S2000 getting "long in the tooth"
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 846
Likes: 0
If you compare a 07 Vette to a S2000, the S2000 will not out perform on the track. It really depends on the driver. Yes it would in the older vette's but the new ones have improved 100%. Corvette is the best bang for the buck sports car. If I were going to get a new car I would seriously be looking in the direction of the newer Vette's. But I guess it's personal preference. The thing I found with the S2000 is that if you do not mod it, it's a car that you get bored of and you start looking for you next car sooner then you thought.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
The thing I found with the S2000 is that if you do not mod it, it's a car that you get bored of and you start looking for you next car sooner then you thought.
I bought this car mainly for it's technology (9k) and looks.....for me it is perfect. I will keep this car at least another 10 years and enjoy it every minute. I notice that the S2k is also "special" for the general public. I get lots of positive comments and looks. I appreciate that...... Of course I realise that beaty is in the eye of the beholder.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 0
From: Jersey City, NJ
Originally Posted by pietsmaans,Aug 21 2007, 05:11 PM
I don't agree with this statement. Everyday I enjoy the beautifull classical lines of this sportscar. IMHO only cars like the 911, Ferrari 430 or Zonda are better looking. My car is 100% stock and I intend to keep it that way except for the wheels maybe. Modded cars with lots of carbon are IMHO misfits and look like Japanese boyracers (=ugly! Yak!). I know.......I will get flamed over this
I bought this car mainly for it's technology (9k) and looks.....for me it is perfect. I will keep this car at least another 10 years and enjoy it every minute. I notice that the S2k is also "special" for the general public. I get lots of positive comments and looks. I appreciate that...... Of course I realise that beaty is in the eye of the beholder.
I bought this car mainly for it's technology (9k) and looks.....for me it is perfect. I will keep this car at least another 10 years and enjoy it every minute. I notice that the S2k is also "special" for the general public. I get lots of positive comments and looks. I appreciate that...... Of course I realise that beaty is in the eye of the beholder.
I'm not one for the exterior modifications myself, I don't mind messing with the engine bay, but other than the wheels, the exterior is completely clean and stock.
I may buy a new car eventually, but I don't see myself selling the S. The car means too much to me.
Former Moderator
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,729
Likes: 8
Supercharger or Turbocharger and you'll be back in the rare minority for performance. Get Street Legal R-compound tires and you'll be in the rare minority for handling.
Otherwise you could spend more to get faster cars. But the S2000 is hard to beat for fun.
Otherwise you could spend more to get faster cars. But the S2000 is hard to beat for fun.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,984
Likes: 0
From: Alpharetta, GA (ATL)
I believe that back in 1999, the S2000 was a "great" car and was waaaay ahead of the competition, however, it's 2007 and things have significantly changed.
Although the S2000 is still no slouch, it doesn't ourshine the cars it was once pitted against.
1) Boxster S was 245 hp, now it's 295 hp and handles even better
2) BMW M Roadster was 240 hp, now it's 330 hp and handles even better
3) Corvette C5 was 350 hp, now it's about to be 415-430 hp and handles even better
I could go on and on and on.
The one thing that Honda sucks at is improvement. It is starting to show in many of their lines... the Accord included. They come out with an idea that's light years ahead of the competition and become a benchmark, then sit back all fat and happy and watch everyone play catch up for like 5 - 10 years. It's happened with the Civic, the Accord, NSX, and now the S2000. It's just another victim of Honda's committmet to laziness.
And we're so drawn in that Honda makes us lose our judgement for good taste... hence why we so readily accepted the S2000 CR. Had the CR come out back in 2003, we would have been like WTF? But since it's 2007, we're just hungry for anything new. Just anything. We're over here fighting for scraps I tell you. All the while, Dodge makes yet another POS car an SR-T (Caliber, ahem)
Although the S2000 is still no slouch, it doesn't ourshine the cars it was once pitted against.
1) Boxster S was 245 hp, now it's 295 hp and handles even better
2) BMW M Roadster was 240 hp, now it's 330 hp and handles even better
3) Corvette C5 was 350 hp, now it's about to be 415-430 hp and handles even better
I could go on and on and on.
The one thing that Honda sucks at is improvement. It is starting to show in many of their lines... the Accord included. They come out with an idea that's light years ahead of the competition and become a benchmark, then sit back all fat and happy and watch everyone play catch up for like 5 - 10 years. It's happened with the Civic, the Accord, NSX, and now the S2000. It's just another victim of Honda's committmet to laziness.
And we're so drawn in that Honda makes us lose our judgement for good taste... hence why we so readily accepted the S2000 CR. Had the CR come out back in 2003, we would have been like WTF? But since it's 2007, we're just hungry for anything new. Just anything. We're over here fighting for scraps I tell you. All the while, Dodge makes yet another POS car an SR-T (Caliber, ahem)
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 6
From: DFW, TX
I for one agree with the fact that this car is slow.
Is it a good car for the twisty's, sure it is...but other cheaper cars are very much so catching up and or beating it. Forget comparing to the Vette, an 07 Vette is definitly faster then an S2000 in everything except for the more technical courses, and now with the improved 08 Vettes...well there even better.
How about comparing the S2k to an Evo, STi, Z, and not the current models either. Evo X, new STi, and the 370Z...all the other companies are improving on their already great vehicles. The S2k is basically unchanged. The F22 was not much of an improvement at all. And well the suspension changes have overall made the car softer, and not really more capable. But instead an easier limit to push.
Lets look at cars like the Civic Si which is now a bargain. 200hp, 6sp, LSD...really a great car for the money, and no its not a whole lot slower then the S. Or the new GTi, another great car, the Mazdaspeed 3. Seriously even cheaper cars are "catching up" to the S2k.
The car was once an icon, an icon of technology. It WAS a pretty quick car, it did out handle everything up to cars over double its price. But not today...today the S2000 needs badly to be rejuvenated. 9000rpm was a big deal one day, and now the F22 is only 8000, however the new M3 has a 4.0 V8 reving to 8400. To me thats far more impressive the any 4 cyl at 9k.
The magic number today is 300. For a sports car to really compete, they need something close to or beyond 300hp. Personally I think the S2k would be perfect doing what I did to mine. Bump the displacement up to 2.5L and now you have around the 290bhp number and a car that will keep up with the others. You also haven't added any weight, and can still rev out to 8k+.
Anyway, enough of my ranting but IMO the S really really needs to get some new technology stuffed into it.
Is it a good car for the twisty's, sure it is...but other cheaper cars are very much so catching up and or beating it. Forget comparing to the Vette, an 07 Vette is definitly faster then an S2000 in everything except for the more technical courses, and now with the improved 08 Vettes...well there even better.
How about comparing the S2k to an Evo, STi, Z, and not the current models either. Evo X, new STi, and the 370Z...all the other companies are improving on their already great vehicles. The S2k is basically unchanged. The F22 was not much of an improvement at all. And well the suspension changes have overall made the car softer, and not really more capable. But instead an easier limit to push.
Lets look at cars like the Civic Si which is now a bargain. 200hp, 6sp, LSD...really a great car for the money, and no its not a whole lot slower then the S. Or the new GTi, another great car, the Mazdaspeed 3. Seriously even cheaper cars are "catching up" to the S2k.
The car was once an icon, an icon of technology. It WAS a pretty quick car, it did out handle everything up to cars over double its price. But not today...today the S2000 needs badly to be rejuvenated. 9000rpm was a big deal one day, and now the F22 is only 8000, however the new M3 has a 4.0 V8 reving to 8400. To me thats far more impressive the any 4 cyl at 9k.
The magic number today is 300. For a sports car to really compete, they need something close to or beyond 300hp. Personally I think the S2k would be perfect doing what I did to mine. Bump the displacement up to 2.5L and now you have around the 290bhp number and a car that will keep up with the others. You also haven't added any weight, and can still rev out to 8k+.
Anyway, enough of my ranting but IMO the S really really needs to get some new technology stuffed into it.
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 6
From: DFW, TX
Originally Posted by nastinupe1,Aug 21 2007, 04:16 PM
I believe that back in 1999, the S2000 was a "great" car and was waaaay ahead of the competition, however, it's 2007 and things have significantly changed.
Although the S2000 is still no slouch, it doesn't ourshine the cars it was once pitted against.
1) Boxster S was 245 hp, now it's 295 hp and handles even better
2) BMW M Roadster was 240 hp, now it's 330 hp and handles even better
3) Corvette C5 was 350 hp, now it's about to be 415-430 hp and handles even better
I could go on and on and on.
The one thing that Honda sucks at is improvement. It is starting to show in many of their lines... the Accord included. They come out with an idea that's light years ahead of the competition and become a benchmark, then sit back all fat and happy and watch everyone play catch up for like 5 - 10 years. It's happened with the Civic, the Accord, NSX, and now the S2000. It's just another victim of Honda's committmet to laziness.
And we're so drawn in that Honda makes us lose our judgement for good taste... hence why we so readily accepted the S2000 CR. Had the CR come out back in 2003, we would have been like WTF? But since it's 2007, we're just hungry for anything new. Just anything. We're over here fighting for scraps I tell you. All the while, Dodge makes yet another POS car an SR-T (Caliber, ahem)
Although the S2000 is still no slouch, it doesn't ourshine the cars it was once pitted against.
1) Boxster S was 245 hp, now it's 295 hp and handles even better
2) BMW M Roadster was 240 hp, now it's 330 hp and handles even better
3) Corvette C5 was 350 hp, now it's about to be 415-430 hp and handles even better
I could go on and on and on.
The one thing that Honda sucks at is improvement. It is starting to show in many of their lines... the Accord included. They come out with an idea that's light years ahead of the competition and become a benchmark, then sit back all fat and happy and watch everyone play catch up for like 5 - 10 years. It's happened with the Civic, the Accord, NSX, and now the S2000. It's just another victim of Honda's committmet to laziness.
And we're so drawn in that Honda makes us lose our judgement for good taste... hence why we so readily accepted the S2000 CR. Had the CR come out back in 2003, we would have been like WTF? But since it's 2007, we're just hungry for anything new. Just anything. We're over here fighting for scraps I tell you. All the while, Dodge makes yet another POS car an SR-T (Caliber, ahem)
