the K series motor OVERALL... is used in many of Honda's cars and the CRV etc., it has a 2.4 liter block that can be adapted, in stock form with less of a tune they are only putting down 20 less hp than the freakishly tuned from the Factory F motor. Since the F platform was used as the base for the K motor, of course they are going to engineer the motor better, hence the whole purpose for adding I-VTEC. The K motor made the B series motor look like ragged crap... and the B motor has always been a benchmark for N/A performance in 4 cylinders. The K motor adapts well to tuning.. put I/H/E on the F20... then put I/H/E on the K20R.... the K motor will make that 20 hp and then some that its behind at the crank from the F20 and put more whp down.

Not to say the F motor is anything less than phenomenal, but the K motor was designed to be better from the start. From all the tuning info I have read and heard from my friends that run performance shops.. the K motor is pretty much the best N/A 4 out there... the F20 was designed specifically for the s2k while the K motor is multi-talented and still makes massive hp when called upon.

 

With i/rh/e and Hondata tuning the K20a2 can put down as much as 205 horsepower to the wheels, which roughly is 30 more than stock. They react very well to mods, especially tuning. It would be great to have an i-VTEC engine in the S2000, but you instead you get RWD and 50/50 weight distribution, so it all evens out I guess. Though it would have been great if the AP2 had added i-VTEC along with that extra .2 liters. There are some people with the K24 block(TSX) and the K20a2 head(RSX-S) hybrid that put down some insane N/A numbers.

 

i dont necessarily agree with you. you have valid points as to what the K has over the F. but on the same hand, here are other things to consider.

the F is still a modern marvel in technology, and with an aftermarket ECU has a fair amount of n/a power to be tapped. UL and others have stated this should be over the 300whp mark n/a.

the F motor will still obtain the highest peak power numbers of the two motors in both n/a and FI form, if money is not an object.

the F motor still has many things the K series does not, which make it unique and built steadily for it's high revving nature. (FRM cylinder walls, skirtless race pistons, forged internals, etc)

the F motor can make over 500whp on pump gas, and also make over 500whp on stock internals, save a head gasket.

the F20C can be revved to over 10,000 rpm with just valve train changes, leaving the bottom end alone. the K series cannot.


so in other words, they both have positives and negatives. the above positives to me, say that IMO the F series is a better motor.

 

i/h/e, test pipe, and aftermarket ECU can put the S2000 into the 230-240whp range. that's 30-40whp more than stock. there have been dyno's showing as such in the UTH forum on more than one occasion.

our ECU is our biggest hinderance to unlocking n/a power.

 

I think we are just going about this in two different directions... for the purpose of the F motor.. it does what it does very very well. Which is why I said it is a phenomenal motor. Of course Honda isn't going to put all forged internals in the K and make it stock vs stock a competitor to the F.. otherwise the cost of the S wouldn't be justified over an ITR.. well at least in Japan and EU where they actually get the ITR.

Didn't UL do the 2.5 liter kit?

If money wasn't an object... I dunno.. that's not really a question any of us can answer.. but I would put my money on the K motor.

The F motor is built from Honda... so naturally in stock forms with better parts it will achieve some things the K motor will not without breaking it open.

The K motor is sorta a sleeping beast... once you awaken it, its nasty. The F motor comes with claws open and ready for battle

 

thats about the same as doing K-Pro on an ITR motor and similiar mods making like 240's whp.

 

This thread is getting STUPID. You cannot compare a modded car to a stock car. Why don't we slap a turbo on with drag slicks vs. a stock winter tire S2000. Or better yet, vs. a Corvette Z06 with a 10 year old driving the car.

The S with (as I've mentioned) a 70mm exhaust, AEM EMS tune, and 4.56 gears (roughly 3000 dollars) will DESTROY a RSX S with 3000 in NA mods.

Wisconsin, just lock this thread and tell these kids to buy an RSX S already.

 

AGAIN. STOP COMPARING CARS. Some of us would just like to compare and contrast engine designs. Wisconsin and Dark Sub Rosa both gave good reasons on why they think one engine design is a better design than the other...and I think they both make good points.

 

Me, nor afwjustin were trying to compare cars.

However, some people started comparing cars, when the discussion was related to the engine.

either way, I agree, it's gotten to be a stupid thread.

 

Wow...I've really stirred up the hornet's nest here. No need to get all excited. You must have misunderstood my point. My point was that you can take a stock S2K and a stock RSX-S, supercharge them and both will make nearly the same amount of power. To me that is discouraging but it is what it is.

Regarding straighline performance, here is a link to the 1/4 thread in the ClubRSX.com forum:

http://forums.clubrsx.com/showthread.php?t=319803

As you can see, the quickest time is 10.84@130.

I don't want to continue arguing with you, nor anyone else up in here. I love the S2000, which is why I am buying one. I am, however, disappointed with some of the performance attributes.