2.2L = 260hp
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: Rochester
Originally posted by PedalFaster
Boban, webmaecker, the two of you both realize that 100 km/h is faster than 60 mph, and that 0-100 times are typically a few tenths slower than 0-60 times, right?
Boban, webmaecker, the two of you both realize that 100 km/h is faster than 60 mph, and that 0-100 times are typically a few tenths slower than 0-60 times, right?
[QUOTE][B]As for Consumer Reports, I agree with the toaster people comment.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
From: Taillights in front of u
Originally posted by webmaecker
with the increase in HP and torque found earlier in the rev range, this car may crack into the 4s...
with the increase in HP and torque found earlier in the rev range, this car may crack into the 4s...
In the new Car and Driver mag
Features a Comptech S2000 with 341hp@6500 and 352lb-ft@3250
the 0-60 was 4.7 seconds and quarter at 13.3
Suppose the s2200 comes with 170lb-ft i-vtec, thats just the math, but I doubt the S could hit the 4s...but a stock S doing 5.4 0-60 seems close though lol
(Information obtain from Car and Driver)
Registered User
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 142
Likes: 1
From: Clearwater
To humor webmaeker's quest for a 4 second 0-60...
has anyone here had forced induction, gears (4.44 or 4.77), reinforced diff, upgraded clutch and slicks? That's the only way I could foresee his dream becoming reality. And even then, it would probably only last 1 or 2 blasts.
has anyone here had forced induction, gears (4.44 or 4.77), reinforced diff, upgraded clutch and slicks? That's the only way I could foresee his dream becoming reality. And even then, it would probably only last 1 or 2 blasts.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,937
Likes: 7
From: houston
Originally posted by speedfreakgc
Not much, just a steep decline and a 50mph tailwind.
Not much, just a steep decline and a 50mph tailwind.
webmaecker...don't believe everything you read in this world.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,054
Likes: 0
From: Bronxville/NY
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Road Rage
[B]http://www.borgwarnerbrand.com/brute_force...rute_force7.htm
2) Same with the S2000 - to get the times from a standing start that bench racers like to throw around, you have to abuse the car. I like to think of a car like the Honda as having great "rolling dynamics". It is not a drag-racer. Current car mags has article on all sorts of hopped up 4-cylinders, including a $68K Comptech S2000 - yet it got walked by a bone stock Z06.
[B]http://www.borgwarnerbrand.com/brute_force...rute_force7.htm
2) Same with the S2000 - to get the times from a standing start that bench racers like to throw around, you have to abuse the car. I like to think of a car like the Honda as having great "rolling dynamics". It is not a drag-racer. Current car mags has article on all sorts of hopped up 4-cylinders, including a $68K Comptech S2000 - yet it got walked by a bone stock Z06.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,660
Likes: 2
From: Midlothian
http://asia.vtec.net/article/ivtec/
Good article on the system - Read "The Future"
I think it gives a very good justification for the desireability of a larger and broader torque output. The S2000 can't touch a Type-R on tight road courses, as its top end (from HP) cannot overcome its torque lag (and short burst acceleration). Peace!
Good article on the system - Read "The Future"
I think it gives a very good justification for the desireability of a larger and broader torque output. The S2000 can't touch a Type-R on tight road courses, as its top end (from HP) cannot overcome its torque lag (and short burst acceleration). Peace!