'06 S2000
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
From: Plano
'06 S2000
I received my honda newsletter by e-mail today. Here's some of what it said about the '06 S2000. Interestingly, in the spec sheet it shows horsepower at 237ft/lb at 7800, this is evidently due to some new testing parameters. Can't wait to see what the Laguna Blue Pearl looks like.
Jon
"Model Overview
The S2000 is even more responsive in 2006. Get an advanced lesson in acceleration when you push this nimble roadster via its new Drive-by-Wire Throttle System
Jon
"Model Overview
The S2000 is even more responsive in 2006. Get an advanced lesson in acceleration when you push this nimble roadster via its new Drive-by-Wire Throttle System
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 0
From: dallas, texas
the new measuring method seems to hurt import cars and benefit domestics for the most part.
bumped the viper up to 510 and the z06 up to 505 (sure its only 505....)
civic si went down to 198 and s2000 down to 237...etc.
nothing changed mechanically. doesn't make much sense to me, since rated horsepower is arbitrary and there is not standard % for drivetrain losses. i guess it does give us an approximate starting point though.....
bumped the viper up to 510 and the z06 up to 505 (sure its only 505....)
civic si went down to 198 and s2000 down to 237...etc.
nothing changed mechanically. doesn't make much sense to me, since rated horsepower is arbitrary and there is not standard % for drivetrain losses. i guess it does give us an approximate starting point though.....
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,459
Likes: 0
From: North Texas
Technologue: SAE What?
You know SAE gross and SAE net; here comes SAE certified.
By Frank Markus
Motor Trend, August 2005
THE SOCIETY of Automotive Engineers recently revised the rules for measuring horsepower and torque and introduced a new standard for certifying said numbers. It's been a quiet revolution, unlike the one in 1971 that made gross horsepower ratings (measured on a stark-naked engine) obsolete by introducing net ratings (testing an engine wearing its alternator, vital-fluid pumps, and intake and exhaust systems). There's no mathematical correlation between gross and net, but the original standard lowered ratings by roughly 20 percent, which provided welcome camouflage for power output ratings already in free-fall during those early dark days of emissions control.
This latest revision to J1349 won't uniformly cut everyone's engine ratings. In fact, the first engine certified to meet the revised standard--the Corvette Z06's LS7 V-8--got a five-horsepower increase to 505. The point of the revision is to account for new engine technologies and to reduce the opportunity for liberal interpretation.
GM's Dave Lancaster, who chaired the SAE committee that drafted the standards, claims that by taking advantage of the biggest loopholes it was possible to inflate SAE net results more than 15 percent (approaching gross output). Modern engine controllers didn't exist in the 1970s, so it wasn't specifically prohibited to run special spark and fuel curves during the test. Using the recommended fuel grade wasn't required, so by running premium in a regular engine with a souped-up spark map, several stray horses could be lassoed. Power-steering pumps could be left off, extra-deep oil pans that prevented windage losses were allowed, exhaust and intake restrictions were poorly defined, and correction factors for temperature, pressure, and even a transmission could be manipulated.
Manufacturers committed to reporting accurate, representative numbers all along won't be affected by the changes. Conversely, any manufacturer that lowers its output ratings in the near future will be under suspicion of having gamed the system.
Inviting a neutral third-party SAE witness to certify an engine's output is the surest way to dispel doubts and win customer confidence. The certification procedure is patterned after one in Europe. Lancaster explains, "We found that their advertised numbers more consistently aligned with the [engine test] results we measured. We wanted to bring that repeatability to the United States." The standard spells out the qualifications for the witness and requires the manufacturer to test a production or production-intent prototype engine, documenting all input variables and output statistics, and filing the information with the SAE. The certified output must be within one percent of the dynamometer output. Of course, ringer engines could easily be slipped through this process, but by certifying an engine the manufacturer guarantees all production engines will produce within two percent of the rated output (Europe allows five-percent deviation).
General Motors plans to certify every new or significantly revised engine in the future. Frank Fsadni, Ford director of V-engines, says his company has no plans to certify any engines. Instead, Ford pulls three engines at random from the production line and runs three tests on each, then reports the average of these nine tests. The Chrysler group is still considering whether to certify all engines or just high-performance ones.
In 1971, the industry shifted to reporting SAE net. This new certification standard is voluntary, and engine manufacturers (and performance tuners) should follow GM's lead. We'll credit those engines that meet this higher standard by indicating "SAE certified" in our spec panels.
You know SAE gross and SAE net; here comes SAE certified.
By Frank Markus
Motor Trend, August 2005
THE SOCIETY of Automotive Engineers recently revised the rules for measuring horsepower and torque and introduced a new standard for certifying said numbers. It's been a quiet revolution, unlike the one in 1971 that made gross horsepower ratings (measured on a stark-naked engine) obsolete by introducing net ratings (testing an engine wearing its alternator, vital-fluid pumps, and intake and exhaust systems). There's no mathematical correlation between gross and net, but the original standard lowered ratings by roughly 20 percent, which provided welcome camouflage for power output ratings already in free-fall during those early dark days of emissions control.
This latest revision to J1349 won't uniformly cut everyone's engine ratings. In fact, the first engine certified to meet the revised standard--the Corvette Z06's LS7 V-8--got a five-horsepower increase to 505. The point of the revision is to account for new engine technologies and to reduce the opportunity for liberal interpretation.
GM's Dave Lancaster, who chaired the SAE committee that drafted the standards, claims that by taking advantage of the biggest loopholes it was possible to inflate SAE net results more than 15 percent (approaching gross output). Modern engine controllers didn't exist in the 1970s, so it wasn't specifically prohibited to run special spark and fuel curves during the test. Using the recommended fuel grade wasn't required, so by running premium in a regular engine with a souped-up spark map, several stray horses could be lassoed. Power-steering pumps could be left off, extra-deep oil pans that prevented windage losses were allowed, exhaust and intake restrictions were poorly defined, and correction factors for temperature, pressure, and even a transmission could be manipulated.
Manufacturers committed to reporting accurate, representative numbers all along won't be affected by the changes. Conversely, any manufacturer that lowers its output ratings in the near future will be under suspicion of having gamed the system.
Inviting a neutral third-party SAE witness to certify an engine's output is the surest way to dispel doubts and win customer confidence. The certification procedure is patterned after one in Europe. Lancaster explains, "We found that their advertised numbers more consistently aligned with the [engine test] results we measured. We wanted to bring that repeatability to the United States." The standard spells out the qualifications for the witness and requires the manufacturer to test a production or production-intent prototype engine, documenting all input variables and output statistics, and filing the information with the SAE. The certified output must be within one percent of the dynamometer output. Of course, ringer engines could easily be slipped through this process, but by certifying an engine the manufacturer guarantees all production engines will produce within two percent of the rated output (Europe allows five-percent deviation).
General Motors plans to certify every new or significantly revised engine in the future. Frank Fsadni, Ford director of V-engines, says his company has no plans to certify any engines. Instead, Ford pulls three engines at random from the production line and runs three tests on each, then reports the average of these nine tests. The Chrysler group is still considering whether to certify all engines or just high-performance ones.
In 1971, the industry shifted to reporting SAE net. This new certification standard is voluntary, and engine manufacturers (and performance tuners) should follow GM's lead. We'll credit those engines that meet this higher standard by indicating "SAE certified" in our spec panels.
Banned
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Drove one at a Honda Press event recently(pre prodcution model? I got to drive the Si again -Yay!) . You won't even notice the DBW. I only noticed it was a little easier to modulate the accelerator. The VSA settings on the S let things get intresting before it intervenes. It's not as nice as the competive mode stabilitrak on the C6 but it's better than Nissan VDC or the BMW DSC all day. For those with children the pass. airbag cutoff is nice. You won't be disappointed if you were waiting to see what the 2006 model will be like. I'm still waiting on ours to show up.
Registered User
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,257
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
Originally Posted by kraemer007,Nov 11 2005, 03:46 PM
Scott are you banned or did you change name again?
Maybe he pissed the wrong person off?
-Doug
Banned
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Nah, I'm just laying low. I really really pissed the Admins off last time. It was really funny...to me anyway. My first SN (from which you all know me so well) will be back in action hopefully by 11/21 like it says so I can get back and reply to all of those who have PM'd me. I know GeneB wants to drive the '06 we're getting soon, and some other member wants a set of the "Black Chrome Emblems..." I'm still working on it.
If you remember for the longest time I put where I worked as part of my sig---they said I couldn't do that.
Even though I never solicited business. So i got creative and just left my job title and e-mail. So I guess that pissed them off. Then I created scott@bankstonhonda just to push their buttons and see if that was worng doing ---thus the"banned."
So welcome " MyNeonIsFstRthanURs2000 " to this board for temporary insanity! I figured it'd be funny to cruise an all the boards with an alternate SN to raise hell with.
So when (if?) rioyellows2k returns I'll get creative again!!! -Scott P.
If you remember for the longest time I put where I worked as part of my sig---they said I couldn't do that.
Even though I never solicited business. So i got creative and just left my job title and e-mail. So I guess that pissed them off. Then I created scott@bankstonhonda just to push their buttons and see if that was worng doing ---thus the"banned." So welcome " MyNeonIsFstRthanURs2000 " to this board for temporary insanity! I figured it'd be funny to cruise an all the boards with an alternate SN to raise hell with.
So when (if?) rioyellows2k returns I'll get creative again!!! -Scott P.
.
