Depends who you ask.

Honda's own figures aren't much different for the 2.2 compared to the 2.0. However, I've seen a few threads on the main (US) board that owners have had stock 2.2 cars dyno-ed and found that they produce more power than Honda quotes.

It wouldn't be the first time Honda has played down performance figures - the NSX was always assumed to have quite a bit more than the 276 bhp quoted figure (albeit that probably had more to do with the gentlemen's agreement between Jap manufacturers to cap power at that level).

 

But they would, wouldn't they

 

"Yeah but the us version only revs to 8, thats 1 lower than the Uk"
"So why not make 8 the red line?"
"Coz the uks goes to 9 its one higher"

Sorry couldnt resist the spinal tap tone of this post

 

Is the capacity increase because the Yanks use weak and watery petrol.
Can they get 98 octane fuel in the US?
Most petrol stations in the US sell 89 octane as regular, 91 octane as super and 95 octane as premium (well that was what they sold last time I was there).
So they hike the capacity to make up the power deficit of the fuel, the larger capacity increases internal moving mass therefore they have to reduce the RPM limit.

 

There is a company in the US that puts the 3.0 TT supra engine into the S2000 isn't there. I can remember reading about it on their website. There were also some videos, it looked rapid!

 

Here it is -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WirkGXYdOus

 

The octane numbers they describe their petrol with don't correspond to the ones we use in the UK. (I think we use RON whereas they use MON).

So, 89 probably equates to our 95 RON. Not sure what their top quality stuff is (93?) but AFAIK it's comparable with the 98/99 RON we get over here.

So, no, the greater displacement in the US (and now JDM) engine has nothing to do with fuel octane numbers.

 

Critically, the area under the torque curve is greater even if the peak isn't really any higher.

The NSX isn't significantly more than the 280 bhp claimed; it's the fact that it has a torque curve like Table Mountain that makes it so unbelievably capable.

The 9,000 rpm & peaky/climbing torque was designed to make the S2000 feel exciting, not for ultimate efficiency. Which is why it's so exciting. Exactly like the original MX-5, in fact!

 

so why is it the power is the same and the torque is little different on the same fuel?