Honda: S2000 News
#321
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by Maximized
I provided facts with the above links(one with Honda's own literature), so you feel the need to get the last word. I guess the engineers at Honda wouldn't be a good source of hard facts
Again, the suspension was dumbed down. Read up on how the engineers changed the roll center, toe, spring rates, etc. etc. Read, learn, and quit being such a nut swinger of the S2K. I think the problem lies in that you really have no clue what you are talking about and base your arguement on magazines.
I am dealing with an 18 year old know it all with diarhea of the mouth. It's sad when a Mustang owner knows more about the car than the owner does. I bet the true owners are mommy and daddy.
Again, the suspension was dumbed down. Read up on how the engineers changed the roll center, toe, spring rates, etc. etc. Read, learn, and quit being such a nut swinger of the S2K. I think the problem lies in that you really have no clue what you are talking about and base your arguement on magazines.
I am dealing with an 18 year old know it all with diarhea of the mouth. It's sad when a Mustang owner knows more about the car than the owner does. I bet the true owners are mommy and daddy.
You skim over the info at hondanews at think you "know" something about the car. I could tell you why the original AP1's were more prone to bumpsteer and why the suspension geometry was originally set up that way, but why bother, you know more about the S2000 than I do. If you really want to know more about the S2000 read Dan Carney's book which details the history of the car from inception to testing to production. Read s2ki.com where owners post their real world experiences, thoughts and opinions. Hondanews gives great technical info, but not much in the way of subjective and/or objective opinions.
As usual, not one proper fact to back up your failing and crumbling argument, and as usual, you love to cap it all off with a personal attack. This is just too easy.
#322
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by srika
the S2000 performs (slightly) better than the 350Z, in all areas. consistently. Yes this includes magazine reviews, but its also proven by various homemade videos I have seen online over the years. its also more fun to drive, even though it doesnt have as much torque down low.
Fact: The 350Z is a faster car.
Fact: You are a magazine racer, whom has little real life experience.
Fact: You are a S2000 nut-swinger.
That said, the 350Z is extremely competent. Even though it is relatively heavy when compared to the S2k, it carries its weight well, and has a wonderful exhaust note.
#323
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by Maximized
FYI Vishnu....I am done. Have a good one and if you want to continue this PM me.
#325
S2000 Owner
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Orlando, Fl, USA
Age: 48
Posts: 1,459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He has a right to his opinion but personal attacks is weak. I love this car and honestly will probably NEVER get rid of it. It's been my daily driver for almost 3 years. Low end power has NEVER been an issue for me. This car is a freakin blast to drive!
If it makes him feel better I'm about to get my diff replaced for the 2nd time . Yes I drive it like I stole it!!!
If it makes him feel better I'm about to get my diff replaced for the 2nd time . Yes I drive it like I stole it!!!
#326
Senior Moderator
OK, breather time. The S2K is a terrific roadster as is the 350Z. IMHO, both suit two different types of driver and server both fairly well. I am partial to the Z but mainly because I have become VERY used to the VQ35DE in my Maxima.
I have driven my friend's S2K (2.0L) and it truly has a Jekyll/Hyde power delivery that takes some getting used and requires focused time to master. (I personally felt that the K20A2 in his previous ride - RSX-S - is a better motor aside from peak HP). OTOH, the Z is MUCH more suited to the novice driver/racer....which is not a bad thing IMHO.
I have driven my friend's S2K (2.0L) and it truly has a Jekyll/Hyde power delivery that takes some getting used and requires focused time to master. (I personally felt that the K20A2 in his previous ride - RSX-S - is a better motor aside from peak HP). OTOH, the Z is MUCH more suited to the novice driver/racer....which is not a bad thing IMHO.
#327
Senior Moderator
In real world driving merging into traffic and general stop and go the s2k isnt the best car due to the lack of down lo power. At the track where you can keep the revs up it shines (but ive also see it get its ass handed to itself on tracks that it cant keep in its power range)
Im not denying its a good car, it is. Its fun. It just needs much more down low power
And vishnus11, the s2k i spent time behind the wheel was a 04
Im not denying its a good car, it is. Its fun. It just needs much more down low power
And vishnus11, the s2k i spent time behind the wheel was a 04
#328
Liquid Ice
Another S2K owner here (2004 AP2). As far as the Z being better than the S2K because of 'real world experiences' at the track, unless you're seeing the same driver on the same day drive both cars, I don't know if you can really directly compare the cars. Its true, the S2K is a harder car to drive in the 1/4 mile, and so you're going to see more people putting down slower times. But if you put a good driver behind both cars I think you'll find the times to be pretty damn close.
As far as the AP1 versus AP2 arguement, it really depends on the situation. In some situations the AP2's neutral handling is better, but in some cases for experienced drivers the AP1's tendancy to oversteer is better. Its just really your preference, just like the preference between the Z and the S2K.
I'm certainly not a know-it-all when it comes to cars, but I don't know why down-low-torque is such a big deal in stop-and-go traffic. I'm not usually revving the hell out of my engine while I'm sitting in traffic and while I may end up having to shift into 2nd, I don't see why its a big deal, especially in a car like the S2K which has a great gearbox.
As far as merging into traffic, I guess if you never want to rev passed 3000rpms then the S2K wouldn't be good for merging, but I'm able to merge just fine and get up to highway speeds without hitting VTEC, and its not like I live in the boonies or anything (DC Metro traffic is considered 3rd worst in the nation I think?)
Anyways, to each his own ... The S2000 is a niche car. There's a reason they only make about 10k a year compared with a more mainstream car. Its not for everyone! I'm not going to be ignorant and say that its the best car in the world, or maybe not even the best value in the world anymore ... But its still the best ~30k I've ever spent
As far as the AP1 versus AP2 arguement, it really depends on the situation. In some situations the AP2's neutral handling is better, but in some cases for experienced drivers the AP1's tendancy to oversteer is better. Its just really your preference, just like the preference between the Z and the S2K.
I'm certainly not a know-it-all when it comes to cars, but I don't know why down-low-torque is such a big deal in stop-and-go traffic. I'm not usually revving the hell out of my engine while I'm sitting in traffic and while I may end up having to shift into 2nd, I don't see why its a big deal, especially in a car like the S2K which has a great gearbox.
As far as merging into traffic, I guess if you never want to rev passed 3000rpms then the S2K wouldn't be good for merging, but I'm able to merge just fine and get up to highway speeds without hitting VTEC, and its not like I live in the boonies or anything (DC Metro traffic is considered 3rd worst in the nation I think?)
Anyways, to each his own ... The S2000 is a niche car. There's a reason they only make about 10k a year compared with a more mainstream car. Its not for everyone! I'm not going to be ignorant and say that its the best car in the world, or maybe not even the best value in the world anymore ... But its still the best ~30k I've ever spent
#329
Suzuka Master
Originally Posted by vishnus11
I could tell you why the original AP1's were more prone to bumpsteer and why the suspension geometry was originally set up that way....If you really want to know more about the S2000 read Dan Carney's book which details the history of the car from inception to testing to production. Read s2ki.com where owners post their real world experiences, thoughts and opinions. Hondanews gives great technical info, but not much in the way of subjective and/or objective opinions.
#330
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
some guy with a black 2005 parked next to me with his top down
i want this car so bad!!!!!!!
i want this car so bad!!!!!!!
#331
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by SpeedyV6
Just out of curiosity, why was the suspension set up that way on the AP1?
I also agree with LiQuice - a niche car built for a niche market. You either like it or you don't. But when driven properly in the manner it was meant to be driven to extract maximum power, it can perform extremely well.
#332
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 43
Posts: 5,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by srika
the S2000 performs (slightly) better than the 350Z, in all areas. consistently. Yes this includes magazine reviews, but its also proven by various homemade videos I have seen online over the years. its also more fun to drive, even though it doesnt have as much torque down low.
Are you willing to back that statment up in the 1/4 mile? If so, my friend Brian would love to prove you wrong for the right price. His car holds the stock Z record on MY350Z.
I've seen both cars run at the track and the Z is a quicker and more consistent drag racer. On a road course it's a toss up. I hate to bring a magazine into the conversation, but check out the latest C&D. The 350Z Track was 1 second faster around VIR than the EVO MR. Now I can tell you from my track experience that a well driven EVO is significantly faster than an S2K around Gingerman and Autobahn. Food for thought.
#333
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 43
Posts: 5,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vishnus11
You went to Honda's website and "investigated" the suspension changes and listed some "hard facts". Power to you. Problem is, your "hard facts" don't relate to your arguments. "Higher at the limit performance" and "less bump steer" aren't dumbing down but instead are useful improvements that further enhance the handling of the S2000.
You skim over the info at hondanews at think you "know" something about the car. I could tell you why the original AP1's were more prone to bumpsteer and why the suspension geometry was originally set up that way, but why bother, you know more about the S2000 than I do. If you really want to know more about the S2000 read Dan Carney's book which details the history of the car from inception to testing to production. Read s2ki.com where owners post their real world experiences, thoughts and opinions. Hondanews gives great technical info, but not much in the way of subjective and/or objective opinions.
As usual, not one proper fact to back up your failing and crumbling argument, and as usual, you love to cap it all off with a personal attack. This is just too easy.
Finally, please post some track times. I'd love to see how well you can pilot your S2K down the 1320. Also, please tell many how many HPDE's or OT's you've been to in your S2K. If it's zero, do yourself a favor and just delete your long-winded response, since it just proves my point that you are a mag racer.
#334
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by Maximized
I retract my statement above.
Are you willing to back that statment up in the 1/4 mile? If so, my friend Brian would love to prove you wrong for the right price. His car holds the stock Z record on MY350Z.
I've seen both cars run at the track and the Z is a quicker and more consistent drag racer. On a road course it's a toss up. I hate to bring a magazine into the conversation, but check out the latest C&D. The 350Z Track was 1 second faster around VIR than the EVO MR. Now I can tell you from my track experience that a well driven EVO is significantly faster than an S2K around Gingerman and Autobahn. Food for thought.
Are you willing to back that statment up in the 1/4 mile? If so, my friend Brian would love to prove you wrong for the right price. His car holds the stock Z record on MY350Z.
I've seen both cars run at the track and the Z is a quicker and more consistent drag racer. On a road course it's a toss up. I hate to bring a magazine into the conversation, but check out the latest C&D. The 350Z Track was 1 second faster around VIR than the EVO MR. Now I can tell you from my track experience that a well driven EVO is significantly faster than an S2K around Gingerman and Autobahn. Food for thought.
What's the fastest time for a stock 350Z on race rubber at Gingerman?
#335
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 43
Posts: 5,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by srika
thats nice to hear about your friend - what's 1/4 time did he get? If I had an S2k, I might race for fun but not for the "right price"... lol
What's the fastest time for a stock 350Z on race rubber at Gingerman?
What's the fastest time for a stock 350Z on race rubber at Gingerman?
A 350Z with race rubber isn't stock, is it ? The same friend I am referring to above ran 1:44's on a stop watch his first time ever tracking his Z. A good set of R compounds is worth seconds in some cases, so your guess is as good as mine. I know there are guys on My350Z that do track there though, so I am sure I can find some concrete times. If I was a betting man, I'd bet a good driver on R compounds in a otherwise stock track Z could run high 1:30's around Gingerman.
I do know that a fully race prepped S2K ran by a NASA Honda-Challenge driver ran 1:37's around Gingerman.
#336
Senior Moderator
13.6 is good, is that on street tires? bone stock right? that would be pretty tough on a S2k.
stock except for the tires more tomorrow...
stock except for the tires more tomorrow...
#337
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by srika
13.6 is good, is that on street tires? bone stock right? that would be pretty tough on a S2k.
stock except for the tires more tomorrow...
stock except for the tires more tomorrow...
As rare as it seems to hit 13.6, some have done it or came really close while being stock. But most guys were running low 14s. (searched on 350z forums too)
http://www.dragtimes.com/Nissan--350...l?resultpage=2
#338
Smitty's Moral Police
As far as the Z being better than the S2K because of 'real world experiences' at the track, unless you're seeing the same driver on the same day drive both cars, I don't know if you can really directly compare the cars. Its true, the S2K is a harder car to drive in the 1/4 mile, and so you're going to see more people putting down slower times. But if you put a good driver behind both cars I think you'll find the times to be pretty damn close.
#339
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by Maximized
I've known that for years. I just wanted to point that out to an ignorant S2K fanboy like yourself with Honda as the source. Again, for an experience driver, Honda dumbed downed the suspension. They did this because newbs like yourself were raising the insurance rates because the car could transition to snap oversteer if you aren't quick on the reflexes. Now if you want to speak technically, please explain to me how the changes affected the car. I can see from your post a few above, that you read a few things and don't understand the physics. It seems that you are armed with the minimal knowledge to make you dangerous.
Please explain to me, I'd love to hear a thorough analysis of how the suspension changes in 04' affected the physics of the car.I'd love to hear the "Facts" because I've presented a well know "flaw" in the car near the limit and you have yet to acknowledge it. Kind of like you think the car has torque. I am sure I will get a google explanation.
Finally, please post some track times. I'd love to see how well you can pilot your S2K down the 1320. Also, please tell many how many HPDE's or OT's you've been to in your S2K. If it's zero, do yourself a favor and just delete your long-winded response, since it just proves my point that you are a mag racer.
Please explain to me, I'd love to hear a thorough analysis of how the suspension changes in 04' affected the physics of the car.I'd love to hear the "Facts" because I've presented a well know "flaw" in the car near the limit and you have yet to acknowledge it. Kind of like you think the car has torque. I am sure I will get a google explanation.
Finally, please post some track times. I'd love to see how well you can pilot your S2K down the 1320. Also, please tell many how many HPDE's or OT's you've been to in your S2K. If it's zero, do yourself a favor and just delete your long-winded response, since it just proves my point that you are a mag racer.
I'll refer you to unlemming's post I think we can trust the mags better than your anecdotal evidence.
#341
Engineer
anyone ever remember this hoax?
S2000-R
360Hp inline 6
Would be nice if Honda designed and actually built it....
http://www.mcclatchie.com/reviews/S2000R.html
S2000-R
360Hp inline 6
Would be nice if Honda designed and actually built it....
http://www.mcclatchie.com/reviews/S2000R.html
#342
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by savage
anyone ever remember this hoax?
S2000-R
360Hp inline 6
Would be nice if Honda designed and actually built it....
http://www.mcclatchie.com/reviews/S2000R.html
S2000-R
360Hp inline 6
Would be nice if Honda designed and actually built it....
http://www.mcclatchie.com/reviews/S2000R.html
at S2000R
#343
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by Crazy Sellout
I thought the argument was that the s2k didnt have enough torque for daily driving?
It is undoubtedly down on torque in relation to something like the 350Z, but with regards to daily driving, its more than capable. And when you really want to haul ass, just keep 'er in VTEC
#344
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by vishnus11
Does that also have not enough torque for daily driving? I don't see people with Accords/Camry's/other DD vehicles complaining about the lack of torque, so why does the S2000 suddenly lack torque in daily driving?
162 lb-ft @ 6800 vs 160 lb-ft @ 4000
#345
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by dom
I don't nessesaraly disagree with you but their argument is.....
162 lb-ft @ 6800 vs 160 lb-ft @ 4000
162 lb-ft @ 6800 vs 160 lb-ft @ 4000
exactly.
Wheres beetroot, he even said the s2k was annoying for daily driving since you always had to rev the hell out of it.
I dont mean to be a dick, but maybe you dont mind that since you are 18. I know when i was 18 i didnt mind if my car was super loud everyday. Hell i even drove it like a stole it. So really, the S2k would have been perfect for me at that time.
Last edited by Crazy Bimmer; 10-04-2006 at 12:56 PM.
#346
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by vishnus11
I don't see people with Accords/Camry's/other DD vehicles complaining about the lack of torque, so why does the S2000 suddenly lack torque in daily driving?
That said:
Originally Posted by DOM
I don't nessesaraly disagree with you but their argument is.....
162 lb-ft @ 6800 vs 160 lb-ft @ 4000
162 lb-ft @ 6800 vs 160 lb-ft @ 4000
I would like to see a torque curve comparison chart between the F22C and K24A3. (SteVTEC?) That would really illustrate the gist of the argument.
#347
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by Crazy Sellout
exactly.
Wheres beetroot, he even said the s2k was annoying for daily driving since you always had to rev the hell out of it.
Wheres beetroot, he even said the s2k was annoying for daily driving since you always had to rev the hell out of it.
the AP2 is an improvement but the car is really FUN to drive only past 6000 or whatever... that being said, I have a friend who is on his 4th S2k right now (he likes them that much). He is the same guy who had the M3 race car and races at SCCA. He is about to go semi-pro. He has run 1:37 at Gingerman with a stock S2k on R-compounds. I have another friend who has had 2 s2k's. The cars have appeal.
Last edited by srika; 10-04-2006 at 02:08 PM.
#348
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by F23A4
....it was not long after I procured my 99 Accord LX (148lb-ft) that I regretted not getting the LX-V6 (195lb-ft) instead.
The TSX is most definently the last NA 4 cylinder car I'll ever buy.
#349
Race Director
Originally Posted by F23A4
....it was not long after I procured my 99 Accord LX (148lb-ft) that I regretted not getting the LX-V6 (195lb-ft) instead. (My 02 Maxima has since made up for 3 1/2 years of driving that torqueless wonder.)
If I want speed/tq I just jump on my bike.
When I see all of these folks clamoring for tq I wonder how they would react to a diesel.
#351
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 43
Posts: 5,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vishnus11
You sir, are pitiful. What happened to "let's continue this through PM". You got your butt handed to you, and now your back for more. Again, reading comprehension would serve you well.
I'll refer you to unlemming's post I think we can trust the mags better than your anecdotal evidence.
I'll refer you to unlemming's post I think we can trust the mags better than your anecdotal evidence.
-You've never had your S2K to a track(drag or road course)
-You cannot explain in your own words how the suspension changes affected the dynamics of the car.
Again, you have no clue what you are talking about. In fact, it's obvious that you cannot comprehend the context of "dumbed down" in terms of suspension tuning. I said it before, but you are a 18 year old know it all. You not being to the track and talking about handling is the equivalant of a virgin talking about sex.
Call me pitiful and claim to "own" me all you want. You look like the moron and further cements my message that you are a magazine racer.
#352
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 43
Posts: 5,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by srika
He has run 1:37 at Gingerman with a stock S2k on R-compounds. I have another friend who has had 2 s2k's. The cars have appeal.
That's about 5-6 seconds slower than my friends old 02 Z06 on R compounds and PF01 pads.
#353
Senior Moderator
I dont have any proof more than telling you that. But I will say this - my friend is an AMAZING driver. He has been racing in Midwestern Council over the past year with his M3 Lightweight race car (9mb of pics here). He is on other boards as "Mafia". I will try to get some threads for you to peruse that talk about him. He is the kind of guy that intimidates guys in a class ahead of him - for instance I think he is in "GT2" class with the M3... there have been times where he has had to let off and not pass the GT1 guy in the lead, just because that would "look bad"... :P He is REALLY GOOD. Ask your friend about Mafia aka Drew, he may know of him. Because I think he has done NASA events too.
#354
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 43
Posts: 5,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by srika
I dont have any proof more than telling you that. But I will say this - my friend is an AMAZING driver. He has been racing in Midwestern Council over the past year with his M3 Lightweight race car (9mb of pics here). He is on other boards as "Mafia". I will try to get some threads for you to peruse that talk about him. He is the kind of guy that intimidates guys in a class ahead of him - for instance I think he is in "GT2" class with the M3... there have been times where he has had to let off and not pass the GT1 guy in the lead, just because that would "look bad"... :P He is REALLY GOOD. Ask your friend about Mafia aka Drew, he may know of him. Because I think he has done NASA events too.
1:42.50 05/25/2003 mafia 2002 S2000 Panther Plus and ATE blue, stock otherwise (S02's have maybe 50-65% tread left). Cool weather... With a passenger
This is the guy whom my buddy Neal knows:
1:36.95 05/28/2002 Mike Pendola 2000 Honda S2000 A032R's, Coilovers, brake pads, motul fluid.
The M3 in the pics look sick!! I was just asking because I was curious and wasn't trying to call you out as a liar.
Last edited by Maximized; 10-04-2006 at 07:17 PM.
#355
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by dom
I don't nessesaraly disagree with you but their argument is.....
162 lb-ft @ 6800 vs 160 lb-ft @ 4000
162 lb-ft @ 6800 vs 160 lb-ft @ 4000
http://www.s2ki.com/forums/index.php...0&#entry546210
Here's an interesting thread -the guy hooked up an accelerometer to his S, and measured the avg. g through 1st gear. Although the image is not longer hosted, you can deduce from the comments, that the VTEC crossover is a lot smoother than we're led to believe, and is function of the fact that the car is making pretty even torque throughout the rev range. Btw, this was done on an AP1, so I'd imagine it would hold even more true for an AP2.
http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...&page_number=4
^ Above is a dyno plot of an AP2 done by TOV. As you can see, from around 3000 to 6000 rpms, the engine is still making approx. 85% of its peak torque (rough calculation). From 2500rpms to 3000rpms, its still making roughly 80% of its peak torque.
#356
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by Maximized
Well since you avoided answering my questions, I can make some simple assumptions:
-You've never had your S2K to a track(drag or road course)
-You cannot explain in your own words how the suspension changes affected the dynamics of the car.
Again, you have no clue what you are talking about. In fact, it's obvious that you cannot comprehend the context of "dumbed down" in terms of suspension tuning. I said it before, but you are a 18 year old know it all. You not being to the track and talking about handling is the equivalant of a virgin talking about sex.
Call me pitiful and claim to "own" me all you want. You look like the moron and further cements my message that you are a magazine racer.
-You've never had your S2K to a track(drag or road course)
-You cannot explain in your own words how the suspension changes affected the dynamics of the car.
Again, you have no clue what you are talking about. In fact, it's obvious that you cannot comprehend the context of "dumbed down" in terms of suspension tuning. I said it before, but you are a 18 year old know it all. You not being to the track and talking about handling is the equivalant of a virgin talking about sex.
Call me pitiful and claim to "own" me all you want. You look like the moron and further cements my message that you are a magazine racer.
No real facts or proof. Just anecdotal evidence, and insecurities.
Read the thread. Then read it again. Maybe read it some more. Your reading comprehension skills leave something to be desired, and frankly, why bother restating what I've already said.
#357
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by Maximized
It seems that you are armed with the minimal knowledge to make you dangerous.
#358
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 43
Posts: 5,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vishnus11
You really know that someone is grabbing for .... anything...when they have to make personal attacks because of their insecurities.
No real facts or proof. Just anecdotal evidence, and insecurities.
Read the thread. Then read it again. Maybe read it some more. Your reading comprehension skills leave something to be desired, and frankly, why bother restating what I've already said.
No real facts or proof. Just anecdotal evidence, and insecurities.
Read the thread. Then read it again. Maybe read it some more. Your reading comprehension skills leave something to be desired, and frankly, why bother restating what I've already said.
You've officially proven that you CANNOT answer my simple questions pertaining to the car YOU own and drive. One requires a simple Yes or No answer. I also love how you've become a psychologist! You are really proving to be a well rounded know it all.
#359
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by Maximized
I've read the thread and I can read perfectly fine. You want to compare reading comprehension let's go. I can tell you that I get paid well by a Fortune 500 company to create collateral for B2B acquisition and report directly to the VP of Marketing for my given segment. Please list your credentials! This is an automotive forum, so I apologize if my grammar isn't skimmed thoroughly for errors.
You've officially proven that you CANNOT answer my simple questions pertaining to the car YOU own and drive. One requires a simple Yes or No answer. I also love how you've become a psychologist! You are really proving to be a well rounded know it all.
You've officially proven that you CANNOT answer my simple questions pertaining to the car YOU own and drive. One requires a simple Yes or No answer. I also love how you've become a psychologist! You are really proving to be a well rounded know it all.
If you had read the thread, then you'd have all the answers to the questions you asked in my posts. You've avoided replying to any of the FACTS that I've posted, instead relying on your anecdotal evidence and misjudgement. Did you read unlemming's post, and reply to it. No. You instead ignored it, and continued with the lame personal attacks. You can't read, plain and simple.
Let me spell this out for you one more time...
You said that the S2000 was torqueless below 6000rpms. I stated that was not the case, especially with AP2s. I provided among other things an article from R&T to illustrate the point. I've also posted dyno plots to further illustrate the point. You on the other hand, have done.....nothing. Not one bit of solid, reputable information to back up your claim that the S2000 has "no torque" under 6000rpms.
You said the S2000 wasn't spectacular on the track. Again, I posted among other things, an article from C&D and an article from R&T in which the S2000 excels against other cars in it class such as the 350Z and Z4 3.0. You posted anecdotal evidence, to which Srika replied and illustrated that the S2000 is indeed highly capable on the track.
You said the handling of the S2000 was "dumbed down" in AP2 iterations. I disagreed, and pointed out the fact that a Best Motoring video comparing both the Japanese spec AP1 and AP2 on a course, in which the AP2 handily distanced itself from the AP1. The AP2 featured the suspension revisions, and no more, since the Jap Spec AP2 still kept their 9k redline (till 06 I believe). I also posted an article and excerpt from R&T in which they specifically commented on how the car was more planted and able to carry greater speed through the corners. In addition you yourself, posted info taken from hondanews I presume, in which the press release explicitly states "at-the-limit performance INCREASED". If all this means "dumbed down" handling to you, the you should seek professional help. "Dumbed down" handling would be something akin to what happened in the Audi TT, in which the car lost its neutral cornering attitute, which was replaced with a heavy, but safe understeer bias, that resulted in equal or less performance in the corners, not INCREASED performance. You've posted nothing that contributes to your argument that the handling was dumbed down.
When your argument started losing steam, you resorted to personal attacks. You'd be hard pressed to find a post in this thread where I personally attacked you. I'd love to, but its not my style.
In conclusion, your argument was based on hearsay, anecdotal evidence, and claims of having spent time behind the wheel. My argument referenced credible sources, and was further bolstered by the fact that I own the vehicle.
Cheers.
#360
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 43
Posts: 5,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vishnus11
psychologist...hmmm....
If you had read the thread, then you'd have all the answers to the questions you asked in my posts. You've avoided replying to any of the FACTS that I've posted, instead relying on your anecdotal evidence and misjudgement. Did you read unlemming's post, and reply to it. No. You instead ignored it, and continued with the lame personal attacks. You can't read, plain and simple.
Let me spell this out for you one more time...
You said that the S2000 was torqueless below 6000rpms. I stated that was not the case, especially with AP2s. I provided among other things an article from R&T to illustrate the point. I've also posted dyno plots to further illustrate the point. You on the other hand, have done.....nothing. Not one bit of solid, reputable information to back up your claim that the S2000 has "no torque" under 6000rpms.
You said the S2000 wasn't spectacular on the track. Again, I posted among other things, an article from C&D and an article from R&T in which the S2000 excels against other cars in it class such as the 350Z and Z4 3.0. You posted anecdotal evidence, to which Srika replied and illustrated that the S2000 is indeed highly capable on the track.
You said the handling of the S2000 was "dumbed down" in AP2 iterations. I disagreed, and pointed out the fact that a Best Motoring video comparing both the Japanese spec AP1 and AP2 on a course, in which the AP2 handily distanced itself from the AP1. The AP2 featured the suspension revisions, and no more, since the Jap Spec AP2 still kept their 9k redline (till 06 I believe). I also posted an article and excerpt from R&T in which they specifically commented on how the car was more planted and able to carry greater speed through the corners. In addition you yourself, posted info taken from hondanews I presume, in which the press release explicitly states "at-the-limit performance INCREASED". If all this means "dumbed down" handling to you, the you should seek professional help. "Dumbed down" handling would be something akin to what happened in the Audi TT, in which the car lost its neutral cornering attitute, which was replaced with a heavy, but safe understeer bias, that resulted in equal or less performance in the corners, not INCREASED performance. You've posted nothing that contributes to your argument that the handling was dumbed down.
When your argument started losing steam, you resorted to personal attacks. You'd be hard pressed to find a post in this thread where I personally attacked you. I'd love to, but its not my style.
In conclusion, your argument was based on hearsay, anecdotal evidence, and claims of having spent time behind the wheel. My argument referenced credible sources, and was further bolstered by the fact that I own the vehicle.
Cheers.
If you had read the thread, then you'd have all the answers to the questions you asked in my posts. You've avoided replying to any of the FACTS that I've posted, instead relying on your anecdotal evidence and misjudgement. Did you read unlemming's post, and reply to it. No. You instead ignored it, and continued with the lame personal attacks. You can't read, plain and simple.
Let me spell this out for you one more time...
You said that the S2000 was torqueless below 6000rpms. I stated that was not the case, especially with AP2s. I provided among other things an article from R&T to illustrate the point. I've also posted dyno plots to further illustrate the point. You on the other hand, have done.....nothing. Not one bit of solid, reputable information to back up your claim that the S2000 has "no torque" under 6000rpms.
You said the S2000 wasn't spectacular on the track. Again, I posted among other things, an article from C&D and an article from R&T in which the S2000 excels against other cars in it class such as the 350Z and Z4 3.0. You posted anecdotal evidence, to which Srika replied and illustrated that the S2000 is indeed highly capable on the track.
You said the handling of the S2000 was "dumbed down" in AP2 iterations. I disagreed, and pointed out the fact that a Best Motoring video comparing both the Japanese spec AP1 and AP2 on a course, in which the AP2 handily distanced itself from the AP1. The AP2 featured the suspension revisions, and no more, since the Jap Spec AP2 still kept their 9k redline (till 06 I believe). I also posted an article and excerpt from R&T in which they specifically commented on how the car was more planted and able to carry greater speed through the corners. In addition you yourself, posted info taken from hondanews I presume, in which the press release explicitly states "at-the-limit performance INCREASED". If all this means "dumbed down" handling to you, the you should seek professional help. "Dumbed down" handling would be something akin to what happened in the Audi TT, in which the car lost its neutral cornering attitute, which was replaced with a heavy, but safe understeer bias, that resulted in equal or less performance in the corners, not INCREASED performance. You've posted nothing that contributes to your argument that the handling was dumbed down.
When your argument started losing steam, you resorted to personal attacks. You'd be hard pressed to find a post in this thread where I personally attacked you. I'd love to, but its not my style.
In conclusion, your argument was based on hearsay, anecdotal evidence, and claims of having spent time behind the wheel. My argument referenced credible sources, and was further bolstered by the fact that I own the vehicle.
Cheers.
I can read perfectly well, especially in between the lines. Your parents bought you an S2K and you think it's god's chariot. In closing, open your eyes a bit and quit being so closed minded. Everything you read in car magazines isn't the absolute truth. You will also find that your parents are a lot smarter than you see them as when you are 18. It's a phase and you'll grow out of the know it all mentality.