Here, best link I could find.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FCGuy
[B]


So, yes, for those who are unwilling to shift or drive at high rpm, the lack of torque is evident.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Garyj
[B]One of the most discussed topics on the S2000 capabilities always gets around to the subject of power - specifically torque.

 

CLASS DISMISSED!

 

Gary,

Time for a physics refresher...the S2000 has very low torque regardless of rpm vs. it's targeted competition (Boxster, M Roadster, Corvette, etc.). Sure, it looks good vs. other NA cars in the same general displacement class like the Miata and MR2 Spyder, but which cars do you think are more frequently compared to the S2000? The supercharger does little to change the S2000's torque characteristics, as most of the incremental power is generated above 6k rpm.

Horsepower = torque x rpm / 5252. Therefore, the higher the rpm at which any given HP value is generated, the lower the torque produced. (a more in-depth discussion of this relationship is at http://www.revsearch.com/dynamometer/torqu...horsepower.html).

In simplistic terms, I think of torque as trailer-pulling power. Would you want a truck w/ the S2000 engine to try towing a boat by keeping the rpm's above 6K rpm? High torque means having plenty of power w/o having to downshift every time the revs fall.

I've driven and owned enough vehicles w/ loads of torque to feel the difference, and the S2000 definitely is lacking in this area. Not a complaint, it's just a reflection of the choices Honda made in using a 2.0L engine.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JT-KGY
[B]I thought the complaint is that S2000 have no low end torque.. which means that

 

It does strike me that the issue is the frenzied noise our vehicles make at any reasonable-power RPM (>6500 RPM to me). Many reviewers are unwilling to drive around in VTEC all the time. I myself love VTEC and spend lots of time near redline but it is still a little bit much, for me, to keep the engine boiling in a traffic situation just so I have "darting" ability. So in traffic situations (not racing) we suffer unless we '"scream" constantly.

Isn't that SOMETIMES annoying compared to big-displacement or low-rpm-spooling turbo thrust? I love my S2K and I'm not trashing it. I just understand the complaint.

I like the thought that our torque curve is artificially limited so as not to blow the engine. Imagine in, say, five years new engine materials allow a reliable (for 100K miles ?) 12,000 or so RPM. That would be an even bigger blast.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Penforhire
[B]It does strike me that the issue is the frenzied noise our vehicles make at any reasonable-power RPM (>6500 RPM to me).

 

rant rant rant...how many times have we had this discussion here? I lost count.