We shouldn't be so quick to condemn the car because it won't let us get away with using crappy driving technique.

 

There are many other design implications other than dealing with the abuse of improper driving. Honda engineers ftw

 

Still wondering if the carbon synchos on the 2004 fixes this little issue.

Got, be specific, what other design issues are we talking about? The 2002 tranny is better than the 00, the 2004 is better than the 02. That means Honda identified real issues and worked to handle them. The Diff in the 2004's been re-enforced. So, the same thing there. Basically Honda made MISTAKES. They've worked to rectify them because that's how honda does things. We all know of the other design flaws. They're documented here.

People have been skipping gears for as long as there've been manual transmissions. I question how you can call that "Abuse" or poor technique. Honda should have anticipated that people would drive that way.

 

Of course with every design there are flaws, and they are updated. In my opinion the tranny upgrades through the years were to solve the griding issue, not wear on the syncros. Syncros are designed to scrub off the diferences in engine speed in the tranny when shifting up, or down. They were designed to withstand some ammount of force and maintain acceptable wear. When you skip gears you are exceeding this "acceptable" force and they sycros are wearing faster than intended. Also these items are considered sprung weight, jsut like a flywheel, or the driveshaft, so added mass to make them unecesarily stronger would decrease performance. Now another thing to understand is that this damage isnt going to make your tranny destroyitself tomorrow, its kinda like not getting your teeth cleaned, for along time you will be just fine, but one day your teeth will fall out. You must realize that when dealing with a high strung sports car that the saftey factors in the design are much less than in a normal car. So what may have applied in other automobiles may not apply in the S2000.

 

What surpises me, and you're not the only one who does it, is how people try to defend Honda when they screw up. As a new design, the S2000 had more than it's share of teething problems.

"You must realize that when dealing with a high strung sports car that the saftey factors in the design are much less than in a normal car. So what may have applied in other automobiles may not apply in the S2000."

I hear this too and it's simply not true. It's not like this is the first performance car Honda's ever made. I'm comparing honda to honda. S2000 to Civic Type-R and Integra Type-R. You could even sort of lump the RSX in there (if you stretch it some). I've never driven an NSX so, I'm not including it.

If anything, the safety factors should be higher because it's a vehicle you have to expect will get driven hard. I will say, these problems probably didn't show up in Japan because, they don't keep their car's as long or drive them as hard as us Americans (or maintain them as poorly).

So, basically my conclusion is, the S2000 is a wonderful car which has gotten better every year until DBW came out. The early ones are somewhat fragile compared to the newer ones. My ideal would probably be a 2002 with a 2004-5 tranny and diff.

 

Please don't say this too loudly. I don't want my year 2000 S2000 to hear you. If it hears you, it just might start to fall apart. It might just fail me for the first time. It just might break down on me when I least expect it. It might just require that I fix something when I have not done so yet. Heaven forbid that my car would think itself to be fragile. Maybe it would not have allowed me to slap on a supercharger for the past 4 years or so. Maybe it would have grenaded when I installed different FD gears in it. Should I have not done those clutch dumps and launches? Should I have not done all those redline shifts? Is it going to start to grind every gear change now that it might know it's fragile? Boy, I really hope it'll go into 5th or reverse tomorrow. Heck, I just hope the damn thing will start. I'm sure glad my car didn't know it was fragile since I never purchased an extended warranty on it. I may have actually needed it had the car known it was fragile.
No, the most fragile part of the "early" cars is not the design of the car. It was the design flaw of some of the owners who were clueless about how to own it, how to look after it and how to drive it.
You are entitled to your conclusion. I am entitled to my appraisal of your conclusion.

 

[QUOTE=Ek9,Aug 2 2006, 02:39 PM] What surpises me, and you're not the only one who does it, is how people try to defend Honda when they screw up.

 

EK9 you are horribly wrong xviper and gotrpms FTW!!!!

EK9 you just got owned!

 

Well, I don't think anyone got "owned". EK9 has some good points. They're just too much of generalizations to have universal S2000 implications.
Of course we've seen many S2000s that have broken and some of those have been early models. We just can't say with any amount of certainty that it was a Honda design flaw or operator fault. In the same token, we've also got quite a few newer models that haven't lasted past the first year without the owner posting up some "horrible, urgent problem" here.

 

yes i know no one got owned i was just being sarcastic, but really i've seen from your posts viper that you beat the the heck out of your car and its still running good i guess, and I myself put my car through it's paces as well alot more than most and it's perfect still.