RE: Honda S2000
Discussion
I drive a 5g Civic 1.3. 
Yeah I know it's nothing much . . . '95 with just a single carb. The last one. Like to see the 4pot with a proper set on.
But.
Everyone who drives it or sits next to me when I drive says: what a smooth ride / what a revelation compared to my Escort / Golf / whatever . . . etc. etc. City / highway driving that is. Almost like driving an auto for the lump is so forgiving, silent and stretchy. Chairs are good. Shifting is yum.
When I step on it - like I did yesterday eve - I keep revs high (4500 - 7000) and shift up and down a lot. Like that very much and came home with a stif neck, no powersteering and all that. Hard work to make it move just a tiny bit compared to a Boxter or whatever . . . but hell it's so easy to spank some bigger cars . . . Passenger has to hold on firm and often they think there's a bigger lump in. No lie.
When you don't like revving, shifting and all that Honda is not for you. S2000 or Civic: same kinda philosophy is in all of these cars.
I would lie if I said there's nothing else than revving hard and clutch around. Few weeks back I thundered around in a 6pot Merc - nothing fancy - and that was easy peasy. One hand steering 40 mph 90 degree turns. Torque all over the place.
over 100 mph - again! I'm waiting for those tickets . . . But still I just like to do some working out with a proper soundtrack 
Yeah I know it's nothing much . . . '95 with just a single carb. The last one. Like to see the 4pot with a proper set on. But. Everyone who drives it or sits next to me when I drive says: what a smooth ride / what a revelation compared to my Escort / Golf / whatever . . . etc. etc. City / highway driving that is. Almost like driving an auto for the lump is so forgiving, silent and stretchy. Chairs are good. Shifting is yum.
When I step on it - like I did yesterday eve - I keep revs high (4500 - 7000) and shift up and down a lot. Like that very much and came home with a stif neck, no powersteering and all that. Hard work to make it move just a tiny bit compared to a Boxter or whatever . . . but hell it's so easy to spank some bigger cars . . . Passenger has to hold on firm and often they think there's a bigger lump in. No lie. When you don't like revving, shifting and all that Honda is not for you. S2000 or Civic: same kinda philosophy is in all of these cars.
I would lie if I said there's nothing else than revving hard and clutch around. Few weeks back I thundered around in a 6pot Merc - nothing fancy - and that was easy peasy. One hand steering 40 mph 90 degree turns. Torque all over the place.
over 100 mph - again! I'm waiting for those tickets . . . But still I just like to do some working out with a proper soundtrack Broadsword said:
Bought an S2000 new a few years ago. Good car in most departments but the lack of grunt spoils it completely. You'd think it would be fun to rev the thing the whole time (and the gearbox is very slick) but, it gets very tedious. Never detected any exhaust note but induction noise quite sexy when at full chat. For good progress beyond ordinary fare, you have to wring it's neck. Not in the same league as a Boxster S, even if it's much cheaper.
"Lack of grunt"?!? WTF??? This is a car that in a straight line is marginally quicker than my ITR. Unless you're comparing it to much pricier cars, there's not much that's quicker for £25k. Lack of torque, maybe, and lack of the consequent "shove-in-the-back" you get from torque...but trust me, it's actually a very rapid motor.
"Not in the same league as a Boxster-S"...well, it wouldn't be, as the Boxster-S costs about 60% more BEFORE options! Compare to the 2.7 though, and in point-to-point performance the S2000 nails the stock Boxster into the ground!
And if you find changing gear tedious, can I suggest you get a big barge with a V8 and an auto-box - clearly far more your scene!
Please don't post opinion threads without making sure your comments actually make sense. It's really embarassing for you and frustrating for us!
Bonce said:
Coming from the Elise, I've found the boot of my S2K to be absolutely cavernous!
Hey Bonce, my thoughts exactly!
I bought an S2k two weeks ago and have just got back from a weekend in Yorkshire - with the Elise, this would have meant 15 mins of pre-departure luggage-packing/squeezing.
This always aggravated...
This time I just threw our bags, coats and wellies into the boot - LUXURY!
And it goes very nicely compared to a Lotus Esprit....
Broadsword said:
Bought an S2000 new a few years ago. Good car in most departments but the lack of grunt spoils it completely. You'd think it would be fun to rev the thing the whole time (and the gearbox is very slick) but, it gets very tedious. Never detected any exhaust note but induction noise quite sexy when at full chat. For good progress beyond ordinary fare, you have to wring it's neck.
You don't 'get' the car, that's a shame. I would stick with something easier to drive, we all know what a bind it is having to change gear.
Broadsword said:
Not in the same league as a Boxster S, even if it's much cheaper.
What a nonsensical statement. The Boxster S isn't in the same league as a 996 Turbo, but according to you the fact that it costs 70 grand less is irrelevant?
This is aside from the fact that performance-wise the S2000 and Boxster S aren't a million miles apart.Neil_H said:
They're just different cars:
front vs mid engine
4pot 2 litre vs 2.7 litre B6
245 vs 275 something
Jap vs Pork
Sound vs ah, now that's subjective . . .
Name me a 4potter frontengine in the same price range that can top it . . .
Dinkel...
...if you mean the S2k, there isn't one (see below), as Honda make the best 4-pot engines in the world...and there are no comparable forced-induction performance soft-tops.
...if you mean the Boxster-S, I don't think anyone does a 4-pot which costs over £30k (except Mitsi's Evo...but that's ever-so-slightly different!!!)
The only arguable 4-pot competitor is the new Elise 111R...between them on price, better than both on performance, worse than both on practicality and sound...and build quality.
...if you mean the S2k, there isn't one (see below), as Honda make the best 4-pot engines in the world...and there are no comparable forced-induction performance soft-tops.
...if you mean the Boxster-S, I don't think anyone does a 4-pot which costs over £30k (except Mitsi's Evo...but that's ever-so-slightly different!!!)
The only arguable 4-pot competitor is the new Elise 111R...between them on price, better than both on performance, worse than both on practicality and sound...and build quality.
I had one of the first S2000s and owned it for 3yrs taking it all over western Europe, Skiing & touring hols it's superb, far better value than a Boxster S, far more fun than a Boxster S far better looking than a Boxster S (still can't work out which is it's arse from it's face!) and far cheaper than a Boxster S. you know I really read Jorno's reviews with a pinch of salt now, every article I read ramble on about nothing important e.g. spare tyre, boot space etc & claim that it's Chassis is twitchy? What utter rubbish, I drove from Bordeaux to Bilbao in 2hrs flat which is over 120miles through the Pyrenees as I was meeting my wife at Bilboa airport and was enjoying a Demi beer when she phoned me from Gatwick to say she was just about to take-off! I'd written down the wrong flight number! Serious drive, one amazing car I WAS Grand Turismo 4 for 2 hrs. the only car to impress me more was it's replacement which was a 911 (996) Carerra 2. my only gripes with Honda was the servicing, poor service levels compared to other Marques for a 28k car, the rear plastic screen & the bizarre group 20 insurance (cost more than the 911? go figure? Anybody out there considering it, just do it! it's like driving a motorbike, get used to revving it, it loves it & makes you grin even when you're in your most foul mood. Well done Honda, a truly marvellous underated sports car
Mustard said:
"Best Nearly New Roadster £20k will buy!" recommended
review
13 Apr 2004
Fun 5
Ride & Handling 5
Performance 4
A while back I borrowed a Honda S2000 for the weekend and was very impressed, a superb driving machine for the very modest some of £25k.
Now the question I sure alot of people will ask, is the Porsche Boxster worth the extra £15k that a reasonable spec 2.7 version would costor should I buy an older Boxster for the same money?
The verdict...
2 cars of a very similar concept but so different in there execution
S2000 despite what anyone may think is a pretty full on hardcore performance machine, (2003my car) that I tried for the weekend was beautifully balanced and the lack of stability control or similar system was never noticed, The engine is an engineering master piece at its lack of low rev torque is not really noticed because it spins up and beyond 3000rpm with such ease.
Critisms... the cabins a bit tight, and a lack of oddment space... and the tonneau covers a bit fiddly
Boxster cossets and feels so balanced and is a very sensuous drive with the fabulous flat six roar, the S2000 by comparison is a full on balls out experience totally different in character and a much more 'focused' car with that wild 9k redline.
Is the boxster worth that £15k in short no says the head, but the heart saying yes, but then says what the hell u really want a 911 dont you?
So there you go if moneys an issue buy the Honda if not get the car you really wanted... the 911. Boxsters a great car but you know the 911 is better!
Said it a year ago and still stand by what I said!
>> Edited by mustard on Sunday 17th April 17:19
wow, this is the first time i've posted a message!! Thinking of changing my MR2 GT for an s2000, anyone with ANY advice at all?? to be honest, never driven one...loved the look as one nailed my MR2 the other day though... want something closer the the speed of my brothers M3 evo too... any idea's??
cheers all.
cheers all.
Used to have a Mk2 MR2 and loved it. The S2000 is 10,000 better as a drivers car though - really can't go wrong.
Just had the 36,000 mile service on mine after 20 months and would rate it as a daily driver, OK on the motorways and fantastic for a bit of fun.
On a separate note, borrowed an 04 model today (the one with the supposed girly suspension). Really liked it - I think that they have softened the diff and the rear dampers so the back end isn't constantly twitching everywhere and so allows you to drift effortlessly out of the roundabouts, without being constantly watching the mirror for approaching walls. They have finally fitted heated mirrors and a clock too
.
Just had the 36,000 mile service on mine after 20 months and would rate it as a daily driver, OK on the motorways and fantastic for a bit of fun.
On a separate note, borrowed an 04 model today (the one with the supposed girly suspension). Really liked it - I think that they have softened the diff and the rear dampers so the back end isn't constantly twitching everywhere and so allows you to drift effortlessly out of the roundabouts, without being constantly watching the mirror for approaching walls. They have finally fitted heated mirrors and a clock too
. Ideas / advice:-
- It's one of the most reliable cars around if looked after, and very well built. At least equal in those regards to a Toyota.
- It has one of the best N/A engines in ANY car under £50k.
- Running costs surprisingly reasonable, but can eat tyres if your right foot is heavy.
- It handles VERY well...but it can bite, esp. in the wet...I know you currently run an MR2 GT (is that a Mk2 or Mk3?), but the S2000 is another step-up in performance, with a twitchier tail-end. No DSC or TC on an S2k.
Visit www.s2ki.com or www.s2kuk.com - ask them what they're like day-to-day and what to look out for when buying. Not exactly unbiased advice, but they should know!!!
IIRC, evo are running a long-termer. See if you can read the recent reviews there.
There have been 2 refreshes:-
2002: Minor cosmetic mods. THINK there were some small suspension tweaks there.
2004: More substantial suspension mods, taken that very-sharp edge off slightly, which in turn has made it a friendlier every-day car. That's still relative, mind! Conclusion is the '04 car is slightly better overall.
- It's one of the most reliable cars around if looked after, and very well built. At least equal in those regards to a Toyota.
- It has one of the best N/A engines in ANY car under £50k.
- Running costs surprisingly reasonable, but can eat tyres if your right foot is heavy.
- It handles VERY well...but it can bite, esp. in the wet...I know you currently run an MR2 GT (is that a Mk2 or Mk3?), but the S2000 is another step-up in performance, with a twitchier tail-end. No DSC or TC on an S2k.
Visit www.s2ki.com or www.s2kuk.com - ask them what they're like day-to-day and what to look out for when buying. Not exactly unbiased advice, but they should know!!!
IIRC, evo are running a long-termer. See if you can read the recent reviews there.
There have been 2 refreshes:-
2002: Minor cosmetic mods. THINK there were some small suspension tweaks there.
2004: More substantial suspension mods, taken that very-sharp edge off slightly, which in turn has made it a friendlier every-day car. That's still relative, mind! Conclusion is the '04 car is slightly better overall.
www.fast-autos.net/honda/04hondas2000.html
'The S2000 engine and transmission are capable of accelerating the S2000 from 0-60 mph in less than six seconds. '
'The S2000 engine and transmission are capable of accelerating the S2000 from 0-60 mph in less than six seconds. '
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff