CR is just plain disappointing. If you read the complete article the guy pretty much says the same thing as all the members that track their cars. Buy the normal and mod it to get a much better track car. CR is just an half arsed effort on Honda's part. God alone knows why they are in F1 when they can't win any races or use the technology to build a proper Club Racer. Look at Ferrari the Scuderia is a proper racing version of F430 (laps as fast as Enzo), look at Porsche with the GT3 and GT3RS and then look at what Honda did with the S2000. If I am not mistaken the official Honda team changed the suspension for the 24 HR race. What kind of a track car is this that has to be modified for the track?
Honestly the guys responsible for the CR should be shot.

EDITS as pointed by Popeye: It was a 25 hour race and the official mods were McMahen Autosports cage, BF Goodrich g-Force R1 racing tires, a single outlet exhaust sourced from AEM, Cobalt Friction XR racing brake pads and Goodridge stainless steel brake lines.

But I still think CR is a half arsed effort

 

Can't say I disagree

 

I second this

 

cr has been out for a fairly long time now, but not a lot of magazines reviewing it with comparo...

id be happy to see an ap1 vs. ap2 2.2 vs. ap2 2.0 vs cr (and maybe type-s) by one of these magazines...

 

It was a 25 hour race and please post your source of that info.

Even SCCA showroom stock classed cars are "modified" somewhat and they run 25 minute races .........not 25 hours

 

dont really believe it
also, the CR has better tires..

 

That could be the difference right there. The CR has better tires for autox, but they may not be the best tires for drag racing, since the sidewalls are stiffer. Also same thing for suspension. Extra stiff may not be as good for hooking the tire up. The wing my effect 1/4 mile times, but shouldn't hurt 0-60.

But either way, we need the Stig.

 

Dude, the 0-60 times were recorded ages ago on the AP2. Times on the S2000 aren't the most consistent, unlike other cars like M3s and 350z, where their powerbands are less peaky, etc etc etc.

Besides, the 5.5 seconds recorded is quite optimistic imo. Try hammering that out of your car in stock form -- I would imagine that most people here (including me) can't even get that after 20 tries. AND there is no real reason for a CR to be slower in a drag race compared to an AP2 -- neither would there be any good reason for it to be materially faster. If anything, the CR would be quicker due to stickier tires and slightly lighter weight.

I won't even take this comparison as a grain of salt, because it's just such non-sense.

I don't understand why people try so hard to discount what Honda has done to make the CR. Bottom line is, the CR faster than a base S2000 around a road course. That's the point, no matter how you slice and dice it. Why can't people admit that Honda has made a faster STOCK car from the factory? "Oh the base model with KW V3 coilovers an TE37 wheels and 4.57 gears would kill the CR." Duhhh ... there are a million things you could do to improve the performance. But again, that's not the point. We are talking about what's rolling out of the Honda dealer. Whether you like the seats and big @$$ wing? That's another story.

 

I am sorry my source was not the most trustworthy and yes it was 25 Hours not 24.
The official mods were McMahen Autosports cage, BF Goodrich g-Force R1 racing tires, a single outlet exhaust sourced from AEM, Cobalt Friction XR racing brake pads and Goodridge stainless steel brake lines.

 

Unless you run them at the same time on the same piece of ground, it's not the same thing.

I am not trying to defend the CR or put down the AP2, but just like dyno runs, you need to run them back to back to be able compare them in my opinion.