First Drive: 2004 Honda S2000 [new 2.2 liter engine]

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

EvilYoda

Lifer
Apr 1, 2001
21,200
9
81
Are there any additional pics of the new rear? I don't think any of those shots appropriately showed the new lights and tips.

And I still love the S2000...I stare and drool every time I see one.

Oh yeah, saw the new 5-series in downtown Detroit too.
 
Aug 23, 2000
15,511
1
81
Originally posted by: faZZter
I'd still rather have one of these......

350Z
w00t for the Z.
As for the miata, get a ford 302 for it and convert it to a miata monster, now that's a miata i would drive.

The S2000 is over rated in my book. ok it has 240 HP, but come on, 160lbs of torque? WTF. My 91 240sx had that much torque, had a 50/50 weight distribution, awesome handling, and better looks than the S2000.

Long Live NISSAN.

 

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,386
1,523
126
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
Originally posted by: faZZter
I'd still rather have one of these......

350Z
w00t for the Z.
As for the miata, get a ford 302 for it and convert it to a miata monster, now that's a miata i would drive.

The S2000 is over rated in my book. ok it has 240 HP, but come on, 160lbs of torque? WTF. My 91 240sx had that much torque, had a 50/50 weight distribution, awesome handling, and better looks than the S2000.

Long Live NISSAN.
it does NOT look better than the s2000.
 

dawheat

Diamond Member
Sep 14, 2000
3,131
91
91
Originally posted by: KokomoGST
Ack, reading this just makes me cringe... not because the S2000 is a bad car... but more because it's just become even more badass.

It's just plain not fair in SCCA competition. The older S2000s had an insane amount of suspension adjustability and were already blazing quick. And being fast on an autocross course means blinding fast during street driving and track driving as well. Now that it has more torque, lower revs, and also lower VTEC engagement along with the same suspension adjustability... that's just WRONG.

But the comment about the Porsche being a great civilized alternative... that is VERY true. Especially if you're not hung up on getting a new Boxster. A used Boxster S can be definitely be found for approximately the same price as a new 2.2L S2000. One of my friends picked up a Boxster base model this spring and I love it's handling... it fells very assuring, almost a tad boring.

I wonder if Honda further stiffened the front swaybar on the S2000. The car is horrendously twitchy at the limit without a GIANT front sway.
I believe they softened the rear sway bar noticeably- hopefully the result will be improved rear traction and less bump steer. Installing a much stiffer front sway like many autocrossers do is a workable compromise, but it does result in increased understeer in low speed corners and/or with street tires. I think some drivers dial in some front toe-out, but that brings its own set of problems.

Also- I do have to disagree that the car is "horrendously" twitchy though it is a bit of a handful on wet surfaces, especially with worn S-02s and can be unexpected when pushing near the limit on uneven surfaces.
 

faZZter

Golden Member
Feb 21, 2001
1,202
0
0
Originally posted by: NeuroSynapsis
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
Originally posted by: faZZter
I'd still rather have one of these......

350Z
w00t for the Z.
As for the miata, get a ford 302 for it and convert it to a miata monster, now that's a miata i would drive.

The S2000 is over rated in my book. ok it has 240 HP, but come on, 160lbs of torque? WTF. My 91 240sx had that much torque, had a 50/50 weight distribution, awesome handling, and better looks than the S2000.

Long Live NISSAN.
it does NOT look better than the s2000.
I think it DOES!

 

Cfour

Golden Member
Jul 6, 2000
1,486
0
0
www.sternie.com
No matter how the car can perform, I can't get around the whopping 160 ft-lbs and the requirement of driving around around 8-9k rpms to get power.
 

OS

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
15,581
1
76
Originally posted by: Cfour
No matter how the car can perform, I can't get around the whopping 160 ft-lbs and the requirement of driving around around 8-9k rpms to get power.
I can't get around how many people say that without having actually driven the car. :D :D :D
 

Cfour

Golden Member
Jul 6, 2000
1,486
0
0
www.sternie.com
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: Cfour
No matter how the car can perform, I can't get around the whopping 160 ft-lbs and the requirement of driving around around 8-9k rpms to get power.
I can't get around how many people say that without having actually driven the car. :D :D :D
So you deny that it has 160 ft-lbs? I may not have driven the car, but I read reviews and testimonials.
 

freebee

Diamond Member
Dec 30, 2000
4,043
0
0
Awesome I was just reading about some new test drives of the s2k in various automags. It still isn't wide enough, more character needed.

160lb/ft of torque is a bit low...they should have upped hp to 260 or greater. Most people would quit complaining if the s2k topped 300 hp even if it only had 160lb/ft of torque.

And the price issue...yes its quite a bargain compared to the Boxter (S or otherwise)....but with Nissan dealers selling base 350z in the 25k range, the 33k s2k (which hardly moves from sticker price) is suddenly a lot more expensive.
 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,502
1
81
Originally posted by: freebee
Awesome I was just reading about some new test drives of the s2k in various automags. It still isn't wide enough, more character needed.

160lb/ft of torque is a bit low...they should have upped hp to 260 or greater. Most people would quit complaining if the s2k topped 300 hp even if it only had 160lb/ft of torque.

And the price issue...yes its quite a bargain compared to the Boxter (S or otherwise)....but with Nissan dealers selling base 350z in the 25k range, the 33k s2k (which hardly moves from sticker price) is suddenly a lot more expensive.

They would probably have to use some sort of forced induction to get 260 to 300 hps from a 2.2 liter engine. The NSX 3.0 liter 6 produces 290 hp.
 

JRS4224

Senior member
Oct 2, 2003
204
0
0
Originally posted by: Eli
I like.
Originally posted by: bozack
If you want something even tempered and relaxed, buy a Porsche Boxster S.
nuff said....
Yeah. For 20k more.
if your gonna get a porsche throw in the extra 100k and get a real one not a boxter

but i would go with a Z4 instead of s2000
 

SilentZero

Diamond Member
Apr 8, 2003
5,158
0
76
Originally posted by: JRS4224
Originally posted by: Eli
I like.
Originally posted by: bozack
If you want something even tempered and relaxed, buy a Porsche Boxster S.
nuff said....
Yeah. For 20k more.
if your gonna get a porsche throw in the extra 100k and get a real one not a boxter

but i would go with a Z4 instead of s2000
Boxster S's are too slow! I test drove one before I bought my E46 M3 and it was weak. If your gonna buy a porsche dish out the $$$ and get a 911 turbo. As for the s2000...they are pretty good performance wise. I know a few people who take them out to autocross days and modified they perform pretty well. Z4's are a huge waste of money! The performance is low, in my opinion the styling is horrid, and they are far overpriced for what u get.
If your looking for a good performance car in the low 30k range Id suggest a Subaru STi, EVO 8, or even a 350z Track model. Those 3 would kill a Z4, S2000, and boxter S. I have nothing bad to say about the S2k however, although its slower than the 3 cars I mentioned, its still a fun car to drive and great on the track.
 

JRS4224

Senior member
Oct 2, 2003
204
0
0
Originally posted by: SilentZero
Originally posted by: JRS4224
Originally posted by: Eli
I like.
Originally posted by: bozack
If you want something even tempered and relaxed, buy a Porsche Boxster S.
nuff said....
Yeah. For 20k more.
if your gonna get a porsche throw in the extra 100k and get a real one not a boxter

but i would go with a Z4 instead of s2000
Boxster S's are too slow! I test drove one before I bought my E46 M3 and it was weak. If your gonna buy a porsche dish out the $$$ and get a 911 turbo. As for the s2000...they are pretty good performance wise. I know a few people who take them out to autocross days and modified they perform pretty well. Z4's are a huge waste of money! The performance is low, in my opinion the styling is horrid, and they are far overpriced for what u get.
If your looking for a good performance car in the low 30k range Id suggest a Subaru STi, EVO 8, or even a 350z Track model. Those 3 would kill a Z4, S2000, and boxter S. I have nothing bad to say about the S2k however, although its slower than the 3 cars I mentioned, its still a fun car to drive and great on the track.
your m3 has got to have at least 100 more horses than the boxter, and since you have a beamer you know how well they drive and should know that they aren't a waste of money. As for the Subaru, Evo and 350z...they ain't even in the same class as were talking about so i dont think you can compare them.
 

Doggiedog

Lifer
Aug 17, 2000
12,775
1
81
Originally posted by: AgaBooga
Originally posted by: Doggiedog
I honestly didn't know...or just forgot. I don't really remember what cars members' around here drive besides RossMan's Accord and DoggieDog's MDX.
Wow! I'm honored. :)

Sweet car btw GT.

I've never driven a Miata but would love to one day since I love driving manual cars.
Pics of your car?
Here ya go.
 

J Heartless Slick

Golden Member
Nov 11, 1999
1,330
0
0
"Then, oh man: Uehara nailed the throttle and wailed up through the gears, smacking redline in each one like he designed the whole thing.

?More torque,? was all he said.

He entered the very first turn, a long right-hand constant-radius sweeper, at what seemed like about 20 mph faster than we had been driving through it all morning?faster than anyone had ever driven through the thing ever for all we could guess. Who knew the S2000 could go this fast?

Then, in mid-turn, at what we had assumed was the limit of adhesion, Uehara lifted off the throttle and sawed the wheel back and forth a few times. Despite the new revised spring, damper and antiroll bar rates, increased body rigidity, enhanced suspension bushings and optimized rear toe settings, we expected to swap ends and start bouncing backward across the gravel runoff area, dust and rocks flying, lizards leaping, jack rabbits fleeing for their lives. But no, the S2000 just kept on gripping the hot pavement.

?Revised suspension means better control of lift-throttle oversteer,? he said.

Then we remembered: Uehara was Uehara, the father of the S2000, the father of the NSX and the former chief engineer of the Honda F1 efforts.

He kept it up for three more laps, doing a magnificent job of heel-and-toe downshifting into each turn, nailing the throttle on the way out and making the S2000 yelp with pleasure.

When we pulled back into the paddock, ?Thank you,? was all he said.

No, thank you, we said.

We had seen the light. We were ready to snatch the pebble from his hand. We got back into another 2004 S2000 and had at it. Yes, it goes quicker than we had assumed. Yes, it has more torque. Yes, it shifts better. So, this was how you?re supposed to drive this thing!"

:p



 

bbrontosaurus

Senior member
Oct 25, 2002
469
0
0
Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Originally posted by: freebee
Awesome I was just reading about some new test drives of the s2k in various automags. It still isn't wide enough, more character needed.

160lb/ft of torque is a bit low...they should have upped hp to 260 or greater. Most people would quit complaining if the s2k topped 300 hp even if it only had 160lb/ft of torque.

And the price issue...yes its quite a bargain compared to the Boxter (S or otherwise)....but with Nissan dealers selling base 350z in the 25k range, the 33k s2k (which hardly moves from sticker price) is suddenly a lot more expensive.

They would probably have to use some sort of forced induction to get 260 to 300 hps from a 2.2 liter engine. The NSX 3.0 liter 6 produces 290 hp.
The 3.0L NSX produces 270 hp with a manual tranny.....the 3.2L engine produces the 290 hp

 

bbrontosaurus

Senior member
Oct 25, 2002
469
0
0
Originally posted by: JRS4224
Originally posted by: Eli
I like.
Originally posted by: bozack
If you want something even tempered and relaxed, buy a Porsche Boxster S.
nuff said....
Yeah. For 20k more.
if your gonna get a porsche throw in the extra 100k and get a real one not a boxter

but i would go with a Z4 instead of s2000

I'd like to have the luxury and sport of a bimmer, but ACK!! That Z4 looks uuuuuugllly.....the S2k looks much better.
 

psteng19

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2000
5,953
0
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
(Shouldn't it be the S2200 now?)
Did Honda ever say that the 2000 in S2000 stood for its displacement? :confused:

And 160 ft-lbs of torque in a 2900 lb car is more than plenty for daily commuting, unless you like to drag race at every light ;)

Heck, my Sentra only has 108 ft-lbs (of course it's 400+ lbs lighter), and I find it to be adequate, though slightly on the weak side.
 

OS

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
15,581
1
76
Originally posted by: Cfour
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: Cfour
No matter how the car can perform, I can't get around the whopping 160 ft-lbs and the requirement of driving around around 8-9k rpms to get power.
I can't get around how many people say that without having actually driven the car. :D :D :D
So you deny that it has 160 ft-lbs? I may not have driven the car, but I read reviews and testimonials.
it still means you have no first hand experience with the car
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY