I managed to catch up with a friend of mine who has an MR2 (the 2.0L @128kW ... not the brand new 1.8L). I wanted to see how the S2000 fares acceleration wise against another 2.0l (MR2 weights about 1200kg against the S2000s 1260kg). Anyway, I knew that the S2000 is a lot faster when you keep it above 7k revs but I was interested at what will happen bellow hte 7k range.

I tried one run from stand still where he launched the MR2 with about 5k revs (very good launch for the MR2) and I just let the cluch got at 1500 revs and climbed the rev range. The MR2 instanly pulled a car lenght (maybe a bit more) on me and I was doing good 40km/h before I felt I was making some of the ground back. After that I was a lot quicker (of course) and passed him doing about 120km/h (when he was going a fair bit slower ... somewhere aoruond 100-110km/h).

Then came the 'big' test - 2nd gear rolling start from 35km/h. Both cars next to each other, in 2nd gear, doing 35km/h. We both step on it at the same time and the MR2 shoots away to about 1 and a 1/2 car lenghts ... all this happened before I was doing 60km/h. Then things chanched and when I passed him, I was already in the 3rd gear (good 115-120km/h) and doing good 10-20km/h more than him. To say I was shocked by him jumping me like that was an understatement ... so, we pulled over and debated it a bit ... just about then we realized that my MR2 friend did a 1st gear rolling start ... hehe - and I still probably beat him to 100km/h :-)

So we did the 2nd gear rolling start from 35km/h again (though this time we were both in 2nd gear) and this time the story was very different. As soon as we put the foot down, I was pulling away from the start ... not by much at the start, but still pulling away (maybe 1 to 2 feet per second). Though, the rate of 'pulling away' got greater as I picked up speed (ie. climber the revs). By the time I backed of in 3rd (at about 120km/h), I was good 4-5 car lenghts ahead.

So the conclusion of this test was that the S2000 was already quicker than the MR2 even at lower revs (tested from 3k). Though, I did a similar test when I had a Boxter2.5 for a day a while ago. We lined it up against the MR2 (with rolling starts) and compared. The Boxter2.5 was a bit quicker at low revs than the MR2 ... it wasn't too much, but it was about 1 - 2 feet/sec quicker. The Boxter2.5 didn't ever fly away but it was constanty pulling away from the MR2 ... and we did run them to about 140km/h. From that I'd deduce that at low revs the S2000 will be about equal with the Boxter2.5. I don't think there will be much between them until you get 6k+ revs on the S2000. Then the S2000 will just fly away, though, bellow that - there's shouldn't be much between them.

ps. A small note, the MR2 is at best 7.4sec car for the 0-100km/h here (should translate to about 7.0secs for 0-100m/h). Concidering the S2000 can beat it to 100km/h with an 'idle' start, that means that it must do less than 7.4secs to 100km/h when launched from idle ... probably closer to flat 7 (that is about 6.7 - 7.1secs for the 0-100m/h time). I'll line up the HSV R8 next and report.

 

Good report David. I especially like your analysis and extrapolation from the MR2 numbers. Having said that though I think you will find it difficult to achieve 7 secs for off idle launch to 100km/h - my experience tells me it is more like 7.5

 

DavidM,

Hehe......

I know you meant to write
'7.0 secs for 0-60m/h' instead of

'should translate to about 7.0secs for 0-100m/h' and
'that is about 6.7 - 7.1secs for the 0-100m/h time'

Wow 0-100 mph in 7 sec, who could ask more for our incredibly fast S2000

 

Hi 2kturkey, 7.5sec would see it lineball with the MR2 to reach the 100km/h. I 'think' (I'm pretty sure I already did) that I can beat the MR2 .... though, either way ... it's about 7+ secs.

1RandyC, good pickup :-) ... it was ment to be 0-60m/h :-) Also, keep in mind that we're talking about 'idle' start from the S2000 - which is the way you take off from he lights 99% of the time. I'm sure I can smoke up the rears and fly of, but that's not feasable (or practical) every single time you take of or are rolling.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 2kturkey
[B]Good report David. I especially like your analysis and extrapolation from the MR2 numbers. Having said that though I think you will find it difficult to achieve 7 secs for off idle launch to 100km/h - my experience tells me it is more like 7.5

 

but sev, as we all know, U ARE THE MAN! as your statement translates, it all depends on the driver.

 

6.21 for the 0-60m/h fits nicely with my 6.7secs 'optimal' estimate for the 0-100km/h time. I think Sev's numbers can be replicated.

ps. These comparisions have nothing to do with the driver ... I'm trying to cut the driver out from the equation and find out how fast the car is.

 

Most people who can shift half decent should be able to replicate this time or close to it, maybe a 6.5 easilly as this envolves a regular take off that anyone can.

But thanks for the compliment dude.

 

You do not have to be great to get 6.2 or so sec 0-60 from a normal launch. I did it over and over when testing my car. I got a best of right at 6 sec w/flawlessly smooth clutching. I got a worst of 6.5 bogging the engine w/less than smooth clutching. It's really not that hard just smooth clutch...redline, shift quick to second...redline ah, your done

 

Ok guys, now I'm either not reading you clearly or we are using different terminology.

'Off idle' says to me let the clutch out at idle then accelerate as fast as possible to 60mph (or 96kmh). Sev if you can do that in 6.2 then please show me how coz I damn well know I can't get anywhere near it.

I know my Stook accelerates as fast as the most of the other Stooks so it's got to be the driver and again from experience I don't seem to be any worse here than the average Australian Stook driver so what are all of us Aussie drivers doing wrong?

Perhaps the real problem is the time zone difference between Australia and Canada - I know we are supposed to be 16 hours ahead - maybe we're actually 8 hours (and 1 second) behind