Honda S2000

jp7152

jp7152

jp7152

Associate
Joined
14 Oct 2003
Posts
1,580
How are these cars?

I must admit, i'm quite tempted. I know it's going to lack the pure straight line performance of the e36 M3 i'm currently driving, however to have a newer car with less miles and a soft-top is really tempting.

Are there any downsides to these cars, and is it possible to get any more power from the car whilst still retaining reliability?

I would want an earlier car (mostly because I couldn't afford a newer one,) and partly as I'd prefer one which handles as it was designed to. :)

What kind of price can I get a decent UK spec car for? Any advice?

Or should I keep the M3? Thanks
 
It depends what you want. If you want an amazing sexy convertible VTEC monster the S2000 is fab. If you're happy with a fast saloon which can take more than 1 passenger then keep it. 2 very different cars really. Mods for the s2000 are quite rare without going pretty serious and spending a lot of money.
 
jp7152 said:
How are these cars?

I must admit, i'm quite tempted. I know it's going to lack the pure straight line performance of the e36 M3 i'm currently driving, however to have a newer car with less miles and a soft-top is really tempting.

Are there any downsides to these cars, and is it possible to get any more power from the car whilst still retaining reliability?

I would want an earlier car (mostly because I couldn't afford a newer one,) and partly as I'd prefer one which handles as it was designed to. :)

What kind of price can I get a decent UK spec car for? Any advice?

Or should I keep the M3? Thanks
Click to expand...

Is the E36 M3 the older shape or the current new shape?

If its the older one I'd have said straight line performance is similar, S2000 takes just under 14s to hit 100mph but gets back to 0mph a lot quicker. Think the old style M3 is something like 13-14s and about 12.5's for the EVO model with the newer ones been sub 12's.

Also the S2000 takes a lot more effort to drive, to get the most you gotta go through the gears due to lack of torque and keep the revs above 6000rpm. Even though the BMW's are superb handling cars and very much a drivers car I'd say the S2000 has the edge and yes I've driven them all. Though the S2000 you have gotta give 110% concentration all the time, I had an early 1999 model which was designed around the driver the most and it was a handful at times. The newer ones got a bit more user friendly but the rear end on them is still very snappy, drifting them is hard wheres drifting an M3 is not so hard.

If I was you an S2000 would be the better car over the older M3, you will have a lot more fun, then engine note is oh so much nicer especially with an exhaust fitted and you will have the roof down on even not so hot days so you can listen to that engine sing. Plus if you want to pull the ladies you will have them flocking as its the kind of car girls love except the S2000 is very much not a hairdresser vehicle it can really shift and out handle the best in the right hands.

On the other hand if you have the newer M3 well thats an awsome car, very quick and great handling, still not quite as fun as the S2000 plus to most people its just another BMW, so S2000 will be a rewarding experience. :)
 
It's an older M3 Evo (E36), but has a couple of modifications so is making nearly 300bhp at the wheels.

What I don't like about it is it feels heavy and it feels old. Controls aren't crisp anymore and it costs massive amounts to run.

What are the running costs of the S2000 going to be like?

The M3 averages about 22MPG which isn't too bad, but it won't run on anything less than 97 octane.
 
E36 is the shape introduced in 1990 Gibbo, not the newer shape :)

JP, i'd change, purely because although the E36 M3 is a great car, it lacks the summer pose factor of the S2000 which is oh so important at this time of year :D
 
S2000 has always been my dream car. Really fantastic convertables. Insurance is insane though :( get a 2002 year car and you will have some nice revisions, glass rear screen, suspension changes etc

Earlier cars than that tend to be a bit twitchy handling wise. Best thing to do is test drive one and see what you think :)
 
Jez said:
JP, i'd change, purely because although the E36 M3 is a great car, it lacks the summer pose factor of the S2000 which is oh so important at this time of year :D
Click to expand...

Def! :D

And with 240bhp standard it's no slouch either really. They do look damned sexy too.
 
jp7152 said:
It's an older M3 Evo (E36), but has a couple of modifications so is making nearly 300bhp at the wheels.

What I don't like about it is it feels heavy and it feels old. Controls aren't crisp anymore and it costs massive amounts to run.

What are the running costs of the S2000 going to be like?

The M3 averages about 22MPG which isn't too bad, but it won't run on anything less than 97 octane.
Click to expand...

Running cost of an S2000 are pretty low. Get a UK car with full Honda service history and you will be fine. They get around 25-28MPG but are best run on Optimax fuel. Insurance will be similar to your M3 maybe cheaper and the S2000 is a far more exclusive vehicle in a way.
 
Will tends to only drive 'proper fast' cars so he found moving to an S2000 similar to what we'd feel if we picked up the keys to a Corsa 1.2 :D
 
Jonnycoupe said:
or just used to/more suited to grunty stuff?
Click to expand...

The 2litre motor produces a little over 150ft-lbs of torque at a heady 7500rpm - you can't put "grunty" in the same sentence as that and keep a straight face :) I don't care how much power the engine has - if that is all the torque that it can bring to the party then it cannot be called grunty. As a side-note - at least Honda did the decent thing in the North American market and put a 2.2litre motor in it from 2004 onwards (don't know if they did here or not) - more torque, and it comes in at a much lower rpm.

***edit***

Fox, that comparison is insulting.






To 1.2 Corsas. ;)
 
Do you need a grammar lesson?

If hes used to grunty stuff rather than the S2000 that makes no suggestion thats the s2000 is actually 'grunty' itself. So you don't really point out that someone needs to keep a straight face over something that was never suggested ;)

Although im not really sure how much more torque other 2.0 NA engines will make... its not much more, let alone wheel torque with short gears. Lets keep it relative in the bashing, it is just a 2 litre Naturally aspirated lump.

Wouldn't mind a S2000 one day purely for the pose/pure sports car side, but not really sure if I'd like it as i hear a lot of the 'really have to ring its neck' :( Will have to blag a test drive some day :)
 
Until I got my Prelude, I'd never driven a VTEC car.

Keeping it at high revs isn't really an issue when you're gunning it, and it's not that difficult to drop down a cog.

Most of the comments you'll find come from people who have never driven a VTEC.

I do like my VTEC engine, sure it's a different power delivery to other engines, but it's still fun, especially when you hear that change-over point (definitely noticeable on my H22A, not sure how noticeable it is on the F20C) and hear/see it screaming very high on the rev counter!
 
They are quick. Oh yes, they go very nicely.

BUT...

It has to be worked hard. Fine when "flexing" the car through the gears down an empty road but what happens when you need a sudden burst of power (such as an overtake?)
Well, basically you need to ram it down 2 gears. Now, on my Civic, this meant to make any headway on a motorway you need to change down to 3rd - try doing that smoothly at 60-70. The Civic is not the S2000, but its the same effect.

It's really on the motorway when that kind of engine fails to shine.

As mentioned, get to a hill and its change down time again.

I was sick of VTEC by the end. Yup its reliable, and in the S2000s case you get a stunning car with very good performance and excellent running costs.
Its amazing for a 2 litre, but marvelling at that fact doesnt equal long term happiness with the car. Its the drive that counts.

Plenty of people love the way VTEC's drive, but if you use the motorway and you've had a larger engine or a turbo before I cant help but think you'll get bored of it pretty quickly, just like I did.
 
Jonnycoupe said:
Do you need a grammar lesson?

If hes used to grunty stuff rather than the S2000 that makes no suggestion thats the s2000 is actually 'grunty' itself. So you don't really point out that someone needs to keep a straight face over something that was never suggested ;)
Click to expand...


I'm well aware that it makes no suggestion about the S2000 - surprisingly enough, I have developed this ability to read text that is placed in front of me. I simply said that you can't put "grunty" and "S2000" in the same sentence and keep a straight face :)
 
if you have a look at some of the best in motoring vids the s2000 keeps up, and woops, some seriously nice metal on the track. The main problem is its kind of geared to wards driving on the track. Its a difficult car to driver really well, but when it is it responds incredibly well :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom