emre

Agisd,

If you dare to give Alfa 147 as a weak example, then don't buy S2K.

It is not that 147 is a strong car (which is obviously not unless GTA), but it is that you seem to be lack of car passion.

IMHO, audi tt or 330ci would better fit to you...

agisd

eeehh?

My brother drives an 147 1.6 in Europe. I did not say that the 147 is not a nice car (design), I said that the engine has no torque (1.6). Btw, have you experienced the 147 or you just have seen it in pics? Because it may have some history behind it but not counting the design (which is excellent) is not very competitive (TS engines are old, body stiffness is not there, FWD too much understeer). I haven't driven the GTA though. It is a rare car to find in Europe.

Audi TT is old now and the chassis is weak and heavy (Golf based). Plus it's expensive in Canada. 4 years ago I liked it but I didn't know much about cars (haven't driven many RWD cars)...

330ci, I like it a lot but I cannot afford it and I don't want a luxury car at this point...Maybe, I can save some money and lease an M3 next year...

cyber_x

agisd,

The VR6 definitely has more low end torque and power. So, driving a S2000 will take some getting used to. But, ultimately, it performs much better than a VR6 and is *a lot* more fun to drive. I certainly wouldn't mind if the S2000 had more torque, but it's already an awesome car without it.

I daily drive my '02 S2000 close to 100 miles a day. It has 43k miles, is bone stock, and has held up fine so far. Some owners have definitely had issues with the car, but that is true of any performance car. People drive them hard, modify them, etc. Read any car message board and you'll come away with the impression that the car has problems - that might be true to a certain extent, but is usually exagerrated. Overall, the S2000 seems to have pretty good reliability.

I don't really pay attention to the fuel economy, so sorry, no help there. If I had to guess, I'd put it at maybe 20-25 MPG? I do a pretty even mix of city and highway driving. I should also mention that much of my highway commute is uphill, so I'm usually in a lower gear and higher RPM than I would normally be on a flat highway. I also VTEC a lot.

Bottom line is, if you like the S2000, get it. It'll probably be a little weird at first, but you'll get used to it, and you won't miss the torque in the long run. For comparison, the only other sports car I have extensive experience with is the Supra TT, and that has tons of torque and power (throughout the entire power band) compared to both the VR6 and S2000, but I like the S2000 just fine.

forsaken

Screw the torque, just dont let off the gas until 8k I heard conservatively it can run 30miles per galon. Reliable wise, if you drive it conservatively. It is more reliable than the vw. But thats just me..

billo

What Cyber said. If you like it during the test drive, buy one. You will adjust to the car slowly. Six months later you will be happier than the day you bought it. Six months after that, you will be happier still. But if it doesn't turn your crank a little at the outset, move on.

cvavra

I agree, test drive one first, see if it is something you like. I recently bought my first s2k after owning more than 10 different imports in the last 5 years including 3rd gen rx7 tt, new accord ex, new civic ex, new integra gsr, impreza, etc. I test drove the 350z, s2000, several BMW's, WRX, Celica GTS, and God knows what else. It came down to the 350z and S2000 which really are 2 different cars. I chose the S2k mainly because it WAS a Honda and I love the powerband. I ride 2 stroke motocross bikes and 600cc sportbikes, so I am used to the high RPM hits. This car is great for daily driving with 6k shifts, all the while knowing what's hiding in the higher RPMs. I am mostly stock, except intake and exhaust. Anyways, not to stray off too far, test drive it, VTEC it, you will know if this is the car for you. While your test-driving, look at all the people cranking their necks to check it out, this car draws more attention than any other I have ever owned. Good luck!

CRH911S

Under 6000rpm the 03 S2K is similar to the middle years 911 Porsche 2.7 (165hp).
The seat of the pants feeling I get is that the 2.7 has more torque but I wouldn't rely on this observation and there is little in the way of stock S2K dyno results that would confirm this one way or the other.
As far as handling is concerned the 2.7, in stock configuration, must give way to the better handling S2K. Keep in mind that, at speed, the rear engine Porsche must be driven differently from the front engine S2K. Personally, I am taken in by the Porsche experience but then again I just can't wipe the smile off my face when driving my S2K.
As far as reliability is concerned I can only say that any car in this class must be routinely and regularly maintained. The frequency depends on how the car is utilized. Honda is nearly bullet proof and a heck of a lot cheaper than the Porsche.
If you intend to drive the S2K, as Honda intended, be prepared to sacrifice reliability for performance. Driven conservatively and you'll be equally rewarded.

antek

Hi there,

my wife and I have 2 nice cars at home, a Honda s2000 and an AUDI S3 .

The first is the high reving, 240 bph, grandmother/children/girl scarer on the road that will make everyone look up when you pass them with 6000+ rpm. We did this a couple of times this weekend when we drove threw a few tunnels.... you should see the faces of people when you pass them with their windows down in the tunnel accelerating from 6000 to 9000 rpm they don't know what hit them!

The second is the Torque monster, the AUDI S3 with its 1.8 Turbo engine (same as AUDI TT 225 bhp) super torquie and very fast of the line with its low rpm torque. Its the annonymous power house that will scare big BMW drivers on the motorway as you can easily keep up with them and even show them your rear with 200+ km/h.

Now both cars a very different and if you don't love cars or to drive, then none of these cars are for you for several reasons:
1) They are expensive cars for the "ammount" of car you get.
2) The Honda s2000 is absolutely not a car you would want to drive long distances with.
3) If you don't plan on driving the car with 6000+ rpm then get yourself something else as all the fun start at 6000+ rpm.
4) The AUDI S3 is "just" a golf (although the chassis and suspension have been reworked for it).

There is one thing that is a big problem with the s2000 and that's the dealers, because the car is sold in very small numbers finding a knowledgable workshop is near to impossible (at least in Europe).

webmaecker

from my trusty Consumer Reports (based on actual owner surveys) used car yearbook from last year, it rates the 2000 S2000 as follows:

- less than 2% of those surveyed reporting trouble with the engine, cooling, fuel, ignition, transmission, electrical, air conditioning, suspension, exhaust, power equipment, and paint/trim/rust.

- 2-5% of those surveyed had trouble with brakes and body integrity.

- 5-9.3% reported issues with body hardware.

-overall rating: above average.

while the VW Jetta (4cyl) reported:

- less than 2% had cooling, ignition, air conditioning, suspension, brakes, exhaust and paint/trim/rust issues.

- 2-5% reported engine and transmission troubles.

- 5-9.3% reported fuel, electrical, power equipment, body integrity and body hardware repairs.

-overall rating: worse than average.


food for thought: european cars (as a whole) reported 21 cars per 100 as having reliability issues. japanese cars reported 12 cars per 100 with repairs. (american makes were worst: 23/100) the S is no exception to the rule...

from what i have seen on this site, many owners can acheive 27-30 mpg on the highway when reducing VTEC use on the S.

Indecision

http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=124480

Of course it's a Honda press release so it could be bias, but you can pick up the actual magazine this month.