S2000 Street Encounters Stories of on-the-road exploits and encounters.

The controversial N/A S2k vs a 6.0 GTO debate..

Thread Tools
 
Old 01-11-2016, 07:27 PM
  #31  

Thread Starter
 
liquid_helix136's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,289
Received 12 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Fasho!

I don't think I could enjoy having an engine in the S that I couldnt rev the shit out of.
Old 01-21-2016, 05:04 PM
  #32  
Former Sponsor

 
Moddiction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 28,698
Received 38 Likes on 30 Posts
Default

Someone needs to swap a 5.0 engine into the S. That would be the best of both worlds. High revving and tons of power and torque! You can safely rev those to 7800 rpm's or so. Have mine revving to 7500 right now.
Old 01-25-2016, 09:46 AM
  #33  
Registered User
 
CrackerMacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Moddiction
Someone needs to swap a 5.0 engine into the S. That would be the best of both worlds. High revving and tons of power and torque! You can safely rev those to 7800 rpm's or so. Have mine revving to 7500 right now.
Or go a step further and drop in the voodoo. 8200rpm and flat plane crank, the sound alone would be amazing.
Old 01-25-2016, 11:24 AM
  #34  
Former Sponsor

 
Moddiction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 28,698
Received 38 Likes on 30 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by CrackerMacker
Originally Posted by Moddiction' timestamp='1453428293' post='23859525
Someone needs to swap a 5.0 engine into the S. That would be the best of both worlds. High revving and tons of power and torque! You can safely rev those to 7800 rpm's or so. Have mine revving to 7500 right now.
Or go a step further and drop in the voodoo. 8200rpm and flat plane crank, the sound alone would be amazing.

That would be sweet however that engine will cost 4 times a regular 5.0 I'd think if not more.

Bolt ons and tune and you can have the 5.0 at about the same numbers as the 5.2 and can safely rev to 7800-8000.
Old 01-26-2016, 12:04 PM
  #35  

 
deception9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 1,313
Received 15 Likes on 15 Posts
Default

stock LS7 supposedly could rev to over 8k rpm, but GM didn't feel like that was necessary and it didn't have the cam profiles to make power up there. V8s can rev, in just about any configuration. but where OHV motors fail big time VS. an F2X motor is volumetric efficiency.

i believe one of the reasons why so many people love this car is the delivery of power and its high end reach.
Old 02-08-2016, 10:05 PM
  #36  

Thread Starter
 
liquid_helix136's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,289
Received 12 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

After boosting now, I stand even further behind the high revving style of this little engine. Revving the ever living piss out of it and building boost as you rev, and it just getting scarier and scarier and pushing you into your seat more and more as you cling on for dear life is freaking amazing!!
Old 05-02-2016, 05:35 PM
  #37  
Registered User
 
Duffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Raritan, NJ
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Here's a question for y'all. First, I drive a bone stock 2001 S2000 (her name is Blanca; best be respectful). A daily driver for nearly 15 years with 85K miles.

My son, who still lives in Texas (I'm a transplant to New Jersey)drives a 2005 GTO. It's pretty pointless to describe his motor based purely on displacement, but I'll try to give you a sense of what you would be up against should you , or I, want to give him a go. My question: Would you give him a go even in a turbo or huffer S2K?

Short block is a basic aluminum LS2 modified by ERL out of Indiana.
Ductile iron sleeves by Darton
Bore: 4.155 in. Stroke: 4.125 in. Displacement: 447 cu. in. (7.325 L)
Started with LS7 heads, mods by ERL see ERLperformance site for details of what they can do
Intake lift > .7 in. (cam profile data upon request}
Static compression ratio: 12.5:1

Rev limiter at 7,200 RPM
Dyno: 550-575 hp (diff is pull to pull with some tire slippage)
500 + ft lb from 3,000 - 6,200 RPM
His biggest problem on the street is that he can't yet put enough tire under it and the motor is still starving for air.
Tubs in the rear and a new intake system are on the horizon.

Check out ERL at ERLperformance and check out their "Super Deck" product/work. That's what my son is running.

Have fun imagining how much fun I'll be having in June. We're going on the "Long Haul" (7 cities/7 days) of the 2016 Hot Rod Power Tour. I'm driving to Texas in my S2K and we'll be taking my son's GTO, "Pearl", on the Power Tour.(it's for hot rods and muscle cars, not sophisticated race cars like the S2K)

We're bad, bad, bad, bad, bad, we're na-tion-wide!
Old 05-02-2016, 07:13 PM
  #38  
Registered User
 
Duffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Raritan, NJ
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by deception9
stock LS7 supposedly could rev to over 8k rpm, but GM didn't feel like that was necessary and it didn't have the cam profiles to make power up there. V8s can rev, in just about any configuration. but where OHV motors fail big time VS. an F2X motor is volumetric efficiency.

i believe one of the reasons why so many people love this car is the delivery of power and its high end reach.
The vast majority of what you said is absolutely correct. My TRACO Motors (TRAvers & COon) V8 was 305 cu. in. in a 1968 Z28 (The "Zebra"). The "stock" 302 cu. in. motor in the Z28 in '68 was originally "rated" by Chevy at under 300 HP. In 1969, the NHRA re-rated the engine for competition at 335 HP. 335 HP in a 3,000 lb car, no big deal you say? Well, in 1968, you could count on one hand (with a few fingers missing) the number of motors available from any factory that put out more that 1 HP/cu. in. The race motor in the Zebra produced over 700 HP (at the crank) and barely 450 ft. lb. of torque. It was designed and built to rev high (9,000 RPM) and go 'round corners very quickly (M. Dr. in LA and later, SCCA 5L sedan)

MANY years later, along comes Honda and the S2000 and delivers more than 2 HP/cu in. As you so rightly stated, it's a mater of volumetric efficiency. The efficiency with which the engine pumps air and fuel through the motor. It was the S2K engine and the most wondrous transmission I'v ever had my hands on that caused me to covet the S2000 until I got one. No more coveting, just lots of high-revving smiles. Still going strong after more than 15 years and 85K miles. I still take her into VTEC on every shift, even just driving 'round town. I'm not even sure my radio still works. I keep it turned off so it doesn't interfere with my pleasure from the engine/exhaust sound of my S2K.
Old 08-03-2016, 09:24 AM
  #39  
Registered User

 
CrimsonCore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Draper, UT
Posts: 65
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I remember the time i beat a 5.7 from a first gear roll. I was rolling up to a stop when a silver 5.7 gto sped up next to me. I wasn't. about to try to take on a v8 in my stock ap1. however when the driver was stabbing at the throttle trying to egg me on, i looked over and saw a fully loaded car of some obnoxious teenagers. I took off as he was letting off the throttle. by the time i got into second, i had 4-5 car lengths. i shut it down at the top of second because i wasn't going to play anymore than that and about a second later, The gto whizzes by at 80ish. Now i wouldn't call this a win in terms of a race. But im sure that punk that was trying to showoff in front of his friends was sure embarrased.
Old 08-10-2016, 10:45 PM
  #40  

 
JDMpearlwhyteZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 1,955
Received 14 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

I'm confused, you say you wouldn't call it a race.

But your first sentence is: " I remember the time I BEAT a 5.7......."


Quick Reply: The controversial N/A S2k vs a 6.0 GTO debate..



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:18 PM.