No, the 2000-2003 were rated correct. they Dynoed between 200 and 210 consistently. occasionally a freak car would produce 220 but thats all. These are Dynojet #'s which give different readings than vtec.net source. But, the bottom line is it was a comparison test and the 04 was rated at the same as the previous years and layed down 26 more HP.

 

Which means 266/2.2 = 120.9 or so.

So now the 9k is the last crying point for the naysayers?

 

i can't believe Honda underrated the hp of the MY04. The "fact" that horsepower remained unchanged IS THE REASON why I bought the MY03 in October, right before the 04's came out.

With a 26 hp gain, I would have chosen the MY04 without thinking twice. I feel like contacting Honda, complaining, and tell them to replace my MY03 with a MY04 for deceiving lies. Do you think a lawyer would help in this situation?

 

no crying...i would expect more power from the increased displacement. the 9k is just a wow/fun factor and a means to an ends.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by jyeung528
i can't believe Honda underrated the hp of the MY04.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by jyeung528
i can't believe Honda underrated the hp of the MY04.

 

i was joking Steve, but hey...thanks for the tip.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ttb

 

i'm not really bitter...like i've said before, i didn't buy the s2000 because it was fast

it's the principality

false advertising is false advertising, be it for good or bad.

but i'm still not 100% convinced that honda underrated the 2004 by a wopping 26 RHWP.

 

How is underrating a car false advertising? It's not like they claimed to have something that isn't there; they just delivered more than they promised.

To draw an analogy, if you ordered a Big Mac at McDonald's and they gave you fries with it for free, would that somehow be false advertising?

I find it unbelievable that you could chastise Honda for doing such a good thing.

Steve