worst S2000 review I have ever seen
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,360
Likes: 0
http://www.epinions.com/content_65356533380
This guy is totally uninformed, making judgements about the car that he has no right to make ( "The dealer said it could get 26 miles to the gallon, but I'd really say it's more like 22." This judgement was made after 1 test drive!) He even tried to review the S as an economy car! And the creme de la creme....
"At the rate they're going right now, in a year you should be able to get one used for 15 or 16k."
Needless to say, I took him up on his request for feedback, describing the reasoning for the placement of the glove box, among other things.
This guy is totally uninformed, making judgements about the car that he has no right to make ( "The dealer said it could get 26 miles to the gallon, but I'd really say it's more like 22." This judgement was made after 1 test drive!) He even tried to review the S as an economy car! And the creme de la creme....
"At the rate they're going right now, in a year you should be able to get one used for 15 or 16k."
Needless to say, I took him up on his request for feedback, describing the reasoning for the placement of the glove box, among other things.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,615
Likes: 1
From: North Richland Hills, TX
quote:
"they have taken all the practability (is this a word?) out of it, jazzed up it's (sic) look"
" I test drived .."
This tool seemingly hasn't made it through jr. high school English.
Nonetheless, he recommended it, just w/ some really stupid observations/comments.
"they have taken all the practability (is this a word?) out of it, jazzed up it's (sic) look"
" I test drived .."
This tool seemingly hasn't made it through jr. high school English.
Nonetheless, he recommended it, just w/ some really stupid observations/comments.
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 19,734
Likes: 247
That guy doesn't have a clue. Since when did a person buy a roadster as a practical family car? Even for a couple (two people only), it's not practical - you can't even take a big load of groceries in it, much less vacation for a week or two. Good grief - he truly was talking from a point of pure ignorance. It's nice to see that he's giving it it's due, but he's talking as if he's an experienced driver and reviewer. Has he ever driven a Porsche? Does he think a Porsche is a bad family car as well? (It's not MEANT to be one!) This guy is, to be blunt, ignorant.
Oh, he doesn't know how to spell or write either. At least he did mention a few good things about the S, but man, is he messed up in his thinking or what? Seriously - was he expecting to find it to be practical? Can anyone list me a practical, sporty roadster? The SLKs, S2000s, MGs, Miatas, even SLs (which I consider tourers, not pure sports cars or roadsters) aren't that practical for every day... It's not what it's made for!
Anyways, I surely hope no one takes his comments seriously. I'll bet he drives a Toyota Tercel everyday or something...
In general,
to that review.
Oh, he doesn't know how to spell or write either. At least he did mention a few good things about the S, but man, is he messed up in his thinking or what? Seriously - was he expecting to find it to be practical? Can anyone list me a practical, sporty roadster? The SLKs, S2000s, MGs, Miatas, even SLs (which I consider tourers, not pure sports cars or roadsters) aren't that practical for every day... It's not what it's made for!
Anyways, I surely hope no one takes his comments seriously. I'll bet he drives a Toyota Tercel everyday or something...
In general,
to that review.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
From: So
before you click on that link, you should know that every click on his review earns him some money.
so if you are offended by the idiot, you should NOT click on it, because you're really paying him by clicking on it.
that's how epinions works.
so if you are offended by the idiot, you should NOT click on it, because you're really paying him by clicking on it.
that's how epinions works.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,360
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Matt
before you click on that link, you should know that every click on his review earns him some money.
so if you are offended by the idiot, you should NOT click on it, because you're really paying him by clicking on it.
that's how epinions works.
before you click on that link, you should know that every click on his review earns him some money.
so if you are offended by the idiot, you should NOT click on it, because you're really paying him by clicking on it.
that's how epinions works.
Trending Topics
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,485
Likes: 0
From: Hampton
Aw hell, just read what this guy said!! I rated his review "Not Helpful"
----------------------------------------------------------------
Two test drives in this maddeningly close-but-no-cigar car left me wondering what Honda was thinking about. First, the positives: it handles like an intuitive extension of your body, with perfect balance and tremendous grip/response. It appears to be of tremendously high build quality - you won't detect a rattle or any sign of looseness. The solidity and tightness of the structure no doubt let the intelligently designed suspension and steering do their work well. The six-speed gearbox shifted precisely and cleanly. But the engine.....
There's a reason that race cars are impractical on the road, and the S2000, Honda's effort to emulate race technology on in a road car, is a graphic illustration why. This engine must be revved well into the VTEC zone (6K RPM and beyond) to exact performance, and below that, there's not much home. Driven sedately, the car feels downright lethargic. Driven to obtain power, you always feel like you're trying to race someone. There's just no in-between. Face it Honda, this car is a toy, not a livable daily road car, unless the driver is a constantly wired, frustrated F-1 race car driver.
The other deficiencies: although they woke up and added a glass rear window, the top is still minimalist and unlined; wind-rush is noticeable from 45 MPH upward. Yet they bothered to power-enable the action of this top - why? (Miata tops of about the same size work fine without power) Save the weight of this power-equipment, and line the top, for pity sake! Add a real glove compartment too, not the silly little near-vertical thing between the seats, guaranteed to dump its contents when you open it. Other interior quibbles (besides the so-so stereo) - the silly arced-bar-graph tach and digital speedo look like they are worthy of an '80's Nissan Z-car. When will car makers learn that every time they insist on their "better idea" for these two instruments, they eventually re-discover that nice, classic, readable analog instruments work best.
In the end, the car just begs out for a more compromising engine, and some minor attention to the detail deficiencies noted. Why didn't Honda just figure out a good way to drop their fine, compact, and light 3.0/3.2 V-6 into the chassis (maybe move the battery to the trunk for better balance), team it with the six speed and some good sound insulation, and they'd have the perfect roadster. Make them in realistic numbers and they'd sell the daylights out of them. Heck, I would have bought one, instead of walking away from the dealer without buying their car. In other words, make a true Nissan 350Z competitor, before the new Z arrives and makes S2000 buyers spending more money look pretty foolish.
It's just so weird that Honda should trickle such a silly, pathetic number of this magnificent "near-miss" (many of which apparently end up on the used-car market very quickly - owners tiring of contant race-mode?). One wonders why they bother.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Two test drives in this maddeningly close-but-no-cigar car left me wondering what Honda was thinking about. First, the positives: it handles like an intuitive extension of your body, with perfect balance and tremendous grip/response. It appears to be of tremendously high build quality - you won't detect a rattle or any sign of looseness. The solidity and tightness of the structure no doubt let the intelligently designed suspension and steering do their work well. The six-speed gearbox shifted precisely and cleanly. But the engine.....
There's a reason that race cars are impractical on the road, and the S2000, Honda's effort to emulate race technology on in a road car, is a graphic illustration why. This engine must be revved well into the VTEC zone (6K RPM and beyond) to exact performance, and below that, there's not much home. Driven sedately, the car feels downright lethargic. Driven to obtain power, you always feel like you're trying to race someone. There's just no in-between. Face it Honda, this car is a toy, not a livable daily road car, unless the driver is a constantly wired, frustrated F-1 race car driver.
The other deficiencies: although they woke up and added a glass rear window, the top is still minimalist and unlined; wind-rush is noticeable from 45 MPH upward. Yet they bothered to power-enable the action of this top - why? (Miata tops of about the same size work fine without power) Save the weight of this power-equipment, and line the top, for pity sake! Add a real glove compartment too, not the silly little near-vertical thing between the seats, guaranteed to dump its contents when you open it. Other interior quibbles (besides the so-so stereo) - the silly arced-bar-graph tach and digital speedo look like they are worthy of an '80's Nissan Z-car. When will car makers learn that every time they insist on their "better idea" for these two instruments, they eventually re-discover that nice, classic, readable analog instruments work best.
In the end, the car just begs out for a more compromising engine, and some minor attention to the detail deficiencies noted. Why didn't Honda just figure out a good way to drop their fine, compact, and light 3.0/3.2 V-6 into the chassis (maybe move the battery to the trunk for better balance), team it with the six speed and some good sound insulation, and they'd have the perfect roadster. Make them in realistic numbers and they'd sell the daylights out of them. Heck, I would have bought one, instead of walking away from the dealer without buying their car. In other words, make a true Nissan 350Z competitor, before the new Z arrives and makes S2000 buyers spending more money look pretty foolish.
It's just so weird that Honda should trickle such a silly, pathetic number of this magnificent "near-miss" (many of which apparently end up on the used-car market very quickly - owners tiring of contant race-mode?). One wonders why they bother.
