Guest

Honda S2000

Mon Oct 21, 2002 1:36 pm

Hello all, I have decided to trade in my 98 Camaro Z28 after 2 years of many great moments. My friend Shane has a black 2001 Honda S2000 and he took me for a spin in it and then let me drive it. The car was a hell of a lot more powerful than I would ever think of from a 2.0 Liter DOHC VTEC 4-Cylinder. The car's handling was absolutely wonderful, and the interior and the bodystyle is completely awesome.

I am wondering if anyone on this forum is familiar or owns an S2000 and I am also interested in the opinions since the car has only been out for 3 years.

Thanks,

MCO-ATL

P.S. I know LOT767-300ER is gonna nail me
 
Superfly
Posts: 37705
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Honda S2000

Mon Oct 21, 2002 2:07 pm

MCO-ATL:
PLEASE don't tell me you made the switch!


My next door neighbour bought a red one. He let me take it for a spin. I was not impressed with anything about this car. I am an average 5'10" and I felt very cramped in this car. The car has no low-end power at all. All of the power is at the high RPMs. I can imagine this car being very expensive to maintain years down the road. The engine has lots of moving parts that aren't shared with other cars in the Honda/Acura line up.
Your Camero is 10 times more car than this little Honda. Have you considered the last of the Pontiac Firebird/Trans Ams? same as your Camero

It's your money and all but I just hate to see people make bad choices when it can be avoided.


Bring back the Concorde
 
JETPILOT
Posts: 3094
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Honda S2000

Mon Oct 21, 2002 2:38 pm

Congrats MCO-ATL.

You've matured and are moving to an all new level of automotive refinment.

You've grown tired of solid rear axles, overweight pseudo sportiness, and cheap plastic interiors.

You can't go wrong with a S2000

BTW what are you doing into a 32,000 car under 20yo. Your parents must be good to you.

JET
 
POSITIVE RATE
Posts: 2121
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2001 11:31 am

RE: Honda S2000

Mon Oct 21, 2002 2:41 pm

The S2000 is one nice looking car- especially if it's black! Being a VTEC engine it should be more powerful than most average 2L engines, infact if i recall Hondas VTEC engines produce almost the same power output as Nissans' 1.8L and 2L turbos which is pretty good. Should you buy it or not? well that's up to you but just remember the Camaro aint really a sportscar and it will never handle the same as the S2000 does.
 
Superfly
Posts: 37705
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Honda S2000

Mon Oct 21, 2002 2:47 pm

JETPILOT:
Are you a comedian?  Laugh out loud


You've grown tired of solid rear axles

All true sports cars are rear-wheel drive.
Bring back the Concorde
 
JETPILOT
Posts: 3094
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Honda S2000

Mon Oct 21, 2002 3:12 pm

Rear wheel drive like my BMW M3..... only mines independant and so is the S2000. Solid rear axels are for delivery trucks not sports cars.

 Nuts

JET
 
Superfly
Posts: 37705
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Honda S2000

Mon Oct 21, 2002 3:20 pm

I guess that dumptruck rear-axel can blow away that Honda.


Honda makes good econo-boxes and that's it.
Bring back the Concorde
 
JETPILOT
Posts: 3094
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Honda S2000

Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:38 pm

Ever hear of the infamous Honda Formula 1 campaign?

240 horses from a 2.0 liter motor and a 9000 RPM redline. Sounds good to me. That's a direct descendant of Formula 1 technology.

Might I introduce you to the Acura NSX....



JET
 
POSITIVE RATE
Posts: 2121
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2001 11:31 am

RE: Honda S2000

Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:40 pm

Honda is ok but NISSAN is better!!! Ever heard of the SKYLINE GTR???
 
captaingomes
Posts: 6251
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 12:23 am

MCO-ATL, the S2000 is a great car! Everything Honda does is first rate, and that's not just their econoboxes. There are only 2 flaws with the S2000 that I can find, and they've both been mentioned here. One is the lack of torque. If you want real performance, you have to rev the hell out of the engine. Secondly, it is small inside. I am 5'10 and 155 lbs, and it fits me just well enough.

Unfortunately, the Nissan Skyline GTR isn't available in the U.S. but for roughly the same price of the S2000, you can get your hands on the new 350Z. The looks are subjective (I love them), but you can't argue with 287 hp from a 3.5 V6 engine. I think it's much more car for the money than the S2000.

Let us know what you decide, and congratulations on trading up from that Camaro!
"it's kind of like an Airbus, it's an engineering marvel, but there's no sense of passion" -- J. Clarkson re: Coxster
 
Adam84
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 1999 6:10 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 12:29 am

Great choice. Honda makes some fabulous 4 cyl. If the engine in the S2000 is anything like the 1.8L that was in the Integra I can honestly say it is smooth as silk even at 8,000+rpm mark.

Good luck on your purchase, and if you do get a S2000....Welcome to the Honda family.
 
Guest

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 12:51 am

I heard that the S2000 is intentionally being limited in production so as to artificially increase the price, and that for all of it's niceties and what have you, if it was actually widely available like their other models, would cost well under $30K. In other words, even though it's a good car, it is highly over hyped.

Apparently, as a result, it is not selling all that well. After all, if you are going to shell out $40K for a car, why not get a BMW or something else of "status" as opposed to a common man "Honda"?

Is any of this true?


-Cerulean
 
desertjets
Posts: 7693
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 3:12 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 1:01 am

The S2000 is actually more around $34,000... not $40k+. Though it would not surprise me that some dealers would be inflating its price. You could get a Z3 2.5 for about the same. But arguably the S2000 is a more sorted out car than the Z3, plus there is a significant power advantage in favor of the S2000... even though you have to rev it to the redline to get it. I think the same goes for the Audi TT.

The S2000 is really more of a pure roadster than either of those two cars. I wouldn't mind having one. But the 350Z is a better alternative, and you can get one for a much as $10k less.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
 
TurbineBeaver
Posts: 1511
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:50 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 1:05 am

Good choice! Stick with foreign cars. No sense in buying a car with a huge engine, that can't get much efficiency out of it. Bimmer gets 333hp out of a 3.0L, and take Ford, they can't even get that out of a 5.0L! Hilarious! Good choice man. Didn't the S2000 get some award for lowest ratio of displacement:hp?

TB
 
flyf15
Posts: 6633
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:10 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:06 am

TurbineBeaver,

Off the top of my head I can think of another mass produced car which has a higher horsepower/displacement ratio. This being the Audi TT. It gets 125hp/L (225hp 1.8L I-4) compared with the S2000's 120hp/L.
 
boeingnut
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:46 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:22 am

Ah, but the Audi TT is turbocharged, while the S2000 is a naturally aspirated engine. For non-turboed production cars, I think that the S2000 is king for HP/L
Excuse me, but what does God need with a starship?
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:34 am

I told you to lay off that crack..

Why dont you buy yourself a nice 96' Impala SS Big grin

Honda is crap. Your turning into a rice boy. And look forward to smelling my exhaust donw the road  Smokin cool

Once again im with Superfly...

2.0L what is that a lawnmower engine?  Smile or a moped?
 
racko
Posts: 4548
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 12:06 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 3:10 am

LOT767-300ER, just read TurbineBeaver's post - there are companies which don't need 10L to create a powerful engine, and a 3.0L M3 puts your Impala to shame.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 3:12 am

The S2000 is a terrific car. As for the comment about it being expensive to maintain down the line, nothing could be further from the truth. Honda engines are pretty much bullet proof, as an indication Honda have not had one warranty claim on their VTEC engines since they started making them about eight years ago.

You do have to keep engine revs high to get the most out of it, but when the valve timing changes it goes like stink with a gorgeous scream.

Honda have actually adapted their VTEC's a bit further, and the new Civic Type R (sorry guys, if you're in the States you have to make do with the less powerful Si) offers almost as much power, a much flatter torque curve and for an awful lot less money, as well as handling just as good (and this is seriously impressive) from a front wheel drive car without traction control, limited slip differential or any other electronic aid. it's also ten grand cheaper. But I still like the S2000!
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
Illini_152
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 6:00 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 3:35 am

You can get all the HP you want out of those little chainsaw motors. You still won't have shit for torque or usefull powerband to speak of. Little hint, when you hear someone harping about how "refined" their powertrain is and "the efficiency" and mentions "HP/L" they're making excuses for why that V-6 Mustang with the base engine that cost $15 grand less then their ricemobile just smoked them off the line.

You can get 200 HP out of that 2.0L engine, but you're still not going to get much in the way of torque, all of 152lb-ft at a zippy 4300 RPM, I'm willing to wager that there is a steep drop off on either side of that peak. (That base Camero with a 3.8L pushrod V-6 that gets only 200 HP at 5500 RPM, manages 225 lb-ft at 2800 RPM. The numbers for the base '02 Camero with the GM 3800 Series II V6 are the same BTW)

Bottem line- there's no replacement for displacement.

Oh, forgot to tell 'ya- EPA fuel economy for the S2000 is 20/26; the base Camero is 19/31. Don't get me wrong, the S2000 is a nice roadster. It looks like it would be fun to toss around on a windy road. But don't try and tell me that it's fast, or is even more efficient that even the cheapest American muscle.

Another one (I really got to just post this darned thing!) that Camero will run on regular unleaded; the Honda needs premium. Base price new is under 20 grand.

- Mike
Happy contrails - I support B747Skipper and Jetguy
 
JETPILOT
Posts: 3094
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 3:41 am

Seems like some people think they know everything. (See Above).

Torque is a product of piston stroke. Not cubic inches.

JET
 
174thfwff
Posts: 2831
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:47 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 3:48 am

Superfly...
"All true sports cars are rear-wheel drive."

The S2000 is a rear wheel drive.

reliability...It's a Honda. I know many people who have 55k+ miles who just change the oil and follow proper inspection by the honda dealer and have not had a visit to the dr. out of ordnary yet....

-174thfwff
Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, Staten, Uptown, what now? Lets make it happen.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 3:50 am

Well, he's correct in that the Honda VTEC's don't produce all that much torque, but then that's not what they're designed to do. They are free-revving engines, and they do that very well. They produce huge amounts of power at a high rpm, and as such that's where their real performance is - in that it is not hugely dissimilar to a track car, and after all the Integra Type R was the nearest anyone has yet got to an out and out racer in road car form. Interestingly, that criticism of the VTEC is one Honda are well aware of, and their latest i-VTEC engines offer 90% of available torque at 3000 rpm, with the surge in power at about 6000 rpm delivering most of the rest.

It isn't better or worse, just a different way of doing it. Some people prefer high torque engines offering relatively low does of power per litre, others prefer the way a variable valve timing engine does. It's just personal preference, dismissing it just suggests you haven't driven one.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
Adam84
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 1999 6:10 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:00 am

Some people have their reasons for buying a Honda vs. Chevrolet.

Let people do whatever they want with their money, are you making his car payments? Do you see me ragging on people when they buy a domestic? No you dont....because you can buy whatever makes you happy. In this case the Honda makes him happy.

MCO-ATL...Dont let anyone influence your decision. Just get whatever you like the most.
 
Guest

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:05 am

Given the fact that just about all of these cars are going to spend 99% of their lives on suburban stop-and-go driving/commuting, and on gridlocked freeways-in both scenarios rarely getting past 60MPH-do any of the differences between Hondas and Chevys described above even matter anyway?


-Cerulean
 
Guest

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:07 am

As a post script to my above post, the only advantage I see a Chevy or Mustang having over a Honda is that the Chevy will get to the next red stop signal first-and will be waiting at a dead stop longer-while the Honda catches up.

-Cerulean
 
DC10Tony
Posts: 991
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 9:51 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 5:17 am

"No sense in buying a car with a huge engine, that can't get much efficiency out of it."

Oh really...?

The LS1 V8 in the F-Bodies averages 20 MPG, not bad for a 310 HP engine.
 
TurbineBeaver
Posts: 1511
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:50 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 5:22 am

FlyF15, I'm sure that is true. However, the S2000 won the award, the TT didn't! So ask the engineers, not me!

Why dont you buy yourself a nice 96' Impala SS

Why? You can get that same amount of HP for an engine half the size. What are the exact figures of the SS? I know it's a V8, but liters? bhp? I'm just curious.


Illini, you're trying to tell me that the M3 isn't torquey? Yeah, OK!

And, who cares how much torque the Camaro uses, or what it's fuel economy is, for afterall, it is the original "mullet-mobile".

TB
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:12 am

"LOT767-300ER, just read TurbineBeaver's post - there are companies which don't need 10L to create a powerful engine, and a 3.0L M3 puts your Impala to shame"

10L? I think your being a bit drastic there.

The invoice on a M3 is $50,000....The car isnt exactly in the same category.

TB: Base SS.

1996 5.7L V8 engine 270hp 330lb of torque. Alot of Impalas do have the basic mods for output of 325hp and 330lb of torque.

Racko: I dont know why your trying to even compare a 50k car to one that costs 25k loaded. The engine is 2 times bigger. Good! Why should I care?

S2000 Is how much? Retail $34-$35k? im guessing? Roadster around 30k?

You can get a a good SVT Mustang Cobra 5.0L V8 That outputs 390hp and has a monstrous torque of 385lb. Base for that is 32k-33k

0-62mph in 4.4 Seconds and the S2.... 5.5...

Id be even ashamed to tell my friends i have a 2.0L ricer burner that i bought for $35k....and a Honda...man just get a Honda Lawnmower Big grin at least you cant rice those (I think)

How about a nice comparison.

HONDA S2000 2003 Model

Available Engines & Transmissions: Convertible Trims
Base Price $34,499

Engines Roadster
2.0L 240-hp I4 Standard

Transmissions
6-Speed Manual Standard

Fuel Economy (city / hwy): 2-Wheel Drive
2.0L 240-hp I4
6-Speed Manual 12 / 8
6-Speed Manual 12 / 8

Engine Specifications
2.0L 240-hp I4
Horsepower 240 @ 8300
Torque (lb-ft) 153 @ 7500
Displacement (cc) 1997

Turbo/Supercharger No
Bore X Stroke (mm) 87 X 84
Compression Ratio 11
Fuel Type Gas
Fuel System MPFI

Now a Mustang SVT 2003

General Information
Price: $34,995
Miles Per Gallon: 16/24 mpg
Curb Weight: 3665 lbs
Layout: Front-Engine/RWD
Transmission: 6-Speed Manual
Engine
Type: Supercharged V8
Displacement: 4601 cc
Horsepower: 390 bhp @ 6000 rpm
Torque: 390 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
Redline: 6500 rpm
Performance
0-60 mph: 4.5 sec
0-100 mph: 10.4 sec
Quarter Mile: est 12.9 sec @ 111 mph
Skidpad: .90g
Top Speed: 155 mph (limited)

LOT767's summary: The funny thing our Rice friends blow at fuel economy! Oh boy that car eats gas like a Hummer! My reasoning. Pay $500 more for a quality vehicle with a solid 5.0L V8 that outputs 390 horsepower and makes 385lb of torque while accelerating from 0-60 in 4.5 seconds. A blind rice boys reasoning. Pay $500 less get a 2.0L I4 that gets 240hp and 153lbs of torque (Total Joke) with a fuel economy of 12/8 and accelarates from 0-60 in 5.5 seconds. Am i influencing you? YES Why? Because your wasting money  Smile

"Bimmer gets 333hp out of a 3.0L, and take Ford, they can't even get that out of a 5.0L! "

Bullcrap.

Ford gets 390 horsepower out of a 5.0L. How about you give the facts TurbineBeaver instead of spouting out lies.

"And, who cares how much torque the Camaro uses, or what it's fuel economy is, for afterall, it is the original "mullet-mobile"."

That means BMW is the rich pretty boy with no....well you get the point Big grin

No im j/k...I wouldnt mind a nice older 7 series...new one is too Daewoo.


 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:14 am

Dan:

Buy this and this is where your going my friend

 
captaingomes
Posts: 6251
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:34 am

LOT, you really should check out those fuel economy figures again. You were posting litres per 100 km!!!! And funny how the Mustang's comparison didn't have fuel economy shown. Maybe you should get the MPG figures so that you can understand what they mean, and also get your comparisons from the same source!
"it's kind of like an Airbus, it's an engineering marvel, but there's no sense of passion" -- J. Clarkson re: Coxster
 
captaingomes
Posts: 6251
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:35 am

Sorry, just a small correction, I just found the fuel economy listed for the Mustang. But again, if you're going to compare figures for two different cars, try to get them from the same source for better validity!
"it's kind of like an Airbus, it's an engineering marvel, but there's no sense of passion" -- J. Clarkson re: Coxster
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:39 am

Among all these numbers, there are things such as handling and driving pleasure that some of you seem to forget.
Horsepower and torque isn't everything, well for people who can't prove themselves in any other way it might be..

Staffan
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:45 am

Staffan. CaptainGomes...well i just pasted over the specs not to cheat...I just missed that  Smile Calm down the econ. is still worse  Smile

Staffan the mustang handles very nicely...I dont know about the S2000 as i have not driven one.

Driving pleasure? I rather have a V8 purring than a I4 ricing Big grin
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:55 am

Oh, sorry, since you had so much negative to say about it I honestly thought you had driven one...

Staffan
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:57 am

Staffan: I only had negative things to say on its technical and price side. But i really doubt the car handles like an 55 AMG.
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 9:05 am

Listening to you, all non-american cars seem to have loads of flaws on the technical and economical side, these manufacturers shure have fooled many people. Thank god for V8's, that's all that matters...  Yeah sure

"But i really doubt the car handles like an 55 AMG."

Considering you get 4 S2000's for the price of the Merc, I wouldn't expect that either.

Staffan
 
captaingomes
Posts: 6251
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 9:09 am

The S2000 is in tyipcal Honda fashion, which means simple, no excess, and still great performance. With a 0-60 time of 5.5 seconds, this car is FAST! Yes, there are faster cars, but if all you are looking for are bragging rights, then you are trully a sad individual.

What Honda has here is a fun roadster with great performance, great handling, and if like other Hondas, it will prove to be reliable and durable, which you can't say for many of the cars mentioned above. Buy what you want, but if you only will buy whatever does the quarter mile the quickest or 0-60 time, and don't care about the rest of the package, you should set some money asside for some professional help as well.  Big grin
"it's kind of like an Airbus, it's an engineering marvel, but there's no sense of passion" -- J. Clarkson re: Coxster
 
Illini_152
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 6:00 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 9:18 am

Wow, I leave for an few hours after posting in defense of American muscle and look what happens (BTW- I used the Camero because I had numbers readily available)

Turbine, I never said ANYTHING about the M3. Personally, I rather like German cars, they are well engineered, silky smooth and true luxury. But if you're looking for pure bang for the buck, the quickest car for your dollar, it's hard to beat a GM F body or a Mustang. We're talking about cars in the $20-$35,000 range. I'd love to have an M3, it sounds like a well-balanced, quick sports sedan.

- Mike (stands behind everything else I said)
Happy contrails - I support B747Skipper and Jetguy
 
B777
Posts: 381
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 9:52 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 9:32 am

LOL, I knew a flame war was coming!
 
Illini_152
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 6:00 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 9:37 am

Wow, I leave for an few hours after posting in defense of American muscle and look what happens (BTW- I used the Camero because I had numbers readily available)

Turbine, I never said ANYTHING about the M3. Personally, I rather like German cars, they are well engineered, silky smooth and true luxury. But if you're looking for pure bang for the buck, the quickest car for your dollar, it's hard to beat a GM F body or a Mustang. We're talking about cars in the $20-$35,000 range. I'd love to have an M3, it sounds like a well-balanced, quick sports sedan.

- Mike (stands behind everything else I said)
Happy contrails - I support B747Skipper and Jetguy
 
Guest

LOT767300ER

Tue Oct 22, 2002 9:41 am

LOT, Just to let you know the 03 Mustang Cobra runs a 4.6 Liter V8, Not a 5.0 V8

MCO-ATL
 
TurbineBeaver
Posts: 1511
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:50 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 9:44 am

LOT, my bad. I was talking about the GTs, and they're 4.6L. Excuse me. However, I still think that there is more to life then power. Though the Cobra might rip the S2000 a new one out of the hole, how about taking the two on a windy road, or through some tough turns? I'd bet the S2000 handles better.

Illini-good points. I just have always felt that Ford and GM spent more concentration on power, and those cars got the short end of the stick in terms of handling.

TB

*flame suit is on, and hopes everyone realizes, "Opinions are like assholes, we all have one, and we'll don't want to change them."
 
Guest

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 9:56 am

Superfly, I'm 5'10, 155lbs. and I felt fine in it. It does 0-60 in 5.5 seconds (Which is about what my Z28 does) so I'm not worried about its lack of torque. I'm tired of American Muscle cars, They bore me. If I was going to get another one I would get a 02 Trans Am WS6

JETPILOT, Thanks bro, I am really excited about it

Positive Rate, Black is the color I'm getting. The 9000 RPM Redline is awesome, I like the car because like you said they inherited a lot of technology from Formula 1

Captaingomes, I just cant get into the Nissan 350Z, The rear end looks to "Audi-ish". The Skyline doesent impress me either

Cerulean, I dont like BMW's. They just arent my style.

LOT767300ER, Here we go again, I dont like the Impala body style & the automatic trans. I cant get into that kind of car.

Illini_152, When Shane and I were cruising around we ran into a buddy of mine who has a 01 Mustang GT, We walked to him for awhile then ran from a light, we took off about even, but when we hit 2nd we pulled him by a couple car lengths so I just thought you would like to know that.

_________________________________________________________________

LOT767-300ER Again:

""Bimmer gets 333hp out of a 3.0L, and take Ford, they can't even get that out of a 5.0L! "

Bullcrap.

Ford gets 390 horsepower out of a 5.0L. How about you give the facts TurbineBeaver instead of spouting out lies."

_________________________________________________________________
First of all, Ford gets 390 HP out of a 4.6, not a 5.0. The only reason why the 03 Cobra is so powerful is because of the factory supercharger that they put on it. If the S2000 had a factory supercharger on it, It would smoke a 03 Cobra.

MCO-ATL




 
BH346
Posts: 3164
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2000 5:50 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 9:57 am

8/12 mpg on the S2000? Where did you get that? Is that on some tuned out version of the S2000? I believe the S2000 gets a 20/26 mpg
Northwest Airlines - Some People Just Know How to Fly
 
TurbineBeaver
Posts: 1511
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:50 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 10:02 am

Captaingomes, I just cant get into the Nissan 350Z, The rear end looks to "Audi-ish". The Skyline doesent impress me either

- That's a GOOD thing!!  Big thumbs up

TB
 
BH346
Posts: 3164
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2000 5:50 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 10:05 am

MCO-ATL...I'm glad I'm not the only person who doesn't like the 350Z or Skyline, I can't stand the 350Z's styling...I couldn't stand that noise those Skylines made everytime they go down the street when I was in Japan...
Northwest Airlines - Some People Just Know How to Fly
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 11:54 am

Brandon: Read above..

"Listening to you, all non-american cars seem to have loads of flaws on the technical and economical side, these manufacturers shure have fooled many people. Thank god for V8's, that's all that matters... "

What the heck i never said that. And on the other side you think that every US car sucks and is too big.

BTW its spelled Camaro not Camero lol

Dan:

4.6L SVT Mustang Cobra yes...but They were running 5.8Ls in 1995 and now they do have limited 5.0Ls and 5.4Ls. This is also a counterargument because its a smaller engine (4.6) and still gets the same amount of juice.

The first 5.0L SVT Cobra came out in uhhh 93' I want to say.

"First of all, Ford gets 390 HP out of a 4.6, not a 5.0. The only reason why the 03 Cobra is so powerful is because of the factory supercharger that they put on it. If the S2000 had a factory supercharger on it, It would smoke a 03 Cobra."

Show me some proof. I can say all stuff like that all night here. They can get those specs out of a 4.6, 5.0, 5.4 and 5.8.

I would personally take the rare 2000 SVT Mustang Cobra R 5.8L Big grin


02 Trans Am WS6 is in no way a "true" muscle car.

"The S2000 is in tyipcal Honda fashion, which means simple, no excess, and still great performance. With a 0-60 time of 5.5 seconds, this car is FAST! Yes, there are faster cars, but if all you are looking for are bragging rights, then you are trully a sad individual. "

Its not like the car itself is a work of wonder like a Bentley. Your not buying this car for capacity...or towing a car like this is about speed. Though i could pull out a road test tomorrow.

" Though the Cobra might rip the S2000 a new one out of the hole, how about taking the two on a windy road, or through some tough turns? I'd bet the S2000 handles better"

Maybe, but i really doubt your going to be doing 110 mph down a county road in the middle of Utah mountains. Especially where Dan is located at...lol
 
Superfly
Posts: 37705
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:09 pm

Cerulean:
Given the fact that just about all of these cars are going to spend 99% of their lives on suburban stop-and-go driving/commuting, and on gridlocked freeways-in both scenarios rarely getting past 60MPH-do any of the differences between Hondas and Chevys described above even matter anyway?


You raise a good point.
By the time the little Honda is getting up to 9000 RPMs, it would already be wedged underneath a Suburban or Navigator in front of it.
The GM F-body (Camero, Firebird/Trans Am) will waste the Honda from a dead stop. This comes in handy for everyday commuting.
Also on the open road the little Honda will be revving so high, you better have a good stereo to drown out the sound of the engine and also the road noise.
I found the Honda interior to be very cheap and the ride was very busy.

As Illini_152 pointed out; "...if you're looking for pure bang for the buck, the quickest car for your dollar, it's hard to beat a GM F body or a Mustang. We're talking about cars in the $20-$35,000 range"


He is absolutely correct!
Imported sports cars that are of good quality and integrity are way out of your price range ($100K+). All of the other little M3s & S2000s are just a cheap imitation for those who 'think' they are too good to drive a Chevy or Ford.
Chevys & Fords just don't have the status at the Country Clubs and golf courses.
What a shame  Sad



If you really want to "move up" and have a "refined" sporty car in this price range, go for the new Ford Thunderbird.  Smile
252 HP @ 6100 RPMs out of a 3.9 V8 that gets almost the same fuel efficiency (3 mpg less than Honda).
That's 12 more horses at 2,900 RPMs LESS than the little Honda.

Also, the Ford Thunderbird has something the Honda doesn't, and that is STYLE!

I am sure you could buy and older Honda Civic and throw a few stickers and a wing on the back and it'll look the same as an S2000!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy



Bring back the Concorde
 
Adam84
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 1999 6:10 pm

RE: Honda S2000

Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:12 pm

Ok now, this is getting crazy. Like I said above...different strokes for different folks.

Honda seems to be doing something right as they are basically able to make quite a few best sellers (Accord, Civic, CR-V, MDX, Odyssey, Pilot, RSX and TL) 3 of those have waiting lists.

Once your in the Honda family, you are usually stuck there as they make some fine automobiles. No it may not have the luxuriousnous of German cars or the raw power of American cars, but its a compromise. Honda makes most of their cars with just enough power to suit buyers needs, but enough engineering to make buyers fall in love.

If Hondas are so bad, why is their resale value one of the highest out there? Why do they need to put people on waitlists for some of their vehicles (Odyssey, Pilot, MDX)? Why does one of their bread and butter sedans continue to be a best seller and win awards out the @ss? Why are their coupe/sedans (TL and CL) from their luxury marque continue to be compared to similar BMW models?

Can you tell me of a current domestic car/van/suv that has waiting lists which are months long? Can you tell me which American car is compared to a similar BMW (which seems to be the worldwide benchmark) model? Can you tell me which American manufacturer has resale values which rival that of Honda?

Not trying to be a dick or anything...but I am just stating pure facts. Honda obviously does not make bad cars as they seem to be able to sell them quite well. I am part of the Honda family and will defend them....but I will not bash other people based on their automobile choice.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ACMIdriver, CMHSRQ, GalaxyFlyer and 66 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos