Pat Dolan

Couldn't resist replying to some of the "its only a Honda" posts. Keep in mind who has a LOOOONG string of GP motorcycle and car victories and world championships...it ain't Posche! Honda can and will build whatever they want, and one could argue that the NSX is certainly on par with anything from Europe. We have some '66 Honda S600s (9,500 rpm redline) and I can tell you that they are an absolute jewell and a joy to work on and drive (in context), just like a 911/912 of the era.

Get it in perspective, guys. Any car that will get the groceries fulfills the real need of transportation. Anything after that is purely personal preferrence. While the S2000 doesn't light MY fire (nothing THAT heavy, including a Boxter cuts it with me - I am trying to figure how to shed a few more pounds from our NA Miata), it is not because it is not a truly nice piece of work and pretty much what Honda thinks its customers want.

Pat

Ghost Rider

Everyone I know who has ever owned a Honda S2000 has traded it in on something else within the first couple of years...

Oh, and they have had reliability problems, clutch, engine, etc. you can't change the laws of physics and more revs = more wear and tear, well maybe you can change the laws if you are Scotty from Star Trek...

KWC4S

can't knock honda's quality....i've had more trips to service dept with my porsche in 5 months than i have with my honda in 375,000 miles over 12 years.

bdellis

I love the look of the s2000 and it is a nice car. But a modified boxter should be able to handle it. The boxter s anyway.

A modified 2.5 liter 944 turbo S will push way over 120hp per liter. It already makes 100per liter stock. With just chips you go up to 120hp per liter...

And dont forget the old RX7's with a 1.3 liter engine pushing about 200hp per liter. Now thats truely amazing and its old technology....

teflon_jones

i'm not a fan of the S2000, but in terms of HP/liter, 120 is pretty good. a modified 944 turbo S may push over 120HP/liter, but it's got a turbo and it's modified. the honda is naturally aspirated and if it was modified it could push even more than 120HP/liter. like i said, i'm no fan of the S2000, i'm just playing devil's advocate here.

the RX7s are rotary engines so they don't exactly count in terms of HP/liter when comparing most cars. but i definitely agree with you that it's amazing since it's such an old technology.

veloce10

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ghost Rider
Everyone I know who has ever owned a Honda S2000 has traded it in on something else within the first couple of years...

Oh, and they have had reliability problems, clutch, engine, etc. you can't change the laws of physics and more revs = more wear and tear, well maybe you can change the laws if you are Scotty from Star Trek... [/

More revs don't necessarily mean more reliability problems. I ride a ten year old Kawasaki ZX6 with a red line of 14000 RPM and have never had to have any repairs, except for tires and drive chain, and yes I do utilize the revs. You seldom if ever hear of any rebuilds being done on inline four cylinder motorcycle engines.
Veloce10QUOTE]

kennycoulter

i like torque. i beat many forms of hondas in my $3,000 gt mustang. including an nsx.

brrt50cal

,

JoeW

I'm late to the conversation (and new to the board), but I thought some of this may be of interest -- note, especially, BS class winners.

http://www.scca.org/amateur/solo2/na...lts/index.html

FYI. J

2fast4ya

Modified ECU
Installation 996 3.6L Engine
Sport Headers
Sport Exhaust System
Sport Catalytic Converters
Sport Air Filter
Air Intake System
Sport Clutch


Power: Est. 340 bhp
Torque: Est. 273 ft lb.
0 - 60 mph: Est. 4.9 sec.
Top speed: 180 mph

zarman

That's a very nice looking car.

A 3.6L is a big displacement engine compared to a 2.0 L (if that's what you're comparing to). You can take a VW GTI 1.8T put a stage 3 turbo kit on it for 6 grand and you can attain 290hp and 296 lb. ft. of torque out of the measely 1.8L with still more power to be drawn out.

But really though, Boster S aren't extremely powerful cars to begin with rated at 258hp /229 lb-ft . Those numbers can be easily surpassed by a MIDLY modified car with a small turbo or supercharger...over even a bored out VR6 from 2.8L to 3.1L will get you 230whp and ample of torque to pass a factory Boxster S. That kind of work is just 4-5 grand to do...not too expensive.


Like someone had said, modified cars can attain performances that surpass many exotics with much higher price tags. Yes any exotic can easily be embarrased, but at the end of the day a Ferrari is still a Ferrari and a GTI is still a GTI albeit with some punch to deflate a lot of egos.

89Turbo944

To put it bluntly. The boxter is less of a car than the S2000. The hole design prosess fo the boxter was very porly done. It was just built to be part of the roadster group. Not rilly as a competitive car.

I work at mercedes benz in north vancouver canada. We have alot of people coming in and trading in porsches for mercedes. i think they are just plain stupid but this has given me the chance to drive boxter, boxter s, 993 991 Turbo, 996 911 Turbo, and a varity of RUF porsche's.

IMO the boxter has a very poor built quality compaired to most anyother porsche. The shifts are vary long and the pedals just dont seem right. And to much plastic. But still a blast to drive and they handle great.

I dont mean to bash the boxter, its a great car. I just beleave Honda has outdone the boxter in practicly every way. Untill Porsche puts in some tech time and builds a new one Hopefully soon. And i also hope they have a good designer not like BMW had for the new 7, 5 and Z. Nast *** cars. % is ok tho, dad has one

PS I owned an S2000, was a great car just not sutable for Vancouver weather. Top down 5 min out of the hole year

Tim

zarman

Came across this Top Gear video. http://www.z4roadster.org.uk/downloa...gearM3CSLL.wmv

black944 turbo

I have to say I own a 944 Turbo and it is hands down a more powerful and more predictable car than the S2k. My dad owns an 02 S2k and that car is the best handling and most fun sports car i have ever driven. It will make my car look like crape on an auto x course and I can tell you that reliability is a ton better on the hondas. The fact that you are comparing a car that is almost 10k more stock for stock is a tribute to how nice the S2k is. The honda pulls more g's in the skidpad than the non s boxster and will out accelerate it. Yes I know that does not mean that it will out do it under normal acceleration but it does have the capability to out do it. I will agree the car is deffinetely not a torque monster, but it is a great car and a wonderful bang for the buck. The car feels like an f1 car and who ever says the interiors are cheap has never realy looked at one closely. The fit and finish is supperb and the build quality is as well. The interior however is a bit purposeful, meaning no nonsense. But the fact that everyone on these boards constantly trashes japanese sports cars is completely unfair. Porsches are not the end all be all cars, yes they are nice but there are some japanese cars out there that are just as nice if not nicer than some porsches. The S2k on the negative side does have a nasty habit of letting loose without warning. But that is about the only negative thing about the pre 04 models handling. So I wish some of you guys would get off your high horses and give some other cars credit.

Vinny '98 3.8 C2S

Looking at overall costs, you have to include the huge depreciation Boxsters are taking in the used car market. If you're buying new, I think the S2000 is a better value.

Having said that, I'd take advangtage of the depreciation and buy a used Boxster or Boxster S vs. a new S2000.