The Torque Myth
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: Rochester
Have to agree 100% with my fellow "DavidM" here. To be as fast off the line as the big-displacement racers, you have to either dump or slip at high throttle & rpm. Which may not be the best thing for clutch and driveline longevity.
Another thing: more than half of these torque-monsters have automatic transmissions which involves even less thinking. Floor it and they'll downshift for you. So they benefit both from more power at a given rpm (assuming they can do that rpm!) and they'll automatically go to the optimum gear. It's not really a matter of better, just different strokes.
Another thing: more than half of these torque-monsters have automatic transmissions which involves even less thinking. Floor it and they'll downshift for you. So they benefit both from more power at a given rpm (assuming they can do that rpm!) and they'll automatically go to the optimum gear. It's not really a matter of better, just different strokes.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
From: Redlands
Originally posted by DavidM
I'm sure that when people say that "S2000 has no torque" they are reffering to taking-off from the lights or at speeds bellow 30mph. In these circumstance the "learn to drive" phylosophy does not hold ... you're already in the 1st gear and have it floored - S2000 just not have here as much torque there as a lot of people would like.
I'm sure that when people say that "S2000 has no torque" they are reffering to taking-off from the lights or at speeds bellow 30mph. In these circumstance the "learn to drive" phylosophy does not hold ... you're already in the 1st gear and have it floored - S2000 just not have here as much torque there as a lot of people would like.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,282
Likes: 0
From: Melbourne
Yes, you need to know how to launch and that's a driving skill.
Again, I'm sure that there's a lot of people who know how to 'launch' their S2000 but do not do so everytime they leave the traffic lights. Sitting at the lights with 7k rpm dialled, popping the clutch and leaving the lights in a flurry of wheelspin is not the way 99.9% of S2000 owrers leave the lights on regualr occasion. So what it boils down to is that you end up waiting for the power to arrive and hence the complaints of "lack of torque".
Another example is that you actually leave the lights (just with a simple regular off-idle launch) and shortly after you start moving, you notice that you need to really get moving (ie. a car is fast approaching or just leaving T-intersection and trying to 'blend' in with the traffic). You put your foot down but because you're only at low-revs you're not really moving anywhere as quick as intended (or liked). You're already in 1st gear and you have it floored .... what else are you supposed to do?
I know that you can push the clutch in, dial-in 8k rpm and dump the clutch to induce wheels-spin while already on the roll but this takes way too long (1+sec is a long time when you need to be 'moving' at an instant) and again, 99.9% of S2000 owners are just now willing to do this on regular occasion.
So, my point was that driver-skill only comes into play when you're already doing 40+mph as that is the only time you can actually down-change. Bellow that you're just caught off-power even though you're in the highest possible gear.
Again, I'm sure that there's a lot of people who know how to 'launch' their S2000 but do not do so everytime they leave the traffic lights. Sitting at the lights with 7k rpm dialled, popping the clutch and leaving the lights in a flurry of wheelspin is not the way 99.9% of S2000 owrers leave the lights on regualr occasion. So what it boils down to is that you end up waiting for the power to arrive and hence the complaints of "lack of torque".
Another example is that you actually leave the lights (just with a simple regular off-idle launch) and shortly after you start moving, you notice that you need to really get moving (ie. a car is fast approaching or just leaving T-intersection and trying to 'blend' in with the traffic). You put your foot down but because you're only at low-revs you're not really moving anywhere as quick as intended (or liked). You're already in 1st gear and you have it floored .... what else are you supposed to do?
I know that you can push the clutch in, dial-in 8k rpm and dump the clutch to induce wheels-spin while already on the roll but this takes way too long (1+sec is a long time when you need to be 'moving' at an instant) and again, 99.9% of S2000 owners are just now willing to do this on regular occasion.
So, my point was that driver-skill only comes into play when you're already doing 40+mph as that is the only time you can actually down-change. Bellow that you're just caught off-power even though you're in the highest possible gear.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
From: Redlands
DavidM,
Reading your post makes me think you believe anyone driving a 4-banger is taking their lives in their own hands by getting on the roadway. Do any S owners find their car hasn't enough power to get around in city traffic? If we're going to be racing, it should be in a safe place, and by people who know how to drive.
In the food chain of race cars the S is down from the top somewhere. The C6 isn't at the top either - not even close. The top position is occupied by a $150K plus road rocket, and that position is occupied by different cars monthly! Our S can be respected for what it does for what it is - a street driveable car that some teenagers can afford (who aren't even rock stars).
As I have read on this forum a number of times, the best performance enhancement should be setting in the drivers seat - a good driver.
Don't get me wrong, I like torque. I've even thought of dropping in the local Chevy dealer and driving a C6. At this time I'm just having too much fun with the S!
Reading your post makes me think you believe anyone driving a 4-banger is taking their lives in their own hands by getting on the roadway. Do any S owners find their car hasn't enough power to get around in city traffic? If we're going to be racing, it should be in a safe place, and by people who know how to drive.
In the food chain of race cars the S is down from the top somewhere. The C6 isn't at the top either - not even close. The top position is occupied by a $150K plus road rocket, and that position is occupied by different cars monthly! Our S can be respected for what it does for what it is - a street driveable car that some teenagers can afford (who aren't even rock stars).
As I have read on this forum a number of times, the best performance enhancement should be setting in the drivers seat - a good driver.
Don't get me wrong, I like torque. I've even thought of dropping in the local Chevy dealer and driving a C6. At this time I'm just having too much fun with the S!
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,282
Likes: 0
From: Melbourne
Hi GaryJ
Reading your post makes me think you believe anyone driving a 4-banger is taking their lives in their own hands by getting on the roadway.
lol, if that's what I implied then I retract that because that was not my intention. My intention was to bring forward a 'flaw' (for a lack for a better term) of the S2000 ... and that is the lack of bottom-end power (call it toqrue if you wish). When you look at the cars that compete with the S2000 - like the BoxsterS, Boxster2.7, BMW Z3 3.0 and Audi TT then all the 'others' have a better 'pick up' bellow 30mph (maybe even 40mph). Then when you compare it to some of the V8 'torque monsters' around (which are often cheaper then the S2000) then even if the S2000 can 'hang' with them in full-flight, then they do have a huge advantage at these low speeds or anytime they leave the lights and don't want to spin the wheels.
On the race-track as well as on the freeway this is totally irrelevent, but in city driving where I (and a lot of other S2000 owners) spend most of the time bellow 40mph - this really shows up.
Do any S owners find their car hasn't enough power to get around in city traffic?
Yes, the S2000 has more low-end pull then any other 2.0L N/A car, but that does not really matter ... it needs to be comprared to other cars out there, not just the ones with a same sized engine. Would I like more grunt for city driving? - sure I would ... just like I would better brakes and other things.
Though, if you're not going be braking any local speeding laws (often 60kph ie. 40mph) then you might as well have bought an MX5 as that is a lot cheaper and not that slower at these speeds.
If we're going to be racing, it should be in a safe place, and by people who know how to drive.
I might have missled you before, but I was not talking about 'racing' in city-conditions. I was just talking about the regular 'chores' of driving in traffic ... like changing lanes and turning from a side street.
As I have read on this forum a number of times, the best performance enhancement should be setting in the drivers seat - a good driver.
Absolutelly, could not agree more. That goes for any car ... not just the S2000. Though, no amount of driver-training will help you with the lack of low-down grunt - which is where the "lack of torque" comment comes from - I though the original post was reffering to the comments regarding S2000's lack of torque ... correct?
Don't get me wrong, I like torque. I've even thought of dropping in the local Chevy dealer and driving a C6. At this time I'm just having too much fun with the S!
Likewise. I though about getting a Boxster 2.7 (and even Boxster S) before I bought the S2000. S2000 was the better car for me (even with it's 'flaws'). Z3 or TT did not even make it on my list ... let alone any of the 'torque monsters' - they do not offer me a better package then the S2000. Though, at the same time my father does happen to have a 5.7L V8 'torque monster' and the best characteristic of it is that it has efforless power in city conditions. Also, nothing punches out of tight corners like one of these. Would I swap my S2000 for it - no way.
Reading your post makes me think you believe anyone driving a 4-banger is taking their lives in their own hands by getting on the roadway.
lol, if that's what I implied then I retract that because that was not my intention. My intention was to bring forward a 'flaw' (for a lack for a better term) of the S2000 ... and that is the lack of bottom-end power (call it toqrue if you wish). When you look at the cars that compete with the S2000 - like the BoxsterS, Boxster2.7, BMW Z3 3.0 and Audi TT then all the 'others' have a better 'pick up' bellow 30mph (maybe even 40mph). Then when you compare it to some of the V8 'torque monsters' around (which are often cheaper then the S2000) then even if the S2000 can 'hang' with them in full-flight, then they do have a huge advantage at these low speeds or anytime they leave the lights and don't want to spin the wheels.
On the race-track as well as on the freeway this is totally irrelevent, but in city driving where I (and a lot of other S2000 owners) spend most of the time bellow 40mph - this really shows up.
Do any S owners find their car hasn't enough power to get around in city traffic?
Yes, the S2000 has more low-end pull then any other 2.0L N/A car, but that does not really matter ... it needs to be comprared to other cars out there, not just the ones with a same sized engine. Would I like more grunt for city driving? - sure I would ... just like I would better brakes and other things.
Though, if you're not going be braking any local speeding laws (often 60kph ie. 40mph) then you might as well have bought an MX5 as that is a lot cheaper and not that slower at these speeds.
If we're going to be racing, it should be in a safe place, and by people who know how to drive.
I might have missled you before, but I was not talking about 'racing' in city-conditions. I was just talking about the regular 'chores' of driving in traffic ... like changing lanes and turning from a side street.
As I have read on this forum a number of times, the best performance enhancement should be setting in the drivers seat - a good driver.
Absolutelly, could not agree more. That goes for any car ... not just the S2000. Though, no amount of driver-training will help you with the lack of low-down grunt - which is where the "lack of torque" comment comes from - I though the original post was reffering to the comments regarding S2000's lack of torque ... correct?
Don't get me wrong, I like torque. I've even thought of dropping in the local Chevy dealer and driving a C6. At this time I'm just having too much fun with the S!
Likewise. I though about getting a Boxster 2.7 (and even Boxster S) before I bought the S2000. S2000 was the better car for me (even with it's 'flaws'). Z3 or TT did not even make it on my list ... let alone any of the 'torque monsters' - they do not offer me a better package then the S2000. Though, at the same time my father does happen to have a 5.7L V8 'torque monster' and the best characteristic of it is that it has efforless power in city conditions. Also, nothing punches out of tight corners like one of these. Would I swap my S2000 for it - no way.
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,414
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
Those that say that the S2000 needs more torque are a bunch of idiots, IMHO. It's the standard argument those that don't understand the car use to knock it. Sure, in some situations, torque is nice - ie. a 4wd EVO 7 needs torque to combat its weight and get overcome the resistance of its drivetrain, but a purpose built lightweight hotrod like the S2000 does not need an abundance of torque to go fast. After all, when did anyone call a Caterham Super Seven lacking in torque?
I love the power output of the engine, and I think it suits the car perfectly. All in all, it is a great package, and when driven well, can be used to devistating effect against the so-called torque monsters.
I love the power output of the engine, and I think it suits the car perfectly. All in all, it is a great package, and when driven well, can be used to devistating effect against the so-called torque monsters.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
From: Redlands
DavidM: It looks like you and I agree on the car, we just have a different take on how we like a car to feel when we drive it. Don't get me wrong, if they come out with an S with double the torque (V6) I'm in the market! I will mention that a characteristic of low-end torque is low top rpm and vice versa (low low-end torque is high top rpm) We're enjoying the same car aren't we? 
S2LRob: I wouldn't have said it quite that strong, but I'm with you on this one. I've mentioned many times that I have torque too: Ford 7.3L Turbo Diesel 4X4 Extended Cab - now that's torque.
S2LRob: I wouldn't have said it quite that strong, but I'm with you on this one. I've mentioned many times that I have torque too: Ford 7.3L Turbo Diesel 4X4 Extended Cab - now that's torque.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,282
Likes: 0
From: Melbourne
I will mention that a characteristic of low-end torque is low top rpm and vice versa (low low-end torque is high top rpm)
That might seem so, but is not always true - look at the 3.2L enigne in e43 M3 which redlines at 8,000rpm and the 3.6L V8 in the F360 that redlines at 8,600rpm. Both engines have got unbelievable 'top end' but very solid bottom-end as well .... all achieved with engine capacity. Tacking on 2 extra cylineres onto S2000 would be my dream car - 6 cylinder 3.0L with 50% more power/torque absolutelly everywhere (and without sacrificing the revline or engine characteristics).
We're enjoying the same car aren't we?
Oh yeah ... plenty of enjoyment :-)
That might seem so, but is not always true - look at the 3.2L enigne in e43 M3 which redlines at 8,000rpm and the 3.6L V8 in the F360 that redlines at 8,600rpm. Both engines have got unbelievable 'top end' but very solid bottom-end as well .... all achieved with engine capacity. Tacking on 2 extra cylineres onto S2000 would be my dream car - 6 cylinder 3.0L with 50% more power/torque absolutelly everywhere (and without sacrificing the revline or engine characteristics).
We're enjoying the same car aren't we?
Oh yeah ... plenty of enjoyment :-)
