S2000 Talk Discussions related to the S2000, its ownership and enthusiasm for it.

04 vs 03 Dyno test on vtec.net

Thread Tools
 
Old Nov 11, 2003 | 07:40 AM
  #191  
B.C.'s Avatar
Community Organizer
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 59,877
Likes: 12
From: Area 51
Default

Originally posted by ttb
what surprises me is not the dyno numbers, but the fact that nobody is piss at honda for underrating (if it is indeed underrated). underrating is almost as bad as overrating. it's misleading and honda should not engage it in, for whatever reasons - insurance, marketing, etc.
ttb,

With all due respect, I would bet my money that you wouldn't mind having an "extra" 10-15HP on your 03. Who wouldn't? I agree that overrate is bad, but underates only means you get more for your bucks.

People generally buy these cars because they are powerful. (maybe I'm wrong) So I would think, that 240 is a great number, but 245, 250 is a better number.

Your 03' is not "truely" 240HP and 153 TQ. It's more "powerful" than the 00 and 01 -->(like mine), but I'm not bothered.

You're not going to write up to Honda and say "Hey, my 03 is more powerful than the 00/01, I think I am decieved, I want a real "240HP" only S2000."

Just my opinions and no flames please.

BC
Reply
Old Nov 11, 2003 | 07:40 AM
  #192  
R11's Avatar
R11
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
From: Portland, OR
Default

No, again, the 04 tested made more than the pre-04 tested. Presuming that this will be the case with all cars is incorrect (although I stand by UL's thoughts on this one and have my fingers crossed -- I aint convinced until more data is out there).
You're going to hold out till the very end aren't you? I think you're in denial . Even the smoothed dyno plots Honda published in their training guide showed a significant increase in HP and torque at every point through out the rev range. The only reason the peak figures matched on that plot was because the pre-04 has the extended red line. I don't really think it's ever been a question of if, just a question of how much.

ron
Reply
Old Nov 11, 2003 | 07:44 AM
  #193  
B.C.'s Avatar
Community Organizer
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 59,877
Likes: 12
From: Area 51
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by R11
You're going to hold out till the very end aren't you?
Reply
Old Nov 11, 2003 | 07:47 AM
  #194  
ttb's Avatar
ttb
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,575
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Back-cracker
Reply
Old Nov 11, 2003 | 07:50 AM
  #195  
B.C.'s Avatar
Community Organizer
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 59,877
Likes: 12
From: Area 51
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ttb
Reply
Old Nov 11, 2003 | 07:51 AM
  #196  
rickycrx's Avatar
Community Organizer
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,669
Likes: 0
From: San Antonio, TX.
Default

SHUT UP AND DRIVE YOUR CARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

God damn you people......

Both cars are S2000's..... They both have phenomenal technology far above most cars on the road.

There are differences. You choose to purchase whatever car you drive and others are free to make the same decisions.

Chill out and enjoy what you have. If you're not happy with it, either deal with it or suck it up and fork over the money for whatever YOU FEEL is a better fit for *YOU*

*steps down off of soapbox*

I would also highly respect the views of Shawn Church. I have known of him since the days when he was developing ZDyne tunes with Jeff Matthews on a water-injected Jackson Racing Supercharged CRX. He's been around a while, and he knows his shit.
Reply
Old Nov 11, 2003 | 07:55 AM
  #197  
Russ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,956
Likes: 0
From: Land of the landeaus
Default

Originally posted by krazik
in the R&C forum they speculated that the lower gearing in the 04 (2ndary reduction gear) equates to about a 4.3 in a 00-03 s2k.
My smaller diameter tires give me about a 4.33 (in addition to the weight savings from the tire/wheel combo) so I'd love a shot at any '04 just for grins. In the end fellas, despite all the hoopla over these mind-numbing comparison threads, who would of wanted an '04 model that was LESS of a performer than the older versions? Everyone would be angry at Honda for taking us a step back. I say good on Honda for pushing the envelope even further.
Reply
Old Nov 11, 2003 | 07:59 AM
  #198  
ultimate lurker's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,895
Likes: 1
From: You wish
Default

Thank you Ricky. And a very appropriate statement Russ.

With that, might I suggest that the mods close this thread for now. More information will be forthcoming in the next few days and the discussion can begin anew with a better range of data to examine.

UL
Reply
Old Nov 11, 2003 | 08:01 AM
  #199  
ttb's Avatar
ttb
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,575
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Russ
Reply
Old Nov 11, 2003 | 08:05 AM
  #200  
Humanatek's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
From: Manuel Antonio
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by LSs1Power
Very impressive.... Im sure if Honda rated the MY 04 S2K at 260HP and 180TQ they would make the 04 S2K more tempting for people who are looking at Boxster S, etc...
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:33 AM.