RE: You Know You Want To: Honda S2000
Discussion
I WISH said:
Never picked up on the twitchiness and handling issues before. I seem to remember that a certain Vicky Butler Henderson used to say that it was her very favouritest sports car.
Still love the looks.
Yeah, not bad for an older design. And the S2k isn't bad to look at either.Still love the looks.
It's very interesting reading all of the responses on this topic especially related to handling etc. Yes the car has some faults and should've been developed and improved further by Honda and the later engines, mainly 09 onwards are not bulletproof (shame on Honda for not acting on my last 2 points). The point that has been lost however is that for the money you can pick one of these up for they are an amazing deal! Tbh insurance seems to be pretty subjective per company based on age, where you leave and previous record and believe me for a lot of the younger members who have been quote high premiums, a boxster s won't be much better.
Let's face it, this car's history and pedigree speak for itself:
The S2000 was on Car and Driver's Ten Best list for 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2004.
The S2000 was the highest-ranked model in the J. D. Power and Associates Vehicle Dependability Study "Premium Sports Car" class for 2004,[28] 2006,[29] and 2008[30] and consistently held one of the top three positions.
The S2000 was ranked number #1 in the BBC Top Gear Survey in 2004, 2005, and 2006.[31]
The S2000 was ranked as "Best Affordable Sports Car" by U.S. News & World Report in 2008[32] and 2009[33]
The F20C engine won the International Engine of the Year award in the "1.8- to 2-litre" size category for five years from 2000 through 2004.
Even look across to the article and subsequent forum topic on the Mazda 180......the S still looks like a better deal.
Let's face it, this car's history and pedigree speak for itself:
The S2000 was on Car and Driver's Ten Best list for 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2004.
The S2000 was the highest-ranked model in the J. D. Power and Associates Vehicle Dependability Study "Premium Sports Car" class for 2004,[28] 2006,[29] and 2008[30] and consistently held one of the top three positions.
The S2000 was ranked number #1 in the BBC Top Gear Survey in 2004, 2005, and 2006.[31]
The S2000 was ranked as "Best Affordable Sports Car" by U.S. News & World Report in 2008[32] and 2009[33]
The F20C engine won the International Engine of the Year award in the "1.8- to 2-litre" size category for five years from 2000 through 2004.
Even look across to the article and subsequent forum topic on the Mazda 180......the S still looks like a better deal.
A (mostly) interesting thread, about a car which I have never had much interest in until now, when they becoming a compelling value proposition. That said, is every £4k S2000 going to have the seized suspension adjustment that needs £1000-£1500 to sort?
I am certainly tempted to test drive one to see how they feel. If the cars are indeed more snappy at the limit than mid-engined stuff like an Exige or Boxster, I can't see how that is anything but a shortcoming, given the S2000's layout should allow it to be relatively benign at the limit.
But like torque-steer on FWD cars, some people will enjoy a car's traits that others see as shortcomings.
I am certainly tempted to test drive one to see how they feel. If the cars are indeed more snappy at the limit than mid-engined stuff like an Exige or Boxster, I can't see how that is anything but a shortcoming, given the S2000's layout should allow it to be relatively benign at the limit.
But like torque-steer on FWD cars, some people will enjoy a car's traits that others see as shortcomings.
Hasbeen said:
I think there are very many people who are front drive demons, but have real trouble adapting to rear drive, & things like the S2k in particular, so don't like the car. That's fine, why should they try to get to like something, which does not really suit them. I have driven a lot of quick RWD stuff, & find the S2k a delightful if rather unforgiving bundle of fun.
Sure you can't steer it on throttle like my 4.6L V8 320+ bhp TR8, & yes the steering is too quick & too light to my likings, & very dead, but tell me one car that has ever given you everything perfectly. A car designed to maintain high mid corner speeds, it does not respond well to the slow in, & heaps of throttle on the way out, that works so well with front drive, but if you use it's abilities it's great.
It does turn in brilliantly, & the balance through medium to quick stuff is beautiful. Yes it does require concentration when driven quickly, but isn't that what we want with performance cars? There are plenty of other cars that will allow the driver to kid himself he's the next Fangio, at quite low, & safe cornering forces.
I love the way it can do such a good impersonation of the wife's Mazda 2, puttering quietly around the town when asked. To most people I can be another hairdresser, in my early MX5, something the deep rumble of the V8 in the Triumph makes impossible, even in the car park.
Any PH-er should know that a manual revving to 9000RPM is going to be a pain in stop start traffic, but if that's not something you do too often, then an S2K may be your ideal car.
Sure you can't steer it on throttle like my 4.6L V8 320+ bhp TR8, & yes the steering is too quick & too light to my likings, & very dead, but tell me one car that has ever given you everything perfectly. A car designed to maintain high mid corner speeds, it does not respond well to the slow in, & heaps of throttle on the way out, that works so well with front drive, but if you use it's abilities it's great.
It does turn in brilliantly, & the balance through medium to quick stuff is beautiful. Yes it does require concentration when driven quickly, but isn't that what we want with performance cars? There are plenty of other cars that will allow the driver to kid himself he's the next Fangio, at quite low, & safe cornering forces.
I love the way it can do such a good impersonation of the wife's Mazda 2, puttering quietly around the town when asked. To most people I can be another hairdresser, in my early MX5, something the deep rumble of the V8 in the Triumph makes impossible, even in the car park.
Any PH-er should know that a manual revving to 9000RPM is going to be a pain in stop start traffic, but if that's not something you do too often, then an S2K may be your ideal car.
well putbraddo said:
A (mostly) interesting thread, about a car which I have never had much interest in until now, when they becoming a compelling value proposition. That said, is every £4k S2000 going to have the seized suspension adjustment that needs £1000-£1500 to sort?
I am certainly tempted to test drive one to see how they feel. If the cars are indeed more snappy at the limit than mid-engined stuff like an Exige or Boxster, I can't see how that is anything but a shortcoming, given the S2000's layout should allow it to be relatively benign at the limit.
But like torque-steer on FWD cars, some people will enjoy a car's traits that others see as shortcomings.
Braddo they are not more twitchy than a Exige or Boxster, but they do move quickly at the limit, or when the limit is induced by clumsy throttle/wheel application. They are on wide rubber, often quite stick as well, so of course the high grip limit gives a quick breakaway.I am certainly tempted to test drive one to see how they feel. If the cars are indeed more snappy at the limit than mid-engined stuff like an Exige or Boxster, I can't see how that is anything but a shortcoming, given the S2000's layout should allow it to be relatively benign at the limit.
But like torque-steer on FWD cars, some people will enjoy a car's traits that others see as shortcomings.
One of the cars problems is that it's a Honda. Many people who would never even consider a Lotus or Porsche think a Honda is suitable for "normal" people. With todays prices, in the US, doting dads are buying the things as a fashion accessory for their college kids.
Where a Celica or Peugeot convertible makes a nice posing car for a fashionable lady, the S is not really suitable, unless she's a PH type as well.
You should go drive one, but don't expect it to respond to hot hatch techniques, those are too ham fisted for an S. Here in Oz, where a high percentage of our kids had rear drive large engined old Holdens or Ford Falcons, often V8s, as their first cars, the S is nothing special, & holds no fears.
In fact, it is more likely to be considered a bit girly. Here many still believe, "if you ain't got 8 you ain't got enough".
PS. I just looked at your garage. I think an S2k will be quite to your likings.
Edited by Hasbeen on Wednesday 19th September 04:20
I don’t particularly want to start picking apart another forum users post, and I fully respect that everyone has opinions, none more or less valid than the next – so don’t take this as negative, but I thought in the interests of giving Braddo a prospective purchaser of a used S2K, a balanced perspective on them, as an ex long term owner of an 02 S2K I should probably comment on the post below.
The S2000 by comparison, never *really* instilled that sort of trust, the closer you got to the limit the more and more you got the sense that you needed more feedback but were receiving it with little nuggets filtered out. Even when keeping inputs smooth and being careful not to unbalance the car, setting it up for corners, and monitoring weight transfer it felt like the car was doing my bidding but against its wishes, there was always a nagging doubt that it might bite. Let me suffix this by saying that I never crashed mine, I span it several times on tracks/airfield days when exploring power oversteer with an instructor, and I had a couple of big moments on the road whilst driving “enthusiastically” but not aggressively. I should also say that I had some really engaging drives in the car – to a certain level and in the dry the car does gel, it just always felt to me that past a certain point the car began to feel ragged and I didn’t enjoy the drive. In the wet, all bets were off completely – but then as others have said, I wouldn’t attempt to drive any sports car fast in the wet so this was less of a problem and more a case of being on high alert for anything that might unsettle the car in normal driving. Likewise as I stated previously – for me, the car didn’t feel easily recoverable if there was a “moment” because the car snapped quickly into oversteer and there never seemed to be enough time to apply enough corrective lock (its also worthy of note for me, that the various moments I witnessed or read about from fellow owners tended not to be “tank slappers” where overcorrection was the problem – it all tended to happen in one big violent transition into oversteer which there wasn’t enough time or lock available to correct – this underlines that even in slow speed accidents that the problem was the speed with which it broke away and the lack of feedback available to the driver up unto that point).
t, instead of showing it respect” etc etc is just not true, or objective. Don’t take my word for this, Google and research the car, and read a cross section of motoring reviews.
I am not suggesting the S2000 is a widow maker, the handling is not *that* much of an issue. However I am suggesting that for whatever reason the S2000 does not instil as much confidence in the driver as its peer cars might, and that the handling can be snappy at the limit, which is a problem in a car which is a little light on steering feel / feedback. This is what makes me feel that the S2000 is compromised as a sports car. I say this having driven many cars which I knew to have had reputations as widow makers, or that I knew to be “a handful” (The Tuscan Speed 6 I had a few blasts in was indeed “all martial and no art” at times to my mind, but it was still a very enjoyable brute, and I felt confident in what it was doing, when it was doing it).
The S2000 has a very loyal following, to its credit. I think this is one of the reasons why it is hard to get an objective opinion on its flaws. However the above was my opinion and finding on it, over a 4 year ownership period, as was the finding of petrol head friends (two mates also had S2Ks).
Absolutely. All of this internet nonsense is no replacement for you personally reviewing the car by the seat of your pants, after all these are all just opinions – and who is to say that my car, and that of my friends (despite being bought new, and not modified) were “badly set up” or non geo’d examples which might have been improved ?. I know not. Just make sure you get enough time in the drivers seat of one to form your own opinion as well as having it mechanically appraised before you stump up your hard earned for one. With regard to the ham fisted techniques, this goes without saying on any transition from FWD to RWD, you would need to adjust driving style.
This is your opinion so I am not about to argue. However I would add that personally I have driven a lot of big engined cars, and various different sports cars, I found the S2000’s handling characteristics to be different to many of them, and not always in a good way.
In summation – for 4K I would definitely go and look at one, the S2000 is in many ways a great car. It does have its flaws though, and I would hate someone to accept this internet derived “its only idiots that crash them, Im a good driver and therefore the S2000 is a fine handling vehicle”- I am afraid that more consideration than that is required, despite what the cars loyal following might tell you. It’s a good car, and is more than the sum of its parts, but its handling is far from its best feature and warrants a warning.
All of the above is of course just my opinion … go drive one, and make sure you get the top down !.
R.
Hasbeen said:
Braddo they are not more twitchy than a Exige or Boxster, but they do move quickly at the limit
Personally I don’t agree with this – I have not driven an Exige, although I have passengered several times in a well sorted one (still the quickest point to point experience of my life to date), I therefore cannot comment on this. The Boxster, and Boxster S I have driven on several occasions and the way that the Boxster grips and indeed begins to unload that grip at the limit of adhesion is completely different to the way in which the S2000 does so. Without trying to accurately describe something you should “feel” through finger tip feed back and the seat of your pants, in prose – the best I can do is to tell you that when pressing on in the Boxster the car felt fluid and and trustworthy, unless I sawed at the wheel (in which case the car responded less gracefully) the car could be made to dance and gave good feedback on the loading of its corners, which allowed me to search its performance envelope that little bit more.The S2000 by comparison, never *really* instilled that sort of trust, the closer you got to the limit the more and more you got the sense that you needed more feedback but were receiving it with little nuggets filtered out. Even when keeping inputs smooth and being careful not to unbalance the car, setting it up for corners, and monitoring weight transfer it felt like the car was doing my bidding but against its wishes, there was always a nagging doubt that it might bite. Let me suffix this by saying that I never crashed mine, I span it several times on tracks/airfield days when exploring power oversteer with an instructor, and I had a couple of big moments on the road whilst driving “enthusiastically” but not aggressively. I should also say that I had some really engaging drives in the car – to a certain level and in the dry the car does gel, it just always felt to me that past a certain point the car began to feel ragged and I didn’t enjoy the drive. In the wet, all bets were off completely – but then as others have said, I wouldn’t attempt to drive any sports car fast in the wet so this was less of a problem and more a case of being on high alert for anything that might unsettle the car in normal driving. Likewise as I stated previously – for me, the car didn’t feel easily recoverable if there was a “moment” because the car snapped quickly into oversteer and there never seemed to be enough time to apply enough corrective lock (its also worthy of note for me, that the various moments I witnessed or read about from fellow owners tended not to be “tank slappers” where overcorrection was the problem – it all tended to happen in one big violent transition into oversteer which there wasn’t enough time or lock available to correct – this underlines that even in slow speed accidents that the problem was the speed with which it broke away and the lack of feedback available to the driver up unto that point).
Hasbeen said:
, or when the limit is induced by clumsy throttle/wheel application. They are on wide rubber, often quite stick as well, so of course the high grip limit gives a quick breakaway.
This is by far and away the biggest problem when trying to form a subjective opinion of the S2000 – especially so on the internet. No one likes to have their favourite car “insulted”, and I can understand the vitriol with which the S2K is defended, in many other ways it’s a very very good car. However the notion that its “bad drivers”, or “people transitioning to their first RWD from FWD and not understanding RWD”, or “People driving it like a tt, instead of showing it respect” etc etc is just not true, or objective. Don’t take my word for this, Google and research the car, and read a cross section of motoring reviews. I am not suggesting the S2000 is a widow maker, the handling is not *that* much of an issue. However I am suggesting that for whatever reason the S2000 does not instil as much confidence in the driver as its peer cars might, and that the handling can be snappy at the limit, which is a problem in a car which is a little light on steering feel / feedback. This is what makes me feel that the S2000 is compromised as a sports car. I say this having driven many cars which I knew to have had reputations as widow makers, or that I knew to be “a handful” (The Tuscan Speed 6 I had a few blasts in was indeed “all martial and no art” at times to my mind, but it was still a very enjoyable brute, and I felt confident in what it was doing, when it was doing it).
The S2000 has a very loyal following, to its credit. I think this is one of the reasons why it is hard to get an objective opinion on its flaws. However the above was my opinion and finding on it, over a 4 year ownership period, as was the finding of petrol head friends (two mates also had S2Ks).
Hasbeen said:
One of the cars problems is that it's a Honda. Many people who would never even consider a Lotus or Porsche think a Honda is suitable for "normal" people. With todays prices, in the US, doting dads are buying the things as a fashion accessory for their college kids.
I believe there is some credence in this – people “expect” a Honda to be safe, reliable, bullet proof. I think many also equate the S2K to an “MX5’s bigger brother” and expect the same benign handling traits when in fact the S2000 simply isn’t the same animal at all. Personally I think it has more in common with the Elise than it does with the MX5, it is a harder more focussed car. This probably adds to the “surprise” that the handling might spring on someone. Hasbeen said:
You should go drive one, but don't expect it to respond to hot hatch techniques, those are too ham fisted for an S.
Absolutely. All of this internet nonsense is no replacement for you personally reviewing the car by the seat of your pants, after all these are all just opinions – and who is to say that my car, and that of my friends (despite being bought new, and not modified) were “badly set up” or non geo’d examples which might have been improved ?. I know not. Just make sure you get enough time in the drivers seat of one to form your own opinion as well as having it mechanically appraised before you stump up your hard earned for one. With regard to the ham fisted techniques, this goes without saying on any transition from FWD to RWD, you would need to adjust driving style.
Hasbeen said:
Here in Oz, where a high percentage of our kids had rear drive large engined old Holdens or Ford Falcons, often V8s, as their first cars, the S is nothing special, & holds no fears.
This is your opinion so I am not about to argue. However I would add that personally I have driven a lot of big engined cars, and various different sports cars, I found the S2000’s handling characteristics to be different to many of them, and not always in a good way.
In summation – for 4K I would definitely go and look at one, the S2000 is in many ways a great car. It does have its flaws though, and I would hate someone to accept this internet derived “its only idiots that crash them, Im a good driver and therefore the S2000 is a fine handling vehicle”- I am afraid that more consideration than that is required, despite what the cars loyal following might tell you. It’s a good car, and is more than the sum of its parts, but its handling is far from its best feature and warrants a warning.
All of the above is of course just my opinion … go drive one, and make sure you get the top down !.
R.
Edited by M@verick on Wednesday 19th September 11:21
Now that is a good post from maverick. Probably the most well reasoned and explained post I have ever seen about the car :-)
I've had mine now for 8 years and 70k miles, it's a 2001. I have been actively looking for an alternative for probably the last 3 or 4 years as it has aged. For a combination of reasons I have not been able to find something that offered the enjoyment I get from it for the amount of money that I would have had to put in to do it, both in terms of purchase price and ongoing maintenance. I've tried lots of things, mostly RWD and 'sporty' from 996, M3, 335i, 350z, to RS4 etc etc.
I agree that the car isn't perfect, far from it. Yes it can be uncomfortable on a long drive and it is noisy and the radio is rubbish and taller people can't get in it. Yes the steering needs more feel, especially when compared to a 911 or an Elise, but if you listen very carefully you can hear what it's saying to you, this takes a lot of time, miles and effort to 'get'. The idea of the electric steering at the time was to minimise power losses over a traditional hydraulic system. It still has more feel than the 2004 M3 I tested, or the 2006 RS4 for example, or my wife's new 3 series (and almost every car I've driven made since 2004. Yes the power delivery is an acquired taste, and some people don't get it, which is fair enough, I've also had sportsbikes and it's more like that than any other car, with a distinct change as the cam profiles change. This can also catch people out, when I first got mine I went to overtake someone in 2nd gear in the rain and had a scary moment when I hit vtec and got wheelspin. I was careful not to be quite so lead footed after that.
I think there are a number of factors which lead to a lot of people criticising the handling. The difference between dry and wet grip is marked and a lot bigger than in an average car. This was magnified by the OEM fitment Bridgestone SO2 tires on the original 16" wheeled cars, which were really good in the dry and scary in the wet, and potentially lethal when it was really cold. Different tires goes a long way to changing this behaviour (and you can no longer get the original tires anyway). The difference that changing the tires makes highlights that the car is very sensitive to this, and also to the pressures. I can tell if my rears are slightly low very easily. The fronts also tend to wear the inside edge first (where it's hard to see), so you can get really bad understeer and not realise why. As has already been mentioned the transition from gripping to slipping can be very sudden. In part this is due to it being relatively light, with wide sticky tires, stiff springs (and a stiff chassis) and short travel in the suspension. I agree that Honda should have made more effort to tune this behaviour as it isn't ideal on the road, and much better on a track in this respect. The suspension geometry is fully adjustable and the car is very sensitive to this adjustment. Personally I think that this is a side effect of the innovative 'in wheel' suspension arrangement, the whole setup only has small amounts of movement to achieve the wheel travel. Finally (at last I hear you say), the rear suspension is a 'semi active' design, there are bushes in it to help the car feel more lively and turn in better (that's the theory). This can make it feel like it's sliding when it isn't, and can be unnerving, perhaps unnerving enough to lift off mid corner, which will prompt a reaction. It is not a drift car, it's hard to keep the revs just right to keep the wheels spinning, and when they stop spinning it grips and tries to head off in the direction you are pointing really fast!
Overall I have learned to drive to the car and to the conditions in the car. I don't think it's so much a matter of being a good or bad driver, as much as it is being prepared to change your style to suit the car (which may explain why I don't get on as well with some others I have tried). It requires you to be very smooth and progressive and to very much concentrate on what you are doing, perhaps more with your head than by feeling it through your fingertips which a lot of people prefer. I like it as it is, and after such a long time I am becoming less and less likely to part with it.
I've had mine now for 8 years and 70k miles, it's a 2001. I have been actively looking for an alternative for probably the last 3 or 4 years as it has aged. For a combination of reasons I have not been able to find something that offered the enjoyment I get from it for the amount of money that I would have had to put in to do it, both in terms of purchase price and ongoing maintenance. I've tried lots of things, mostly RWD and 'sporty' from 996, M3, 335i, 350z, to RS4 etc etc.
I agree that the car isn't perfect, far from it. Yes it can be uncomfortable on a long drive and it is noisy and the radio is rubbish and taller people can't get in it. Yes the steering needs more feel, especially when compared to a 911 or an Elise, but if you listen very carefully you can hear what it's saying to you, this takes a lot of time, miles and effort to 'get'. The idea of the electric steering at the time was to minimise power losses over a traditional hydraulic system. It still has more feel than the 2004 M3 I tested, or the 2006 RS4 for example, or my wife's new 3 series (and almost every car I've driven made since 2004. Yes the power delivery is an acquired taste, and some people don't get it, which is fair enough, I've also had sportsbikes and it's more like that than any other car, with a distinct change as the cam profiles change. This can also catch people out, when I first got mine I went to overtake someone in 2nd gear in the rain and had a scary moment when I hit vtec and got wheelspin. I was careful not to be quite so lead footed after that.
I think there are a number of factors which lead to a lot of people criticising the handling. The difference between dry and wet grip is marked and a lot bigger than in an average car. This was magnified by the OEM fitment Bridgestone SO2 tires on the original 16" wheeled cars, which were really good in the dry and scary in the wet, and potentially lethal when it was really cold. Different tires goes a long way to changing this behaviour (and you can no longer get the original tires anyway). The difference that changing the tires makes highlights that the car is very sensitive to this, and also to the pressures. I can tell if my rears are slightly low very easily. The fronts also tend to wear the inside edge first (where it's hard to see), so you can get really bad understeer and not realise why. As has already been mentioned the transition from gripping to slipping can be very sudden. In part this is due to it being relatively light, with wide sticky tires, stiff springs (and a stiff chassis) and short travel in the suspension. I agree that Honda should have made more effort to tune this behaviour as it isn't ideal on the road, and much better on a track in this respect. The suspension geometry is fully adjustable and the car is very sensitive to this adjustment. Personally I think that this is a side effect of the innovative 'in wheel' suspension arrangement, the whole setup only has small amounts of movement to achieve the wheel travel. Finally (at last I hear you say), the rear suspension is a 'semi active' design, there are bushes in it to help the car feel more lively and turn in better (that's the theory). This can make it feel like it's sliding when it isn't, and can be unnerving, perhaps unnerving enough to lift off mid corner, which will prompt a reaction. It is not a drift car, it's hard to keep the revs just right to keep the wheels spinning, and when they stop spinning it grips and tries to head off in the direction you are pointing really fast!
Overall I have learned to drive to the car and to the conditions in the car. I don't think it's so much a matter of being a good or bad driver, as much as it is being prepared to change your style to suit the car (which may explain why I don't get on as well with some others I have tried). It requires you to be very smooth and progressive and to very much concentrate on what you are doing, perhaps more with your head than by feeling it through your fingertips which a lot of people prefer. I like it as it is, and after such a long time I am becoming less and less likely to part with it.
The thing I hated about mine was the steering feel, it was really light and I just couldn't feel what the car wanted to do.
I think that on a track it would have been fantastic but on the road (where it should have been at home) it felt too nervous for my liking.
I came from an MX5 turbo running over 250bhp which weighed about a ton and I was expecting the S2000 to be a pussy cat, but I was wrong. It may have been st geo or tyres that let my car down but I would really like to try one that someone rates highly.
I love the styling, interior, engine, gearchange, it was just the steering that killed it for me.
I think that on a track it would have been fantastic but on the road (where it should have been at home) it felt too nervous for my liking.
I came from an MX5 turbo running over 250bhp which weighed about a ton and I was expecting the S2000 to be a pussy cat, but I was wrong. It may have been s
t geo or tyres that let my car down but I would really like to try one that someone rates highly.I love the styling, interior, engine, gearchange, it was just the steering that killed it for me.
Test drove one many years ago & was let down with both power delivery and the disappointing interior.
Right enough the car I test drove was around £18k then & an E46 M3 was found to be a much better purchase.
At 4k now however i'm thinking that + another 4k on a charger would see a bit of a weapon for 8k, spend another 2 on suspension brakes and tyres and it'll be an absolute beast!!
Right enough the car I test drove was around £18k then & an E46 M3 was found to be a much better purchase.
At 4k now however i'm thinking that + another 4k on a charger would see a bit of a weapon for 8k, spend another 2 on suspension brakes and tyres and it'll be an absolute beast!!
Edited by C8LNJ on Wednesday 19th September 17:01
braddo said:
Some top posts, gents, thanks.
The idea of having one for a few track days and weekend mornings is becoming increasingly appealing. Well, the idea of at least test driving one is certainly appealing!
IMO the track is where the car works best, this was me in my first one, awesome The idea of having one for a few track days and weekend mornings is becoming increasingly appealing. Well, the idea of at least test driving one is certainly appealing!
Weekend mornings are fun as well
Edited by Urban Sports on Wednesday 19th September 21:09
Maverick / Dave - agree with a lot of what you've both posted. Tyres and geo both seem to make an inordinate difference with the car.
Did either of you a) fit cross-braces or b) adjust the geometry to REDUCE grip?
I did both - before, with 03MY geometry (granny-spec, safe-safe-safe-snappy) and S02s, I didn't really dare push it. After, initially still on S02's, then on T1R's, I felt I could 'play' on wide roundabouts, known corners, etc...but still not on unknown roads. Never span it though...so all of that should give you some idea how I felt about the car*
I've posted my thoughts earlier - that the car needs bracing AND setting-up to suit the owner*. I reduced both camber and rear-toe-in, which made the overall limits lower and the rear break-away earlier (and therefore more progressive). Still had too much dry grip, but was less snappy as a result...OE spec of 2-degrees rear camber, combined with the high factory toe-in, was always going to give perhaps too much grip.
Final comment - some owners have removed/replaced the rear suspension link that increases toe-in under compression...which increases mid-corner stability, but upon release of compression (e.g. lifting off the throttle mid-corner) gives a sudden reduction in rear grip...
(It's a carry-over from some fwd fast Hondas, where it works beautifully...not 100% certain about it's applicability to rwd...OK if you know about it, IYSWIM)
* Equally, I don't dare push the NSX any harder than I did the S2000 - possibly due to rarity / repair costs as much as ability, but as a point-of-reference for anyone reading. But I push the ITR harder than I've any right to get away with, and still manage to get away with it every time...
Did either of you a) fit cross-braces or b) adjust the geometry to REDUCE grip?
I did both - before, with 03MY geometry (granny-spec, safe-safe-safe-snappy) and S02s, I didn't really dare push it. After, initially still on S02's, then on T1R's, I felt I could 'play' on wide roundabouts, known corners, etc...but still not on unknown roads. Never span it though...so all of that should give you some idea how I felt about the car*
I've posted my thoughts earlier - that the car needs bracing AND setting-up to suit the owner*. I reduced both camber and rear-toe-in, which made the overall limits lower and the rear break-away earlier (and therefore more progressive). Still had too much dry grip, but was less snappy as a result...OE spec of 2-degrees rear camber, combined with the high factory toe-in, was always going to give perhaps too much grip.
Final comment - some owners have removed/replaced the rear suspension link that increases toe-in under compression...which increases mid-corner stability, but upon release of compression (e.g. lifting off the throttle mid-corner) gives a sudden reduction in rear grip...
(It's a carry-over from some fwd fast Hondas, where it works beautifully...not 100% certain about it's applicability to rwd...OK if you know about it, IYSWIM)
* Equally, I don't dare push the NSX any harder than I did the S2000 - possibly due to rarity / repair costs as much as ability, but as a point-of-reference for anyone reading. But I push the ITR harder than I've any right to get away with, and still manage to get away with it every time...
Kozy said:
havoc said:
But I push the ITR harder than I've any right to get away with, and still manage to get away with it every time...
This interests me, I wonder how many people given a budget of £5k would take a DC2 over an S2K. Sounds like you possibly would?Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff