i agree with the OP. the mags do not really badmouth it besides motor trends yearly review. they gave it 3.5 stars out of 5, but the honda fit and civic 4/4.5. they pretty much ignore the s2000, probably since it is a somewhat dated design. every other maker seems to come out with revisions and it feels like the mags dont want to seem dated by talking about that "old honda." recently, the mags have been comparing the m roadster and boxster s. the boxster s is an even older design.

its hard to give specific examples, but there is definitely a vibe that the mags have forgotten about it. the S is like the guy who is a great person with excellent skill, but is overlooked by all the women because he doesn't look the most fashionable/hip. hehe, society is like a superficial woman.

 

Like most other posters, I think C&D still think pretty highly of the S. They haven't mentioned it much because it's been out for a few years without drastic changes. Doesn't matter though, I gott mine, it's definitely "drivable" and a blast.

 

Dunno about you guys, but I'm not gonna let any magazines ruin my fun

 

It's a 7-year old car. Magazines like C&D won't rave about such an old car.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. The S2000 will always be an S2000. It's not like the car will drive any worse when it drops out of magazines' radar.

 

I liked this article, it compares the s2000 to other more expensive cars, and the honda, with the lowest price is better than half of the other cars.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?se...article_id=1949

The vette wins ofcourse, this it road and track, but the honda places well.

 

The S2000 has a timeless beauty in my opinion. Honda hasn't done much to its design since release so there hasn't been much hype about it. If Honda ever made a coupe version of it, I bet it'd be on the mag's radar and hyped up again like it was when it first debuted.

I think all the negative things I've read about it were due to the "American" flavor in cars. MORE TORQUE, off the line speed, quarter mile jazz that I think is BOGUS and worthless use of measurement of its valued in owning and driving this car. The worthy mag reviews are those that can describe the joy of driving this car and driving it in the environment that it has been designed for...high reving, corning, go kart style of driving around corners...it's purpose as a RWD roadster.

Undrivable (subjective to skill)
Low torque (due to lack of rpm usage)
Not enough trunk space (not it's purpose)
Oversteer (subjective to skill)
Unstable (subjective to skill)
Not fast enough (who cares?? moving from a dig, once in VTEC, stay in vtec, based on skill, it's fast enough to keep up with faster AWD and turboed vechicles around a track)

These negative comments just make me want to slap someone. It's not the car for them if they don't appreciate it's design. This is still an awesome car regardless of it's lack of being in magazine radars lately.

 

I think C&D is pretty much the only magazine that really understands the car - writers at the other mags are all showing their age and their preference for softer cars as they age.

Consumer reports is just hopeless - its like Camry drivers giving a review of the car, and all they can really point out is how the S is not a Camry. If you know absolutely nothing about a subject, CR has some merit, but I've found every time I read a review on any subject I have basic knowledge of (cars, cameras, computers, vacuums even), the CR article is really under-educated and seems off bias. But, if you know nothing about the subject, it can be helpful.

 

I'm also waiting to see the S in some comparos where the S is the highest price car, not the lowest - S vs Redline Sky vs Solstice GXP - instead of S vs. Boxster S vs Audi TT vs Z4 vs 350Z.

 

This is the quote I was talking about, from the R&T article linked above:

[QUOTE]

 

I also remember Road and Track calling the Z4 a "failed attempt at replicating an S2000" a while back as well.