My Cobra weighs 3665 and goes like hell...but I also can appreciate a lightweight car with a dinky engine - but if that dinky engine can be made to provide more thrust and flexibility, I do not care about 9k redline bragging rights - to me the proof is in the driving. And this is not just rhetoric - I have voted with my $$$'s.

If Honda produced a 50 cc matter/antimatter annihilation gravity inversion powerplant that weighed less than the 4-banger, that would be OK too. Or, a battery engine with an output in kW equivalent to 240 HP and with a 200 mile range that produces torque instantly and is cheaper than gas to run is just fine with me.

When i am driving flat out (used to race SCCA Class C), I do not recall having time to appreciate whether the conecting rods were titanium (NSX) or forged (Cobra, S2000), or what - it was a question of the vehicle dynamics, and I have faith that the new engine, with whatever the redline will be, will be an improvement, and the rest of it is just moot "bench talk".
If someone hands your azz to you, I find little consolation in "my revs are higher than his".

It will be interesting to see how the new car measures up.

A Wankel engine cannot be compared in displacement to a reciprocating engine, of course. So I guess the folks who put a lot of weight in titles must say "highest redline of any production, mass-produced, reciprocating, piston engine".

 

My original post was in response to Colin who was worried that TWO(!) of the titles the car currently holds would be wiped out in one fell swoop! Now I can appreciate someone liking a "high strung" car and the aspect of being able to wind out their motor to 9K. But I'm guessing the vast majority would not even know the difference if the redline were lowered 500 RPM and it wasn't marked on the tach. As far as "Highest specific output in a normally aspirated car" goes, I don't think that translates directly into any specific aspect of driving enjoyment in the car. Yes, it makes it easier to keep the weight down but again, in and of itself it does nothing from a relative standpoint. Sounds good though doesn't it?

I'd be highly surprised if the base character of the car is altered to any significant degree. I really think all the hand wringers should just quit worrying and wait for the final product. I'm with Road Rage, I think the changes to the power plant and drive train will result in a better driving experience. It will be just as "visceral" and even more fun. And more effective. Personally I'd be more concerned about the changes to the suspension but I even think that may not end up necessarily being a bad thing. Give 'em a little credit.

ron

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by R11
[B]My original post was in response to Colin who was worried that TWO(!) of the titles the car currently holds would be wiped out in one fell swoop!

 

Sorry to dissapoint you guys, but the redline will be in the 8s.

 

Hey Colin, I really didn't mean anything personal that's why I said no offense. It seems that you may have a bit more of a vested interest in the "bragging rights" aspect since you market the cars and I can definitely understand that. It's just that there's this macho mindset in a large portion of the S2K community that driving the S is like some kind of red badge of courage or something. Yes, I can understand for some people there's a bit of a challenge in making the car go fast, but really, it's mainly just a little more work involved. As far as more power per liter than a Ferrari goes, I think that just shows how over rated the title is. Sure, it's an efficient engineering design but in the grand scheme of things it really doesn't mean that much. As for the redline, I seriously think a large part of the motivation in the first place was exactly for the reason I've been talking about. Bragging rights. When the S2K first came out it was definitely a statement and image kind of car. And it has done it's job. Look at all the people here who hang on all those marketing lines from the brochure like they are gospel. But that's OK. Like you said, to each his own. I just hate to see people use these things as a reason to rail against what I think will be an all around improvement for the car is all. You can see from the recent comparison testing the mags have done just how close the competition is from a performance standpoint. I really believe Honda is just making sure the S maintains it's competitiveness. There's always room for improvement. Again, I don't believe the changes will be radical. I think the nature of the car will remain to be what it is. I think the changes will be subtle but effective. We'll know soon enough. If I'm wrong I'll be eating some crow. But I don't think I will be .

ron

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Colin
[B]

Well I guess you got me.

 

I'm with Colin. I'm a design engineer and this is one of the "7 Wonders of the Design World". It is very uncompromising. It is a true sports car. No track capability was compromised to make way for creature comfort. The rumored design of the 2004 will be giving way to that. C&D Sept 2003 makes some statements on the changes.

Also, I am 18 months from lease-end. Now I am contemplating a buyout just for collectibility purposes. Of course, I will have the choice 18 months from now to go '05 S2K or elsewhere. I suppose a test drive is all that can solve that one.


02 Suzuka

 

How about a Cadillac 16? 1000 Hp/1000 rwtq, as refined as you could want. Quite a piece of engineering - a thing of beauty - i saw it in person at the Detroit Auto Show, and everyone, including an acquaintance from Honda Engineering, thought it was awesome.