S2000K-R vs. ZO6

Yeah you heard right...read this article and look at the numbers...it's a very good battle to come

http://www.mcclatchie.com/reviews/S2000R.html

S2K-R #'s

3.0 Liter Inline 6
360HP/230lbs of torque
0-60 in 4.1 seconds (just a smidge of the 405HP ZO6)
60-0 Braking in 105 ft (identical to the ZO6)
Quarter mile in 12.8 @ 111.7 mph
11.8 inch rotors w/4 piston calipers
67.5 mph in the Slalom
0.93 g's (obviously not 1.00 g's like the ZO6...but good for a convertible)
2587 lbs (test weight)

All I can say is wow!

God Damn!

About time Honda stepped up to the plate with something like this. The NSX is a great car but they need something "affordable" like this. I hope they make a hardtop version with more body rigidity. And why the hell aren't they calling it the S3000?

they arent calling it a S3000 because it is a S2000, with a little bit of added power and dynamics. i personally think the S2k will beat the Z06. I never understand why Americans (no offence to anyone) seem to think that a high lateral G figure means a car handles well. I have seen countless people dismiss cars because their lateral G figure isnt as high as their (usually Amercian) counterparts. Its the amount of usable grip that makes the car good handling, and even though the Corvette is brillaint compared with American cars of old, and maybe the best handling American car available, it is still a tiny bit behind Japan and Europe's finest.

Someone brought to my attention that article is a fake...if you look at the root URL it seems it is...but maybe he got it from some place and stuck it on his site. I dont know...I was so hyped about a ZO6 killing RWD Honda...too bad.


UGH!!!

this is an article i found on the Temple of VTEC:

Submitted by Mike Freitas on September 28, 1999 at 11:43:13:
Jeff,
Gotcha a new one (magazine)...This one deals with all the Honda Type "R's" made. Bunch of pictures on Mugen Hondas, and at the beginning of the book, (page 10) it has a picture of what they think the S2000 "R" will look like. It will be a two door coupe, with no convertible version. Looks "nice!"

Specifications are 2.0 liter, 260 ps (256.5 hp) @ 9000 rpm, and 25.0 kg/m (180 lb-ft) of torque. Also, next Integra "R" will be FR, they are saying it will use the same mechanicals as the S2000, but will be 240 ps (236.7 hp). S2000 "R" to debut 12.1.2000, and Integra to debut 4.1.2001.

Mike

Dang, that new ITR is a long ways off. I wonder if/when we'll ever see it here Stateside. That S2000 Type R coupe is sounding intriguing, though. jkp





this was after searching google.com and this was the ONLY article that came up for the S2000 Type R, so maybe you're right and it is a fake after all, although it wuldnt surprise me if they made a Type R, to follow, Civics, Integra's, Accord etc.

me take on it:

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?postid=543514#post543514

Originally posted by Pennzoil GT-R
. I never understand why Americans (no offence to anyone) seem to think that a high lateral G figure means a car handles well. I have seen countless people dismiss cars because their lateral G figure isnt as high as their (usually Amercian) counterparts. Its the amount of usable grip that makes the car good handling.

Can you help me explain this to me? I completely believe you but I don't get how some cars can have such high lateral g and slalom numbers. For example http://www.supercars.net/cars/2002@$Dodge@$SRT-10%20Concept.html How can such a clunky big heavy thing achieve .92gs and a 70mph slalom?

The slalom and lateral Gs very much can give a very good idea of how well a car handles. They don't call it road holding for kicks and grins. Better handling is really determined by many things, wheelbase, weight ratio, suspension, frame, tires, and there are some other factors.

I voted for the Vette since the other car doesn't exist and probably won't ever exist.

lateral G gives a good idea of road holding, but IMO road holding and handling are different. Whenever anyone asks me this i always use the Jaguar XJR-15 as an example because it was a Le Mans racer built by Tom Walkinshaw and even though it had high levels of grip all its drivers described it as the worst handling car of all time. It had a mid engine mounted too high, and that meant that if it went over any bumps mid corner or had a slight steering wheel correction it would spin. the point is, unless you got it to go through the corner perfectly, then it would become unbalanced and spin. It just didnt have any balance. That Dodge on the other hand, even though i dont know alot about it, will probably have been engieered to be near perfect weight distribution, a lower centre of gravity as possible, and will have a very good suspension and chassis set up. If the chassis and suspension are setup properly, anything can be good handling.

I thought they already sold hardtop S2000s in europe?

Originally posted by Pennzoil GT-R
they arent calling it a S3000 because it is a S2000, with a little bit of added power and dynamics. i personally think the S2k will beat the Z06. I never understand why Americans (no offence to anyone) seem to think that a high lateral G figure means a car handles well. I have seen countless people dismiss cars because their lateral G figure isnt as high as their (usually Amercian) counterparts. Its the amount of usable grip that makes the car good handling, and even though the Corvette is brillaint compared with American cars of old, and maybe the best handling American car available, it is still a tiny bit behind Japan and Europe's finest.

I see alot of people doing this, i'm even guilty of it in the past before i was shown how far off i was. but lateral G's do play a pretty big part in the slalom, its gives a gneral idea of how much lateral force the car will hold, meaning unless the car has serious body roll/camber change or an extreme amount of weight in one end of the car it'll grab those #'s on a slalom each time it turns. if it does have some of the abov e mentioned, or others which i'm sure there are, when you throw all that inertia & directional change into it you'll realize real quick that you overcome its grip. Someone once told me that you can have a poor slalom with high grip, but its very unlikely to have a good slalom with poor grip, but i'm sure theres many other factors which apply to this. Slalom alone doesnt make a good handling car either, how well the car reacts to mid turn changes, decreasing radius turns, hairpin & turning while braking (not supposed to do this but its necessary in certain cases) so theres no real way to judge how well a car handles without testing it in the real world.

and the Z06 does very well at the slalom and skidpad, as well as about everything else, I wont argue what you believe but the Z06 is getting its own class in SCCA autocross in a field filled with S2000's & miatas, NSX's and the like, because it does that well in comparison to the competition, and it includes drivers of all abilities.

Originally posted by FYRHWK1
and the Z06 does very well at the slalom and skidpad, as well as about everything else, I wont argue what you believe but the Z06 is getting its own class in SCCA autocross in a field filled with S2000's & miatas, NSX's and the like, because it does that well in comparison to the competition, and it includes drivers of all abilities.

i agree with you, the Corvette is the one US car which can seriously challenge Europes and Japans best. More US manufacturers need to follow that example (namely Dodge).

Originally posted by Fliquer
I thought they already sold hardtop S2000s in europe? There is a hardtop roof available for the S2000 in all its markets.

Originally posted by Pennzoil GT-R


i agree with you, the Corvette is the one US car which can seriously challenge Europes and Japans best. More US manufacturers need to follow that example (namely Dodge).

You have to be kidding me? :rolleyes: