was amazing, and the J series 60 degree V6 is supposed to be even better. I’m sure they could make a high-revving V6 with plenty of torque to please all parties. They aren’t much heavier either.
We all know the key to the S2k is balance and excitement, and diesel doesn’t cut it.
on Jun 4th, 2011 at 5:00 am
I love the power top. When it starts to rain at a stop light and I have 10 seconds to put the top up, I can with a power one from inside the car!
I don’t like the fact of only reving to 6000rpm, where would Vtec be… 3000??
And I don’t think it’s possible for Honda to make an engine with more TQ then HP or even make them match…. Just my 2 cents. I love my S2000 the way it is. Just update it a bit and make it an S3000 with a 3.L.
on Jun 4th, 2011 at 5:53 am
I once owned a diesel car…learned to hate it! Without putting on throw-away gloves, nearly impossible to refuel without getting diesel odor on hands. I do agree with much you say about what could be deleted in a replacement car for the S2000. However, cruise control and A/C should be retained. The new car should have at least 350 hp with option for 400 hp. Transmission should be 7-speed with optional paddles behind steering wheel. The 350 hp version base cost should not exceed $41k and 400 hp version $45k in todays dollars. The optional hardtop should also be offered at extra costs.
on Jun 4th, 2011 at 9:42 am
I’d have to fully agree with keeping everything non-power and simple, with power options. These things need to be affordable and undercut the miata to really sell well, and to keep the weight to a minimum.
That being said, I don’t know why you’d suggest a diesel to muck all that up! They should do an extremely small 2.5 liter-ish high revving as sh*! V6 or a new version of the F22 with a 10K redline with a massive bore and tiny stroke.
I’d like to have one of those H1 2.6 liter Vee’d Busa motors V8′s that weighs the same as an F20 but makes 375hp at 9500 RPM (or a detuned reliable 275hp production version
on Jun 4th, 2011 at 2:28 pm
Diesel, while so many want it, is a horrible choice. The USA is not europe, so get that europe has diesel out of your heads.
Our diesel is ultra low sulfer unlike the rest of the world using standard diesel. This makes it incredibly hard to have a reliable diesel engine without serious costs.
Diesel isn’t that available in the US. Not too many carry it and those that do don’t sell alot so it could be as old as a month to even a year in some cases. Only truck stops will have fresh diesel and they may not have a small consumer level nozzle that will fit.
Regulations for diesel only get worse and worse. 2011 and above now MUST have DEF(diesel exhaust fluid) which raises costs, adds weight, and can leave you limping or stranded should you run out or even low on fluid. Yes the ECU will lock your car into limp or shut off should you run low, scary stuff.
You have to turbo and direct inject diesel anyway. Why not just add a tiny little itty bitty turbo and direct injection with a 7k RPM redline. Run a relatively high CR still and run small amounts of boost from 5-8psi. The factory F motor can easily handle big power of 19psi so what’s 5-8? Honda guys always talking about how great vtec(which is funny cause every car has variable cam timing now) is then you get into a turbo car and really see what power increase truly is.
on Jun 4th, 2011 at 10:55 pm
I do believe thats changing the s2000 way too much.
Yes, it needs to be lightweight. Yes, it needs to retain its minimalism.
However, a power folding soft top would probably be essential in a car that is likely to cost $40k. Also, a big chunk of this car is the engine. There is no better feeling that chasing a 9k redline. A turbo kills the feel. No matter how linear modern turbo engines are, there is always going to be a hint of lag in the beginning and it will never be as linear as a naturally aspirated engine.
I realise that today with regulations and emissions laws, it becomes difficult to have an efficient high revving naturally aspirated engine, but thats where Honda needs to come in with innovative technology.
Honda has definitely lost its mojo since the S2000. The CR-Z or Civic Type R are just not going to make up for the S or the NSX.
If you ask me, photocopy the 2008 S2000, make its physical size 10% bigger, get about 300bhp from a naturally aspirated engine, keep weight below 1400kgs and you should have a winner. Keep it simple.
Someone once said, ‘the S2000 is not an all-in-one car’, the type we see today that try to be everything to everyone. It has a single purpose. To deliver the best driving experience at a reasonable price. I think if Honda sticks to that, we could be on to something.
on Jun 5th, 2011 at 8:27 am
Love the thought but…
Development and support of a car model is a huge fixed and/or sunk cost that gets greater every year and therefore requires more sales volume to justify. Even Porsche could not survive at 20K units/yr and needed the Cayenne and Panamera to buttress the sales base.
A hardcore drivers car that we would like would just not generate the sales volume.
In fact I believe that the s2000 was a technological exercise/”halo” car. Rumor at the time was that it was too spendy to build and the production life span would be short. This may be Salesman BS to support the above list price but I don’t believe that Honda can make money on a car that averages less than 10k units/year.
Honda decided that it could recover the development and plant costs if we sell some more and spend nothing on promotion.( The amount spent on changes was peanut shells compared to a new model developement). That kept the s2000 going until sales fell too low.
Don’t expect to see the likes of the s2k again.
on Jun 5th, 2011 at 9:38 am
Your idea of the next Honda sports car is interesting at first but falls flat on it’s face with the choice in engine. This car has to accommodate people with different interests and plans for the car. While some can afford it as their “race” or “fun” car, others daily the car and use it as a primary means of transportation. Therefore those little items like Cruise Control, Power steering and power top help out a great deal in the commute and while just cruising. But different strokes for different folks. That is why there is so much variety offered in this world.
You kinda have to look at it through each persons perspectives(i.e. A person doesn’t need $12k motons as his upgrade to coilovers if that person wants to use the car as a canyon carver and some minor auto X, they will be perfectly happy and suited with $1200 Bilstein PSS9 Coilovers or something in that range). You are concentrating so much on what you want to use the car for that you overlook what the average buyer will use the car for.
In that retrospective, my ideal next gen Honda sportscar would first come with an option of a coupe or roadster…
Retain similar dimensions but have 2-3 inches more legroom.
2800-3000lbs.
2.6-3.2L inline 6 motor revving to 9k
330whp, 200-210wtq(the vtec surge would be nothing short of amazing, car can still be used as a gas saver in low rpms but have enough tq to overtake on the fwy or climb hills).
Wheels/Tires:
Front 9 in. wide wheel w/ 245/40/18
Rear 10.5 in. wide wheel 275/35/18
This is just the basis and would’ve liked to stay with 17′s but all the descent tire sizes in the 255 width + range come in 18 inch wheel sizes with a 35 or lower profile sidewall.
on Jun 5th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
How about an electric car with 4 motors, one in each wheel.
They can double as generators for braking and can be used for VSA, ect.
Use the whole floor for battery’s to keep the centre of gravity low.
Put a small turbine where the engine is now to generate electricity, the regulator goes where the transmission was.
Great power aff the line (think about the Tesla), low weight = long range.
That, or a 2.7I6 revving to 10,500 rpm making 350-365 HP to show a certain German car maker how I6′s should be made.
Same bore as the F20 but shorter stroke, central gear driven cams with VTEC.
Just change the F20 moulds a little and it could be done.
on Jun 5th, 2011 at 2:14 pm
At first when i was reading this it sort of seemed like a good idea but it just went out of proportion when the diesel came into the story. i like to know that i have the one of the best NA engine out there but i know it would be far superior if they used a high revving V-6, i know the 9k rpms would not be reality in a v6, but maybe 7500-8k would something thats reasonable. I jus hope it won’t a v6 like Hyundai put on there Tiburon’s those things have a 2.7 v6 and they are highly under power and the car is super heavy (i know its not a 2 seater but you guys know what i mean). The v6 ought to be somewhere near the 3.2-3.5 liters and make the block of aluminum or something light weight. If not its just basically just going to be a remake of a 350z but with a Honda badge on it.
So if i got to make the next generation of an s2000, i would stil keep the same body just make new adjustments to make it even more appealing to the eye with 17′s and 255′s on the back, with a high reving 3.2-3.5 v6 with close ratio gears and a 6 or 7 manual gearbox with a light weight frame maybe somewhere around the lines of 2700-2850 lbs. that way when theres a person and a full tank of gas it will be right on the 3000lbs range; and with a v6 under the hood you should be good to go =] that would be a good choice for me.
on Jun 5th, 2011 at 7:53 pm
ok I agree with the no built in hardtop thing, lets just hope the designer of the project thinks the same as he most likely will not because of cost. and I’m sure they will keep it power, if they continue with the track edition maybe that one will be more stripped down version with no power top.
a few more considerations, I think with today’s market and gas prices they will most likely put in a 2.4-2.6 4cyl with a turbo on it. they will keep it FR. with safety a huge part of it now they will have a bit of a time keeping the weight down but I’m sure they would try to make it lighter as per cost of material. as much as i would love for them to put a straight 6 in it that wont happen.
they should keep it to a 6 speed manual transmission only, but I have a feeling if they re-introduced it it might have a 7 speed auto option to expand there customer base.
I don’t think they will loose any of the options like cruise, power windows or anything like that, in fact they might add a few like Bluetooth, heated/cooled seats and so on.
as for looks i think they shouldn’t change it up to much because the car is stunning as it is but they will have to change it a bit so hopefully they wont make it hideous. lol wheels will most likely be an 18″ but they may stick with the 17″s to keep cost down.
all in all I don’t think anything will be done in the next few years because of the way the economy is and what’s going on in Japan right now. all I can hope is they make something that can work with both people that go on the track and drive the car the way it should be and make it so the old people can feel young again buying a roadster.
on Jun 6th, 2011 at 5:55 am
I’m on board with all but the diesel motor. That’s a limited power band much like our current motors are limited. You’ll be waiting ages for new advanced materials of construction to trickle down into the motor. Plus the urea and particulate control systems are in conflict with your concept of simplicity.
Keep the light weight rev-happy 4 cyl. There are technologies currently available to transform the 4 cyl motor into world class ass-whooper. Direct injection + variable intake/exhaust valve timing would increase torque, expand usable power across the entire rev range, reduce emissions, and improve fuel economy. All are available right now and can be easily adapted as the next evolution of the F-series motor.
on Jun 6th, 2011 at 6:54 am
I think the next Honda sports car should be made completely from titanium and run on farts and rainbows, lol.
on Jun 6th, 2011 at 7:59 am
You had me right up to the diesel part. A sports car’s soul is it’s engine and there’s nothing exciting about a diesel engine no matter how much torque it has. Nevermind that all the torque diesels produce would necessitate beefy drivetrain components which will increase weight greatly.
The obvious choice is a turbocharged gasoline engine.
on Jun 6th, 2011 at 8:34 am
I would keep everything how it is and change the powertrain to the V6 3.5L TL Type S/RL. Just under 300HP and all Natural, who needs a supercharger or turbo???
on Jun 6th, 2011 at 11:06 am
I’m with Rob.
on Jun 6th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
As long as Honda is going down the “green road” we will not see another S2000 remotely close to our legend in its own time. The corporate mind-set that built the NSX, S2000 and the NSX V-10 is gone. There may be another president in the future that has the spirit of Sochiro-san and Shigero-san but I am not holding my breath. If we see another S car from Honda it will be kinder, gentiler, polite and available with an automatic in short, a Hondamiata. No thanks.
on Jun 6th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
If the rumors are true about the CR-Z going with forced induction, and with the proof that you can keep the car economically viable with the addition of strong turbos as per Bizimoto, then I think the next iteration of the S2k should be just that: a hybrid turbo.
on Jun 6th, 2011 at 11:01 pm
This article starts from the wrong premise. It assumes Honda is looking to replace the S2000. You call for what would be a very extreme car — essentially a Lotus Elise competitor. Honda isn’t going to make that car.
If Honda wanted to stay in the two seat roadster market, they would have just kept making the S2000, maybe with another refresh.
My prediction is that their next high end performance car will be some sort of GT. It will be an Acura and it will be a Ferrari competitor, not an Elise competitor and certainly not a Miata competitor.
on Jun 7th, 2011 at 4:33 am
i dont think honda will ever make a diesel car at least not in the near future. the new car will have more electronics. its to appeal to all consumers. i was thinking more like the miata. it gained lots of new things but kept the weight off. i also dont think it will come without traction control, pretty much every car is getting it nowadays. i would like to see rear wheel drive, about the same weight and more power. one other thing that i would like is heated seats. the rest of the stuff as far as electronics that they might add, dont really need.
on Jun 7th, 2011 at 8:36 am
I’m with SpitfireS here. I like the idea of the electric car with well-balanced weight that uses brakes AND turbines to help recharge the batteries. If Honda can find a way to do this while maintaing the fantastic handling offered by today’s S2000, they’ll make the green goons and gear heads happy at the same time.
on Jun 8th, 2011 at 11:19 am
@dsms2k: Honda produces already diesel cars.
But I would not buy an S2000 with a diesel engine.
The heart of the S2000 is its high reeving race like engine.
on Jun 8th, 2011 at 2:18 pm
@stocky-
Diesels won the 1998 Nurburgring 24Hrs, 2009 World Touring Car Championship, and Le Mans every year since 2006… they make excellent race (and “race-like”) motors.
on Jun 13th, 2011 at 11:58 pm
Same AP2 look with front lip as standard (the car looks gay without it)
Same weight
3.0-3.2 Liter engine producing 350-400 HP (to solve the low end torque problem and make the car more fun and powerful)
9000 RPM or more
As few gadgets as possible. The current S2000 gadgets are more than enough.
on Jun 14th, 2011 at 5:29 am
i agree with everyone else about the diesel part. Having a force induction four cylinder is definitely more viable in this day in age. But also with the V6 honda accord engine it would also make sense to allow the cylinder deactivation to save gas and open it up when power is wanted would make more sense. If any carmaker actually thats willing to provide a reasonable cost sports car that can incorporate, cylinder deactivation, stop and go engine turn off like porsche and brake regeneration while still maintaining a high horsepower engine around 350hp to 400hp would be a success
on Jun 29th, 2011 at 5:05 pm
put a v6 in it with at least 300hp with matching or close to matching torque. And for god sakes, put a damn mp3 aux out on the stereo. A few creature features would be nice as well. Leave the top powered, i don’t care about the cruise control or the mirrors and make the trunk just smidgen bit bigger so i can fit a full size suitecase in it. A navi system option would be nice also. For the love of god, don’t make it a hybrid and don’t dumb it down to compete against the miata, what a waste that would be. Don’t mess with the looks too much, update it but don’t civic-ize it and make it look ugly.
on Jul 25th, 2011 at 7:23 am
Personally, I’m no fan of diesels and would not buy one. They have a lot of limitations that are hard to get around. Audi has managed to cheat mother nature and win a lot of races, but I’m not confident that they have the answer. Plenty of races have been won by technological dead ends. Ford’s 7 liter V-8s won everything in sight, but today’s high performance engines look a lot more like the Ferraris they beat.
Yes, there is more energy in diesel fuel, but the engine has to expend more energy to get it out. Combustion chambers are too tight, so combustion efficiency is lousy and burn speeds low. Most diesels go to a long stroke design to open up the head, which severely limits revs. Since smaller cylinders shed heat more efficiently and diesels need to hold heat for reliable compression ignition, they tend to have a lot of displacement per cylinder, further limiting revs. Since diesels pump a full charge of air regardless of throttle setting, pumping losses are high. Due to the tremendous compression ratio and poor combustion characteristics, the block and entire crank train has to be very strong, which makes it too heavy, even given modern materials.
To compensate for all of this, high performance diesels tend to be turbo’ed to crazy boost levels, which requires intercoolers, blow-off valves, big oil coolers and lots of engine control systems. In addition, turbos running at high boosts make for lousy throttle response. VWs 2 liter TDI makes a whole 140 hp running a boost pressure of about 16psi, the same hp as a gasoline 1.8 liter Civic running no boost.
Having owned a Maserati BiTurbo, I applaud Honda for keeping the S2000 simple under the hood! The Maser is a neat car, a little faster than the S to 60, but it is all torque, requires lots of TLC, and not nearly as much fun to drive. A new Honda sports car needs to be as elegant under the hood as the S.
My preference would be for a 2 liter straight 6. Straight sixes are naturally in balance (even better than V8s) and have excellent torque delivery. A short stroke 2 liter 6 could easily turn 12,000rpm in street trim and stay within the 4900fpm piston speed limit of our S motors. An 84×60 bore /stroke would do, with a couple hundred fpm to spare. The hood line could be lowered between the fenders since the engine would be 2 or 3 inches less tall. 275 hp would not be unreasonable, with no boost. Besides, nothing sounds like a straight 6 spinning through 10 grand!
If you really want to dream, how about a direct injected 2 stroke engine? It could be way lighter than the current S motor, easily put out 60 more HP (for an even 300) and get better mileage. With such a light engine, the power steering could be eliminated, further reducing weight.
The chassis would have to be a clean sheet design. Street cars are never stiff enough to be sports cars. The added expense of a stiff chassis isn’t worth it when the average driver doesn’t know the difference anyway. To beef up a street car and make a sports car out of it is cost and weight prohibitive. The next S2000 won’t be based on a CR-Z, or any other street car, if Honda has their wits about them.
The great thing about the S is that it is not designed to appeal to the average driver, it appeals to a technically savvy enthusiast that likes to drive, and knows how. There are VERY FEW automobiles available today that succeed as honest driver’s cars. The bottom line is, Honda needs another tour-de-force old school sports car, not a me-too BMW M, 370Z or Miata.
on Jul 26th, 2011 at 5:11 am
I have a diesel tractor, ute, 2 pumps & a light table top, the last thing I need is a diesel pleasure car. Once I’ve got rid of the stink of the stuff, I’m not interested in getting more of it when I’m out for fun.
I wouldn’t mind the steering to be a bit slower, & a bit heavier, & a little bit of glove box space would be nice, but apart from that, just some more power thanks.
If you can’t manage that, could you just fire up the production line again for a few months, I’m going to need a replacement sometime reasonably soon, & no one’s making one.