I'm considering buying a s2000. but people have pointed out that s2000 lowend power is weaker than a prelude. I personally feel that prelude is tolerable. Anything worse is just not enough for me. And personal experience from you guys?

 

I've owned both...on the same day...no comparison really; the S is a superior car in every way except trunk space

 

I've owned both as well... as far as low end? It's hard to explain. Maybe in the lowend of the lowend the prelude is superior (sub 3000rpms), but the s2000s gearing is so short it doesn't matter as you are never in that rev range and if you are, it isn't for long. Everywhere else the s2000 is faster than the prelude. Even rolling on the throttle in sixth gear on the highway. The s2000 runs about 4000rpms at 80 mph in sixth (if I remember right). The prelude runs about the same except it is in FITH gear. That should tell you how short the gearing in the s2000 is (thus multiplying torque to the wheels) as compared to the prelude.

 

The torque published in most magazines is measured at the crankshaft, but real world torque is what you get at the wheels (and it depends in the gearing). Since the Prelude and S2000 have different gearing, especially since the S is a 6 speed, then the real world difference might not be told on paper. I suggest you go drive a S2000 and see for yourself. As long as you remember the S2000 is not some drag queen (like your muscle cars) then you should be pleasantly surprised.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by suvh8r
[B]The s2000 runs about 4000rpms at 80 mph in sixth (if I remember right).

 

60km/h - the Prelude won't be able to pull in 6th gear either

Trust me if you like the Prelude you'll love the S, and if you hate the lude you'll love the S even more . Go and ask for a test drive it'll change your perception of the S.

 

The torque difference between the cars is very small.. The Prelude had 155tq and the S2000 has 153tq. Plus don't forget the Prelude's engine is .2 liters bigger than the S2000's. They are both great cars, but as everyone else has stated...The S2000 is better hands down.

 

I own both cars right now. The Prelude pulls harder in lower RPMs, but the S2K is just so much quicker. It's such a light car, you really don't need much torque to get the car going fast.

 

As others have noted the S2000 is not a drag machine, but it is a stupendous car. I never owned a Prelude but I still own my tricked out '90 CRX-Si. Now the CRX-Si will eat my S2000 alive from 0 mph to about 35 or 40, but then the S2000 gets going and the S2000 eats the CRX-Si alive and spits out the bones!

The lowend torque is something that lots of people talk about, yes it is a characteristic but not one that would cause me to not want the S2000.

Also remember with those big sticky tires on the S2000 and the weight transfer ONTO the drive tires it is hard to break the tires loose for a quick start. The Prelude and the CRX-Si have a serious weight transfer OFF the narrower drive tires and so it is easier to get them spinning for a good launch.

If you have the cash, buy the S2000, it is way more car than the Prelude!

 

If you want torque get a mustang. A 6k rpm launch will get the S off the line even if it lacks torque. It is hard to compare front wheel drive to rear wheel drive. The Prelude is a great car, my brother had a 97. I never lost to him off the line in my Type R and it lacked torque much worse than the S.