SICK of reading about S2000's low mid-range power
10-10-2007, 02:59 AM
#22
UK Moderator
Here's a really useful site http://www.rri.se/index.php?DN=23 They have power/torque curves available in all sorts of different measurements for many cars. Select the car you want to view and then select downloads where it gves you the choice of PS/bhp Nm ftlbs etc.
According to that, the S2000 makes peak torque of 140lb-ft at 7,511rpm, with 120 or more from about 2,700rpm, all the way to 9,000rpm, so 85% of peak is available from 2,700 upwards.
As for power we have the following:
RPM____bhp
2000____41
3000____70
4000____95
5000___115
6000___150
7000___185
8000___210
8318___214 (max)
By way of comparison a Boxster 2.5 makes peak torque of 154 lb-ft at 5,504 rpm with 125 being available between 2,000 and 6,300rpm
the power numbers are as follows:
RPM____bhp
2000____48
3000____81
4000____110
5000___143
6000___165
5821___166 (max)
Actually, here are the power numbers for the S2000, 2.5 Boxster and BMW320
RPM____S2000_____Box______320
2000____41________48_______47
3000____70________81_______77
4000____95_______110______100
5000___115_______143______120
6000___150_______165______128
7000___185______
8000___210
Max
214@8318______166@5821__132@6410
The 320 has peak torque of 133 lb-ft and has 120 or more between 2000 and 5000 tailing off quite considerably above that.
Not sure what that proves, but it's quite interesting
It's worth remembering that comparing the power at the same rpm isn't necessarily fair as the S2000 is shorter geared so will go through the revs that bit faster, perhaps a power at % of maximum revs would be better?
Readjusting the above we have:
____%________S2000____Box____320
(33/32/32)_______70______48_____47
(44/48/48)_______95______81_____77
(67/63/63)______150_____110____100
(78/79/79)______185_____143____120
(89/95/95)______210_____165____128
All in all, the S2000 looks pretty good compared to ze Germans...
PS I've just noticed that there is a 2nd page on the dowload pdfs which givees the actual, rather than my estimated figures so you can compare for yourselves...
According to that, the S2000 makes peak torque of 140lb-ft at 7,511rpm, with 120 or more from about 2,700rpm, all the way to 9,000rpm, so 85% of peak is available from 2,700 upwards.
As for power we have the following:
RPM____bhp
2000____41
3000____70
4000____95
5000___115
6000___150
7000___185
8000___210
8318___214 (max)
By way of comparison a Boxster 2.5 makes peak torque of 154 lb-ft at 5,504 rpm with 125 being available between 2,000 and 6,300rpm
the power numbers are as follows:
RPM____bhp
2000____48
3000____81
4000____110
5000___143
6000___165
5821___166 (max)
Actually, here are the power numbers for the S2000, 2.5 Boxster and BMW320
RPM____S2000_____Box______320
2000____41________48_______47
3000____70________81_______77
4000____95_______110______100
5000___115_______143______120
6000___150_______165______128
7000___185______
8000___210
Max
214@8318______166@5821__132@6410
The 320 has peak torque of 133 lb-ft and has 120 or more between 2000 and 5000 tailing off quite considerably above that.
Not sure what that proves, but it's quite interesting
It's worth remembering that comparing the power at the same rpm isn't necessarily fair as the S2000 is shorter geared so will go through the revs that bit faster, perhaps a power at % of maximum revs would be better?
Readjusting the above we have:
____%________S2000____Box____320
(33/32/32)_______70______48_____47
(44/48/48)_______95______81_____77
(67/63/63)______150_____110____100
(78/79/79)______185_____143____120
(89/95/95)______210_____165____128
All in all, the S2000 looks pretty good compared to ze Germans...
PS I've just noticed that there is a 2nd page on the dowload pdfs which givees the actual, rather than my estimated figures so you can compare for yourselves...
10-10-2007, 03:06 AM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: On the slippery slope
Posts: 1,258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know about the rest of you but I bought this car to drive so I want to change gears and be involved in the driving experience. If you don't want to have to work to get the best out of a car then buy an auto box luxo barge!
I don't have a problem with the cars power and it definately isn't difficult to drive or inadequate when you engage tourist/shopping mode.
But more is always better and I wouldn't object to getting a bit more power
I don't have a problem with the cars power and it definately isn't difficult to drive or inadequate when you engage tourist/shopping mode.
But more is always better and I wouldn't object to getting a bit more power
10-10-2007, 03:09 AM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Tring
Posts: 1,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My turn to add to the pot 
We have all had nice cars and the S is one of them
I've had a 3ltr V6 Alfa GTV (225 bhp) and a 2ltr Clio 172 cup and compairing the two with the S is quite obvious.
On a daily commute and pottering around at 5-6k rpm the S is a very happy car and I think the torque is actually fairly good.
On the track though, the S is very good when on the boil and in the Vtec, however on a few occassions if you slip out of the vtec area then the car is gutless and I can admit that. The Alfa and Clio were a lot easier to keep at a consistent speed because of the broader power band - but if driven properly it would wipe the floor with both + Boxters, Z4s and the like.
Today the motoring press and subsequently consumers have been fascinated with torque and mid range grunt, because all they want to do is stay in one gear and put their foot down. Well the S is not like that, all you need to door is drop the clutch engage another fantastic gear and boot it.
Unfortunately high end power from a 4 cylider 2.0ltr NA car will not give you mid range grunt - that is the compromise.
If people want torque, quite happily criticise the S then buy something else because I & many others are very happy with the car
We have all had nice cars and the S is one of them
I've had a 3ltr V6 Alfa GTV (225 bhp) and a 2ltr Clio 172 cup and compairing the two with the S is quite obvious.
On a daily commute and pottering around at 5-6k rpm the S is a very happy car and I think the torque is actually fairly good.
On the track though, the S is very good when on the boil and in the Vtec, however on a few occassions if you slip out of the vtec area then the car is gutless and I can admit that. The Alfa and Clio were a lot easier to keep at a consistent speed because of the broader power band - but if driven properly it would wipe the floor with both + Boxters, Z4s and the like.
Today the motoring press and subsequently consumers have been fascinated with torque and mid range grunt, because all they want to do is stay in one gear and put their foot down. Well the S is not like that, all you need to door is drop the clutch engage another fantastic gear and boot it.
Unfortunately high end power from a 4 cylider 2.0ltr NA car will not give you mid range grunt - that is the compromise.
If people want torque, quite happily criticise the S then buy something else because I & many others are very happy with the car
10-10-2007, 03:22 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 7,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But....
there are annoying spots within the rev change that severely piss me off.
For example.... overtaking at 50-55mph. Which gear do you use? 2nd gear is too high and 3rd gear is out of VTEC causing a pause before the car zooms away nicely once it hits 6k rpm. Do the same overtake at either 40mph (2nd gear) or 60mph (3rd gear) and it's superb.
Don't get me wrong, I love the car, it's my second. But ask me if I would like more low down grunt / torque to and I'll say yes everytime.
there are annoying spots within the rev change that severely piss me off.
For example.... overtaking at 50-55mph. Which gear do you use? 2nd gear is too high and 3rd gear is out of VTEC causing a pause before the car zooms away nicely once it hits 6k rpm. Do the same overtake at either 40mph (2nd gear) or 60mph (3rd gear) and it's superb.
Don't get me wrong, I love the car, it's my second. But ask me if I would like more low down grunt / torque to and I'll say yes everytime.
10-10-2007, 03:22 AM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: On the back wheel. . .
Posts: 20,306
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bibbs,Oct 10 2007, 09:23 AM
On the track it is really hard work to keep the thing on the boil. 
You'll just be in a higher gear in the 3-6 car than you would in the 6-9.
If you let it drop below 6 then yes you'll have to work it back up.
But you would in the other car if it dropped below 3
10-10-2007, 03:27 AM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South London
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm told avoiding p_o_r_n leads to a greater satisfaction on the marital front too...
Just to add my bit, if you enjoy driving cars changing gears is no problem.
10-10-2007, 03:32 AM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by WRumbled,Oct 10 2007, 02:30 AM
The reason that it attracts so much criticism is that, because it has so much power, it is always compared to bigger engines.
Take the Z4 for example. You don't compare it with the 2.2; you compare it with the 3.0 straight-six.
Compared to most 237bhp motors, it does lack torque.
Compared to most NA 2 litre motors, it doesn't.
Who, amongst us, cares?
Take the Z4 for example. You don't compare it with the 2.2; you compare it with the 3.0 straight-six.
Compared to most 237bhp motors, it does lack torque.
Compared to most NA 2 litre motors, it doesn't.
Who, amongst us, cares?
I think the S is fine up to 6k. One mate I took out in it I was only taking it up to 6k for the first few miles and he still was going on about it being quick. He didn't realise I hadn't touched the VTEC yet, he was sure when I did though
10-10-2007, 03:32 AM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I came to the S2k from a V6 engine, and have driven relatively high-torque cars for years. I was put off the S2k by all the coverage saying that it wasn't much good when tootling/as a daily driver because of the need to rev it.
Top speed vs other cars, torque curve, lack of toys inside the car - none of these mattered when I drove my first S2k a few months ago!
It's the driving experience that sold it to me: the driver and the car working together (once you've got to know each other); being connected to the action; having to work to get the most out of the car, and not having an ECU and other gizmos 'knowing better' and largely determining what goes on after you've put in your 'request' for the car to do something. Every drive brings a smile (even commuting) and despite its foibles, grumpy old git attitutude before it warms up - I just love it!
An uber-saloon, Max-Power monostrosity, etc may show me up if the car isn't on the boil or, more correctly, if I'm not, but who cares? I reckon I'm having a better time of it!
Top speed vs other cars, torque curve, lack of toys inside the car - none of these mattered when I drove my first S2k a few months ago!
It's the driving experience that sold it to me: the driver and the car working together (once you've got to know each other); being connected to the action; having to work to get the most out of the car, and not having an ECU and other gizmos 'knowing better' and largely determining what goes on after you've put in your 'request' for the car to do something. Every drive brings a smile (even commuting) and despite its foibles, grumpy old git attitutude before it warms up - I just love it!
An uber-saloon, Max-Power monostrosity, etc may show me up if the car isn't on the boil or, more correctly, if I'm not, but who cares? I reckon I'm having a better time of it!