I hate to even mention this b/c I'm sure you guys have beat it to death already, but I haven't been able to find much information to compare the 2.2 liter and 2.0 liter S2000s. It just seems to me that a 2.0 liter with the same horsepower and slightly less torque would be faster than the 2.2 liter. Has anyone seen 0-60 numbers on the 2.2's? I'm also impressed with that 9000rpm redline of the older models, vs the 8000 redline on the new ones. Do you think Honda improved the S2000 with the newer models? My gut tells me to like the old ones better, but I just can't see Honda taking that kinda step backwards. Any additional insight is greatly appreciated.

 

just search the board, its been covered a thousand times. yeh they make the same hp at the flywheel, but its been said that the 2.2l puts more power to the ground (on the dyno). i would rather own the 9k motor; its more worth it than an extra 9 ft/lbs of torque, and a couple more ponies on the dyno.
-Chris

 

I think it is a matter of opinion. I take the position that newer models are usually improvement over the previous models. Cars do improve over the years in general and one can't simply wait and wait to get the latest and the greatest. Somewhere along the line, one has to jump in. Everyone who bought S2K should be satisfied and comfortable with their particular automobile. That is just how I see it.

 

the argument against that would be that everywhere except North America the F20C is still in use.

 

drive both
the 2.2 has a nice boost in torque in low end...but if you're used to the 9K redline, the 8K can seem pretty low.
there are dyno plots on this forum....the curves are similar except that the 2.2 has the same power as the 2.0, just ~500-1000 RRM lower in the rev band.

 

hm. i think theres like 100000 posts about this.
by fact from dyno chart, 2.2 puts out more horsepower.
i remember as about 20 more. maybe 14.
but to me. they are all just same s2k.
0.1 sec faster wouldn't make any different to regular people.
but i guess redline is something to think about. but you get better interior and exterior for less rpm.
my .02 cents

 

more like 10HP more. 20 is a stretch.

while the 2.2 has a higher peak, the 2.0 has a longer high-end powerband. I compare the high end powerband, the rev range that is used in performance driving (6-9000 rpm). compare that to the 6-8000 on the 2.2.

 

Published 0-60 numbers I've seen on the U.S. '04-'05s are very slightly quicker than earlier years (e.g., 5.4 vs. 5.5 in R&T). It's not clear how much of that is the engine, how much of it is suspension and wheel/tire changes, and how much is random variation. It would be interesting to see a comparison with overseas S2000s, which still have the 2.0 engine but I believe have incorporated the other changes.

Is it an improvement? That's a matter of opinion. I think the newer ones are more refined, and I personally like that better, but not everyone does.

 

I have driven both and decided to go with the 04 versus previous gen. Why? The 00 to 03 has the that incredible 9k redline, which is an extreme rush. But, you wont be taking it to 9k with every shift. The 04+ has a still very exciting 8k redline, but seems to put more usable power to the road at any rpm than the 2.0. Also I like the styling of the 04+. They have kept it clean but made it more muscular in appearence with the bigger wheels, wider tires and revised bumpers. If you put the 2 side by side and compare you will see what I mean. As far as dyno runs, the 2.2 is definately putting down more power. Anywhere from 12 to 26hp depending on what dyno you have seen. If you are like me you will want that power now instead of spending thousands of dollars tryng to add it later to a 2.0. With the 2.2 your just that much further ahead with every thing you're going to add. I have talked to 04 owners who claim they can always pull on an 00 to 03 in real world driving situations. Some have said the 04+ is softer suspended, but it is evry bit as fast on the track as the 00 to 03 with no bump steer. Honda was able to tune the suspension to the point where its more usable to drive everyday. In the end, do this. Drive both and see which one puts the biggest smile on your face. Believe me you wont go wrong with either one

 

A little bit of reverse exaggeration, don't you think?

I have test driven an 00, 02, and an 04. Guess which one I ended up with. I agree though that they are all fun. The thing that bothered me the most about the older models was the twitchy rear end, which some others may in fact like better? The thing I liked best about the 04 was the greater and more useable torque down at lower RPMs. But they are all fun sports cars and you won't go wrong with any of them as others have mentioned.