There is no age limitation on stupidity although experience comes with time. There's simply a lot of loose nuts behind the wheel. Why leave your car home just because it's raining? Why is it such a surprise that you have to slow down in the rain? It's physics, a fact of life. Do you actually think you can drive the same way in the rain as you would in the hot dry? If you do, you are one of those loose nuts. IF ....... THE ....... ROAD ......... HAS ....... SOMETHING ...... ON ....... IT ...... TO ...... MAKE ...... IT ....... LESS ...... GRIPPY ...... THAN ....... DRY ......... SLOW THE HECK DOWN!!!!!! But then, it's your a$$ (until someone else gets involved) and it's your car but it's your driving like you're invincible that raises all of our insurance rates.

 

Well I thought this thread offered a lot of good experienced advice from several quarters to those who may benefit with winter coming on. I'm not sure where it's going to go from here, but are we really saying that when we hear some 17 year old driving a 240 bhp RWD wiped out on a bend in the wet, we should be seriously thinking that the bump steer problem or the stock SO2's were the cause of the problem. Come on!

Talk about complicate the issue.

 

Cedric, you keep harping on the same fact, as do I... but we are barking up the same tree from different sides. I'm not saying that a 17 year old may have wrecked the car due to bump-steer, I'm saying that he might not have; had the bump-steer not been present.

The longer you drive (i.e. the more experience you have) the better you are prepared to deal with an unexpected situation. You or I could correct a slide or other mishap with little drama. It's obviously the driver's fault if they got into a situation they couldn't handle. That I would never debate.

The thing that frustrates me about your viewpoint (I said frustrates, not offends!) is that you keep maintaining that it doesn't matter what the car or tires do. I'm saying that what the car, suspension and tires do are all part of the equation here. There is no way you can argue that the suspension tuning of this car, or tire choice for it are not IN ANY WAY related to any of these accidents. What bugs me is the lack of acknowledgement that there are no issues with this car.

Hence the barking up the tree comment... I think we can all agree that if you put this group of young drivers that have wrecked their cars in the same situation of their wreck -but in an Integra- that the wreck wouldn't have happened. What I am saying is that if you put the same group into that accident situation in say - A Boxster (notoriously more stable, yet every bit as fast as the S2000) then I GUARANTEE that many of the accidents wouldn't have happened.

There is a difference between blaming the car for a misjudgement and admitting that your car has shortcomings.

Every car on the market has shortcomings, and many times those shortcomings can be contributing factors in an accident. It is just as foolish to ingore this fact as it is to ignore the fact that the full responsibility of the accident still rides with the driver. (Unless the shortcoming caused a mechanical failure.)

It's easy to dismiss someone else's experience as 'an act of stupidity' or 'carelessness,' but it's also a cop-out and a good way of making someone feel better about (A. their own purchase, and (B. their ability (or common sense) to stay out of trouble.

Chew on that for a while... we all need to be realistic. It's a car and it has flaws, just as any other on the road. It also has just as many (or more) knuckle-heads behind the wheel. Combination of inexperience, unpredictable handling and bad conditions = a recipe for disaster.

To clarify, the term unpredictable handling is not a positive attribute. It has been argued that the very tendency that causes most S2K accidents is what makes it fun to drive; which is true only to a point. The term unpredictable handling has nothing to do with a car's balance (understeer/oversteer) it has to do with the fact that the balance of the car changes rapidly and without warning. If the S2000 had no bump-steer it would be every bit as fun to drive, just more predictable. What makes matters worse is that this unpredictability only shows up when the car is pushed to the limit. So those of you who drive at 7-9/10ths will never experience it. So my best advice is to go to a driver's school so you know what 7-9/10ths feels like and then keep your car in that range. You will get loads of enjoyment from it in that range.

In the end, it's OK to believe that it's everyone elses' inexperience and that it can never happen to you... But it's not OK to blindly believe that what the factory in Japan produces is the best possible solution and is not without it's own quirks or miscalculations.

 

Read this article, keep in mind that our car HAS BEEN diagnosed with unaccaptably high bump-steer levels... not that I think it might have too much, it has been measured too high.

Again, that doesn't mean it caused any accidents... it means it could have been a factor along with a healthy dosage of inexperience.

http://www.longacreracing.com/articles/art...rt.asp?ARTID=13

 

Jason:
Post to follow, I'm having a little trouble logging in so this is just a space holder

 

Jason,

IMO your own words are supporting what a lot of us have been saying and contradicting your own argument. Your viewpoint seems to be:

1) Inexperienced driver.

2) Unpredictable handling at 10/10's.

I don't think any inexperienced driver, especially one without one bit of track time under their belt, can handle this car at 10/10's, and I'm not saying that because of the bump steer issue. They wouldn't be smooth, they'd lift in corners, and do a bunch of other things that a more experienced person with some track time and instruction wouldn't do. Therefore, these inexperienced people are likely crashing this car well before 10/10's. If, as your last post says, people driving at 7-9/10's will never experience the bump steer issue then the bump steer issue is not a factor in most of the accidents that are occurring. Even if it is happening to a small degree at below 10/10's I would propose that other factors including those mentioned above, the fact that most of the accidents seem to happen in the rain, and the fact that many people driving S2000's come from FWD cars, play such an overwhelming part in these accidents as to render the bump steer issue insignificant in most of the accidents we've heard about.

 

Well I've just lost a whole post. As it happens Strike has said pretty well what I wanted to say anyway. Your bump steer problems are at 100% on the track. This thread was good advice to young and new drivers with the onset of winter.


We're not talking about 100% on public roads!!!! Anyone who balls's up now has 'the word' from Jason Saini that it's the bump steer problem.

I'm not annoyed in the least, but I am a little tired of going round in circles.

 

---------------------------------------
... it means it could have been a factor along with a healthy dosage of inexperience.
---------------------------------------
I don't agree with a 'handling trait/fault' being a 'factor' in someone having an accident. It's no more a factor than:

- S2000 having high-grip levels - if the grip levels were minimal then people would drive slower and less peope, would have accidents ... right?

- S2000 having too much power - if the S2000 had a lot less power then then people would not go as fast. Not only that, but you couldn't push the back out and induce power-oversteer. If you had so little power then you could not induce power-oversteer (even in the wet) and less accidents would happen ... right?

- S2000 having close to neutral-handling characteristic. If the S2000 was a seriously undesteering pig then peope would never loose the back and have less accidents ... right?


None of these S2000's characteristics/traits are 'safe'. Sports cars are NOT safe ... is this a problem ? Should the S2000 have less power, less grip and be a heavy-understeerer? ... it would make the car a lot 'safer' but certainly not something I'd want to drive. I want a car with a lot of power, high grip levels and neutral handling characteristics - that is what you get when you buy an S2000 ... if any of that is a problem then you have a wrong car.

btw, I'm not saying that S2000 is a perfect car and that it's handling cannot be improved on ... far from it, of course it can - there are things I'd like it to do better ... though, that does not mean that any of that can be attributed to an accident any more then you driving the car instead of cathing a bus.

 

Jason,

A couple of points I differ with you on (big surprise huh )

I think comparing the S2000 with the Boxster is a flawed argument for a couple of reasons; First the boxster has a rear mounted mid engine and handles different because of this. It also has a bit of understeer dialed in or at least more than the S2000. Also since it has a bit more rear weight bias it helps keep the rear loaded under braking. The push and the rear weight bias makes it a little bit safer in turns that people enter too hot.

Those points alone account for a more benign handling car at it's limits without even talking about the suspension.

Another point is anyone experiencing the bump steer issue is driving too damn fast on the street. You could also argue that the bump steer acts as a warning that you are pushing it too hard. I would bet that the same people who are crashing their cars now would have crashed them (only at a higher rate of speed) without the bump steer.

One final thought, Which would make the S2000 safer to drive for neophytes all else being equal,...tires with twice as much grip or tires with half as much grip?

Think about it.

 

I have thought about it, Bieg... And I am sick of going in circles, Cedric... and I whole-heartedly disagree with you, Strike. But none of that matters because we are all entitled to our opinions!

I just feel it is important to talk about ALL the facts, rather than simply dismissing an incidents as driver error. There are plenty of situations where bump-steer could have been a contributing factor to an accident.

Did anyone read the bump-steer article I posted? How can you read that and then dismiss bump-steer as a non-issue?

In the end, I'm just trying to play devils-advocate... somebody here has to do it!

And RE: The Boxster... I agree with your points, Bieg. But I am just saying that it's possible to build a balanced sports-car that's just as fast but more stable. Maybe the RX7tt is a better comparison?

I'm not annoyed at anyone, I'm just trying to provide an opposing viewpoint! Wouldn't be a post with me and Bieg otherwise, right!