RE: Honda S2000 | Spotted
Discussion
Court_S said:
That looks lovely.
I really like these, thought they were cool when they came out and still think they’re cool. Love the simple, understated but pretty looks. Used o see a fair few around, but they seem pretty rare these days.
As much as I like them, £25k is a lot of money for one.
thanks! 25k is the limited edition one.I really like these, thought they were cool when they came out and still think they’re cool. Love the simple, understated but pretty looks. Used o see a fair few around, but they seem pretty rare these days.
As much as I like them, £25k is a lot of money for one.
you can have a very good s2k for 10k!
mine is probably worth around 15k with mods included(ohlins, big brakes etc and under 40k miles, facelift with lower tax etc)
grudas said:
nothing wrong with them, people who don't know how to treat RWD buy them and spin them/crash them.
they can bite and with vtec at 6k can spit you out randomly but I haven't had any issues with mine.
it is a facelift 04 one with "less snapy" geo and ohlins/wider tyres and good alignment so makes a difference but car is very predictable.
My experience too...had an 05 for 4 years; treat it like the front-mid engined RWD car it is in adverse conditions and they are benign.they can bite and with vtec at 6k can spit you out randomly but I haven't had any issues with mine.
it is a facelift 04 one with "less snapy" geo and ohlins/wider tyres and good alignment so makes a difference but car is very predictable.
Had a mate who at the time of release of these worked at a Hertfordshire Honda Main dealer. He took me to their S2000 graveyard, it was full of damaged S2000 all with suspension damage awaiting the same part that was on back order.
He reckoned over 50% got crashed in the first month of ownership, often older ladies that had upgraded from MX5s (they sold these as well).
In the wet they have a bit of a rep for being a handful .
I almost got one in 2012 , it was between this and a lotus Elise or Boxster , I opted for the Boxster which was probably the best car but depreciated like crazy . The other 2 stayed rock steady
He reckoned over 50% got crashed in the first month of ownership, often older ladies that had upgraded from MX5s (they sold these as well).
In the wet they have a bit of a rep for being a handful .
I almost got one in 2012 , it was between this and a lotus Elise or Boxster , I opted for the Boxster which was probably the best car but depreciated like crazy . The other 2 stayed rock steady
LaurasOtherHalf said:
The chassis, compared to the mid engined MR2 was a particular let down.
I think to a large degree that's down to the difference in weight. Going by official figures the S2000 is 300kg heavier than the MR2 and it certainly feels it. The weight was at worst comparable with six cylinder competition at the time, but none of them had the delicacy of a sub-tonne car either. thelostboy said:
I think they are very pretty cars; especially the face lift.
Would love to drive one to see just how tricky they are to drive. I remember being at a Honda UK ran trackday in our NSX and it was hilarious watching them spin everywhere. I'll never forget following three of them: the guy in front spun and the other two panicked, lifted off and sympathetically spun in beautiful, almost orchestrated tandem.
And yet, you watch the Best Motoring videos and the modified ones look rapid. I mean, how can you go wrong with front-engined, rear wheel drive, a naturally aspirated engine revving to 9,000rpm and that gearbox?
Is something actually 'wrong' with the car, or were there too many people coming from safe FWD hot hatches who couldn't drive for toffee?
They are not 'tricky' to drive at all but you need to be able to actually 'drive' to get the best from them. I do think they are very sensitive to tyre choice. I was always told that the OEM Bridgestones had slightly stiffer tyre walls over other manufacturers which might make some difference to the alleged 'snappy' handling.Would love to drive one to see just how tricky they are to drive. I remember being at a Honda UK ran trackday in our NSX and it was hilarious watching them spin everywhere. I'll never forget following three of them: the guy in front spun and the other two panicked, lifted off and sympathetically spun in beautiful, almost orchestrated tandem.
And yet, you watch the Best Motoring videos and the modified ones look rapid. I mean, how can you go wrong with front-engined, rear wheel drive, a naturally aspirated engine revving to 9,000rpm and that gearbox?
Is something actually 'wrong' with the car, or were there too many people coming from safe FWD hot hatches who couldn't drive for toffee?
Mine was a daily driver for a few years and several 10's of thousands of miles (I can't remember exactly how many) and I never had any issues with it. I recall driving to work one morning (around 40 miles) after a heavy snow fall (a few inches) which included driving along untreated country back roads and getting there and back without any problems.
I'd love another one. MX5? I wouldn't even give a thought to owning one of those (and I have driven a couple). I guess it all comes down to personal preference.
A mate had one of these a few years back and I was impressed at the engine note and comfort. It had only done around 30k miles and looked immaculate.
The performance wasn't too impressive though - he had a tussle over 20 miles or so against my bargain basement Saxo VTS and there was nothing in it on shorter, twistier roads. It was only on long straights that the S2000 would pull away (i.e over 100mph).
He wasn't happy at all when we caught up later and sold it a few weeks later.
It was quite telling that the rolling road revealed it only made 217bhp at the flywheel too, which was disappointing bearing in mind they're meant to make 240bhp.
The performance wasn't too impressive though - he had a tussle over 20 miles or so against my bargain basement Saxo VTS and there was nothing in it on shorter, twistier roads. It was only on long straights that the S2000 would pull away (i.e over 100mph).
He wasn't happy at all when we caught up later and sold it a few weeks later.
It was quite telling that the rolling road revealed it only made 217bhp at the flywheel too, which was disappointing bearing in mind they're meant to make 240bhp.
I'm going to throw the interesting one out there (it's touched on in the article, too), but I have driven both the S2000 and the RX8 R3.
Ignoring, for a moment, the reliability of the RX8 and the comparative cost of the S2000 I do think that the S2000 chassis is't quite as well balanced as the RX8's. I'm talking about the R3 RX8 and a facelifted S2000, so the 'better' of both worlds.
The engine in the S2000 is very compelling when compared to pretty much any naturally aspirated inline 4, and some 6s IMO. The chassis feels nicely planted and, although I've not pushed one to the limits properly, didn't seem that snappy. The VTEC in the S2000 is a lot more toned down compared to the Civics etc.
That said, comparing the S2000's engine to that of the RX8 is a no-brainer if you want that high-revving experience. Neither have buckets of torque, and the RX8 has the fuel economy of a 1920s Bentley, but to drive it is - as the article says - the better car of the two.
I know that reliability will become a point here, with the RX8 engine being fragile - whilst RX8 fan-boys will preach that "It's reliable if you look after it" - it's simply not. There are cases of them getting to 100k+ mileages, but that isn't the norm for them. I am a huge RX8 fan, but I've been through a fair few engines, changed oil regularly and premixed, but they still go bang. With that in mind, a good engine rebuild, with a 3 year warranty is ~£3k. You can buy a low mileage 2009 RX8 R3 for less than £7k. So you could, compared to the Spotted feature, buy the car and have enough money left for 18 year's worth of rebuild and warranties - and have a better car at the end of it...
It'll be an unpopular opinion, I'm sure, but drive both of them back to back and you'd be surprised.
Ignoring, for a moment, the reliability of the RX8 and the comparative cost of the S2000 I do think that the S2000 chassis is't quite as well balanced as the RX8's. I'm talking about the R3 RX8 and a facelifted S2000, so the 'better' of both worlds.
The engine in the S2000 is very compelling when compared to pretty much any naturally aspirated inline 4, and some 6s IMO. The chassis feels nicely planted and, although I've not pushed one to the limits properly, didn't seem that snappy. The VTEC in the S2000 is a lot more toned down compared to the Civics etc.
That said, comparing the S2000's engine to that of the RX8 is a no-brainer if you want that high-revving experience. Neither have buckets of torque, and the RX8 has the fuel economy of a 1920s Bentley, but to drive it is - as the article says - the better car of the two.
I know that reliability will become a point here, with the RX8 engine being fragile - whilst RX8 fan-boys will preach that "It's reliable if you look after it" - it's simply not. There are cases of them getting to 100k+ mileages, but that isn't the norm for them. I am a huge RX8 fan, but I've been through a fair few engines, changed oil regularly and premixed, but they still go bang. With that in mind, a good engine rebuild, with a 3 year warranty is ~£3k. You can buy a low mileage 2009 RX8 R3 for less than £7k. So you could, compared to the Spotted feature, buy the car and have enough money left for 18 year's worth of rebuild and warranties - and have a better car at the end of it...
It'll be an unpopular opinion, I'm sure, but drive both of them back to back and you'd be surprised.
OldFiver said:
Same.
I was looking to trade up from my Mk1 '5 at the time for something a bit more grown up and mildly more practical.
For the 10k at the time to change I just could not see where the money went. Certainly not in the driving experience.
Passed on the car, but still have the OldFiver
Unpopular opinion but I did just the same thing, moving from NA MX-5 to S2000 to a BBR 200 NC MX-5 then the FD3SI was looking to trade up from my Mk1 '5 at the time for something a bit more grown up and mildly more practical.
For the 10k at the time to change I just could not see where the money went. Certainly not in the driving experience.
Passed on the car, but still have the OldFiver
Not really a fan of the S2000, only owned it for 3 months, it certainly is a beast in the track but I found the lack of low end power annoying since it is my daily drive to work, the steering is shape the feelback was a bit “filtered”. The lack of any sound proof combine with vtec reving engine also make my daily 30miles trip feel like after fighting a war.
I swapped from an JDM 2.2 Prelude to a 2001 Monte Carlo blue S2000.
For a few weeks, I couldn't escape the feeling that the former was quicker through the gears and had a more pronounced VTEC changeover. Although I preferred the looks, cabin and seating position of the S2000, I was a bit underwhelmed.
Then the penny dropped with the S2000. Unlike, say an EP3, it's not a case of enjoying the duality of the cam change as vtec kicked in, it's about keeping it in the vtec zone for mile, after mile, after mile. They respond brilliantly to treatment that would seem like abuse in other cars.
I can understand why many are left cold on a test drive. Mine sometimes seem to need a proper 20 miles of pretty enthusiastic driving before it felt 100% alive - but when it did, I had some of the best drives of my life.
But in truth, I never really trusted the chassis. Grip was either 'on or off' with no real progression between them. They need very good tyres, a good geo. Mine bit me twice in circumstances where other RWD cars would have been fine, and I felt like I was driving on egg shells for quite a while afterwards.
I've owned 3 Boxsters since (2.7, 3.2 and 3.4), and without doubt they are a measurably superior car (bar durability and reliability) but the S2000 was absolutely unique and completely addictive. I'd have another in a heartbeat.
Mine was also only the 3rd car out of 60+ i've owned that I made money on!
For a few weeks, I couldn't escape the feeling that the former was quicker through the gears and had a more pronounced VTEC changeover. Although I preferred the looks, cabin and seating position of the S2000, I was a bit underwhelmed.
Then the penny dropped with the S2000. Unlike, say an EP3, it's not a case of enjoying the duality of the cam change as vtec kicked in, it's about keeping it in the vtec zone for mile, after mile, after mile. They respond brilliantly to treatment that would seem like abuse in other cars.
I can understand why many are left cold on a test drive. Mine sometimes seem to need a proper 20 miles of pretty enthusiastic driving before it felt 100% alive - but when it did, I had some of the best drives of my life.
But in truth, I never really trusted the chassis. Grip was either 'on or off' with no real progression between them. They need very good tyres, a good geo. Mine bit me twice in circumstances where other RWD cars would have been fine, and I felt like I was driving on egg shells for quite a while afterwards.
I've owned 3 Boxsters since (2.7, 3.2 and 3.4), and without doubt they are a measurably superior car (bar durability and reliability) but the S2000 was absolutely unique and completely addictive. I'd have another in a heartbeat.
Mine was also only the 3rd car out of 60+ i've owned that I made money on!
I recall being sat in the Honda dealer telling my wife "we won't lose money on it, it's a future classic" when I handed over my credit card for the showroom GT100.
3 years and 15k later, I lost 8k, but had a Le Mans trip, 3k euro jaunt and a few track days fun out of it.
I will go and tell my wife, that had we kept it, we wouldn't have lost any money it... hindsight hey.
Not to everyone's taste, but I loved it and would have a GT100 back in a heartbeat (for what I sold it for anyway!). I hope No.37 is out there somewhere.
3 years and 15k later, I lost 8k, but had a Le Mans trip, 3k euro jaunt and a few track days fun out of it.
I will go and tell my wife, that had we kept it, we wouldn't have lost any money it... hindsight hey.
Not to everyone's taste, but I loved it and would have a GT100 back in a heartbeat (for what I sold it for anyway!). I hope No.37 is out there somewhere.
kambites said:
Fabulous engine and I always rather liked the styling, albeit it not in white... however, personally I never got on with the chassis; either on the standard cars or any of the few modified ones I've driven. I always felt a curious sense of disconnection between the front and rear axles; the whole car just feels a bit muddled compared to the best sports cars out there.
I certainly wouldn't call the chassis "snappy", although it's slightly less benign than an MX5.
The car has a lot of passive RWS and it's very useful, once you get used to the kinematics. It seems a lot more pronounced than an NSX, which has very similar geometry, but behaves more subtly.I certainly wouldn't call the chassis "snappy", although it's slightly less benign than an MX5.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 15th October 09:26
Some people fit longer toe control links as they cannot get on with it.
Bizarrely, I am so acclimatised to Honda handling I found an Evora disappointingly un-throttle-adjustable unless you's actually got it to break away a bit. Funny what you get used to; Honda handling over Lotus shocker....
Black S2K said:
The car has a lot of passive RWS and it's very useful, once you get used to the kinematics.
I think it's a carry-over from their fwd suspension design - on the Type R's and VTi's it's immensely useful and gives near-French levels of lift-off-oversteer.In the S2000 I think it's a two-edged sword - if you're competent and used to it, yes it's useful and conveys greater agility and options than you'd expect (given the engine, power-oversteer is never going to be as easy as a TVR or AMG). But it's also possible for it to catch you out...which is contributory to the S2000's bad rep, handling-wise...
I think Honda over-thought it and designed it for people that (a) can drive; and (b) understand what it does. Which rather limits the audience...
NJ72 said:
I'm going to throw the interesting one out there (it's touched on in the article, too), but I have driven both the S2000 and the RX8 R3.
Ignoring, for a moment, the reliability of the RX8 and the comparative cost of the S2000 I do think that the S2000 chassis is't quite as well balanced as the RX8's. I'm talking about the R3 RX8 and a facelifted S2000, so the 'better' of both worlds.
The engine in the S2000 is very compelling when compared to pretty much any naturally aspirated inline 4, and some 6s IMO. The chassis feels nicely planted and, although I've not pushed one to the limits properly, didn't seem that snappy. The VTEC in the S2000 is a lot more toned down compared to the Civics etc.
That said, comparing the S2000's engine to that of the RX8 is a no-brainer if you want that high-revving experience. Neither have buckets of torque, and the RX8 has the fuel economy of a 1920s Bentley, but to drive it is - as the article says - the better car of the two.
I know that reliability will become a point here, with the RX8 engine being fragile - whilst RX8 fan-boys will preach that "It's reliable if you look after it" - it's simply not. There are cases of them getting to 100k+ mileages, but that isn't the norm for them. I am a huge RX8 fan, but I've been through a fair few engines, changed oil regularly and premixed, but they still go bang. With that in mind, a good engine rebuild, with a 3 year warranty is ~£3k. You can buy a low mileage 2009 RX8 R3 for less than £7k. So you could, compared to the Spotted feature, buy the car and have enough money left for 18 year's worth of rebuild and warranties - and have a better car at the end of it...
It'll be an unpopular opinion, I'm sure, but drive both of them back to back and you'd be surprised.
That's an interesting comparison. I owned an S2000 and once have driven a few R3 RX8's (on road and on track - Thruxton) and agree that the Mazda's handling is very impressive, if perhaps a little 'neutral'. Of course, being a 2 seater convertible means it will appeal for different reasons although aside from having 2 more seats and 2 more doors, I seem to remember being quite unimpressed by the size of the boot so wouldn't say it's the most practical 4 door saloon. I'd still like to own one though but I think another S2000 would still be my first choice between these two.Ignoring, for a moment, the reliability of the RX8 and the comparative cost of the S2000 I do think that the S2000 chassis is't quite as well balanced as the RX8's. I'm talking about the R3 RX8 and a facelifted S2000, so the 'better' of both worlds.
The engine in the S2000 is very compelling when compared to pretty much any naturally aspirated inline 4, and some 6s IMO. The chassis feels nicely planted and, although I've not pushed one to the limits properly, didn't seem that snappy. The VTEC in the S2000 is a lot more toned down compared to the Civics etc.
That said, comparing the S2000's engine to that of the RX8 is a no-brainer if you want that high-revving experience. Neither have buckets of torque, and the RX8 has the fuel economy of a 1920s Bentley, but to drive it is - as the article says - the better car of the two.
I know that reliability will become a point here, with the RX8 engine being fragile - whilst RX8 fan-boys will preach that "It's reliable if you look after it" - it's simply not. There are cases of them getting to 100k+ mileages, but that isn't the norm for them. I am a huge RX8 fan, but I've been through a fair few engines, changed oil regularly and premixed, but they still go bang. With that in mind, a good engine rebuild, with a 3 year warranty is ~£3k. You can buy a low mileage 2009 RX8 R3 for less than £7k. So you could, compared to the Spotted feature, buy the car and have enough money left for 18 year's worth of rebuild and warranties - and have a better car at the end of it...
It'll be an unpopular opinion, I'm sure, but drive both of them back to back and you'd be surprised.
25 grand gets a very nice Boxster S which is a better sports car in every way. I had a go in one, albeit it a cheap, leggy one and bought a 350Z Roadster instead, decided I needed more cylinders. there were loads about for three grand and up back then.
Great looking car but there seems to be a scene tax added, plus a dealer with a nice example getting carried away with the pricing, lest someone buys it and they could have squeezed another few quid out of it.
They are alright but the pricing has gone daft relative to the Z4, 350Z, SLK etc, that kind of money gets you an SLK55, and change, various TVR's, 370Z, 911 or some description, or a new MX5.
Would have to be really keen on an S2000 to pay 25 grand for one.
Great looking car but there seems to be a scene tax added, plus a dealer with a nice example getting carried away with the pricing, lest someone buys it and they could have squeezed another few quid out of it.
They are alright but the pricing has gone daft relative to the Z4, 350Z, SLK etc, that kind of money gets you an SLK55, and change, various TVR's, 370Z, 911 or some description, or a new MX5.
Would have to be really keen on an S2000 to pay 25 grand for one.
I bought my S2000 earlier this year. Facelift with a mis-match of tyres on the rear. While I haven't pushed it too hard (yet), I feel the wider tyre and revised suspension give it decent grip in the wet. Compared to the 1 series I also drive, the lower COG and less roll means it "feels" ok in the wet. I intend to have better tyres put on for when I get it back on the road next year as they will make all the difference in wet conditions. The front did push on a bit on some corners, but understeer is often expected on factory suspension settings.
Also, I have driven the RX8 to its [near] limits on a track. The chassis is great and compared to the S2000, it probably would be faster and more fun around a track. But on a weekend use around country roads, I have more fun in the S2000 as the roof is down. This to me makes the difference. Nothing to choose between them on the engine, both characterful in their own rights.
I agree with the article that the S2000 makes a great weekend car - I lived with it for a week while the 1 series was in for repairs... the fuel use, cabin comfort and heavier clutch was not enjoyed. But on the brief moments where I had some open road, the commute was enjoyable. Much prefer taking the car out for a drive at the weekends to just enjoy driving, which I believe the S2000 allows you to do very well.
Also, I have driven the RX8 to its [near] limits on a track. The chassis is great and compared to the S2000, it probably would be faster and more fun around a track. But on a weekend use around country roads, I have more fun in the S2000 as the roof is down. This to me makes the difference. Nothing to choose between them on the engine, both characterful in their own rights.
I agree with the article that the S2000 makes a great weekend car - I lived with it for a week while the 1 series was in for repairs... the fuel use, cabin comfort and heavier clutch was not enjoyed. But on the brief moments where I had some open road, the commute was enjoyable. Much prefer taking the car out for a drive at the weekends to just enjoy driving, which I believe the S2000 allows you to do very well.
matjk said:
Had a mate who at the time of release of these worked at a Hertfordshire Honda Main dealer. He took me to their S2000 graveyard, it was full of damaged S2000 all with suspension damage awaiting the same part that was on back order.
He reckoned over 50% got crashed in the first month of ownership, often older ladies that had upgraded from MX5s (they sold these as well).
In the wet they have a bit of a rep for being a handful .
I almost got one in 2012 , it was between this and a lotus Elise or Boxster , I opted for the Boxster which was probably the best car but depreciated like crazy . The other 2 stayed rock steady
I went to buy an S2000 from a guy a long time ago, the guy took it for a last little drive to make sure everything was okay and ended up spinning it, causing damage to the front left of the carHe reckoned over 50% got crashed in the first month of ownership, often older ladies that had upgraded from MX5s (they sold these as well).
In the wet they have a bit of a rep for being a handful .
I almost got one in 2012 , it was between this and a lotus Elise or Boxster , I opted for the Boxster which was probably the best car but depreciated like crazy . The other 2 stayed rock steady
I'd driven 3 hours to get it and was only 30 mins away!
there's a few other people I know who wrote them off
they've aged so well
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff