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

Top up or down when racing?

Thread Tools
 
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 07:35 PM
  #11  
Enthralled's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 14,373
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
Default

I almost redlined 6th one time i was @150mph and had about 300 rpm left.
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 07:36 PM
  #12  
trinis2001's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
From: Caribbean - Trinidad
Default

These guys think it's better top down:

Reply
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 07:48 PM
  #13  
s2k rookie's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,189
Likes: 0
From: CT
Default

Well, i was thinking about going to etown on the 15th to run on the strip and see if i can win. I just wanted to know if top down or up is better.
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 07:49 PM
  #14  
vishnus11's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Default

top up will significantly cut down on aerodynamic drag on these cars. Folks here actually notice a difference in gas mileage with the top down on the hwy, so its not wonder that putting the top up will make a difference if the "race" involves anything above 80-90mph. The folks on street encounters say that if two identical S2000s race, one with the top up and one with the top down to 100mph from a dig, the one with the top down would loose by approx 2.5 car lengths. All hearsay as I haven't seen anything to back it up, but its something to keep in mind.

If your talking about tracking the car, or road racing it, then having the top up might not matter - depends on the track I guess - one with good long straightaways where the driver can get up to 110+mph might benefit from keeping the top up.

But for example in an AutoX, where one barely breaks 60mph, it shouldn't matter. I think someone on here actually said that the car handled better with the top down because of the lower CG!
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 08:32 PM
  #15  
MasterVtec's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
From: SLC, UT
Default

A GTO absolutely killed me yesterday.

My top was up.

lmfao.
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 08:36 PM
  #16  
ej3ffrey's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 662
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio, TX
Default

Originally Posted by MasterVtec' date='Mar 22 2007, 08:32 PM
A GTO absolutely killed me yesterday.

My top was up.

lmfao.
those things are beasts
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 08:41 PM
  #17  
Maskdman3's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
From: Shreveport, La
Default

Originally Posted by MasterVtec' date='Mar 22 2007, 11:32 PM
A GTO absolutely killed me yesterday.

My top was up.

lmfao.
Let us add 4 more cylinders and try again.

There again at 6.0 liters we would still have some room for growth. Better give us 10 cylinders.
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 08:43 PM
  #18  
trivium's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,723
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Spec_Ops2087' date='Mar 22 2007, 08:15 PM
Aerodynamically, top up would be the smarter of the two choices as there is much less drag.

The max speed top down is only ~150mph where as max speed top up is ~168mph. Pretty significant difference considering what we're talking about.
Show me evidence of a stock S2000 going 168mph with the top up on a flat level surface.
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 08:51 PM
  #19  
mc2's Avatar
mc2
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Default

lots of times you see people racing with the top down because they cant fit in the car with their helmets on.

i think it's pretty sure that top up will have less drag though.
Reply
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 08:55 PM
  #20  
Spec_Ops2087's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,301
Likes: 18
From: New Jersey
Default

Originally Posted by trivium' date='Mar 22 2007, 11:43 PM
Show me evidence of a stock S2000 going 168mph with the top up on a flat level surface.
There are about 3 or so max speed videos of s2ks scattered throughout the internet and they are all around 168ish.

We all know the classic one of the s2k on the autobahn that did 173 if my conversion was correct but he was on a slight downhill apparently.

Otherwise, there is no real evidence beyond them. I'm not going to go out and test the max speed but that is around the general concensious for max speed in this car. Prove me wrong that it ISN'T the max speed

Maybe its 165 not 168, who cares about a 3mph difference but its mid to high 160s
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:29 AM.