Good afternoon and happy New Year to my Florida brethren.

Trendy is correct, Jeff and Joe (hardtopguy.com) did the swap on my car back in July. The pictures do not do it justice. Both cars looked great in person after the swap.

Find a willing dealer or another owner. I get PMs monthly from interested people, so they are out there. Hardtopguy can do the work, but the Cleveland to south Florida commute would be a pain.

 

Actually it does... As for my inferior logic, well my company brought in $2.1 million in revenue in December 2004.

Thanks for your concern anyways.

 

Actually you are wrong...

You should really try and make sure you know what your talking about before you open your mouth and start insulting Tommy and trashing his business skills. Maybe you should go back and look at what education you've received before you start handing out worthless insults.

What country buys the largest number of S2000s? The USA.

F22 is a derivative of the F20. They share blocks and I'm sure many parts. I'm not 100% sure, but I'd be willing to say the main differences are the bore and the stroke which create the 0.2 liter displacement increase. I'm not looking at hard tech information here, but this is the normal when they enlarge an engine. Also you don't save any production costs when you produce two motors in the same factory. Ideally you want to produce a homogenous product.

Secondly if you knew anything about the construction and/or use of the F20/F22 you would realize its not a mass produced block. Out of the MAYBE 10,000 cars built a year give or take a few spares, there is not a single other application for that motor. Now if it were a K20/K22 (and derivatives) then you might have an argument (those are the motors used in the CRV, Accord, RSX, TSX). Honda doesn't have a warehouse in Japan stacked floor to ceiling with S2000 crate motors. If they did, it would be against the Japanese just-in-time production methods.

Now the real business reason for the F22 was to try and boost sales of a declining product. S2000 sales have been trending downward (go check the SEC 10-Q statements) and American Honda was attempting to resurrect sales by answering a criticism of the 00-03 cars, which was torque. Although in my opinion increasing displacement by 0.2 liters while decreasing redline is counter productive.

So next time think before you speak...

 

do other countries get taxed based on engine displacement? There must be a reason why the mainstream cars in europe and asia are under 2.0L other than a fuel reason

 

Some are taxed some or not... Some people think its a big deal, I don't. Hell we are taxed on cars that consume too much gas, does that make people not buy them, probably not.

 

cars in europe are taxed based on engine displacement, and the exponential jump happens exactlly at 2L.

 

Dont get me wrong I personally wouldnt buy a 2004+ s2000, just becuse I feel it was to some extent "dulled down" but that is just my oppinion.

Still its a freaking s2000, and a badass car. some people will prefer pre 2004, some post 2004, but most wont notice the difference.

The F22c is unfeasable in europe, making an already restrictive car even more with higher taxes.

As much as I revel in the prestige of 9,000 RPM I wouldnt mind a bit more torque, and your wrong Mav by saying that the s2000 was the first production car with it....................the S600 wich came out in '64 turned up to 9,500 RPM stock.

 

Taxes are not as much as people think... There are plenty of larger displacement vehicles in Europe... Plus I don't think its a hard and fast EU rule about displacement.

I don't know for sure and don't really care to be honest with you. I'm talking about economics/business responding to trendy who was just flat out wrong.

 

Man you are batting 1000 today...

Yes Honda made revisions in the 2004 other than the engine. Revisions on certain things were done on the car worldwide. HOWEVER thats not what you were talking about was it? You were talking about the engine.

Additionally the reason we don't get the RSX-R or NSX-R is that they are not economically feasible for our market.

Honda sold all of 15 (I think I read that, regardless well under 100) NSXs in the US last year. Rumor has it each one at a SUBSTANTIAL loss versus the cost of production and transit to the USA. Remember the US has funky rules of its own regarding importation of cars and such, so if you don't sell a certain volume of a vehicle in a given year there is no money to be made on it.

Not 100% sure on the RSX-R, but I'd guess its related to the NSX problems, but the RSX hasn't been selling real well as of late either.

FYI right now Honda doesn't make much on the cars it imports from Japan. In the Honda lineup for North America only the Insight (is it made still?), a handful of CRVs, the RSX, the S2000, and the NSX come from Japan. I'm not sure on the new RL, Accord Hybrid, and Civic Hybrid. The rest are all made in England (CRV production is moving to the USA), Canada, and the USA.

 

Please enlighten us then... If not as a model evolution, a response to the torque criticism and to boost sales, then why?

As for the NSX Type R and Integra Type R, judging from NSX sales alone (Honda only sold less than a dozen new NSX's last year), it wouldn't be financially feasible for Honda to sell those models here in the US. But hey what do I know, according to you, I have bad business logic.