What is the legacy of the S2000?
but true!
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,629
Likes: 42
From: Windsor, CA
Unfortunately, its current legacy is that it's one of the last times Honda led the way on engine technology (the other being the Insight that was released at the same time).
They still haven't released an engine with direct injection, the CR-Z drivetrain is an embarrasement, their attempt at downsized turbos was a joke compared to Ford's, and they appear to be falling behind on EV and advanced hybrid designs. Meanwhile Ford and GM are really stepping up to the plate with their small DI turbo engines.
Honda killed the performance stuff to focus on green technologies, but I haven't seen any evidence that they have been effectively moving forward with the green stuff.
They still haven't released an engine with direct injection, the CR-Z drivetrain is an embarrasement, their attempt at downsized turbos was a joke compared to Ford's, and they appear to be falling behind on EV and advanced hybrid designs. Meanwhile Ford and GM are really stepping up to the plate with their small DI turbo engines.
Honda killed the performance stuff to focus on green technologies, but I haven't seen any evidence that they have been effectively moving forward with the green stuff.
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 33,169
Likes: 1,639
From: Randolph, NJ
I think that most everything everyone has said is correct. I do believe that Honda has (temporarily I hope) lost its way. Part of the blame, of course, belongs to the movement towards more environmentally friendly vehicles, part of the blame belongs to the movement towards safer vehicles, and part of the blame belongs to the recession. To a certain degree, Honda has pulled back from the performance/sporty car to save money. Whether or not they over did it remains to be seen.
It is probably temporary. Because they make motorcycles they will always be involved in motorsports and will always have an eye on the enthusiast. I think that will, in the long run keep them in the sports car business.
I think that the S2000 has had a major impact on the industry. Honda has always been a leader in engine technology and when the S2000 was introduced with a 240 horsepower 2 litre engine it made the other makers rethink their powerplants. Not all went in the same direction as the S, but they all were forced to rethink the engines in their sports cars/sporty cars.
I think the emphasis that Honda put on the frame rigidity lead the way. There is no question in my mind that many of the other cars on the road today are what they are in terms of frame and structure because of the S2000.
As was mentioned, the start button lead the way. I'm not sure if the S was the first, but it certainly popularized it. Whether or not others followed Honda I don't think it's a coincidence that so many cars have it after the S2000 promoted it.
Reliability is another impact. Those of us who owned MGs, Triumphs, Jaguars, or Fiats years ago knew that the words sports car and reliable couldn't be used in the same sentence. Honda changed all that. Not that reliability started with the S2000, but for the first time you could buy a real, pure sports car and know that it would start every morning and get you home every night. That was absolutely unheard of for those of us who grew up on British roadsters.
Finally, at least for this post, I think the S2000 had a major impact on value. Where could you get a car like this with performance like this at a price like this?
It is probably temporary. Because they make motorcycles they will always be involved in motorsports and will always have an eye on the enthusiast. I think that will, in the long run keep them in the sports car business.
I think that the S2000 has had a major impact on the industry. Honda has always been a leader in engine technology and when the S2000 was introduced with a 240 horsepower 2 litre engine it made the other makers rethink their powerplants. Not all went in the same direction as the S, but they all were forced to rethink the engines in their sports cars/sporty cars.
I think the emphasis that Honda put on the frame rigidity lead the way. There is no question in my mind that many of the other cars on the road today are what they are in terms of frame and structure because of the S2000.
As was mentioned, the start button lead the way. I'm not sure if the S was the first, but it certainly popularized it. Whether or not others followed Honda I don't think it's a coincidence that so many cars have it after the S2000 promoted it.
Reliability is another impact. Those of us who owned MGs, Triumphs, Jaguars, or Fiats years ago knew that the words sports car and reliable couldn't be used in the same sentence. Honda changed all that. Not that reliability started with the S2000, but for the first time you could buy a real, pure sports car and know that it would start every morning and get you home every night. That was absolutely unheard of for those of us who grew up on British roadsters.
Finally, at least for this post, I think the S2000 had a major impact on value. Where could you get a car like this with performance like this at a price like this?
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 4,894
Likes: 1
From: USA
Originally Posted by thomsbrain,May 11 2010, 02:51 PM
, the CR-Z drivetrain is an embarrasement, their attempt at downsized turbos was a joke compared to Ford's, and they appear to be falling behind on EV and advanced hybrid designs.
If you look at any Honda product they get the absolute maximum out of their existing technology before replacing it. Which is one of their components for success, since they can improve products without drastically increasing cost. This is also a component of the reliability model. Make adjustments to known products to make them better instead of starting from scratch every few years. Honda hasn't reached the limit of IMA so why bother with a "new" technology? Eventually they will be able to make the IMA generator/motor less than the 6" thick it is now, better battery technology will yield lighter, smaller, more powerful batteries. The J-Series V6 is a great example of Honda getting everything out of it's existing technologies. It's easily a 12 year old power plant and i-vtec, VCM, DOHC i-vtec have extended it's capabilites.
I'm glad to see Honda sitting it out on the "Pure Sports Car" front. Is it really the right time for a vehicle like that when gas mileage, cost of ownership, monthly finances, and employment are bigger issues now then they were 10 years ago when the car came out? In this day how many people can afford a $36K+ sports roadster as an additional car or practically own one as an only car? The car would just pile up on the lots like the Current 370Z.
Registered User
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
From: West Chester PA
The legacy of the s2k? That’s a deep question 
My opinion…
In its prime, say the first 4-5 model years, I think it clearly showed that more could be done with less. More performance from fewer cylinders, fewer emissions, fewer pounds, fewer dollars. Of note -- in MY2000, the s2k had an MSRP of $32k, yet performance was generally within spitting distance of the then-current M Roadster and Boxter S, which had MSRPs of $43k and $50k.
It was a fairly simple mechanical design (except for the engine), but was executed brilliantly. No fancy materials anywhere (save the aluminum hood), yet all that steel still came in under 2800 lbs, was tight as a drum, and pushed the engine behind the front axle line. Suspension components were also steel, but it was a race-car status double wishbone setup all around – no semi-trailing arms or multi-link stuff. The top was nothing revolutionary, but it did stow in ~7 seconds and didn’t take up any trunk space (even if it did have some wear issues – sigh…). The transmission was traditional but was praised as one of the best made. No torque vectoring or AWD, just an LSD and RWD. But all of it was done exceptionally well. And in terms of styling, it skipped the “look at me” treatment and went for clean and classic.
At release, I think it’s fair to say the engine was revolutionary and anything but simple. IIRC, the F20C was only recently knocked off its perch of having the highest specific output and piston speed of any NA production engine – and it took Ferrari to do it. Come to think of it, I think it’s fair to say the s2k helped to usher in the new era of high-revving (8k+ RPM) engines now seen in many performance cars. It may not have caused the high-rev trend, but it was certainly at the leading edge of it.
Yes, it has aged quickly in the last several years, but as everyone knows – it was developed in the late 90s, what do you expect? I love it for what it still is and will always be: a timeless sports car with a rev-ripping engine and a race-car-like driving experience that won’t punish you if you want to use it every day; a fantastic underdog entry from the company whose founder didn’t even finish high school. Whenever you drive it, it’s like having a little piece of Soichiro Honda with you.
My opinion…In its prime, say the first 4-5 model years, I think it clearly showed that more could be done with less. More performance from fewer cylinders, fewer emissions, fewer pounds, fewer dollars. Of note -- in MY2000, the s2k had an MSRP of $32k, yet performance was generally within spitting distance of the then-current M Roadster and Boxter S, which had MSRPs of $43k and $50k.
It was a fairly simple mechanical design (except for the engine), but was executed brilliantly. No fancy materials anywhere (save the aluminum hood), yet all that steel still came in under 2800 lbs, was tight as a drum, and pushed the engine behind the front axle line. Suspension components were also steel, but it was a race-car status double wishbone setup all around – no semi-trailing arms or multi-link stuff. The top was nothing revolutionary, but it did stow in ~7 seconds and didn’t take up any trunk space (even if it did have some wear issues – sigh…). The transmission was traditional but was praised as one of the best made. No torque vectoring or AWD, just an LSD and RWD. But all of it was done exceptionally well. And in terms of styling, it skipped the “look at me” treatment and went for clean and classic.
At release, I think it’s fair to say the engine was revolutionary and anything but simple. IIRC, the F20C was only recently knocked off its perch of having the highest specific output and piston speed of any NA production engine – and it took Ferrari to do it. Come to think of it, I think it’s fair to say the s2k helped to usher in the new era of high-revving (8k+ RPM) engines now seen in many performance cars. It may not have caused the high-rev trend, but it was certainly at the leading edge of it.
Yes, it has aged quickly in the last several years, but as everyone knows – it was developed in the late 90s, what do you expect? I love it for what it still is and will always be: a timeless sports car with a rev-ripping engine and a race-car-like driving experience that won’t punish you if you want to use it every day; a fantastic underdog entry from the company whose founder didn’t even finish high school. Whenever you drive it, it’s like having a little piece of Soichiro Honda with you.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,212
Likes: 0
From: Long Island City, NY
The S2000 was on Car and Driver's Ten Best list for 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2004.
The S2000 was the highest-ranked model in the J. D. Power and Associates Vehicle Dependability Study "Premium Sports Car" class for 2004,[27] 2006,[28] and 2008[29] and has consistently held one of the top three positions.
The S2000 was ranked number #1 in the BBC Top Gear Survey in 2004, 2005, and 2006.[30]
The S2000 was ranked as "Best Affordable Sports Car" by U.S. News & World Report in 2008[31] and 2009[32]
The F20C engine won the International Engine of the Year award in the "1.8 to 2 litre" size category for five years from 2000 through 2004.
The F20C was featured on Ward's 10 Best Engines list for 2000 and 2001.
The S2000 was on Edmunds Consumers Most Wanted for 2002, 2004, 2005, 2007.[33]
The S2000 was one of Jalopnik's Best10 Cars Of The Decade.[34]
The S2000 was the highest-ranked model in the J. D. Power and Associates Vehicle Dependability Study "Premium Sports Car" class for 2004,[27] 2006,[28] and 2008[29] and has consistently held one of the top three positions.
The S2000 was ranked number #1 in the BBC Top Gear Survey in 2004, 2005, and 2006.[30]
The S2000 was ranked as "Best Affordable Sports Car" by U.S. News & World Report in 2008[31] and 2009[32]
The F20C engine won the International Engine of the Year award in the "1.8 to 2 litre" size category for five years from 2000 through 2004.
The F20C was featured on Ward's 10 Best Engines list for 2000 and 2001.
The S2000 was on Edmunds Consumers Most Wanted for 2002, 2004, 2005, 2007.[33]
The S2000 was one of Jalopnik's Best10 Cars Of The Decade.[34]
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
From: Montana
Originally Posted by johnjp27,May 11 2010, 05:46 PM
The legacy of the s2k? That’s a deep question My opinion…
In its prime, say the first 4-5 model years, I think it clearly showed that more could be done with less. More performance from fewer cylinders, fewer emissions, fewer pounds, fewer dollars. Of note -- in MY2000, the s2k had an MSRP of $32k, yet performance was generally within spitting distance of the then-current M Roadster and Boxter S, which had MSRPs of $43k and $50k.
It was a fairly simple mechanical design (except for the engine), but was executed brilliantly. No fancy materials anywhere (save the aluminum hood), yet all that steel still came in under 2800 lbs, was tight as a drum, and pushed the engine behind the front axle line. Suspension components were also steel, but it was a race-car status double wishbone setup all around – no semi-trailing arms or multi-link stuff. The top was nothing revolutionary, but it did stow in ~7 seconds and didn’t take up any trunk space (even if it did have some wear issues – sigh…). The transmission was traditional but was praised as one of the best made. No torque vectoring or AWD, just an LSD and RWD. But all of it was done exceptionally well. And in terms of styling, it skipped the “look at me” treatment and went for clean and classic.
At release, I think it’s fair to say the engine was revolutionary and anything but simple. IIRC, the F20C was only recently knocked off its perch of having the highest specific output and piston speed of any NA production engine – and it took Ferrari to do it. Come to think of it, I think it’s fair to say the s2k helped to usher in the new era of high-revving (8k+ RPM) engines now seen in many performance cars. It may not have caused the high-rev trend, but it was certainly at the leading edge of it.
Yes, it has aged quickly in the last several years, but as everyone knows – it was developed in the late 90s, what do you expect? I love it for what it still is and will always be: a timeless sports car with a rev-ripping engine and a race-car-like driving experience that won’t punish you if you want to use it every day; a fantastic underdog entry from the company whose founder didn’t even finish high school. Whenever you drive it, it’s like having a little piece of Soichiro Honda with you.
My opinion…In its prime, say the first 4-5 model years, I think it clearly showed that more could be done with less. More performance from fewer cylinders, fewer emissions, fewer pounds, fewer dollars. Of note -- in MY2000, the s2k had an MSRP of $32k, yet performance was generally within spitting distance of the then-current M Roadster and Boxter S, which had MSRPs of $43k and $50k.
It was a fairly simple mechanical design (except for the engine), but was executed brilliantly. No fancy materials anywhere (save the aluminum hood), yet all that steel still came in under 2800 lbs, was tight as a drum, and pushed the engine behind the front axle line. Suspension components were also steel, but it was a race-car status double wishbone setup all around – no semi-trailing arms or multi-link stuff. The top was nothing revolutionary, but it did stow in ~7 seconds and didn’t take up any trunk space (even if it did have some wear issues – sigh…). The transmission was traditional but was praised as one of the best made. No torque vectoring or AWD, just an LSD and RWD. But all of it was done exceptionally well. And in terms of styling, it skipped the “look at me” treatment and went for clean and classic.
At release, I think it’s fair to say the engine was revolutionary and anything but simple. IIRC, the F20C was only recently knocked off its perch of having the highest specific output and piston speed of any NA production engine – and it took Ferrari to do it. Come to think of it, I think it’s fair to say the s2k helped to usher in the new era of high-revving (8k+ RPM) engines now seen in many performance cars. It may not have caused the high-rev trend, but it was certainly at the leading edge of it.
Yes, it has aged quickly in the last several years, but as everyone knows – it was developed in the late 90s, what do you expect? I love it for what it still is and will always be: a timeless sports car with a rev-ripping engine and a race-car-like driving experience that won’t punish you if you want to use it every day; a fantastic underdog entry from the company whose founder didn’t even finish high school. Whenever you drive it, it’s like having a little piece of Soichiro Honda with you.
My personal favorite about the s2000 is the styling. If you look at the most beautiful cars of the past they are generally the most simple designs. Simple yet beautiful is hard to do, and Honda nailed it.
