|
as the years roll by, acceleration stays the same
my question is, how fast is fast enough? does the S2000 not run in the high 5's in 0-60 mph, and the quarter mile in like 14.5 seconds @ 97mph or something very similar? i only ask because i seem to be coming across more and more posts of people who are anxious to get a new iteration of the current engine and talk like their car sucks.
my other cars' acceleration (estimated): 1989 chrysler reliant (k-car): 12 sec 1991 nissan NX1600: 9 sec 1995 nissan altima: 8.5 sec 2004 acura RSX: 7.8 sec 2005 acura TSX: 7.8 sec 2007 honda S2000: ~6 sec? i guess everyone's perspective is exactly that- their unique, relative perspective. to me, the S2000 is perfectly driveable under 5,000 RPM, but it'll take off if you want it to, and of course its handling is always precise and fun. i guess i didn't buy this car to drive it into the ground on the track every weekend, though. i'm content with gunning it down an on-ramp and flying by the tons of people who drive the 325xi and the C230 here in DC. |
People are complaining because in the 8 yrs it has been in production.. power has not increased at all. Family sedans these days are packing huge HP while our little sports car is on the sideline watching everybody else get upgrades.... even the 350z is pretty damn quick these days.
|
Originally Posted by boofer,Sep 4 2007, 10:00 AM
my question is, how fast is fast enough?
Through MY04-MY05, the S2000 was fastest in it's class. In MY07 the Sky and Solstice both got turbos, they introduced an M badge Z4 with 330hp, and the Boxter S was 06ish. The S2000 is no longer first among peers, and it used to be faster than the 50K Boxter and the 40K Z4, which were above its class. |
^ I agree. The 350Z gets stronger year after year. The problem with the S2000 is that so many Americans complained it had no torque, was too twitchy, not enough interior space, etc. Instead of spending R&D time getting more power and better handling out of the car, Honda spent the R&D time giving the car more low end, roomier interior, more cupholders, softer suspension, etc. That's why I bought a MY00 and modded it. I'd put my car against any stock 350Z in production from a 40 roll on the freeway or at Mid Ohio.
|
.. and that's why I switched. :)
edit: I don't think it's always about just speed while going straight, otherwise no one would buy Miatas. |
push your car through some curves at 7.5k rpm and you'll fall in love with your car again.
|
Originally Posted by chuhsi,Sep 4 2007, 11:25 AM
push your car through some curves at 7.5k rpm and you'll fall in love with your car again.
|
Originally Posted by toofast4yalll,Sep 4 2007, 09:12 AM
^ I agree. The 350Z gets stronger year after year. The problem with the S2000 is that so many Americans complained it had no torque, was too twitchy, not enough interior space, etc. Instead of spending R&D time getting more power and better handling out of the car, Honda spent the R&D time giving the car more low end, roomier interior, more cupholders, softer suspension, etc. That's why I bought a MY00 and modded it. I'd put my car against any stock 350Z in production from a 40 roll on the freeway or at Mid Ohio.
then again, i'm an S2000 noob. you can't really get more HP out of a N/A 4-banger though, can you? bolt-ons to the existing engine provide negligible benefits at best, so you'd have to go FI. i'm sure some of you have done that, but that has to decrease the overall lifespan of the engine, right? |
Originally Posted by boofer,Sep 4 2007, 10:00 AM
my question is, how fast is fast enough? does the S2000 not run in the high 5's in 0-60 mph, and the quarter mile in like 14.5 seconds @ 97mph or something very similar? i only ask because i seem to be coming across more and more posts of people who are anxious to get a new iteration of the current engine and talk like their car sucks.
my other cars' acceleration (estimated): 1989 chrysler reliant (k-car): 12 sec 1991 nissan NX1600: 9 sec 1995 nissan altima: 8.5 sec 2004 acura RSX: 7.8 sec 2005 acura TSX: 7.8 sec 2007 honda S2000: ~6 sec? i guess everyone's perspective is exactly that- their unique, relative perspective. to me, the S2000 is perfectly driveable under 5,000 RPM, but it'll take off if you want it to, and of course its handling is always precise and fun. i guess i didn't buy this car to drive it into the ground on the track every weekend, though. i'm content with gunning it down an on-ramp and flying by the tons of people who drive the 325xi and the C230 here in DC. |
Originally Posted by boofer,Sep 4 2007, 01:53 PM
you can't really get more HP out of a N/A 4-banger though, can you? bolt-ons to the existing engine provide negligible benefits at best, so you'd have to go FI. i'm sure some of you have done that, but that has to decrease the overall lifespan of the engine, right?
And hey I own one and love it. And both the EVO and STI were making more power when I bought it. Then the rest of the class caught up months after my purchace. If honda want's to grow the S2000 then it needs more power or less weight. BUT honda doesn't care about a car that only sells 6000-10000 cars annually, End of Story |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:49 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands