Its new car time \o/

My problem with them is they are 'supposed' to be a sports car, the S2000 costs what ..£20k + to buy new, and it doesn't even have a 'proper' sports car engine. The MX5 being much cheaper in every respect raises less eyebrows for me in that respect, it's cheap and cheerful. The S2000 isn't particularly, it costs what I would expect to pay for something with a 'real' engine. That's my problem with it, most of the ones I have heard have made a pretty horrible noise too, the sound is 'half of everything' with a sports car, or it is to me at least.

What really irks me though is that I like everything about the S2000 except it's engine, it's one of those rare cars where I can honestly say it's great at what it does, it's one of the purest sports cars around today, but the engine ruins it all for me. It's just not right! ...kind of like a beautiful women that is lovely in every way, except she has a beard. Something which is impossible to get passed, the engine is so important, intrinsic to the whole mix, you can't forgive it, or let it slide, it's vital.

Janesy B said:
Wouldn't a V6 or a |6 slightly upset the balance of an MX-5 somewhat?
Click to expand...

Probably yea, the MX5 is cheap enough to get away with it though I think, just about. I would advocate making it a bit bigger though and putting a bigger engine in it ...still, you would then have a Jpaanese take on the BMW Z4 I suppose.
 
Last edited:
I'm so boring. All I can think about this car is how its a ridiculous amount of money (Deals what, £15-£16k in total?) for a 3 year old Honda S2000 :confused:
 
So because it doesn't do 0-60 in 4.7 seconds means it's not fun to drive? It's not a "petrolhead" car? Should a "proper sports car" engine have more than 4 cylinders? Bearing in mind not all cars weigh as much as a Mercedes S Class.

Anyway, you didn't answer my question. What have your silly little prejudices got to do with anything? I can play too. Why has the ST220 that's what, £20k+ to buy new, and is "supposed" to be a performance car, got front wheel drive? LOLOMGBBQROFL. etc.

And FWIW I know my MX5 is slow. :p
 
Howard said:
So because it doesn't do 0-60 in 4.7 seconds means it's not fun to drive? It's not a "petrolhead" car? Should a "proper sports car" engine have more than 4 cylinders? Bearing in mind not all cars weigh as much as a Mercedes S Class.

Anyway, you didn't answer my question. What have your silly little prejudices got to do with anything? I can play too. Why has the ST220 that's what, £20k+ to buy new, and is "supposed" to be a performance car, got front wheel drive? LOLOMGBBQROFL. etc.

And FWIW I know my MX5 is slow. :p
Click to expand...

No, it's not so much about the speed, it's about the 'feel' of the engine, how it sounds and how it delivers it's power. It's rather hard to explain actually, I think some people will know what I mean.

Obviously it needs to be quick, but not epically fast, leave that to the super cars costing super car money.

As for an ST220, what's that got to do with sports cars ? ....it's a family car with a bigger engine than usual and some sporty bits. Hardly the same thing at all. Also, I would never buy one new, I would never in a million years pay £22-£24k for a Mondeo. I know he didn't buy his S2000 new either, but that isn't my point.

I'm just sharing my views is all, and trying to get my point across. I'm not actually bashing people's car choices as such. I am trying to make people understand why I have a problem with the S2000, believe me I have problems with many other cars. But, most of them I don't really care about one way or the other, the S2000 thing gets me so much because, apart from the engine, it's such a good car otherwise, held back by Honda's relentless pursuit of VTEC nirvana, it annoys me, makes me want to scream "WHY DID YOU DO THAT" into a pillow etc. If only they had used some variation on the NSX engine in it, it could have been magnificent I think, although it's also VTEC I know, at least they started with a good base for a sports car.

As you probably realise, I don't have an issue with VTEC, not at all, just Honda making 'performance' oriented cars with 4 cylinder engines with VTEC technology that basically makes the car only interesting to drive once you rev the bejasus out of it. Otherwise, you could be driving any 4 pot run of the mill bland-mobile tbh. The Civic Type R I can excuse, it's a hot hatch, different kettle of fish really, but doing it to the S2000 is a tragedy.

Anyway I will shut up now, I think I made myself sufficiently clear.

Enjoy your S2000 anyway Sin. Just think of what it might have been though, if Honda had done things differently with the engine.
 
Last edited:
Surely it's down to preference. Some people like revvy 4 pots and some don't. There's nothing wrong with the S2000, I think the soundtrack matches it perfectly. Take the case of the MGB, the stereotypical English sports car, with the 4cyl jump it handles well, as soon as they stuffed a |6 lead weight in the front it ruined the car, totally.
 
S2000 is a brilliant car, perfect timing for it too. Agree with Fox about the price but thats main dealer facilities for you :)
 
Moeks said:
Also, I would never buy one new, I would never in a million years pay £22-£24k for a Mondeo. I know he didn't buy his S2000 new either, but that isn't my point.

I'm just sharing my views is all, and trying to get my point across. .
Click to expand...


I think you are one of the people who maybe shouldnt talk about buying cars eh? recent history and all that.... ;]
 
Oh yea, it's down to personal preference. As I said though, it gets me 'personally' because if I liked the engine, I would probably buy one. I really like them otherwise. But, grrr, just grrr Honda. It's like someone mixed Olives into my favourite food (I hate Olives btw) ...nearly, so close, almost, right recipe ...but damn it they ruined it.

Morba said:
I think you are one of the people who maybe shouldnt talk about buying cars eh? recent history and all that.... ;]
Click to expand...

Yea well, £24k doesn't look so bad for a loaded Porsche though really does it, only when that turned into £32.5k and my money started to burn before my eyes that it became a bad idea. If I earned twice as much as I do, I'd have probably gone through with it anyway. Although in retrospect, the Boxster isn't really me, so for non financial reasons I am glad I didn't go through with it too. All I can say is, I was having an early life crisis. Anyway, nevermind that, there has been more than enough 'me' on this forum of late, this isn't my thread so I don't want to talk about me in it, if you don't mind. Just cars :)
 
Last edited:
Oh I want to drive it, it's on my list of must drives. Maybe I will change my mind, but I doubt it. It doesn't make the right noise for a start and it has what ...150bhp or so when you're outside of the VTEC zone. So experience with plenty of other cars with 'similar' power, tells me, I doubt I will change my mind, but stranger things have happened I suppose.

I will give the car a chance to impress me, and if I like it, when I do get around to driving one, I will say so here. And I will accept whatever you throw at me for what I have said in the past. But I have this gut feeling, that it wont work for me. Besides, you'll all be having a huge laugh if I do come back and say I was wrong and that the engine is great, I am sure.

Some call Honda engineers geniuses, I call them miss-guided for the most part. I guess that comes down to preference for one philosophy of 'engines' or another though.
 
Last edited:
Moeks said:
Some call Honda engineers geniuses, I call them miss-guided for the most part. I guess that comes down to preference for one philosophy of 'engines' or another though.
Click to expand...

I cannot agree and I hate VTEC engines. The thing is, I hate VTEC engines because they absolutely do not suit my driving style and not because they are crap because they are not - if you love to rev the **** out of your car then a VTEC powerplant is a hugely rewarding engine and delivers excellent performance, a Honda S2000 is NOT a slow car when driven in the correct manner.

For you, an S2000 would be rubbish, for me as well, but this doesn't make it a rubbish car full stop nor does it make Hondas engineers misguided simply because we'd prefer a niec 6 pot. There are other cars for people like us.

Not to our taste does not = crap. Surely you can see how VTEC would fit in with other peoples tastes? I'm all for slating fundamentally crap cars, like the Vauxhall Vectra, but the S2000 is very much not in this category. It's different, not rubbish.
 
Moeks said:
for a start and it has what ...150bhp or so when you're outside of the VTEC zone.
Click to expand...
I often read this comment as if its like flicking a switch from 150 BHP mode to VTEC. I thought that ignoring the slight 'kick' at VTEC it was just a system of allowing the torque to continue higher up into the rev range before tailing off?

Whilst for blatting up the motorway all day this rev for the power setup might get old I can't imagine anything better for when your on it driving a country lane.

Oh and congrats on the purchase but shame on you for lack of pics :p
 
Last edited:
The S2000 engine bashing slightly confuses me. It was always going to get a vtec screamer with a crazy redline figure, you just need to look at Honda's history over the last 20 years. It's not like they are dog slow either w/o vtec, they just come alive when you do. It's definately a marmite power delivery, but judgement is probably best kept reserved until it has been driven, especially since you like the other aspects of the car enough. Even the NSX was on a similar basis just on a larger scale.

Also you can always chuck a supercharger on them (which at least 2 people here have iirc) and that will provide 350+bhp from what I remember, and the power delivery will feel like of something of a larger displacement.

The MX-5 would actually quite happily take a V6, it was originally designed by the Americans to take one. This can be seen by amount of space in the engine bay, allowing V8 conversions to be more popular of recent too. However as the whole car was basically based on the Lotus Elan they decided the engine's characteristic's more important, thus the the rev happy 4 pots. Yes the MX-5 is often deemed underpowered, but it is generally accepted that when you drive one that the bhp figures are largely irrelevant.

Sorry for contuining the slightly off topic nature of the topic.

Back on topic, nice car and I hope you get a chance to enjoy. Albeit I also have one foot in the Fox/Jez camp regarding the nature of the deal. Enjoy non the less. :)
 
Fox,
I actually said pretty well what you said over the space of several posts. I think it was just the way that I worded it perhaps that may have lead you to think I was saying it was crap, I wasn't far from it. I really do not like the engine, but otherwise I think it's a great car. The whole VTEC concept and implementation is a marvel of engineering really, getting so much out of so little and all. But, as you said, it doesn’t suite me, or you, some people I am sure it does.

Doesn't mean I can't show my disdain for it though, I have made the reasons for my thinking fairly clear I think. I am absolutely not saying it is crap though, I'm not even saying the engine is crap, not at all. Nor do I really believe Honda should consult me on what kind of engine I would like them to use :p ...(be nice if they did though!) ... I am just, well (for want of a better phrase)...just saying is all I suppose. As I said, my initial jab at them, was playful, tongue in cheek predictability really.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom