S2000 Talk Discussions related to the S2000, its ownership and enthusiasm for it.

S2000 - not the fastest really

Thread Tools
 
Old Mar 24, 2008 | 06:54 PM
  #51  
03AP1's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
From: DFW
Default

Originally Posted by Ruprecht,Mar 24 2008, 09:48 PM
2007 Toyota Tundra Double Cab Limited 4x4.

5,673 lbs curb weight
5.7-liter i-Force V8
381 hp
401 lb.-ft of peak torque at 3,600 rpm

0-60 in 6.3
1/4 in 14.8 seconds at 93.7 mph



How about the Toyota Sienna all wheel drive minvan?
4,464 lbs curb weight
3.5 v-6
266 hp
245 lbs.-ft. @ 4,700 rpm

0-60 in 6.75
1/4 mile, 15.17 seconds at 86.35 mph


So how does the S compare?
Dude are you serious?! The S runs 0 - 60 in less than 6 secs and runs the 1/4 around 14. Good drivers have run the 1/4 in 13.8 +/- 0.1 (unsure on exact time). Did you even research the car before you bought it? Those stats you posted don't even come close to keeping up w/an S!!
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2008 | 07:00 PM
  #52  
Ruprecht's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Default

[QUOTE=03AP1,Mar 24 2008, 06:54 PM] Dude are you serious?!
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2008 | 07:06 PM
  #53  
03AP1's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
From: DFW
Default

The link you provided didn't work for me - REGARDLESS, do some research in this forum and you'll see that the info you have is either wrong, bad driver, bad test car, or the S was driven at an altitude much higher than S.L.

EDIT: You are right. Comparing 2 sports cars is ideal. And the comparisons you provided - you should put lengths on them in a 1/4.
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2008 | 07:08 PM
  #54  
Ruprecht's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by 03AP1,Mar 24 2008, 07:06 PM
The link you provided didn't work for me - REGARDLESS, do some research in this forum and you'll see that the info you have is either wrong, bad driver, bad test car, or the S was driven at an altitude much higher than S.L.
Sorry bout the link. Fixed now.

Also, think about it for a sec...if a GT Mustang is lined up with you on the light before the merge, you will be ready to rock and roll on the green.

If a minivan or double cab tundra is at the light, are you really gonna be thinking you gotta apply the pepper? It is not my natural instinct...They are minivans and 3ton trucks , not competing sports cars.

So, you figure you will pass no prob and are not even looking for the juice. You have 300 feet for the merge. The Truck has launched on you full bore. Now you gotta catch up. Is that 1.1 second advantage of the quarter gonna save you there. No way.

My point is that if Honda had developed the S with the market rate, we would have another 60 horses from the factory and a sports car that would have no problem with a 3 ton truck. Which is what it should be.

To clarify, I am not talking about lining up on a track, I am talking taking the commute home, not expecting to have to be on the pepper against a dang pickup truck. Is that what the S requires?
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2008 | 07:11 PM
  #55  
shy_guyAP1's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,402
Likes: 3
Default

My friend has a 13.8 timeslip when he was stock.
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2008 | 07:30 PM
  #56  
Riceboi's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,144
Likes: 2
From: Nor Cal
Default

Originally Posted by PilotSi,Mar 24 2008, 12:17 PM
This car goes faster than it feels...
Hell, many on here can get it into the 13s in a mostly stock car (just a really good driver).

A high-13sec 1/4 time pass is still a *dream* for any other factory 4-cyl, non-turbo'd car.

Impressive in my book.
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2008 | 07:36 PM
  #57  
GPMike's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 10,513
Likes: 0
From: USSA
Default

Originally Posted by plokivos,Mar 24 2008, 02:06 PM
not a drag racing car, yo.
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2008 | 07:49 PM
  #58  
gomarlins3's Avatar
Gold Member (Premium)
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 23,387
Likes: 104
From: Kuna Idaho
Default

Originally Posted by snmalone,Mar 24 2008, 01:02 PM
I own a 2000 S2000 for 4 months now. before i had a 98 integra type r with i/h/e and some smaller mods and that car was really fast for what it was.

after this i got the s2000 and i have to say i am really disappionted. it doesnt only feel slower than the itr it is slower. i dont notice vtec kickin in almost at all unlike in the b18 integra. i tried to understand the car and to give it some time, but everytime i drive it fast and hard its just disappointing somehow. it lacks something, not sure what exactly. just doesnt feels so aggressive and fast. i expected really more of this car. what is your opinion? are there some people out there who feel the same? or others who think completely different? would be interesting to hear your opinion about this....
Option #1: Boost it.

Option #2: Sell it.
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2008 | 07:57 PM
  #59  
TheChemist's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
From: So Cal USA
Default

Wow...what a thread

Did anyone notice where the OP said he was from? The Tyrol part of Austria!! Perhaps Innsbruck and the winter olympics come to mind?
He's at GD altitude where NA engines run out of breath...a little FI to compensate and all will be fine...unless, of course with the extra umph he flies off one of those infamous mountain switchbacks
Reply
Old Mar 24, 2008 | 08:34 PM
  #60  
ace123's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,187
Likes: 3
Default

Originally Posted by gomarlins3,Mar 24 2008, 09:49 PM
Option #1: Boost it.

Option #2: Sell it.
at 4000 ft, i lose ~15%, or 30whp. so i'm at 180 whp for my DBW AP2, by most dynos.

boost it and you'll get not just your typical 210whp+90whp from CTSC/AC, but 180whp+120whp or 160whp+140whp because you actually make the power you should have if you were at sea level. or get the JR rotrex, for 160+200whp. or inlinepro for 160+2XX(+) and some torque so it feels fast.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:27 PM.