STi vs S2000, as measured in Ft*Lb
#1
STi vs S2000, as measured in Ft*Lb
I have been looking into S2000's recently as I have always enjoyed their looks and no-nonsense roadster construction. I, just a few nights ago, got the chance to borrow the 2001 S2000 of a friend of mine for a few hours of driving.
The low low-end torque isn't an issue for putting around town, as has been said. Its completely adequate. What I did not like, however, is not even having it on tap when I desired a speed change. I understand that you cannot expect to drive an S2000 like and STi and get the most out of it, so I decided to drive it how some would say "its supposed to be driven": I pushed the skinny pedal until the tach passed 6000 RPMs. As I told my friend, I think owning the STi almost numbed me or something... I was hoping for more.
Going into the S2000 decision I understood that it would not have the power I was used to, but I also feel that torque and fun-to-drive is not a 1 to 1 relationship. The S2000 is definitely fun to drive. Despite being 40* out I still put the top down. I just think, that if I am going to spend $20,000 on a car that can fit only me, my girlfriend, and perhaps a few puppies in the trunk, I may need more oomph.
The S2000 is a high-reving roadster. That is its "niche". I thought that I could put up with a smaller amount of power due to the extras an S2000 would offer me: most notably a really huge sunroof. Handling was defiantly nice, however the STi's AWD system, coupled with Potenzas, is nothing to laugh at either. I actually tailed an S2000 through the twisties at Summit Point with little-to-no problem.
So I guess this post is more of a "why I have almost decided not to get an S2000" post. But I still hope some would find it somewhat interesting/insightful. I welcome your thoughts. For the time being I have to evaluate how much power I can give up for a little more "fun-to-drive". I'm curious if other people have had this same problem going from a more poweful car, to this particular roadster?
Here is a plot I made using one from my STi and one I found online of an S2000. The S2000 is a rough sketch, so its not dead-on, but for most purposes it fits the bill for this purpose. My STi, for clarification, had a UTEC installed which resulted in high boost levels. Other than that it was stock at this dyno.
Pay no attention to the numbers below the plot. For this dyno they don't really mean anything.
The low low-end torque isn't an issue for putting around town, as has been said. Its completely adequate. What I did not like, however, is not even having it on tap when I desired a speed change. I understand that you cannot expect to drive an S2000 like and STi and get the most out of it, so I decided to drive it how some would say "its supposed to be driven": I pushed the skinny pedal until the tach passed 6000 RPMs. As I told my friend, I think owning the STi almost numbed me or something... I was hoping for more.
Going into the S2000 decision I understood that it would not have the power I was used to, but I also feel that torque and fun-to-drive is not a 1 to 1 relationship. The S2000 is definitely fun to drive. Despite being 40* out I still put the top down. I just think, that if I am going to spend $20,000 on a car that can fit only me, my girlfriend, and perhaps a few puppies in the trunk, I may need more oomph.
The S2000 is a high-reving roadster. That is its "niche". I thought that I could put up with a smaller amount of power due to the extras an S2000 would offer me: most notably a really huge sunroof. Handling was defiantly nice, however the STi's AWD system, coupled with Potenzas, is nothing to laugh at either. I actually tailed an S2000 through the twisties at Summit Point with little-to-no problem.
So I guess this post is more of a "why I have almost decided not to get an S2000" post. But I still hope some would find it somewhat interesting/insightful. I welcome your thoughts. For the time being I have to evaluate how much power I can give up for a little more "fun-to-drive". I'm curious if other people have had this same problem going from a more poweful car, to this particular roadster?
Here is a plot I made using one from my STi and one I found online of an S2000. The S2000 is a rough sketch, so its not dead-on, but for most purposes it fits the bill for this purpose. My STi, for clarification, had a UTEC installed which resulted in high boost levels. Other than that it was stock at this dyno.
Pay no attention to the numbers below the plot. For this dyno they don't really mean anything.
#2
I had a C5 that made 337rwhp and 351rwtq. It also had Z06 wheels/tires and 4.10 gears. With those same Z06 street tires, I ran a 12.29 at 117.3mph at a 1/4 mile strip near DFW.
I sold the C5 to get the equity out of it and then missed having a sports car, so I did the lease special on an '05 S2000.
I love driving the S2000. While it's not as fast, it is very nimble and is fun to toss around the city streets. Dropping the top and banging through the gears, shifting right before the rev limiter is still an aural delight, particularly with an intake.
The Sti is a great ride too, but it's not even a sports car. It's an AWD rally sedan.
Anyway, you seem concerned about power, so I'd recommend keeping your Sti or upgrading to a C6 or Z06.
I sold the C5 to get the equity out of it and then missed having a sports car, so I did the lease special on an '05 S2000.
I love driving the S2000. While it's not as fast, it is very nimble and is fun to toss around the city streets. Dropping the top and banging through the gears, shifting right before the rev limiter is still an aural delight, particularly with an intake.
The Sti is a great ride too, but it's not even a sports car. It's an AWD rally sedan.
Anyway, you seem concerned about power, so I'd recommend keeping your Sti or upgrading to a C6 or Z06.
#3
I can understand the "aural" delight of ripping through gears with the top down. I got a touch of it last night. I can see how fun it would be to drive on summer nights.
I have already sold the STi and am currently driving my DD, a Jeep Cherokee. With that being able to serve me during my Home Depot runs I am fine with a car with less utility than the STi.
I still want to try a SC'd S2000, or a post '04 model. Theres always E36 M convertibles for around the same price as well.
I have already sold the STi and am currently driving my DD, a Jeep Cherokee. With that being able to serve me during my Home Depot runs I am fine with a car with less utility than the STi.
I still want to try a SC'd S2000, or a post '04 model. Theres always E36 M convertibles for around the same price as well.
#6
Originally Posted by versionJDM,Jan 18 2006, 01:19 PM
i am not sure exactly what the point of this thread is?
I think you ment "I dont like the point of this thread"
#7
Originally Posted by y2ks2k,Jan 18 2006, 04:44 PM
I think I got the point of the thread.
I think you ment "I dont like the point of this thread"
I think you ment "I dont like the point of this thread"
Trending Topics
#8
Interesting/amusing plots. I assumed as much after driving the STi extensively and teh S2000. Around this time of the year, I'd trade the S2k for an STi any day of the week. That changes when it finally warms up!
#10
Originally Posted by BillyD,Jan 18 2006, 02:22 PM
The low low-end torque isn't an issue for putting around town, as has been said. Its completely adequate. What I did not like, however, is not even having it on tap when I desired a speed change.