s2000 Past Blast - Motor Mag

[ECU-MAN]

sounds like their volvo drivers

[stevharr]

Didn't the S2000 just win Top gear's Best Car award.... AGAIN? I think the guy that wrote that article is talking out of his exhaust pipe

[dragons2k]

IF it aint holden or ford its not good enough for motor

[BlitZ]

did it win top gear best car?
i remember watching a clip where that also baggged it.. ..

they mention the same thing. great track car but not an everyday car

[Malenic1981]

I read that sh#t article, those people don't know what they are talking about, it's not farken falcon or commodore so it has to be big, and have big engine that has fu#k all power. I would never trust those people on their opinions and testings, they suck big time, expecialy whan it comes to jap cars, if you ask them the best car would be commodore. Just check jap or europian mags and see what they say about S2K.

[AusS2000]

I read the article when it first came out and sent a response. I checked the latest edition of Motor and couldn't find any mention of it:

_____________________________
I am amazed by the Past Blast article on the Honda S2000. How could David Morley and myself see the same thing and yet hold diametrically opposed opinions on almost every point?

Let's start at the start. "With rear drive and ONLY a six-speed manual gearbox....". Should it have more gears? Or perhaps an automatic? The S2000 has one of the best six speed manual box of cogs ever to bless an automobile according to many reports. And what else should a sports car have?

"The real let down was the visual package." Subjective I know, but he has to be joking. I see it as beautiful, elegant and purposeful. And in light of the current trend of high gunwales, even higher posteriors, and bulbous noses like the TT and 350Z I see a timeless elegant design. David is right that the tail between the legs look of the Boxster certain attracts more attention, but not for the right reasons.

The under bonnet visual may not scream 'high performance' but the engine note surely does. The S2000 achieves a fine balance between low rev civility and screaming VTEC howl with aplomb.

"The big omission was cruise control". I see where this is coming from. Cruise control is anathema to the S2000. If you choose the F3 over the Old Pacific Highway then this car ain't for you.

"Bigger blokes will be pushed for elbow room". Perhaps cut down on the cheese burgers.

"it's then that you notice the dreaded digital dashboard". I think we have Ford and Nissan to blame for the 80s stigma attached to the digital dash. But in the S2000 I wouldn't have it any other way. Speed is immediately clear in the center and the arcing tachometer is the primary feedback when driving hard. I certainly don't have trouble seeing it and I've driven in all sorts of conditions. And the fact is, if analogue gauges had a real advantage you'd see them in V8 Supercars and F1. But you don't.

"getting the thing to shift it's arse requires much pedal stomping and gear sticking". To quote Julie Andrews, "These are a few of my favourite things". Hey, if you don't like driving get a taxi.

"The rear end is the culprit". Much has been made of the S2000's tailyness. It's certainly not for the faint hearted. But those that get to know the S2000 and learn it's limits don't have a problem. There are plenty getting around the road and track that don't seem to see this issue. I haven't heard Drew Russell complain as he overtakes big Fords and Holdens in the twisty bits.

The S2000 is a fun car. I've had mine since March 2000, after a 6 month wait. And I'll part with it when they pry my cold dead fingers off the steering wheel. If there is only room in your life for one car then perhaps the S is not for you. Or perhaps it is and you put up with the odd inconvenience like I do. I'd much rather carve the Old Pacific Highway in the S than sit in traffic in a Falcondore on the F3.

And then it dawned on me. The reason why Mr Morley's and my perception differed so much. The answer is in the second paragraph:

"An engaging personality, it would seem [to Mr Morley at least], just isn't enough if she doesn't also have the proper jumper monkeys." Is this really what passes for journalistic creativeness in the 21st century?

Perhaps the tag line of the article should have been:

"Not for troglodytes"

[Malenic1981]

well said

[preludacris]

here here

[racinghonda]

Morley is a complete yobbo. If the engine doesn't have 500nm at 200rpm then he won't be happy. He has no idea now to drive a manual car, the sheer bliss of keeping a high performance engine on the boil with a sweet shifting gearbox escapes him.

[BrianC]

Yeh i guess Morley had some personal reasons for bagging out the s2k. Theres no way theres a car in the entire world thats THAT bad. If i didnt know what car they were talking about when i was reading it, i woulda guessed something completly different, not the s2k. The way he described it was asif it didnt move at all! Even if u had the WORST 2L engine in the world, it would still move faster then the car he was describing in the mag.

What seems to be the common tagline from these reviewers is that, its a great track car, not so good road car. IMO i cant see how driving a great track car, to and from work everyday, can possible be a bad thing?

And im not surprised they didnt publish ur letter in their MailBag section of their mag AusS200! I guess some of these kinda mags have turned into more of an entertainment type magazine, rather then factual and unbiased. Take Top Gear for example, that old fart thinks every car is shit - just for the sake of entertainment

Ahh well, each to their own. Im sure the s2k puts a smile on all ur faces every time u climb into it. And in the end thats all that matters

[Malenic1981]

I went to honda dealership yesterday, ther is one S2K for sale $40000 00 model with 75K, if I just had money, I think it's just great car, the feeling you get when you sit inside the car is something special.
I just want one

[aaronng]

WTF is a jumper monkey? Is that what they hire to write car articles?