S2000 Coupe
Registered User
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
From: Belfast, Northern Ireland
For me the roof down option is a nice extra. I like the looks and noise with the roof down but I prefer the looks with the hard top on. Not sure on the mockup though.
I'd wanted an S2000 for years but the fact that it's a convertible was lower down my reasons for wanting one. I loved the engine, wanted to scratch my RWD itch, was already a Honda fan and liked that it's a little different and rare.
I had also been looking at Z4s but only the coupe. I've never had a desire to own the convertible. Same goes for a Boxster. I prefer the looks of the Cayman.
Disclaimer: All the above is purely my own opinion and not to be taken as fact
I'd wanted an S2000 for years but the fact that it's a convertible was lower down my reasons for wanting one. I loved the engine, wanted to scratch my RWD itch, was already a Honda fan and liked that it's a little different and rare.
I had also been looking at Z4s but only the coupe. I've never had a desire to own the convertible. Same goes for a Boxster. I prefer the looks of the Cayman.
Disclaimer: All the above is purely my own opinion and not to be taken as fact
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,330
Likes: 180
It was the only decent engined convertible I could get in and out of like a normal car.
I wouldn't want one as a permanent coupe - you can't hear the engine / exhaust / intake anywhere near enough even with the soft top up, never mind with the hard top on .... to have that option permanently taken away ... there are other cars that do that better.
I wouldn't want one as a permanent coupe - you can't hear the engine / exhaust / intake anywhere near enough even with the soft top up, never mind with the hard top on .... to have that option permanently taken away ... there are other cars that do that better.
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 8,076
Likes: 86
From: Costa del Cornwall
Originally Posted by gbduo,Jan 9 2011, 04:12 PM
Isn't a X shape or something, it was quite revolutionary chassis when it came out, i think?
not the best pic of the chassis but gives the idea.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,525
Likes: 88
From: Soham Cambridgeshire
It was called a "High X frame" which as you can see in the pic richmc posted is in fact fairly high in the body shell.
The "X" transfer loads across the car diagonally and being high helps the problem of a convertable folding in two like a wallet when subject to a front or rear impact, mainly due to the removal of the roof structure from a saloon or coupe monocoque body shell, also the reason for the strong tunnel.
In principal some old cars before monocoque shells used an "X" frame for the chassis when they were separate items to try and solve the
problem of the chassis twisting when suspension loads were applied to one wheel. I am sure Boswell could name some, I have seen some in the past but can't put names to the cars
The "X" transfer loads across the car diagonally and being high helps the problem of a convertable folding in two like a wallet when subject to a front or rear impact, mainly due to the removal of the roof structure from a saloon or coupe monocoque body shell, also the reason for the strong tunnel.
In principal some old cars before monocoque shells used an "X" frame for the chassis when they were separate items to try and solve the
problem of the chassis twisting when suspension loads were applied to one wheel. I am sure Boswell could name some, I have seen some in the past but can't put names to the cars
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post