Hondas have been known to "Bridge the gap" from performace to the everyday average driver. The S2K is no differernt. A great car but no TRACK deidacated car. It was made as a modern day Honda S600/S800 :)
I call it art not track work :)
Printable View
Hondas have been known to "Bridge the gap" from performace to the everyday average driver. The S2K is no differernt. A great car but no TRACK deidacated car. It was made as a modern day Honda S600/S800 :)
I call it art not track work :)
O M G !!!!
if the s2k is not a track built car then neither is a typ r
you should really check what you are talking about before you submit it dude
ill get the link and add your sweet heart in . . .
Its threads like this that make Ozhonda a laughing stock. The s2000 a luxury car??? Not a track car??? Suspension too soft??? U guys have no clue, i really cant be bothered with this one
Are you using after market coilovers? If you are, why did you replace your stock ones?Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteAP1
i hear what your saying my brother and you couldnt be more spot on :thumbsup: .Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteAP1
the thing makes me LMAO and nearly fall out of my chair is that majority of the post are simply bias opinions . (Nothing wrong with that;) ) but i dare say most of what people know is what they have heard or read about in magazines :rolleyes: . As a matter of fact , on a recent track day with the MX-5 club , a guy with a stock MX-5 ( r spec tyres / brakes ) was lapping faster than S2000's , ITR's and various other sports cars , this was at Oran park . Does this make the MX-5 a better car ? hell no . In a basic comparison the S2000 has the edge over the ITR is most departments . End of the day , you cant compare the handling of a FWD against a RWD . If FWD's were so good , F1 cars would be ! ;) Sure the ITR has good handling for a FWD , but its not great . As for the S2000 being "tail happy" im sick of hearing that . Usually comes from people who have never driven one . :rolleyes:
And we all know , the DC5 is a soft car, Honda beeffed it up too much for it to be a serious competitor . I personally like it , but the Australian spec is cut short .
to sum up really , it really depends on who's driving either car to get the best out of them . Thats where this thread should of ended . :p
It wasnt beacuse they were too soft its because they werent stiff enough for me. If ure "track cars" suspension is so damn good why do they make coilovers for M3's and porsches. I know plenty of ppl who have replaced ITR suspension, whats ure point. Stock for stock, S2000's suspension is better than the ITR. (not an opinion a designed fact)
U ask what other performance car is a convirtable?? A few AMG, ferrari and lambo owners might have something to say about that. I wanna know what respected preformance car apart from the TypeR is FF.
Mind u, the type R is just a variation of an Integra, a damn good one i might add (personally i love the car), none the less its an integra in the integra line up. The S2000 is a track focused car (not that the ITR isnt), chasis and engine specific, with hell of alot more race bred attributes than the ITR. It has aircon and power steering (like any high priced performance cars) because what person with $80k will buy a car without the two. Im sure there are a select few who may buy the car in that state, but they're hard enough to sell as it is.
Even if YOU fail to see the S2000 as a track car, it still out performs the ITR on paper and the track. (and please dont tell me about the one time when it was the other way around, isolated incidents are hardly scientific) While ure at it you should sue Honda for marketing and advertising the S2000 as a track car, seeing as though its not an all......
Thats where i stated awhile back :) And others did too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vuey
The only bias seems to be coming from actual owners of the described vehicles :)
Original question has been answered and this debate can go on forever ~ So be my guest and make a new thread about ITR vs S2K...SAME DRIVER etc.
Thats all good and well but what about all this BS about the S2k not being a track car, do we pride ourselves in posting opinion as fact? or just incorrect information?
3 from 3 my brother !Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteAP1
someone organize this man a prize / award .... give the man something !!!! ;)
Lotus Elise owners :pQuote:
what person with $80k will buy a car without the two
but my neighbour has one , and he misses his S2000 dearly . Its not a day to day driver the Lotus . abit too track focused . Sure its great on the track , but for day to day trips up and down Parramatta road with all its pot holes , you may as well be ridding in a shopping trolley !
any S2000 owner will tell you , shes a very harsh ride , feel every bump in that road i tell you , bad on the stock 16's and stock suspension , even worst for me now on 18's . And my gf's car is even worst on 19's ! :eek:Quote:
Stock for stock, S2000's suspension is better than the ITR. (not an opinion a designed fact)
Some of you guys are arguing whether the cars are designed as a TRACK CAR or not. In reality this description is a very 'open' subject. I'm actually not for or against anything or anyone, but I want to raise a few points that might clarify things a bit.
1) If you bring the S2000 onto the track, does your Honda Warranty cover it if you have problems (aside from wrong gear downshift)?
2) The DC2 Type R came out with lighter and carbon fibre 'everything' as well.... Since someone mentioned Air Con, I ought to remind everyone the Type R Integra doesn't come with AC standard.
My point is, all Type Rs and also the S2000 ARE designed so that they COULD go on the track as it is. Why separate them?
3) Just a point. Most people who drive an NSX doesn't bring it onto a track ever. Is it capable of being driven hard on the track? Oh shit yeah.
4) A Modena 360 or F430 or GT3 or M3. Can they be track cars? Oh yeah. Are they DEDICATED track cars? Oh not quite. That'll be the 360 CS, F430CS, GT3-R or M3-CSL. Do they still have luxuries? Yeah. Is it confusing you?
5) Aaronng is kinda right. The S2000 is a convertible and as such it shouldn't be termed as a Track Car. So shouldn't an MX-5.
However, the important thing is that if you decide to drive the S2000 on a track, it's going to kick bums... because it probably works better on a track than on the road, as the rear slides a bit.
Which brings us back to my original 1st sentence - the definition of TRACK car.
Instead of arguing over this point, I think it'd be much easier if we separate and term them DEDICATED TRACK CAR and CAR ABLE TO TRACK.
Then we look at the cars. Do the Gallardo, 360CS, M3CSL, STI V.8, EVO IX, S2000, Type Rs, MX-5, GT3-R, Lotus Elise (new ones are still light but have Air Con, btw.) -do these belong as a dedicated track car? NO. Surprisingly. Despite their light weight savings, technology, chassis balance, semi-slick tyres and ceramic brakes on some cars, etc, they are primarily to be driven on the street by the end user/buyer. To be a dedicated track car, they'll need to come out form the factory with FULL ROLL CAGE installed.
Are they all capable of being driven on the track and set fast times? Bloody oath YES...
To me the Type Rs and S2000 are nearly equals, all are track 'biased'.
Look which section of the forum we're posting in for the clue.... LOL :P
Which one is faster around the track? Without a doubt, the S2000.
Better balance. Better suspension. Rear wheel drive inherently better to drive. Better track oriented engine and gearing. Better start button. Better built - built in NSX factory. Better looking. Higher price.
As for the engine performance differences between DC Type Rs and S2000. Not much in them... The Power Band on both are for top end, but S2000 has a little bit more. Which on a 'track' and with suitable gearing, will give a slight edge to the S2000 after the cornering apex. In real world driving, the S2000 is only very slightly quicker in a straight line. And the Type R engines have more potential to be unleashed from factory too - so all in all - they're similar enough 4 cylinder engines.
Track "able" is good definition but i think its safe to say were talking about the same thing. The cars are bought to be road registered ud be a fool to think that they come track preped for professional use from stock. When i say track car, thats what i mean anyway.
My point is take a look at the S2k gear box, deemed by most as one of the best H gates in the world, the steering wheel, the dash, the light weight wheels, tyres created just to suit the car, 50/50 weight distribution, engine mounted behind the front axel for balance. Sway bars thicker than most aftermarket products. Re-enforcment absolutly everywhere, chasis and suspension. Why would a non able track car have so many track focused technologies. Being a convertable has no impact on the car whatso ever. Its as ridgid as ever, thats why those who havent driven the car extensivley claim it to be tail happy. Again there are many many high end sports cars that are much faster and much more track "able" than the two, that are convirtable and fully equiped. U show me a luxury car has chasis re-enforcment pertruding through the cabin floor. And what kind of a luxury car revs to 9k with a cabin that small. Also what luxury car comes with only a close ratio six speed and no auto option???
End of the day the S2000 is a "track" car just as much as the type R if not more so, seeing as though its FR (a true sports car). U can agrue one is faster than the other all u like, just make sure uve got a clue about the both cars before u post incorrect info.
If they were not stiff enough for the road, then it is already sacrificing performance for comfort. DC2R's suspension is stiff enough, but people swap for aftermarket coilovers because they want it lowered.Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteAP1
A generic Porsche is not a track car. The only Porsche that I consider a track car is the GT2 and GT3. And an M3 is not a track car. The M3 CSL is a track car. Show me coilovers that are worth using to replace those on the CSL and GT2/GT3.
Generic AMGs, Ferraris and Lambos are not track cars. They are high performance sports cars. The Challenge Stradale variation of the Ferraris are track cars.Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteAP1
Track variations take the sporty car and turn it into a track based car by sacrificing comfort by taking away AC, sound deadening (there is heaps in a street car) and overly stiff dampers and springs. Take a DC2R and an S2000, both stock. Run them on the terrible roads that we have in Sydney and find out which one is less comfortable. Also on the subject of sound deadening, does the S2000 have that? If it does, then it has just compromised performance for comfort.Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteAP1
It is not performance that makes a track car. It's the sacrifice of comforts, road compliancy and sound deadening to get that last 5% of performance out of a chassis is what makes it a track car.Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteAP1