I would love to see some track documented acceleration numbers for the S2000, for all years.

I no longer trust the motoring magazines when it comes to the S2000, given the way they seem to be repeating what the factory tells them without doing their own tests on the 2.2.

I know some people don't care about acceleration numbers. I guess this is not the thread for you. I also know numbers vary. But if a member posts numbers he or she got at a track, we can see the range for ourselves and not have to trust the magazines to tell the truth.

In particular, I'm eager to see some proven numbers for the 04 2.2; the 04 2.0 when those become available also. I'd like to see 0-60, 1/4 mile, and 0-100. I know some of you in the warmer states have had your 04 at the track by now. I want to see if the power increase in the 04 results in faster acceleration or if the power increase only maintains existing acceleration numbers overall (We know that rolling acceleration is increased for everyday driving, but that's a different matter).

 

0-60 and 0-100 are not numbers you will get "at the track." For this reason I have much more faith in magazines and their abilities to produce these numbers than I do from an individual with a G-tech or stopwatch and measuring tape.

Regardless, they are stupid and useless measurements, who cares.

We do?

 

When I say track documented numbers, I mean drag numbers. Magazines, by the way, use g-tech to get their numbers much of the time. I want to see posts from owners who have time slips.

Like I said, if you don't care about acceleration numbers, why not stay out of this thread? Most people, including magazines, care about these numbers. That's why they're posted. They give a baseline for comparison.

The magazines are reporting numbers for the 2.2 that we know are wrong (see temple of vtec). They're being lazy.

I own a 2004 2.2 and I can tell you that the car definately has much more rolling acceleration. I shoot every opening and almost never need to vtec.

All I'm asking for are some numbers from owners. If you don't have those numbers or don't think they matter, then power to you. I care about them. Stop raining on my parade.

 

Name one.

[QUOTE]The magazines are reporting numbers for the 2.2 that we know are wrong (see temple of vtec). They're being lazy.

 

Ever watch car and driver TV? They use g-tech. How do I know, I've seen them mounted under the windshields. Ever see the commercials for g-tech? Using g-tech technology is much easier than using other means. But you knew that, you're just trying to be an instigator.

You're just an ass. I made a simple post asking to see if folks have gotten verified acceleration numbers for their cars, whatever year. You are an abrasive low class shit.

As for your insistence on ignoring the dyno results from temple of vtec, well, you're just an idiot.

If you want to start a different post about how slow the 04 is, be my guest. This is a thread about owner confirmed track results.

 

Actually, I don't "know" that they use a Gtech, and neither do you. You are making an assumption here and when asked to back it up with some proof have instead decided to start name calling. I would guess that the magazines have a more accurate means of determining such figures, but who knows, apparently neither of us.

Do you always lash out and call people names when they don't have the same perspective as you? Maybe we could put a camera on you and make a t.v. show out of it.

I'm not ignoring them, however unlike you I am also not ignoring the Texas dyno day which showed zero gains.

And now you are putting words in my mouth too. Ha.

If I can be so bold as to make a suggestion. You might find that more people respond to your posts if you manage to act more like an adult when replying to them.

 

2004S200,

Just ignore him...

ron

 

Yes ignore reality -- and when you don't agree with other people make sure you throw in a lot of insults and call them names.

Yes, I'm certain that laziness is why the 2004 0-60 numbers are no faster. Or wait, maybe it could be the change in gearing that requires a 2-3 shift now ... or one of another dozen factors. This of course does not take anything away from the fact that 0-60 is a silly measurement played out in Magazines to appease the arm chair idiots for bragging rights.

P.S. As per an old article in their magazine C&D uses a 5th wheel setup for timing, not a G-Tech.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 2004S2000

 

anyway....

drag strip numbers are based on distance, not speed, i.e. 60 feet, 1/8 mile and 1/4. you will get a timeslip saying how long it took you to go 60 feet, but not the time it took you to go from 0 - 60 mph.

mph at end of run is calculated going thru trap start/finish

i do not think mph at 60 feet 1/8 mile is calculated since it is only a single light.

keith