S2000 at altitude sucks...
#1
S2000 at altitude sucks...
Drove the S2000 from Seattle to Denver on Sunday / Monday -- 22 hours straight through the night (3 hour nap somewhere around Mountain Home Idaho). Hell.
Interesting observations:
1. VTEC is felt later in the RPM range than before.
2. The car has zero torque, at sea level it was bad, up here it's terrible.
3. Less sound (duh).
Overall I am left with the impression that cars like the S2000 which require high revs and have low torque are not meant for 5200 feet of elevation.
Altitude.
My wife however is happy, she has a convertible to drive around town.
Interesting observations:
1. VTEC is felt later in the RPM range than before.
2. The car has zero torque, at sea level it was bad, up here it's terrible.
3. Less sound (duh).
Overall I am left with the impression that cars like the S2000 which require high revs and have low torque are not meant for 5200 feet of elevation.
Altitude.
My wife however is happy, she has a convertible to drive around town.
#5
Hmm, I'm loving my S2K mile high and it ran great going up Mount Evans last weekend (highest paved road in the U.S.). Perhaps it has more to do with the ECU taking several days to adjust to the change in air density. VTEC does seem to be later than others who post. Mine usually kicks in about 6500.
Trending Topics
#10
What you are talking about is the way all normally aspirated engines perform as altitude increases. This is the same phenomena that small piston powered aircraft experience -- the higher they fly the the lower the performance of the engine. A way to counter this is to use a turbocharger, which higher end private planes have. This allows such aircraft to fly in the 20-25000 ft. range rather than the sub 20s range for normally aspirated aircraft.
Air density decreases as elevation increases and so the available oxygen decreases and the engine produces less power.
Air density decreases as elevation increases and so the available oxygen decreases and the engine produces less power.