Sorry if old:

I just got the new Road and Track last night in the mail. there is a one page article on the new 04 S2K. Not ONE bad thing to say about the car. The writer said it is faster, handles better (more controlled tail movement) etc.

The gears where changed to take effect of the new 2.2 litre's characteristics also.

Again, I'm sure this has all been beaten to death...but its good to see a respected magazine speaking highly of the changes.

So...do people still want 800more RPM or do they want a faster track time?

I'd take track time anyday.

Ciccone

 

Faster how...from 30-50mph? What a meaningless stat! It might handle better from the standpoint the tail is more controlled, but that likely means they just lowered the car's overall handling limits.

That is nothing more than marketing speak. That same gearing would work equally as well in the 2.0L S2000! If you disagree then please explain -- else I assume you fell for the marketing hype! The new gears with the old 2.0L (just like the 2004s will be like in the rest of the world) would give it 40-50% of the gains the new US-spec 2004s -- but would retain the 9k redline!

You need a math lesson. Looking at redline, 9000 minus 8000 is 1000. Looking at fuel cut-off, 9200 minus 8200 is 1000. Again don't fall for the smoke-and-mirrors.

Did it actually say it would be faster on the track? Has anyone done a direct comparision at the track yet? In the hands of a skilled driver, the old car might just be just as fast or even faster (depending on the course layout).

 

Jesus, STL. Are you having a bad day or do you always jump on somebody with both feet for no reason at all? Pretty tactless, I must say. Go take a ride in your car and breathe deep, for christ's sake.

 

STL,

Wake up! Smell the coffee!

ron

 

Hey, I'm just pointing out all the inaccuracies in his post! Maybe I was too hard on him, but I get tired of all the mis-information posted here (like 'only 800rpm difference', etc..)

I wish I could! My car is in the shop (and has been for over a week). Some dude did an illegal U-turn in front on the car and hitting him couldn't be avoided. At least he claimed responsibility and has good insurance...

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ciccone376
Sorry if old:

I just got the new Road and Track last night in the mail. there is a one page article on the new 04 S2K. Not ONE bad thing to say about the car.

 

STL,

OK, that sounds like a normal human now.

Sorry to hear about your car, glad you're ok and you're not getting screwed.

And about the all the misinformation on this site, try to relax. I just started to post about an electronics question someone had and all the wrong answers he was getting, and I realized I sounded exactly like what I scolded you for. So I deleted it. I understand your aggravation, believe me.

 

Originally posted by ciccone376
The writer said it is faster, handles better (more controlled tail movement) etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Faster how...from 30-50mph? What a meaningless stat! It might handle better from the standpoint the tail is more controlled, but that likely means they just lowered the car's overall handling limits.

-----------------------------------------
If you feel that acceleration between 30-50 is pointless I'm not sure where how you drive! They stated on average greater then 1 sec. difference in 'standing start' acceleration tests. thats a pretty nice difference.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by ciccone376
The gears where changed to take effect of the new 2.2 litre's characteristics also.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is nothing more than marketing speak. That same gearing would work equally as well in the 2.0L S2000! If you disagree then please explain -- else I assume you fell for the marketing hype! The new gears with the old 2.0L (just like the 2004s will be like in the rest of the world) would give it 40-50% of the gains the new US-spec 2004s -- but would retain the 9k redline!

-----------------------------------
Why is it marketing? If the new engine has characteristics that differ from the 2.0L, i.e. a different torque curve or more HP downlow...wouldn't the changed gear ratios help to exploit that? This might be a bad way of putting it, but go play Grant Turismo..take any car that allows you to switch gear rations, the same car/same engine with different ratios REACTS differently! The engineers are paid to develop the car correctly, I trust they calculated the new gear ratios for the new engine and got the results they wanted.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by ciccone376
So...do people still want 800more RPM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You need a math lesson. Looking at redline, 9000 minus 8000 is 1000. Looking at fuel cut-off, 9200 minus 8200 is 1000. Again don't fall for the smoke-and-mirrors.
----------------------------------------
Sorry, maybe I should do more homework...I have seen on this board that the redline on the 2.0L is 9K and the 2.2L actually 8200. Whatever the numbers, even R&T stated it was only a difference of 800 usable RPM


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by ciccone376
or do they want a faster track time?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did it actually say it would be faster on the track? Has anyone done a direct comparision at the track yet? In the hands of a skilled driver, the old car might just be just as fast or even faster (depending on the course layout).

-----------------------------------
Nope, nobody has done a test, its my assumption. the S2K with less tendancy to produce snap oversteer, rotates better, has more torque and acclerates faster in the midrange just might be faster.

--------------------------------------------------

I wasn't looking for a flame war. I was just stating what I read in the article.

I also think its a little over the top to believe everyone that owns an S2K drives it at 10/10's on the street. Most people here would crap their pants if they entered into an oversteer situation, so why is it bad that Honda helped 'control' it and make it possible for the driver to rotate the car? Porsche went from Air cooled to Water cooled, probably a MUCH larger change then what has happened to the S2K...do you still believe that the new Porsche's aren't worthy?

Ciccone

 

The 30-50mph time is pointless in the car that's faster 30-50mph is slower when doing a 40-60mph test. All I am saying is that such a small slice doesn't mean much. The two reviews I heard about, prior to this one, say 0-60 times and 1/4 times should pretty much be the same. In honestly though, this car isn't about 0-60 and 1/4 times IMHO.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ciccone376
Why is it marketing? If the new engine has characteristics that differ from the 2.0L, i.e. a different torque curve or more HP downlow...wouldn't the changed gear ratios help to exploit that?

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by STL
It is marketing-speak because the new gearing isn't really tailored for the new 2.2L engine.