Are s2000's reliable?

[andrewken]

I know that Honda's in general are very reliable, i got a 94 accord with 200,000+ miles on it. Are the s2000's built to last a very long time as in over 200,000 miles or 10 years?

[SiGNAL748]

Yes.

I know this doesn't pertain directly to the subject, but if I had the choice between an NSX and a lower model Ferrari. I'd pick the NSX, simply because it puts the build quality of a Ferrari to shame. Honda's are well built, no matter which model.

[mx52nv]

yes, but the clutch does heat up pretty quick at the strip sometimes. I have driven them at the track and strip enough to know. And if you supercharge it, be careful.

[BNR34_V-SpecII]

stock clutch or after-market clutch? supercharged it or turbocharged it, upgrade on flywheel and clutch are required. ACT makes clutch for S2000 so does Cusco. Flywheel by Unorthodox.

[mx52nv]

for the most part, I like my ACT, but can be noisy at times.

[Tano016]

Signal978: OMG, Please don't compare an NSX to a Ferrari. I've owned honda's all my life and i drive a Gsr right now and i dont have any complaints,they are great cars, but the nsx and ferrari shouldnt be put in the same sentance, completely diffrent design mentality. The Nsx has been left unchanged since 1990, something that honda has been perfecting for 15 years at least, that's why it's built so well. Ferrari's demonstrate creativity and true exotic performance. The nsx costs like 130000(canadian) and it has what 290hp, big deal, most family sedans have about 260-280hp right now. Iv'e driven bith a ferrari f355 (the cheapest ferrari BTW)and an Nsx, and honestly the NSX had an awesome tranny but the ride felt quite dull and boring when compared to the ferrari. Honda's are more relaible because honda is a company has a reputation for building relaible cars that can be driven every day, they put reliability above everything. Ferrari's focus is more on performance and looks and they are built very very, they just need to be tuned up more often. If i could afford one of these cars i would be so rich that i would be able to afford tune-ups so i just buy a ferrari!

[SiGNAL748]

Originally Posted by Tano016

Signal978: OMG, Please don't compare an NSX to a Ferrari. I've owned honda's all my life and i drive a Gsr right now and i dont have any complaints,they are great cars, but the nsx and ferrari shouldnt be put in the same sentance, completely diffrent design mentality. The Nsx has been left unchanged since 1990, something that honda has been perfecting for 15 years at least, that's why it's built so well. Ferrari's demonstrate creativity and true exotic performance. The nsx costs like 130000(canadian) and it has what 290hp, big deal, most family sedans have about 260-280hp right now. Iv'e driven bith a ferrari f355 (the cheapest ferrari BTW)and an Nsx, and honestly the NSX had an awesome tranny but the ride felt quite dull and boring when compared to the ferrari. Honda's are more relaible because honda is a company has a reputation for building relaible cars that can be driven every day, they put reliability above everything. Ferrari's focus is more on performance and looks and they are built very very, they just need to be tuned up more often. If i could afford one of these cars i would be so rich that i would be able to afford tune-ups so i just buy a ferrari!

I know you're trying to disprove me, but you're basically supporting my above statement. I never said anything about an NSX performing better than a Ferrari. The subject at hand is simply reliability. Thanks.

[SiGNAL748]

Actually I would like to retract my Ferrari>NSX performance statement. I happen to have a Top Gear video of the following cars racing;

Acura NSX
Ferrari Modena
Lamborghini Murcielago
Lamborghini Gallardo
Porsche 911 Turbo
BMW M3 CSL

The NSX holds first for almost the whole race, with the Murcielago and Gallardo pulling ahead for 1st and 2nd on the last half of the final lap. The Modena held 2nd for a good amount of time, but falls to last place by the end of the race, overtaken by the M3 coming into a turn.

If you would like a copy of this video (30mb), I will gladly provide it.

I also love how you compare a family sedan's horsepower to an NSX. Sure a family sedan may push out 300 or so horsepower, but you forgot to mention the half ton difference between the family sedan and the NSX. To put this into perspective, an NSX weighs less than my Prelude.

I totally love your idea of horsepower = performance. Power to weight ratio, weight distribution, skidpad and handling obviously have nothing to do with performance. A family sedan has much more horsepower than an NSX, which totally puts it over the NSX's head.

[Master Hiko]

im glad you caught yourself on that because i didnt want to have to point out that a NSX is well within the performance parameters of ferraris and lambos, thats what they were built to compete against and thats exactly what it is, competition.

btw, im not some honda fanboy, my dad has a 360 and i love it more than 97% of other cars. i myself have owned 2 preludes so im not biased.

[gswetsky]

Gee, guys. Talk about thread hijack!!

An S2000 is a finely tuned machine and has to be treated as such. Will it go 200,000 miles? Yes, but probably on its second engine and fourth clutch.

Let's not compare apples and oranges. Honda is a very dependable car, but you can't compare an S2000 to an Accord. It doesn't work that way. I'd expect the S2000 to still be running long after the Vette and 350Z have died and been turned into paper clips.

Hope that helps.



Gerry

agreed with wetsky...the S2000 is gonna be reliable and is gonna last probably longer then it's competition, Z4, 350, so on...but it isn't gonna be as good as an accord or civic, because it's built for performance and handling...

[mx52nv]

they are fairly reliable until you add any type of F/I, then they blow up more than most others.

[jchavis]

Originally Posted by SiGNAL748

Yes.

I know this doesn't pertain directly to the subject, but if I had the choice between an NSX and a lower model Ferrari. I'd pick the NSX, simply because it puts the build quality of a Ferrari to shame. Honda's are well built, no matter which model.

You are a god damn fool. Take the Ferrari, sell it and buy two nsx's and a couple of mods. And who the hell would put 200k on a $200,000 car that gets 9 m/gal ? Your a fool.

[jchavis]

Originally Posted by dustrman03

agreed with wetsky...the S2000 is gonna be reliable and is gonna last probably longer then it's competition, Z4, 350, so on...but it isn't gonna be as good as an accord or civic, because it's built for performance and handling...

acctually the 350z is way more dependable than the s2000 or almost any honda out there today. its first service is at 104K. it's a brand new platform and design so everything thing built into it is more advanced than the s2000 that just used existing parts on a slightly diffrent platform.

[gswetsky]

Originally Posted by jchavis

acctually the 350z is way more dependable than the s2000 or almost any honda out there today. its first service is at 104K. it's a brand new platform and design so everything thing built into it is more advanced than the s2000 that just used existing parts on a slightly diffrent platform.

You have absolutely GOT to be kidding!!! Can you say Chevy Vega? Everyone who would buy a car that is made with new unproven parts stand up. Give me tried and true every time.

My Accord has 93,000 miles on it. I've only had to put in an alternator. That's it. For dependability, give me Honda every time. Maybe you can convince a 350Z owner his car is more dependable than an S2000, but this is an S2000 forum you're in. How about some data to back up your claim? Do I have data? Yes I do - it's in the April, 2005 Consumer Reports where three Hondas, one Toyota and zero Nissans made it into the top ten picks.

As far as maintenance is concerned, here's part of a report from a long term test Edmunds ran on a 350Z......

True Market Value: $26,890
What It Sold For: $25,555
Depreciation: $9,880 or 28 percent of original price paid
Final Odometer Reading: 19,394
Total Routine Maintenance Costs: $181.50

If the first maintenance is at 104,000, what was the $181.50 for?



Gerry