That's why I bought one and eventually why I sold it 3 months later (not the mugen mind ) it doesn't do what it says on the tin

 

Do you honestly think that your S would be quicker in the wet on a consistent basis? Never driven a FD2 but plenty of well set up DC5's and EP3's on track and road and in the wet the margin for pushing on is far greater no matter what the S2k's set up.

And true 38k could buy you a far more interesting car but id still like to try one
I may come to the same conclusion as Boab but for some reason id really like to give it a go.

 

According to Evo they reckon you can get it for

 

I do - but have no proof.
Not as forgiving as FWD but loads more traction than that Mugen RR I suspect.
Due to the fact it has a superb suspension setup and great traction control.
I've done over 10K of SC 'ed miles with no "moments" at all.

On the "shopping" car - it's your

 

Here comes the post that gets me banned for sacrilege

For years we (myself included) how claimed how the S was not given a fair crack of the whip - on top gear it was a wet track, on 5th gear the original CTR beat it cos Plato was far more aggressive than Tiff, the reporter doesn't get the car etc etc.

Sorry but no excuses, the S got spanked tonight in the dry by the same driver.

It is a 9 / 10 yr old design, its held its head up well for a long time, but its time to acknowledge the newer breed is better

 

You mean faster, it's no way a better sports car.

 

Nothing wrong with the post at all, but what has age got to do with it?

The RR has a less sophisticated suspension setup. Hell, its rear springs and dampers are seperate! How archaic is that?!

The Lotus 7 was designed alongside the Acropolis and yet that somehow manages to stay pretty quick

2 things contributed to the RR's quicker lap time:

Soft semi track tyres
Super stiff suspension

I'm pretty sure that a major reason Honda never bought out an S2000 Type-R is because of just how good it would have been - aka NSX territory.

The CR/Type-S was a stupid idea because it actually has no difference in mechanicals to the standard model, although I do like the front bumper!

Also remember that the S suspension is FULLY adjustable for settings as standard.

Thats because, despite the softening down of it, it was always meant to be a driver's car


Oh, and see below for how it really is

 

But the car was wholly in a different league, your Elise would get spanked by an Exige SC. If they mugenated an S2000 then it would be a reasonable comparison none the less their point was valid, the FD2R and the Mugen RR are quicker round a track than a stock S2000 and we the Uk market would buy something faster than the stuff they have over there

the S2000 geometry is fully adjustable, the suspension is far from adjustable the only thing you don't get on the FD2 is rear toe adjustment.

 

This is where i'm not sure.

I honestly don't think we'd put up with the ride of the FD2R, let alone the RR.

As much as it pains me, the FN2 is the right tool for the job.

And the job for any mulinational, as we all know, is making money.

 

As others have said, the S2000 is a 9 year old car that has only had minor changes and tweaks to get it into it's current state but despite this it is still a very capable car. It makes you ask just how far ahead of the competition was the S2000 back in 1999? Could Honda ever repeat it?

In my opinion the Mugen has an age limit just like the CTR, you reach a certain age and cars like these become less desirable. I would much prefer to be seen in an S2000 over the Mugen. Both cars do give off a "look at me" statement but in two completely different ways.