It's been pretty wet here for the last week or so (at least seems like it) so I've been doing a fair bit of wet weather driving. Though I'm having fun sliding the car all over the place (at low speeds ie. bellow 60km/h), it does slide rather eazy (the back of the car that is). In particular at low speeds I'm finding that the back can very easily break traction - from stand still I can do it with 2 - 2.5k launch. Also, around corners (tight ones) I can push the back out with giving it some throttle. In 1st gear I don't need anymore than 3k revs. In 2nd I have to try a bit harder but with about 4 - 5k revs and a 90 degree corner I can hang the tail out.

The car is very progressive and after a little while you do it almost around every 2nd corner just for fun ... though, I'm of the opinion that the S2000 does not have much grip at the back in the wet. I don't know whether it is the lack of weight over the rear wheels, or the amount of power or the sharp front end, or the LSD - but it definatelly seems to be stepping out at speeds and situations where I felt totally planted in my MR2 ('93 model) or any other car that I had the pleause of driving in the wet. I find that I could go a lot faster (and safer) around these slow speed corners in the MR2 when it was wet. The MR2 was actually very fast in the wet and did not suffer too much performance loss ... even with totaly bold S02s at the back, it I was confortable going 150km/h (94mph) and never aquaplaned; and around low speed corners I could go good 10km/h faster and still not be sliding. Though, when the MR2 stepped out, the slide was a lot more 'agressive' than the S2000. I know that the S2000's LSD has something to do with this (while the MR2 did not have LSD) but I can see how a lot of people would spin (or crash) the S2000 in the wet - it just slides so eazy in the wet. Odd thing is that at speed (80kph/50mph) the back seems pretty planed in the wet and does not even feel like it's about to step out - it seems a lot more planted than at low speeds. Very odd ... can anyone explain that and shed some light on this?

ps. It's about 13 - 18degrees Celcius these days and there's no real water on the road ... just wet.

 

Hey there down under,
sorry i can shed and light on that not enough experience but
mannnn that sounds like your having a blast down there.!!you should take a voyage up to maine sum time and take one for a spin on our snowy roads, well your gonna have to wait until next year the snow is finally gone(thankgod). Its about 70 degrees here, best day of the year by far , you could say almost paradise.
Well iwish i had my snook now cause its gonna be a great summer this year, i can feel it.
Well anyways have fun and drive safely, oh ya is 13-18 celcius warm or cold?

 

13 to 18 = 55 to 65

Impressive David!

I guess you spin in the opposite direction of the northern hemisphere.

Thanks for the advice/warning.

 

13 degrees Celcius = 55.4 degrees Fahrenheigh
18 degrees Celcius = 64.4 degrees Fahrenheigh

To me that is pretty cold ... not snowy kind of cold but cold for around here.

Also, Barry, hehe :-) it seems to spin always 'out of corner' ... does that mean that you guys spin to the 'inside'? :-)

 

I attended what turned out to be a wet auto-x yesterday here in SoCal. I didn't bring my S2K (because it doesn't see rain, ever), but there was a red one present. I paid close attention to the car in the rain and it was turning some of the fastest times of the day in both the wet and dry. Looked like stock tires, but I never got a chance to check it out up close to verify or see how much wear was on them.

Overall, the car looked very stable and controlled, even in the chicane which I was approaching at around 65 mph. The course was very tight otherwise and one part was on very slick new asphalt. The S2K was one of the few RWD cars not to spin (saw a new MR2, only about a second off the S2K pace, go through a huge spin).

Frankly, I was surprised. However, rain tends to magnify the behavior of cars and requires a similar magnification of the proper driving style. IOW, being smooth is critical to going fast in an S2K, so in the rain, you have to be ultra smooth to avoid swapping ends.

UL

 

DavidM,

In Aus. you guys get the MR-2 with the high output 3S-GE engine tuned for around 180 hp, yes? In the US our '2s have the 3S-GTE which is a turbo with 200 hp and (very important) 200 lb-ft of torque. My old '93 DID have the LSD and I had "crash bolts" installed F + R for more negative camber.

My experience is totally opposite. Maybe it's because the Turbo could kick in in the middle of the corner, or maybe it's because of the greater torque, but I was always more concerned with the '2 in the wet than I am with the S2000.

It may be because I know from my autox experiance that the MR-2 was so hard to control once the tail started to slide. I used to spin so often I was convinced there was something wrong with me! IMO the MR-2 had no middle ground, either the front was "in front" or the back was "in front". The S2000 is much easier for me to modulate the throttle and control the rear stepping out (Thank you Honda for NA)

Our cars may have been different, but I think if your '2 was more stable, I'd check my rear tires for wear, or if your car is new, spring spacers. Oh, onemore thing, I live in Hawaii it never gets cold here and I hear the S-02s need some heat to work well.

 

I would think that being a rear-mid engine car, that the back might tend to come out more than the s2000. Not sure how the weight distro is, but the end coming out may have something to do with it ...

 

I recently spent a day out at Gingerman Raceway in Michigan enjoying an open track day, where half the day was in the rain. I found the S2K very driveable in the rain, not only predictable but also pretty damn fast and stable.

Since this was my first track day in my S2K, I was having fun exploring the limits of understeer and oversteer in the car, but all in all I was very pleased with it's wet weather abilities even on the S02's (3000 miles).

Clark

 

Hi guys,
Here's some answers:
- The MR2 here has 128kW (about 170hp)
- My S2000 tyres are close to new as I have only 5,000km on them (3125miles).
- MR2 weights about 1240kg (fraction less than the S2000) and has 43/57 (front/back) weight distribution. It also has 225 tyres at the back (I had S02s).

Also, Colin, you're absolutelly correct about the MR2 being a handfull when pushed over the limit ... though on the track I could drift/slide the car comfortably around most corners (though, I did spin it at about 150km/h once). I found that I 'cured' the 'snappyness' of the back end with the S02 tyres. When I had Falkens at the back the car was literally suicadal at the limit. Then the S01s were pretty good but still not progressive enough ... the S02s had the grip and progressiveness to be able to control the back end when sliding (95% of the time).

Besides that, I find the back (not front) of the S2000 very slipery in the wet. As I said before, this is at slow speeds while at medium speeds the car seems fine (though I have not really pushed it too hard there ... not that I'm really pushing it at slow speeds). It's very controllable and progressive and I'm having fun with it, though, the grip limits seem pretty low at the back of the car while in the wet.

I'll check on the 'spacers' thoug, I doubt that is the case as I pushed the car very hard in the dry and the can grips/handles very well.

 

Hi David,

Interesting what you saybecause best motoring VCD (1999)

tested the stook and it did the best time around a wet track @ 42.73

200sx turbo - 43.30

integra Type R - 43.37

RX-7 type R - 44.17

NSX - 43.50

not doubting you or anything like that but the stook performed considerably well againsts these cars.... have some great pics of it but dont know how to post


[Edited by Aus2k on 04-22-2001 at 08:47 PM]