AP1 VS AP2
05-03-2007, 04:47 AM
#101
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: West Henrietta UPSTATE NY
Posts: 58,680
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Bottom line, only us AP1 owners have the honor of wearing this shirt.
Even if AP2 MIGHT be a tad faster, both AP1 and AP2 are way slower than a Ferrari, but 9k is clearly more exotic than only 8,000 rpms.
Even if AP2 MIGHT be a tad faster, both AP1 and AP2 are way slower than a Ferrari, but 9k is clearly more exotic than only 8,000 rpms.
05-03-2007, 04:50 AM
#102
Registered User
Originally Posted by Triple-H,May 3 2007, 07:47 AM
both AP1 and AP2 are way slower than a Ferrari, but 9k is clearly more exotic than only 8,000 rpms.
except I have 8200 RPMs damnit... don't deny me those extra 200 rpms... 
05-03-2007, 05:52 AM
#103
Moderator
Originally Posted by iKMTi,May 3 2007, 03:40 AM
lol
you know F1 car rev up to 22k RPM.
you know F1 car rev up to 22k RPM.
05-03-2007, 05:58 AM
#104
Former Moderator
Originally Posted by TRDLiquidSilver,May 3 2007, 02:07 AM
when did i ever say F1 drivers was driving the s2000 and oversteering into runoff areas or a redwood tree? the F1 analogy came from changes to F1 cars every year to make the new car better than the last from every standpoint. the AP1 was the Ferrari F2006 and the AP2 is the F2007.
The AP2 modifications were based on input from average drivers.
By the same analogy...if you incorporate input from only Buick LeSaber drivers on how to "improve" the S2000, then you end up with a car that is much softer, ie more like a Buick...which I think we can all agree does not increase total potential of the car. Now this is extreme, and I am in no way comparing the AP2 to a Buick.
But when revising the AP1, if Honda had taken input only from Jason Saini and Ian Stewart rather than from average drivers, would the AP2 be the car it is today?
BTW...this is not the first car company to "soften" a car because of consumer pressure. The RX7tt R1 was incredibly hardcore when it arrived. Evidently, too hardcore for even sport-minded drivers. The result was Mazda "softened" the car up from the base settings that its professional test drivers said were perfect and sold the R2.
Red...I hear you that stock rules allow some limited mods (shocks, front swaybar, tires)...however, I put it to you that the changes allowed are equivalent for both cars except in one area: tires. The AP2 runs much more rubber than the AP1. So if anything the mods allowed give an advantage to the AP2.
05-03-2007, 06:19 AM
#105
Having owned both and driven both on the track and at autocross (60K in MY00 and 40K in MY04) I have to say that I always 'felt' like I was going faster in my AP1 but I actually am faster in my AP2. I would go as far as to say that the AP1 was better at exposing flaws in my driving, and that the AP2 is more forgiving of the same flaws. I would probably have been able to improve my driving more quickly and found it easier to discover problem areas in my technique driving my AP1. Unfortunately I am not financially in the position of having a dedicated track/autocross car so my S2K has to be my daily driver as well, and in that arena, I much prefer my AP2, especially in traffic and on interstates. (but then I have now crossed into the 'vintage' age group, so maybe that has something to do with my lack of appreciation for 'rawness' in stop and go traffic 
) I haven't posted up in one of 'these' threads since 2004, it's actually kind of nice to see one that hasn't degenerated completely to "My &ick is bigger than your %ick" Kudos to the rational discussers (you know who you are)
Cheers,
Mike
) I haven't posted up in one of 'these' threads since 2004, it's actually kind of nice to see one that hasn't degenerated completely to "My &ick is bigger than your %ick" Kudos to the rational discussers (you know who you are) Cheers,
Mike
05-03-2007, 07:41 AM
#107
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: WV Pan Handle
Posts: 1,466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Based on RedMx5's source:
AP1: Average time 13.9817 (14 times)
AP2: Average time 14.0918 (5 times)
Given the tiny data set, a tenth of a second is well within the margin of error, but AP1 FTW
AP1: Average time 13.9817 (14 times)
AP2: Average time 14.0918 (5 times)
Given the tiny data set, a tenth of a second is well within the margin of error, but AP1 FTW
05-03-2007, 09:39 AM
#108
Banned
Join Date: May 2005
Location: So Cal
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RED MX5,May 2 2007, 01:01 PM
I was hoping this thread might go in that direction. It's pretty obvoius to everyone why most people prefer the AP2, but it would be very interesting to hear from all the guys who have owned both and come away preferring the AP1. I have a feeling that it's a very small group, so it wouldn't use up a ton of bandwidth even if we heard from them all. To me, comparing the AP1 to the AP2 is like comparing the F40 to the F50. The F50 is quicker, faster, and more refined, but the F40 was the last "race car for the street" designed under the iron hand of Enzo Ferrari, and it shows up in the driving experience. Enzo didn't make concessions to drivers; His attitude was that if the car was right then the driver needed to adjust. If the car broke or went out of control it was never because the car was flawed, but because the driver had handled it badly. When you drive an F40 you have to drive it the way Enzo intended. When you drive an F50 you drive it the way Fiat intended, and it's just not the same thing. The original AP1 wants to be driven the way the Honda test drivers drove it during the final development and tuning sessions (on race tracks around the world). Later cars were changed based on customer feedback, and even if they are quicker, faster, and more confidence inspiring, they're not the same, because they don't make such strict demands on the driver. Early AP1's, F40's, GT3's, and all air-cooled 911's, are all cars that have to be driven in a specific way or they'll bite their owners, and that's what makes them so desirable to some people. They are not for everyone and were never intended to be. Neither is an F50, an AWD Porsche, or an AP2, but they're all "more civilized" or "more refined," which is just a nice way of saying that they are more forgiving. For most people that is a good thing, but it's not what everyone wants in a car that is basically a toy.
The F40 is the true F1 car on the street. That why I love it. Small engine that put out a lot of power.
05-03-2007, 09:49 AM
#109
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: West Henrietta UPSTATE NY
Posts: 58,680
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by iKMTi,May 3 2007, 12:39 PM
What I like about the F40 because it a V12 2.0 Liter engine, while the F50 is the 6.0 V12 engine.
The F40 is the true F1 car on the street. That why I love it. Small engine that put out a lot of power.
The F40 is the true F1 car on the street. That why I love it. Small engine that put out a lot of power.
The Ferrari F40 did not have a 2.0 V12
1992 Ferrari F40 - Features & Specs - At a Glance - MSN Autos
Standard Engine, 2.9L 475 hp V8. Horsepower, 475. Torque (lb-ft), 424.
05-03-2007, 12:06 PM
#110
Registered User
Originally Posted by Triple-H,May 3 2007, 07:47 AM
Bottom line, only us AP1 owners have the honor of wearing this shirt.
Even if AP2 MIGHT be a tad faster, both AP1 and AP2 are way slower than a Ferrari, but 9k is clearly more exotic than only 8,000 rpms.
Even if AP2 MIGHT be a tad faster, both AP1 and AP2 are way slower than a Ferrari, but 9k is clearly more exotic than only 8,000 rpms.
