So um..The s2000 is being resurrected..
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
It sounds nice enough but I don't see the connection with a distinct roadster styled convertible that the S2000 is. Actually, other than the name, I really see no genetic resemblance. It could be an outstanding car on it's own merits but calling it an S2000 is a huge mistake in my humble opinion. Hey....how about S3000? That way it would protect the distinction and sanctity that only a true S2000 is AND should remain.
How about car names that make sense?
For example, the AP2 should have been called the S2200.
BMW names used to make sense (320i, 323i, etc), but no longer do.
Same for Mercedes.
An S3000 would need a 3 liter engine, for the name to make any sense, and should be a front engine RWD roadster, or else it absolutely should not use the 'S' prefix.
How about building off of the NSX name, for what is really going to be a junior NSX, and will have nothing whatsoever to do with the S2000?
CSX, because it will have the Civic drivetrain?
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 893
Likes: 12
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Kabayo' timestamp='1400200344' post='23162053
How about building off of the NSX name, for what is really going to be a junior NSX, and will have nothing whatsoever to do with the S2000?
CSX, because it will have the Civic drivetrain?
That badge-engineered Civic?
I believe it was discontinued in 2012, replaced by the Acura ILX.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acura_CSX
Anyway, my point was that names should mean something. I don't care about the 'CSX' name. It was only a suggestion and an example of a name that might make some sense.
Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 281,961
Likes: 442
From: Charleston, SC. \>
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post