RE: Honda S2000 GT 100 Edition
Discussion
havoc said:
Andy G Bmth said:
...Lotus Elise with a charged type R engine in is proof enough (even if its not done by the manufacturer
The reason it wasn't done by the mfr was the need to provide a warranty with it (and therefore test it to destruction), and emissions-test it, etc. etc...
Lotus bought the off-the-shelf ready-tested s'charged VVTi engine because that meant NONE of that mucking around which they didn't have the resources for. Honda would have had zero-choice but to develop in-house a new engine which would have had only one (already long-in-the-tooth) application for. It would therefore have been a loss-making exercise...
Sorry Andy, but you're really starting to sound like you haven't a clue about the costs and timescales involved in developing cars...
In that time they have had ample time to develop further (obviously costs are another matter) but again if this was to be an issue they could always sell the engines to another manufacturer like toyota and rover before them did with Lotus.
I'm playing devils advocate and have the benefit of hindsight but i belive honda have missed a trick by not develping the s2000 further when there is such a following for the existing car which has been proven in this thread
porcupineprince said:
Paper Lawyer said:
The GMan said:
I love them.
I think they look great with the copue type room you can get. Never understood why they didn't make it an offical option.
Say what? The hard top is supplied as standard with the GT model. Or do you like the Mooncraft hard top?I think they look great with the copue type room you can get. Never understood why they didn't make it an offical option.
Back on topic though, my favourite Honda and I hope to buy one at some point.
Dracoro said:
Porscheplayer said:
when you put your foot down in 6th at 4000revs nothing happens
You CLEARLY haven't driven one then. 6th at 4000rpm is 80mph and it pulls at those speeds without any issue. Not blindingly fast obviously (there's 3rd/4th/5th for that) but certainly plenty to get going with normal traffic and so on.I'm an Ex-owner and obviously used to a lot more power than you if you think the "pull" is adequate then
Good day sir
Andy G Bmth said:
I'm playing devils advocate and have the benefit of hindsight but i belive honda have missed a trick by not develping the s2000 further when there is such a following for the existing car which has been proven in this thread
OK, fair points. Powertrain-wise though, I still think that without going FI (which I hope Honda never do) it was going to be a big exercise to improve on the existing unit meaningfully. My pet 'what if' was an S2500 I-5 unit (F20C + a cylinder) - wouldn't harm the C-o-G much, would fit in the existing bay with only modifications to the air-box (and bonnet?), and would probably have sounded fantastic - Audi Quattro-meets-VTEC anyone?!?(In reality, the balancing issues would probably have lowered the rev-limit to ~8,000 or so, so peak power wouldn't have been any more than ~260-280bhp, and the premium they'd have had to ask would have been £££)
PS - forgot - the US market got a 2.2 engine specifically for their lazy 'asses' - more torque, lower rev-limit (so I'm guessing a stroked lump).
PPS - Had a bad day at work...didn't mean to sound rude earlier! (Not this time anyway...usually it's deliberate!
)havoc said:
Andy G Bmth said:
I'm playing devils advocate and have the benefit of hindsight but i belive honda have missed a trick by not develping the s2000 further when there is such a following for the existing car which has been proven in this thread
OK, fair points. Powertrain-wise though, I still think that without going FI (which I hope Honda never do) it was going to be a big exercise to improve on the existing unit meaningfully. My pet 'what if' was an S2500 I-5 unit (F20C + a cylinder) - wouldn't harm the C-o-G much, would fit in the existing bay with only modifications to the air-box (and bonnet?), and would probably have sounded fantastic - Audi Quattro-meets-VTEC anyone?!?(In reality, the balancing issues would probably have lowered the rev-limit to ~8,000 or so, so peak power wouldn't have been any more than ~260-280bhp, and the premium they'd have had to ask would have been £££)
PS - forgot - the US market got a 2.2 engine specifically for their lazy 'asses' - more torque, lower rev-limit (so I'm guessing a stroked lump).
PPS - Had a bad day at work...didn't mean to sound rude earlier! (Not this time anyway...usually it's deliberate!
)it's just so frustrating when you have a car maker that has missed such an opportunity both in terms of sales and decent sports cars, Honda are particularly bad at it - NSX, S2000 and Toyota never replace the Supra whilst offering watered down versions of the MR2 and Celica. Lotus have done the same with the mid high end market with the esprit but at least they have realised that and have a new model in the pipeline.
I know the market has changed but enough Evo's and M3's (not to mention the amount of 4x4 guzzlers) have been sold in the meantime to suggest that these models would have been a success if carried on.
Neil_H said:
Andy G Bmth said:
Neil_H said:
Awesome car, I still rue the day I drove though a puddle on the M20 and ended up in the armco.
i think i remember that... was it 2-3 years ago and posted on s2k? if so it wasn't long after i got mine that it happened
Honda could and maybe should have developed the s2000 engine more, but its clear they simply are not interested in doing so. all they have done is refine the vtec with the i-vtec and bring out a 2.2 diesel, biggest petrol engine in the range is 2.0 at the moment.
Sure from a petrol head point of view its disapointing, the potential in the engines Honda COULD develop is there for all to imagine, but i dont think Honda themselves feel they are missing any opportunities, they are heading firmly down the green route.
Sure from a petrol head point of view its disapointing, the potential in the engines Honda COULD develop is there for all to imagine, but i dont think Honda themselves feel they are missing any opportunities, they are heading firmly down the green route.
Andy G Bmth said:
Neil_H said:
Andy G Bmth said:
Neil_H said:
Awesome car, I still rue the day I drove though a puddle on the M20 and ended up in the armco.
i think i remember that... was it 2-3 years ago and posted on s2k? if so it wasn't long after i got mine that it happened
GravelBen said:
Berger 3rd said:
...biggest petrol engine in the range is 2.0 at the moment...
Unless of course you count the 2.4 (Accord Euro, CRV & Oddysey), the 3.5 V6 (Accord V6), or the 3.7 V6 (Legend)...
Edited by GravelBen on Thursday 13th August 08:29
however i was talking uk only, the legend isnt sold anymore, the crv isnt sold with anything bigger than 2.0/2.2 diesel, and the accord is not sold with the 3.5 either.
so in the uk at least 2.4 is the max for now at least.
People saying the S2000 didn't develop or wasn't replaced soon enough are missing the point slightly.
Like the NSX, the S2000 was a one off project to show the engineering ability off. It wasn't begun as a typical model line intended to continue and evolve in the same way as say the Civic or Accord. If that was the intention you'd have seen an all new model every 4 to 5 years in line with normal Japanese product scheduling.
In reality, the fact the NSX and S2000 continued so long demonstrates there was both the demand and the engineering benefit necessary to keep production going longer than originally planned.
Like the NSX, the S2000 was a one off project to show the engineering ability off. It wasn't begun as a typical model line intended to continue and evolve in the same way as say the Civic or Accord. If that was the intention you'd have seen an all new model every 4 to 5 years in line with normal Japanese product scheduling.
In reality, the fact the NSX and S2000 continued so long demonstrates there was both the demand and the engineering benefit necessary to keep production going longer than originally planned.
Berger 3rd said:
GravelBen said:
Berger 3rd said:
...biggest petrol engine in the range is 2.0 at the moment...
Unless of course you count the 2.4 (Accord Euro, CRV & Oddysey), the 3.5 V6 (Accord V6), or the 3.7 V6 (Legend)...
however i was talking uk only, the legend isnt sold anymore, the crv isnt sold with anything bigger than 2.0/2.2 diesel, and the accord is not sold with the 3.5 either.
so in the uk at least 2.4 is the max for now at least.
ETA: I think most countries get either the Accord Euro (2.4) or the Accord V6 (US model), presumably Honda NZ can't decide which they like best and so they continue to sell both.
Edited by GravelBen on Thursday 13th August 09:18
10 Pence Short said:
People saying the S2000 didn't develop or wasn't replaced soon enough are missing the point slightly.
Like the NSX, the S2000 was a one off project to show the engineering ability off. It wasn't begun as a typical model line intended to continue and evolve in the same way as say the Civic or Accord. If that was the intention you'd have seen an all new model every 4 to 5 years in line with normal Japanese product scheduling.
In reality, the fact the NSX and S2000 continued so long demonstrates there was both the demand and the engineering benefit necessary to keep production going longer than originally planned.
ISTR the Beat was never replaced either.Like the NSX, the S2000 was a one off project to show the engineering ability off. It wasn't begun as a typical model line intended to continue and evolve in the same way as say the Civic or Accord. If that was the intention you'd have seen an all new model every 4 to 5 years in line with normal Japanese product scheduling.
In reality, the fact the NSX and S2000 continued so long demonstrates there was both the demand and the engineering benefit necessary to keep production going longer than originally planned.
SS7
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff