opinion of the honda S2000

personally i think this is a awesome car..i mean what other 4 banger can pound out 245 horsepower...this car blows my mind..and the styling is great..it is a great looking little sports car..except for the fact that i can barley fit in one...id still get one if i had the money..you also would save alot of money on rims, because instead of spending 2500 - 3g's on 22's... some 17's look huge on this car..and the stock exhaust is great looking..so much stuff i like about this car...i will say, "this is the ONE thing honda has done right"

Originally posted by RSScamaro
245 horsepower

Correction...it is 240HP...2.0 Liter 4 cylinder. And yes it is a great car for the money. Kinda hard to extract more HP out of it since Honda tuned it and max'ed it out alot! I mean you can add a turbo kit and get 100HP more and still only better your 0-60mph time by .4 seconds. (0-60 mph is like 5.9 seconds) Very nice looking exterior wise...and best of all and the part I like the most personally...

REAR WHEEL DRIVE

:D :D :D

Originally posted by NISSANSPDR


Correction...it is 240HP...2.0 Liter 4 cylinder. And yes it is a great car for the money. Kinda hard to extract more HP out of it since Honda tuned it and max'ed it out alot! I mean you can add a turbo kit and get 100HP more and still only better your 0-60mph time by .4 seconds. (0-60 mph is like 5.9 seconds) Very nice looking exterior wise...and best of all and the part I like the most personally...

REAR WHEEL DRIVE

:D :D :D

Wrong!!! Go talk to S2000 owners at s2ki.com and many of them will tell you that they had no problem getting 0-60 in 5.2 secs completely stock. Some of them have superchargers installed, and they are able to achieve mid 12-sec in 1/4 mile. Magazines' testers just don't drive cars hard enough to achieve best times.

honda is so fanatic about squeezing so much power out of such small engines. and it is amazing that they can do it without blowing the engine up. i mean 9000rpms? that's almost what honda bikes do. good looks on top of it. the manual tranny, IMO, is one of top 2 or 3 out there, if not number 1 (well at least among the cars i've driven which include a ferrari, porche, viper, vette to name a few). grant it you don't use 9000 rpms regularly but when you do it's almost like you're playing a video game with this thing. the fun to drive factor is definately a huge influence. prolly the funnest car i've driven. with all that said, i would never get an S2000 unless i had extra cash to throw around. as impractical as this car is with its unnecessarily high-revving engine (for daily driving) to its very minimal space, it's a car to get on an impulse decision, IMO. it's like picking up a candy bar at the cash register. you dont' need it, may not even want it, but you'll get it if you hae some change in your pocket.

Originally posted by pw_350Z_baby


Wrong!!! Go talk to S2000 owners at s2ki.com and many of them will tell you that they had no problem getting 0-60 in 5.2 secs completely stock. Some of them have superchargers installed, and they are able to achieve mid 12-sec in 1/4 mile. Magazines' testers just don't drive cars hard enough to achieve best times.

Easy there killer...we are on the same team...(Nissan...Z owners even!!!)...no need to ream me. Just reading what I read in mag's..R/T I believe.

Who can argue with a red line of 9 grand? i would love to hear one of those baby's scream! the only thing wrong with this car is that its blows with the low end torque, but i wouldnt expect alot coming from a 4 pot putting out 245 hp. Honda definately took every ounce of hp they could get out of that engine. As long as you keep it above 6000 rpm i bet this car would do beautifully on auto-x or on the track.

Del, I must ask. How much torque does the S2000 have? And at what RPM does it start to show? You say they are fanatical about getting a lot of power out of each engine. Oh please, Honda and Acura are popular with the notion of havin very little torque and it kicks it at such a high RPM it is almost wortless. Besides, I am not a big fan of the S2000, it is not a very good looking car. Give me an RSX that is a much better looking car. That is the one big reason I don't like Honda/Acura. They don't care much about the torque. Horsepower is not all you need.

Originally posted by Polygon
Del, I must ask. How much torque does the S2000 have? And at what RPM does it start to show? You say they are fanatical about getting a lot of power out of each engine. Oh please, Honda and Acura are popular with the notion of havin very little torque and it kicks it at such a high RPM it is almost wortless. Besides, I am not a big fan of the S2000, it is not a very good looking car. Give me an RSX that is a much better looking car. That is the one big reason I don't like Honda/Acura. They don't care much about the torque. Horsepower is not all you need.

153 lb ft of torque and not until late into the rpm band. not sure exactly at what point but are you surprised? me neither. i know about the impracticality of having the hp and torque (what little any honda has) peaks at such high rpms for daily drivers. but you have to admit, this is one hell of a fun car to drive, if you drive it the way it's meant to be driven. have you driven one? me and about 7 of my friends were given the chance to drive one of these cars on a road coarse in indianapolis and it's easily the funnest car i've driven. the 6-speed gearbox is better than any gearbox i've experienced, handling is extraordinary beyond belief and the greatest thing is, everyone beat the living hell out of this car for a whole day. and the car remains solid. just burned alot of oil and needed new tires and brake pads but that's a given with any car. this car was built for this. unfortunately, i agree, honda's attitude, or lack thereof, about torque can be rather unsatisfying.

for city driving, this car is as impractical as they come. get on some open road or highway and it'll take a beating. you may think that you're breaking somethign with a 9000 rpm engine, but no this thing's solid. and give credit to honda for just being able to squeeze that much power out of a naturally aspirated 2 liter 4 banger despite the impracticality of such technology.