Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Honda S2000 Honda S2000
604 messages, Last post on Mar 24, 2009 at 3:21 PM
You are in the Honda S2000 Forum. Your Host is claires
|
habitat1 - Numbers are just fun to mention and to ponder. Stats shouldn't really matter in sports either since it should only matter if a team wins. Considering how much more the Porsche Boxster S is compared to the S2000, it's amazing how similar the performance is. "My conclusion is that the two are very close to 60, 100 or any other measurement of acceleration, but with a slight edge going to the Boxster S. If the S2000 isn't broken in, and/or the driver hesitates to take it to redline, the Boxster S will win every time." This might be true if you take two inexperienced drivers and put them in both cars (since the S2000 requires more driving effort), but you might as well throw times out the window altogether if that is the case. Those links I previously posted conclude otherwise to your thoughts. When people mention that "you have to take it redline to make it accelerate that fast" is just stating the obvious. They are saying you have to do something extra (implying more difficult) in order to get the results. Like, "wait a second, the car can't be that good because you have to do this and that in order to get those times". Well, that's just how you drive the S2000. You take it to redline. There is no other way to drive it if you are going to drive it the right way. In a Porsche Boxster S, you don't. Two different vehicles that you drive differently. If you drive both vehicles properly, the S2000 will edge out the Porsche Boxster S every time. The Boxster S just has a larger margin of error. Seems like you are a little heartbroken with your S2000 withdrawal, habitat. Why did you decide to get the Acura TL? I know I saw you post on the RX-8 site. Were you considering that vehicle as well? Also, how did your trade-in deal go? I was wondering how the resale value of your 2002 model held up during your trade-in. Sphinx99 - "I've actually seen a fair number of 911 cabrios with a child seat in the back." I promise you I'm not anti-kid, but I just feel sports cars and chidren should not mix. If I was fortunate enough to get my hands on a 911 cabrio, child seats would be as "strictly prohibited" as smoking a cigarette in a California restaurant.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: titan (Jul 31, 2004 4:10 am) The base Boxster you buy on looks alone because it's not in the same performance class of any of the cars listed. The pricier Boxster-S is a different matter. Don't buy a Z until the tire feathering problem is fixed. Quickly stated, you'll need to replace the front tires every 5-7k miles in all likelihood -- 10 to 12k max. No word from Nissan if the '05 fixes the defect. Don't have any insight into a Beemer Z4 other than to mention a Honda will be more reliable. Good hunting! |
|
|
Replying to: carliker (Aug 09, 2004 8:17 am) Obviously, I am partial to the S2000, but I don't think that is a correct statement. I've seen a few road test 0-60 numbers that put the S2000 neck and neck with the Boxster S, but I've also seen a few that put the Boxster S slightly ahead of the S2000. Going to 100 mph, the figure I recall for the S2000 by Motor Trend is 14.0 or 14.1; the Boxster S 13.8. And the Boxster S tops out at 160+ mph, whereas the S2000 is more like 150-155. Again, all of these "numbers" are insignificant to me. I think the S2000 has twice as much "fun to drive" value as the Boxster S, even if the Boxster S slightly edges out the S2000 in lateral g's, slalom, and top end acceleration. And that extra $25k+ that stays in your pocket with the S2000 doesn't hurt matters; nor does Honda vs. Porsche maintenance and reliability issues. "Why did you decide on the TL?" It was a tough decision. The 2004 TL 6-speed offers very good performance for a FWD sedan that can comfortably carry 4-5. I was replacing a 1995 Maxima SE and, unfortunately the 330i was just too small for our needs. The 545i 6-speed would have done the trick size wise, but by the time you loaded it up with the TL's standard features, it cost $30k more. And the i-drive still "drives-me" nuts. I also considered a E320 CDI, but didn't think it was a very good value and, other than the fun of driving by gas stations, doesn't offer much excitement. I am reasonably happy with the TL, but my 6 year old daughter likes to rub in the fact that I "used to look cool" driving the S2000. So, yeah, I am a little heartbroken. For those that have an S2000, don't take it for granted. You could spend twice as much to only be half as happy. |
|
|
I've had the back end of our 2K kick out of shape more than a few times--it's catchable with little drama--under heavy throttle in a corner, a trait I'm familiar with from racing days and other RWD cars. The first thing to go on what I consider one of the greatest "fun to drive" cars I've ever driven or owned, is the set of Bridgestones under it, in favor of Goodyear GS-D3s. The D3s are stickier, wet or dry, and inspire a greater sense of confidence under cornering--much better rubber more suited to the vehicle, IMO. Of course, the B's are Japanese, so it's understandable they're standard fare. BTW, the second thing to go are the stock speakers and maybe the radio, as well. Otherwise, my wife--an excellent driver of performance vehicles--and I consider the 2K a quite stunning machine and plan to keep it. |
|
|
Thanks for the advice on tires. I have been wondering. Update; I'm nearing 17k miles. I'm guessing that mileage-wise I'm in the upper echelon of MY04 owners. What's frightening is the fact that I am probably going to need my SECOND set of rear tires by the time I hit the 20k mark. I do not know if the Potenza RE050s simply don't last as long as the S02s, or if I am driving much more aggressively, but I don't recall the S02s going in 10k miles of non-racing daily driving. |
|
|
|
do you do 4-wheel alignments and regular tire rotations?
|
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Aug 14, 2004 8:24 am) I traded my S2000 in with 18,000 miles and the original tires, although the rears were ready to be replaced. |
|
|
As habitat said, you don't do rotations on the S2000. It isn't an alignment issue, either, the tires wear uniformly. I'm just assuming that the RE050s wear faster than the S02s did. This is a surprise to me because the Z4 uses runflat versions of these tires and I don't hear the same issue. The only other car that uses RE050s is the Enzo, and I have heard that is a different compound (but same tread pattern). |
|
| Having spent the last year plus going to road courses and seeing lots of S2000's but very few Boxsters or S's I can say that on a road course the S2000 seems to have a pronounced advantage. When discussion at the track gets around to those two cars the Boxsters are easy to pass IMO while the S2000 with a good driver is really tough to stay close to in the corners. Only seen one Boxster S and it couldn't grade the car based on that driver. Older 911's are common at the tracks but Boxsters just don't seem to have the demographic that wants performance beyond 'fun to drive'. | |
|
|
|
Well must have to do with the tire compound then. Automakers do like to put sticky shoes on the cars as OEM to give you those good handling numbers. Remember how the NSX eats tires? Also let's face it, if you are in a car like the S2000, you are going to corner aggressively and that takes its toll. I used to get only about 8K on front tires on my Saab turbo no matter which tire I used. I tried Pirelli, Bridgestone and Michelin, all about the same results.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Honda S2000 Honda S2000
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Honda S2000
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
