The Honda S2000

[JD]

So what do people think of the Honda S2000? I am impressed that with this car Honda was able to do what they have failed to do so many other times. For starters, they have finally produced a car with a perfect 50/50 front/rear weight distribution. It also remains (with the exception of the NSX) the only rear-wheel-drive sports car that Honda makes. They have managed to edge out the Porsche Boxster and the BMW M Roadster in many respects.

I do have issues with its engine, however. As technologically advanced as it is, it is limited in its durability. Other Honda VTEC engines (examples: the Civic Si's B16A, the Integra GS-R's B18C, the Prelude's H22A) have the ability to withstand fairly high levels of boost. Of the twelve fastest Hondas in the world (in terms of drag racing), I believe two thirds of them have either the B18C or the H22A powerplant. These engines can be rebuilt with lower compression, forged aluminum pistons and connecting rods, iron sleeves, fueled with larger fuel injectors, and protected with block guards and other forms of safe-guarding to perform to a limited degree of reliability under the stresses of 25 PSI of boost or more even.

I have my doubts however, about the S2000 engine's ability to perform up to the edge of this envelope, due to the fact the it pushes the limits so much as is, naturally-aspirating 240 horsepower up to a 9,000-rpm redline. Additionally, I have heard many critical commentaries addressing the engine's lack of low end torque. Its performance capabilities cannot be denied as being anything short of astounding, but, its adaptability in terms of fitting into the routines of a daily driving car, coupled with the more fragile nature of its high-revving capabilities makes me withhold the praise for it that so many generously adorn on it. Honda needs to figure out how to take the engine's capabilities and revamp it into a more-well-rounded package.

[enzo@af]

As for building engines with aftermarket in mind, I don't think Honda really cares. If they were desirous of building cars with the intent of the owner's modifying them, I don't think they would've made the new Civic larger, heavier, and with a flat rear floor (and thus lower exhaust pipes, just ready to be scraped).

The S2000 is running with 2 liters, so low torque numbers aren't that surprising. I would assume (without any basis) that with a 9,000 RPM redline low end torque problems could be averted by not letting the RPM's drop.

----------
"Ferrari isn't a car, it's a lifestyle"
-Enzo Ferrari.

[JD]

You're dead right, Honda does seem to be moving the Civic out of reach for the aftermarket tuner, much to the dismay of many enthusiast Honda owners.

Apparently they have moved the catalytic converter closer to the exhaust manifold, situating it so it is almost incorporated into it, making the exhaust system more difficult to work with for tuners.

As for the S2000, Honda is reportedly trying to work on the engine's low torque issues, as yes, keeping the rpm needle jumping will supply the power needed, but it also makes the car more difficult to live with, particularly as a daily driver, with little "stop light" power. They were able to engineer more torque into the bottom end of the 3.2TL's power delivery without too drastically altering the engine. Maybe some of the principles applied there will work on the S2000.

[VTEC V6]

if u shift at 5k rpms u will hit 60 in 11 seconds. thas pretty bad that all the power is way way up there in the power band
ppl will be thinkin ur showing off and speeding when ur just trying to get up to speed wit the redline @9000rpm

i think a supercharger will help out the s2000 alot especially wit low end torque

and then it will be able to keep up wit corvettes, m3's, etc.



----------
00 Honda Accord coupe EX V6 SS
aem cai, WW 3-piece midwing, clears

[enzo@af]

Also, just because power is down doesn't mean it isn't a good sports car. In the days of old sports cars were small, quick, tight handling cars. They would get killed in drag races, but they are a blast to drive. Straight line performance isn't everything.

----------
"Ferrari isn't a car, it's a lifestyle"
-Enzo Ferrari.

[JD@af]

enzo

You're absolutely right, and its handling is top notch. But to market this car as to be conceived as a "relative" mass production car, it must function practically as a daily driver. Period. They aren't building this car as a supercar that is expected to be purchased by racing teams to use as their new platform (which, for example, is the intended buying group for the new Saleen S7), but as a sports car, probably for warm weather use (as Honda has finally developed a non-front-wheel-drive car), but still with daily driving practices supposedly integrated into the design parameters. And frankly, if it takes 11 seconds to hit 60 mph shifting at 5,000 rpms, I think Honda has missed the boat.

[Adam]

I think it's awesome in looks, but i don't know much about it.

[HXMan]

That car was my reason for going to collage....I wanted to make enough money to be able to afford one.

But now after hearing about the cars awful low rpm performance I am not sure I would like one. 0-60 in 11sec if not shifting over 5000rpms? WTF is that! Sure, the car has only 2 liters in displacement but my civic only has 1.6 liters and it can probably go 0-60 in 11 seconds shifting at 5 grand.

I know the car was optimized for top end power but I would not want to be pounding the shit out of my car all the time just to get up to speed.....has anyone heard that old saying TOO allways talks about. RPM=Ruins Peoples motors.

I ask how long is a S2000 motor going to last if it hits 7000rpms quite a few times daily?

I do love the way the car looks, and the high end is great, but if I was to buy one I think honda would have to do some more work and definitly boost up the low end torque.

Anyone know if the S2000 uses intake butterflies like the GSR.....maybe the honda engineers could adapt that to the S2000 to produce some more low end torque......of course they could lower the compression and put a turbo on there too!

[JD@af]

In fact, with the S2000, for the first time Honda is really going back to the drawing boards trying very hard and working long, late hours trying to devise methods of bulding engines utilizing the VTEC high-rpm power, while retaining more of the low rpm power that VTEC engines usually lack. The most obvious solution, increase displacement, is being considered of course, but Honda is trying to work around this.. naturally a big challenge. But the complaints of the low end torque in the S2000 are being filed so completely across the board that Honda engineers are taking it very seriously. I too wish that Honda would just stick a turbo on there and sell the car with a factory, Honda-supported FI system, but I doubt that we'll see anything like that (at least not in North America).

But hey, we can dream and hope, and pray that Honda has a few other tricks up their proverbial sleeves to utilize complete cam timing changes with rpm to produce the low end torque not found in conjunction with the VTEC system to date.

[HXMan]

Maybe they can incorperate the new VTEC-I technology and vary the cam timing. I believe that the S2000 already has the three stage VTEC in it, I just can't see why the torque is so weak in the low end...well I kinda know why, but I mean with 2.0 liters there should still be something there.

Maybe they will have to loose a little high end power for some low end torque....who know's. But I do have faith in the honda engineers. Look at the new K series engines coming in the new integra, they got some torque, and plenty of high end power!

[JD@af]

K series engines? Never heard of them! Wow, I figured that the new Integra had a B18C, basically with a stroker to bump the displacement to 2.0 liters. I gotta get on the ball.

As for the S2000, yes, it does feature the three-stage VTEC system, but its lack of low end torque is related to its excessive overlap of cams (i.e. the intake and exhaust cams are open simultaneously, which actually helps create a pressurized flow that allows more air to pass through the engine. There is suction created by the fact that the exhaust valves open, removing air, while the intake valves are still open, therefore drawing more air into the cylinders). This is great for high rpm power and breathing, but a real enemy of low end torque and power (and an enemy of forced induction as well). This also helps illustrate the one-sided intended usages of the S2000 engine, and one of primary challenges facing Honda engineers.

HXMan, thanks for the info, and if you have any links or other info sources for the RS-X, please share. Thanks!

-JD

[texan]

JD- http://www.tamparacing.com/ubb-impor...ML/000087.html

The most info I've seen on it is in that post.

[JD@af]

Much obliged, tex.

I like the timing chain (about damn time somebody did away with a timing belt, and at least one-upped it for a chain), but naturally I do not like a single pulley that controls both of the pulleys that are keyed on to the cams. I see Honda's reasoning for doing this, but once again, this move takes away tunability.

What remains to be seen for the general public is whether the i-VTEC system will be able to change the timing significantly enough to produce significant gains at low rpms. It's like the whole issue of "on-boost performance versus off-boost." Without deferring to displacement or FI, this remains a formidable challenge to Honda engine design parameters. Hell, if Honda can solve this riddle, I won't even want to play with my cam timing.

I will be eagerly awaiting a chance to see that production version two months from now in NYC.

[texan]

JD- please hit me up on my email ([email protected]) or AIM (texan245) ASAP! Thanks.

[kepone]

Originally posted by VTEC V6
if u shift at 5k rpms u will hit 60 in 11 seconds. thas pretty bad that all the power is way way up there in the power band

this is a statement that always pisses me off.. its the biggest bullshit line ive ever heard..

hey, guess what? if you shift a viper 4 grand below its redline, its 0-60 will probably close to 11 sec too.. does that make it a bad car? umm.. no..

the fact that the s2000 is as docile as a civic during normal driving is an advantage, not a weakness.. why cant people see that? they have their econobox for the workdays and a full out track beast for the weekends.. i mean, what more could you ask for?

ill admit that the torque is a bit lacking, but the car works.. it gets the job done.. and if you dont have the skill or balls to keep the car in its powerband when you want to race, dont go knocking honda for that.. its that simple..

now, onto this reliability thing..

if you go run 25 lbs of boost through ANY stock engine out there.. and that includes ALL honda engines and EVERY other engine in the world, you're going to damage/ destroy the engine..

any engine thats taking high boost levels, is going to be heavily modded internally. ALL of the fastest civics/integras etc etc using the b16, b18, or h22 are internally modded to handle the boost, and they all have lower than stock compression.. so to say that the s2000 cant do the same just shows a general lack of knowledge... just like any engine, you can upgrade the head gaskets, pistons, rods, rings, valves, whatever you want to affect the compression of the s2000's engine.. the only problem is that there isnt much of an aftermarket for it yet ( because its only a year old )..

comptech has a supercharger out for the s2000 now, that makes the engine put out 340crank hp, with stock internals.. so sorry, the s2000 will have no trouble in the forced induction dept.. BUT, unless the compression is lowered in one form or another, high boost levels will be impossible on pump gas.. race gas is a whole different ball game ..

BTW, if anyone is worried about the engines reliability.. just think of it this way.. all of hondas current engines are pretty high strung..and none of them break.. do you think they would put a POS in any of their cars?