mk1_salami
mk1_salami
Guy with the Tokyo number plate? It sounded epic when I heard it. I always wanted a bit of sport with that but it never happened! Really nice looking and sounding car.
Honda S2000
- Thread starter skimpybeardy
- Start date
Guy with the Tokyo number plate? It sounded epic when I heard it. I always wanted a bit of sport with that but it never happened! Really nice looking and sounding car.
Depends how you define "fast/slow", they are decent in a straight line, decent in bends but it does not excel in either.
It is a good all round car, but not "amazing"
You do really have to cane them to achieve their full performance though. 240bhp in a car with more cylinders or forced induction will initially feel faster.
But they're by no means slow, and great fun
mk1_salami
mk1_salami
In reality there's not much in it between an S2K and an EP3 Civic Type R. So to summarise; last generation hot hatch fast.
Disagree based on experience. Standard they will do a 13.9@100 quarter.
mk1_salami
mk1_salami
On a roll on, there is nothing in it in my experience. S2k quartermile time is lower because the CTR's can't launch for toffee.
This is from a 2006 S2K with Toda full system, K&N fancy induction kit and remap, 2 up against an EP3 with cat back system and 1 up. From 40-110 ish numerous times.
This is from a 2006 S2K with Toda full system, K&N fancy induction kit and remap, 2 up against an EP3 with cat back system and 1 up. From 40-110 ish numerous times.
Last edited by a moderator:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 11,924
- Location
- London, McLaren or Radical
That Rotrex is a beast & the price isn't bad either... a no-brainer if you have the cash spare (if I did, I would have already snapped it up 
)
)
S2000's arent slow, and yes, on paper everyone says "OMGZ no torques!!11" in the real world, its fine. You dont have to rag it to go fast either.
I wanted one for 8 years and ive not been disappointed with mine. I love it
Mine is an 02 with glass rear screen. I would at least get an 02 or newer just so you dont have to worry about that rear screen.
fairly sure mine needs the Geo / bushes doing, as it feels a bit sloppy. They do suffer with siezed bushes quite a lot too.
/edited to add, insurance is a killer too, but I didnt do too bad at 25 with 3NCB, got it for £800 with elephant, but thats with 2 females on the policy too.
Also I have the Spoon N1 exhaust system.
I wanted one for 8 years and ive not been disappointed with mine. I love it
Mine is an 02 with glass rear screen. I would at least get an 02 or newer just so you dont have to worry about that rear screen.
fairly sure mine needs the Geo / bushes doing, as it feels a bit sloppy. They do suffer with siezed bushes quite a lot too.
/edited to add, insurance is a killer too, but I didnt do too bad at 25 with 3NCB, got it for £800 with elephant, but thats with 2 females on the policy too.
Also I have the Spoon N1 exhaust system.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 11,924
- Location
- London, McLaren or Radical
Can't see how any S2000 couldn't take an EP3 - there's a 40bhp difference at the flywheel and practically same weights.
Rear Wheel Drive + lower centre of mavity = faster round corners
FWD FTL
I will never buy another FWD car...
I have a 240bhp mk1 mx5 at the minute, which flys
Next car on the list is an s2000
As for drag racing... rear wheel drive wins again... due to the torque moment created due to acceleration, the weight is shifted towards the read of the car, pressing down more on the rear tyres & reducing pressure on the front tyres... meaning an equivalent RWD car will trounce a FWD in a straight line...
Last edited:
Torque is over played, most high revving cars don't have masses of torque, they are simply built to deliver horses not torque. A sports car is about bhp not torque. If you want torque buy a wafter with an auto box. If you want a sports car buy something that revs freely, has a sharp throttle and reacts to a couple of mill of feet movement.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
The whole "no torques" thing is a bit of a moot point though.
The S2000 does not have no torque, it just gets tarnished with that brush because of the segment it sits in. There are other cars with less or similar torque that do not get brandished with the no torque label.
The S2000 does not have no torque, it just gets tarnished with that brush because of the segment it sits in. There are other cars with less or similar torque that do not get brandished with the no torque label.
The torque is fine when compared to any other 2L NA engine.
Some local rally teams have chucked them into their cars now, limit lowered to 2.0 litre...the choice was obvious
Once your above 20mph the car is very quick when you keep it on the boil. Most peoples talent will run out before the cars speed and handling will.
Once your above 20mph the car is very quick when you keep it on the boil. Most peoples talent will run out before the cars speed and handling will.
It's a brilliant car to drive - the only thing imo that would make it even better is more power! Don't get me wrong it's quick, plenty enough to have fun in but it looks/feels like it should be faster!!
It's set up for more certainly-
fully forged / balanced b/e capable of handling boost with no changes
LSD + Wide rears for grip
50/50 weight distribution
fully adjustable geometry
Good at higher speeds - piles on speed alarmingly quick, even at higher speeds
An EPIC gearbox!!! - I love the box, as Sin says I just want to change gears for fun, it makes the other cars i've driven feel like i'm stirring porridge!
It's set up for more certainly-
fully forged / balanced b/e capable of handling boost with no changes
LSD + Wide rears for grip
50/50 weight distribution
fully adjustable geometry
Good at higher speeds - piles on speed alarmingly quick, even at higher speeds
An EPIC gearbox!!! - I love the box, as Sin says I just want to change gears for fun, it makes the other cars i've driven feel like i'm stirring porridge!
Last edited:
