as the years roll by, acceleration stays the same
09-04-2007, 07:28 PM
#23
Originally Posted by boofer,Sep 4 2007, 09:53 AM
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?
For the enjoyment I get with the SC, the "shortened" lifespan is worth it.
Let's see.... I put on 40k miles in 6 years... so only 12 years left on the engine....
09-04-2007, 07:33 PM
#24
Registered User
Originally Posted by JustinsanE,Sep 4 2007, 08:11 PM
Sorry couldn't resist. Me and my dad built cobra kit car and that car is an insanely fun car, mostly because of all that power with ~2000 lbs to move, with handling to boot. If you think the s gets sideways with ease, one little twitch of your foot makes you do the merry go round with this baby.
09-04-2007, 07:58 PM
#25
Registered User
Bitch, bitch, bitch, if you don't like it, get something else for ****s sake.
This is a great car, and I personally don't care that a 350z has more power. If I wanted soemthing bulky, I'd hang around a weight watchers convention.
Nothing against the thread starter, but a lot of whiny replies.
This is a great car, and I personally don't care that a 350z has more power. If I wanted soemthing bulky, I'd hang around a weight watchers convention.
Nothing against the thread starter, but a lot of whiny replies.
09-05-2007, 12:41 AM
#27
Registered User
Let's pretend Honda did come up with some sort of bigger-engine S2000. Call it a 340 HP 3.2 V6. Now the driveline has to be heavier, the chassis needs to be strengthened, and so the weight goes up to 3100. Still a significant power/weight increase. The car will be faster.
It's now a $41K car.
At that price point these days, it needs a retractible hardtop to compete. Bigger wheels, too. That adds another $2K and 150 pounds and takes away half the trunk space.
Now you have a $43K, 3250 lb car with about a 55/45 F/R weight distribution.
That still might be a nice car, and it will probably be a faster one.
But I predict that most of the auto world would be saying, "well, it's faster, but it's just not the fun little go-kart of a roadster that the old S2000 was...."
But hey, it will beat those 350Zs in the street races!
It's now a $41K car.
At that price point these days, it needs a retractible hardtop to compete. Bigger wheels, too. That adds another $2K and 150 pounds and takes away half the trunk space.
Now you have a $43K, 3250 lb car with about a 55/45 F/R weight distribution.
That still might be a nice car, and it will probably be a faster one.
But I predict that most of the auto world would be saying, "well, it's faster, but it's just not the fun little go-kart of a roadster that the old S2000 was...."
But hey, it will beat those 350Zs in the street races!
09-05-2007, 12:49 AM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
enjoy the car for what it is. i had to make the choice between a 350Z and S2000 and it was easy. there's just something about the fun factor/go kart/top down/spin it to 8k(or 9K)/uncompromising/purist tendencies of the car
09-05-2007, 04:24 AM
#30
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,852
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think putting a V6 in the car is neccessary.
Like others have said, a small, efficient turbo ala Acura RDX (Put the car at the 300-320hp mark), lower compression ratio, slight suspension/wheel upgrade, and a beefier rear end. Price it at 38K and call it a day.
No need to remake the car. Look at the old Z cars or Supras. There were many differences between the N/A and their turbo counterparts, from brakes, engine compression, suspension differences, transmissions, etc...
With a little R/D, Honda could have made a screamer from the factory. Of course, this would have had to been done in 2004/05 range to see any gains sales wise and image wise. But then again, it took them 15 years to kill the NSX, so is it completely unlikely/out of the question to launch an Uber-S2000 for 09/10? They won't. We all know that. But it doesnt hurt to dream.
Like others have said, a small, efficient turbo ala Acura RDX (Put the car at the 300-320hp mark), lower compression ratio, slight suspension/wheel upgrade, and a beefier rear end. Price it at 38K and call it a day.
No need to remake the car. Look at the old Z cars or Supras. There were many differences between the N/A and their turbo counterparts, from brakes, engine compression, suspension differences, transmissions, etc...
With a little R/D, Honda could have made a screamer from the factory. Of course, this would have had to been done in 2004/05 range to see any gains sales wise and image wise. But then again, it took them 15 years to kill the NSX, so is it completely unlikely/out of the question to launch an Uber-S2000 for 09/10? They won't. We all know that. But it doesnt hurt to dream.