Road & Track Does it! NSX Vs S2000
02-26-2001, 03:12 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Melbourne!
Posts: 3,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UL, you are correct - see my original post from the 2nd of January.
http://www.s2000online.com/forums/showthre...p?threadid=3015
http://www.s2000online.com/forums/showthre...p?threadid=3015
02-26-2001, 04:45 AM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: southern
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMO, posters here are exhibiting too narrow a focus by just concentrating on speed and braking. So what if the S2000 by some chance could run as fast as the NSX? What significance is that, really?
As an owner of both vehicles, I can say that from my perspective there is really no comparison between these 2 cars. The NSX is a superior vehicle in every way: quality, speed, accelaration, handling, comfort, gawks, you name it.
The only significant S2000 advantage is that it's a roadster (not to mention a good value) - and that's why I bought it.
Again, in my opinion only.
As an owner of both vehicles, I can say that from my perspective there is really no comparison between these 2 cars. The NSX is a superior vehicle in every way: quality, speed, accelaration, handling, comfort, gawks, you name it.
The only significant S2000 advantage is that it's a roadster (not to mention a good value) - and that's why I bought it.
Again, in my opinion only.
02-26-2001, 06:04 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally believe that the new NSXs with the 6 speed and 290 HP will be about 0.5 sec faster then the s2k on the 1/4 if not more. So yes the NSX is faster.
As for the 4.9, even if it is a misprint it does NOT mean it is impossible, 4.99 is not out of reach if everything is done perfectly. I have done repeated 5.1s with a best of 5.11 and i am sure my car will be faster this summer, a few others have done 5.3 range, so it is not that far off.
As for the 4.9, even if it is a misprint it does NOT mean it is impossible, 4.99 is not out of reach if everything is done perfectly. I have done repeated 5.1s with a best of 5.11 and i am sure my car will be faster this summer, a few others have done 5.3 range, so it is not that far off.
02-26-2001, 06:30 AM
#14
I will still stick with "it is a misprint"!!!!
even the Motor Trend sloping downward track could only get the S2000 down to 5.2-5.3....
4.9 to sixty would equate to 13.5ish for the
even the Motor Trend sloping downward track could only get the S2000 down to 5.2-5.3....
4.9 to sixty would equate to 13.5ish for the
02-26-2001, 07:27 AM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Portland
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
0-60 is really somewhat of a useless number, due to all the factors that can vary...
60-80 and 60-100 times are better representations since there are less "error" factors involved...
I mean the GMC Syclone does 60 in 4.6... But I imagine its quite a bit slower around the road course than the NSX or S2000...
Sure the article could be a misprint... but who knows... maybe someone should write a letter to the editor to find out.
60-80 and 60-100 times are better representations since there are less "error" factors involved...
I mean the GMC Syclone does 60 in 4.6... But I imagine its quite a bit slower around the road course than the NSX or S2000...
Sure the article could be a misprint... but who knows... maybe someone should write a letter to the editor to find out.
02-26-2001, 08:51 AM
#16
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fairfield County
Posts: 2,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by gregstevens
What is your basis for claiming it is a misprint?
What is your basis for claiming it is a misprint?
Simple.
In the "Road Test Summary" section of the two subsequent issues of Road & Track Magazine, i.e., the February 2001 and March 2001 issues, the Honda S2000 0-60 mph acceleration and 60-0 mph braking stats remain the same as they did before the January 2001 "Battle of the Brands" article.
For the record according to Road & Track, S2000 0-60 mph acceleration is 5.5 sec, and 60-0 mph braking is 123 ft.
Road & Track continues to list Acura NSX 0-60 mph acceleration as 4.9 sec and 60-0 mph braking as 134 ft.
02-26-2001, 09:11 AM
#17
Banned
Originally posted by S2000 Driver
How do I know it was a misprint?
Simple.
In the "Road Test Summary" section of the two subsequent issues of Road & Track Magazine, i.e., the February 2001 and March 2001 issues, the Honda S2000 0-60 mph acceleration and 60-0 mph braking stats remain the same as they did before the January 2001 "Battle of the Brands" article.
For the record according to Road & Track, S2000 0-60 mph acceleration is 5.5 sec, and 60-0 mph braking is 123 ft.
Road & Track continues to list Acura NSX 0-60 mph acceleration as 4.9 sec and 60-0 mph braking as 134 ft.
Originally posted by gregstevens
What is your basis for claiming it is a misprint?
What is your basis for claiming it is a misprint?
Simple.
In the "Road Test Summary" section of the two subsequent issues of Road & Track Magazine, i.e., the February 2001 and March 2001 issues, the Honda S2000 0-60 mph acceleration and 60-0 mph braking stats remain the same as they did before the January 2001 "Battle of the Brands" article.
For the record according to Road & Track, S2000 0-60 mph acceleration is 5.5 sec, and 60-0 mph braking is 123 ft.
Road & Track continues to list Acura NSX 0-60 mph acceleration as 4.9 sec and 60-0 mph braking as 134 ft.
However, and again, it really doesn't matter to me, but they could still have gotten the times...I mean, really! Think about it...downhill, tailwind, perfect launch! It's possible!
No big deal...just musing.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post