Well...actually in 2009...

 

Where do people think those 10 horsepower are going?!

Look, if the shaft were made of some sort of rubber, I'd understand this logic. Or better still, maybe if it sat inside some kind of viscous fluid like ATF or maple syrup or marmalade. But it isn't. Once and for all: shaft no lose horsepower!



Oh, and by the way, the S2000 as it is now actually has a slight rearwards weight balance.

 

Just FYI, I'm responding without having read any other responses.

In general, engines have been located in the rear (behind the driver) for several reasons, including (but not limited to) weight distribution, aerodynamics, reducing drivetrain losses, shifting weight over the rear wheels (for improved traction on a RWD car).

Most cars sold today are front engine, front wheel drive cars. They are cheaper to make, suffer less drivetrain loss, and in general are considered easier to handle on typical street situations.

Cars like the Porsche 911 are true rear-engine cars as the engine is centered over or even behind the rear axle. While they benefit from the less drive train losses, they have typically suffered from handling issues (generally oversteer on a rear drive car) because of the weight being in the rear of the car. This has improved over the years with many technologies, such AWD (Carrera 4S and 911 Turbo) and various kinda of traction control (all 911s these days).

Cars like the Boxster/Caymen, Elise, MR2/MR-S, etc., are MR cars (mid-engined, rear-drive). They are mid-engined because the engine and the driver/passenger are between the axles (not over or outside of the axles). The benefit include, better weight balance (more balanced control), lower polar moment (the car rotates easier for better handling), and less drivetrain losses (the engine is closer to the drive wheels).

The S2000 is technically a mid-engined car (although some MR diehards will argue this til the day they die) because the engine and the seats are between the axles for the purpose of achieve close to 50/50 weight balance and a low polar moment. (While it is a RWD car, it does not fit under the MR category simply because that term was already used for platforms in which the engine is located behind the seats.) Pretty much the S2000 benefits from all the same things as an MR car, except it has more drivetrain loss due to the longer driveshaft from the front to the rear.

Which brings us to your question...

There'd be gains, although small, and at what expense? If you're just looking for increased power at the wheels, it's easier and cheaper to go FI and to reduce drivetrain losses by moving the engine.

IMHO, no! If the engine even fit, it would take way too much rework and redesign. The engine would have to be turned 90 degs. Where would the tranny even go? You'd most likely have to move the gas tank (probably up front).

And after all this, the whole weight balance of the car is now GONE! Keep in mind, the car, including the seat location, windshield, long hood, and even the exterior asthetics were designed around the basic platform of a front-mounted mid-engine rear-drive car.

The hood on the S2000 is very long because the engine is pushed back behind the front axle. Remember, the S2000 is technically a mid-engined car (engine and driver/passenger between the axles), whereas most cars with the engine in front of the driver/passenger are front-engine cars. Thus, the engine is pusched back behind the front axles (long hood) and the seats in the are pushed back close to the rear axle.

As far as storage, there is a reason that MR cars like the Boxter have two small storage areas. The primary purpose of the design was handling and storage was secondary. The hood is short because the windshield/seats are pushed forward, leaving only a small space for storage up front. And the engine is just forward of the rear axle leaving on a small space over/behind the rear axle for storage.

No go. This kind of change requires one to go back to the drawing board and start from the platform up. You'd essentially end up with an MR car. And if you're that dead set on a MR car, it's just easier to go buy one.

Lastly, keep in mind that the S2000 is the continuation of a Honda sports car from the '60. The S500 and S600 were front-engine, rear-drive cars (and high revving as well). The S2000, while loaded with the latest technology (at least when in was released in 1999), keeps in the traditions established with the first S cars. Anything else and it wouldn't have been an "S."

 

You forgot, "what if it was mid-engine and FWD?"

It would be the ONLY one on the market ...

 

get rid of the soft top/soft top motor, and strip the trunk completeley of anything. Then swap in an nsx motor. Ofcourse the whole 505/50 weight distribution would be F#^%@d but oh well.

 

Confucious say: "If things were different, they wouldn't be the same"

 

I hear ya!

Then it wouldn't be an S2000, would it?

It would look different, it would handle different (not necessarily better or worse, just different), it would feel different, it might cost different............ And if it would probably be named something different.

And the OP asks the question about improved storage space. If the car were initially designed around a different platform (such as an MR), I would assume it would have about as much storage space as an MR-S or Boxter (assuming that performance and handling were still a top priority). As it is, I'm very impressed with the amount of storage the S2000 has.