my best friend has a 03 with a intake and exhaust and i have a 04 that is stock. we raced from a light and i got him off the line by about 2 cars by the end of the 1/4 mile i had him by a hood....

 

And your point is..............

 

His point is...

Many, many folks (including me) have raced earlier models and "squeeked by" a car length or two up to 100mph. I know...nothing too dramatic....it is mostly a driver's race. BUT, all this talk about the AP2 not being as "raw" and it being "softened" for the North America market just doesn't wash. I believe the '04 model has slightly STIFFER suspension in the front (it definitely has addidional frame stiffening). Does that make earlier models without the beefed-up rear differential or frame "soft"? I don't think so. But, for all those doubters out there, please do a search about rear diff failures on this site....it's an eye opener.

oh..and btw...It's not just Church Automotive that have done back-to-back dynos on S2000s and seen some differences. I suspect there's more than one out there with a "factory freak".

just my .02...

 

benny your a loser - thank you roadster 1

 

Incorrect. The front rates were increased by 6.5 percent the rear rates decreased by 10 percent (this is against the 02+ cars which had decreased spring rates when compared to the 00 and 01's). The 02+ cars also have a smaller diameter rear sway bar and the 04+ cars a slower steering ratio.

The 04 cars are softer than the first two years of production.

Back to back same day dynos on cars of all years have shown zero trend for any year. The claims made by TOV are innacurate as they have never been reproduced.

What about the slew of 04+ cars suffering from gear disengagement under load.

 

[/QUOTE]The claims made by TOV are innacurate as they have never been reproduced.

 

[QUOTE=Roadster_1,Jan 17 2005, 05:02 PM] oh..and btw...It's not just Church Automotive that have done back-to-back dynos on S2000s and seen some differences.

 

about the amuse lip

 

Then why not provide one of the MASSVIE 150 they have dynoed that matches your numbers?

 

I thought this might be helpful for those who haven't actually read the TOV reviews. Two seperate excerpts from multiple reviews over at TOV. These quotes don't refer to the power debate, but the acceleration times.

On another note, it's just comical to sit back and watch these debates unfold. I saw it over here when the 04 first came out and now over at clubrsx when the 05 was released a few months ago. To be honest though, I think you guys win when it comes to the battle of the MY. Not that it matters but as an impartial person who has not owned either car, from everything iIhave read and researched if both an 03 and 05 were for sale brand new I would be buying an 05. Quotes below from TOV.

"The first portion of the test involved measuring acceleration times for the cars over a multi-gear interval. At first we thought we'd stick to one gear to avoid shifting issues, but our real world experience told us that if we started below VTEC, the 04 was going to kick the tar out of the 00 due to the higher lower end grunt and tighter gearing (as we saw in side by side roll ons). So we decided to make a run starting at 30 mph in 1st gear and end it at 70 mph in 3rd gear. Yes, an arbitrary range, but it seemed as good as any and allowed us to avoid major speed limit violations.

Up first was the 04. With 1/3 of a tank of gas and a 210 lbs driver we made 4 passes down our favorite stretch of road, 2 in each direction. The car was very consistent in its performance, and averaged a time of 5.415 seconds with a standard deviation of only 0.042 seconds.

Next was the 00. With a half tank of gas and the same driver on the same stretch of road, within 20 minutes of the first test. It averaged 5.668 seconds with a standard deviation of 0.107.

The difference between the averages was 0.253 seconds, but what does that mean? To find out, we fed our dyno data into a nice little simulation we've developed in Excel to compute acceleration times. The absolute numbers predicted by the simulator were off by a couple of tenths, but the predicted difference was 0.237 seconds - very close to our observed difference. Furthermore, when the extra weight of gasoline in the MY00 was added to the simulation, the predicted difference reached 0.245 seconds. While we don't claim to have written the world's greatest simulator, the fact that the dyno data, simulator predictions and real world testing all support each other suggest that what we measured on the dyno performs as it should in the real world.

While a seat of the pants perspective is one thing, how do the cars run head to head? In a few informal runs to 60mph we observed that the 2.0 and 2.2L cars were almost dead even in acceleration, with the 2.2L taking a very slight advantage, if at all. However, once we had the opportunity to do a direct comparison well through 3rd gear, the advantage of the '04's 2.2L motor was unmistakable. The '04 clearly accelerated harder in 1st and 2nd gear, but it would generally give up some of the ground it gained when it had to shift so much sooner than the '00 model (thanks to the reduced redline and shorter gearing). Once in third it was able to gain more distance and it just started walking away from the '00. It should be mentioned that the 2000 car had an AEM cold-air intake and a fully broken-in motor, to the bone-stock 2004's fresh 950 miles. Results of roll-on in gear acceleration comparisons were more conclusive. From a fairly high rpm start (65mph in 3rd gear), the advantage of the 2004 model was measurable, but not staggering. From lower rpms in 3rd gear (we tried from 40mph), the advantage was quite dramatic. The '04 easily put several carlengths of distance on the '00 model before we even hit the VTEC transition at around 6000 rpms. Shawn will be performing several more roll-on acceleration tests with the Vericom and reporting the results in his article.
In terms of acceleration numbers, our Vericom measured a best 0-60mph time of 5.7seconds and a best 1/4 mile time of 14.3 at 99.8mph. As we were doing our testing during the lunch break for the track day, our time was limited, and I was only able to make a few passes. Certainly with more practice we could have knocked a few tenths off of both of those figures. Buttonwillow is situated in the middle of California's central valley, and it's rather dry and dusty, resulting in 60ft times in the 2.5 second range, a relatively poor showing. Generally, S2000s are capable of 2.0-2.1 second 60 ft times (and this is on narrower tires). Additionally, the Vericom does not allow for any rollout, so a correction factor of up to 0.2 seconds is often used (Motorweek, for example, automatically lops 0.2 seconds off of all of their 1/4 mile times) when comparing Vericom results to dragstrip 1/4 mile times. Assuming ideal conditions, this indicates that the '04 should be capable of 1/4 mile times in the mid-upper 13 second neighborhood and low 5 second 0-60s