S2000 Losing Favor?
05-01-2005, 09:52 AM
#11
Registered User
Originally Posted by Intrepid175,May 1 2005, 12:34 PM
Yup, that's been one of my favorite articles. For those who haven't see it, it's a comparison of:
This is the final standings:
1st - Chevrolet Corvette Coupe
2nd - Porsche Boxster S
3rd - Porsche Carrere S Coupe
4th - Lotus Elise
5th - Honda S2000
6th - Dodge Viper SRT-10
7th - BMW Z4 3.0i
8th - Nissan 350Z "35th Anniversary" - this is an updated 300hp version!!
9th - Mercedes-Benz SLK350
They start out in the evaluation of the S2000 with:
"Coming into this test, no one gave the S2000 any serious consideration. It was simply a car meant to fill a spot as Honda's sports-car representative. (The Acura NSX was left out because it's likely to be discontinued next year or be replaced by another model.) And since this head turning 2-seater met all the sports-car criteria for this test..... "what the heck," we said"
They also said,
"I had honestly forgotten just how good a sports car the S2000 is. The gearbox is quite simply the best in the world, with wonderfully short, extremely positive throws. This current S2000 is less twitchy than the original, and was the easiest with which to execute beautiful 4-wheel drifts through the Bottonwillow's faster corners. Man, is it fun," said Mike Monticello, Associate Editor.
A mid pack showing isn't bad for a little four banger that costs less than half and almost less than a third (in some cases) the money of it's competition. I know that comparison tests like this need to be taken with a grain of salt but it's nice when our car seems to do so well, and I AM biased!
FWIW!
Drive Safe,
Steve R.
This is the final standings:
1st - Chevrolet Corvette Coupe
2nd - Porsche Boxster S
3rd - Porsche Carrere S Coupe
4th - Lotus Elise
5th - Honda S2000
6th - Dodge Viper SRT-10
7th - BMW Z4 3.0i
8th - Nissan 350Z "35th Anniversary" - this is an updated 300hp version!!
9th - Mercedes-Benz SLK350
They start out in the evaluation of the S2000 with:
"Coming into this test, no one gave the S2000 any serious consideration. It was simply a car meant to fill a spot as Honda's sports-car representative. (The Acura NSX was left out because it's likely to be discontinued next year or be replaced by another model.) And since this head turning 2-seater met all the sports-car criteria for this test..... "what the heck," we said"
They also said,
"I had honestly forgotten just how good a sports car the S2000 is. The gearbox is quite simply the best in the world, with wonderfully short, extremely positive throws. This current S2000 is less twitchy than the original, and was the easiest with which to execute beautiful 4-wheel drifts through the Bottonwillow's faster corners. Man, is it fun," said Mike Monticello, Associate Editor.
A mid pack showing isn't bad for a little four banger that costs less than half and almost less than a third (in some cases) the money of it's competition. I know that comparison tests like this need to be taken with a grain of salt but it's nice when our car seems to do so well, and I AM biased!
FWIW!
Drive Safe,
Steve R.
They don't include Supra's in comparos these days but that doesn't mean we've forgotten how good of a car it is...
05-02-2005, 09:59 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forget the car magazine guys and their praise or lack of it ... I just did a comparison test on the 2 cars in my garage, a 2004 S' and a 2004 Chrysler Pacifica. The S' came in first. In-fact it kicked the Pacifica's ass 
The S' has still got it. I'll post test numbers a later time. 
The S' has still got it. I'll post test numbers a later time.
05-03-2005, 07:18 AM
#15
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Valdosta, GA
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, sports cars tend to be flavors of the month with the automotive press. Two years ago the 350Z was the greatest thing since sliced bread, now it's an overweight pig with a cheapo interior and annoying tire wear problems. Same thing with the WRX and the EVO, the magzines gushed all over them until they did long term tests and watched the cars fall apart.
Of course, Honda could really help itself with the press by actually updating the car occasionally. And I mean more than .2 liters of displacement or bumper changes.
The other thing that I have noticed is that- at the $30k price point- the S2000 really doesn't have any competition anymore. The SLK, Boxster, and BMW Z cars have all taken big jumps up the price ladder. The Elise and the 350Z cost considerably more. I think it's probably harder to include the S2k in comparison tests when the other cars in the comparison cost at least another $10k-$15k. The only convertibles that I can think of that are close in price are the Mini Cooper S and the Mustang GT, and I doubt there is much cross-shopping between those cars and the S2000.
Of course, Honda could really help itself with the press by actually updating the car occasionally. And I mean more than .2 liters of displacement or bumper changes.
The other thing that I have noticed is that- at the $30k price point- the S2000 really doesn't have any competition anymore. The SLK, Boxster, and BMW Z cars have all taken big jumps up the price ladder. The Elise and the 350Z cost considerably more. I think it's probably harder to include the S2k in comparison tests when the other cars in the comparison cost at least another $10k-$15k. The only convertibles that I can think of that are close in price are the Mini Cooper S and the Mustang GT, and I doubt there is much cross-shopping between those cars and the S2000.
05-03-2005, 07:33 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dunbar,PA
Posts: 2,153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems as though Honda doesn't even want to promote the S2K anymore. Even though it is such a great car, it seems to have gotten swept under the rug by Honda and the automotive press. Why???
What really erks me is that Honda hasn't helped matters. For some reason, they promote the heck out of the Ridgeline. Every time I turn on TV, I see a commercial for it. It may be a very nice truck...who knows...but the more I see it, the uglier it gets. (No offense to anyone who owns one-I'm not a truck guy.) My point is, why feature something that is
in the looks department when you already have a thing of beauty??? To me, it's like Playboy putting "Rosie Odonnell" on the cover and all the beautiful babes "somewhere" in the magazine.
I just don't get it
What really erks me is that Honda hasn't helped matters. For some reason, they promote the heck out of the Ridgeline. Every time I turn on TV, I see a commercial for it. It may be a very nice truck...who knows...but the more I see it, the uglier it gets. (No offense to anyone who owns one-I'm not a truck guy.) My point is, why feature something that is
in the looks department when you already have a thing of beauty??? To me, it's like Playboy putting "Rosie Odonnell" on the cover and all the beautiful babes "somewhere" in the magazine. I just don't get it
05-03-2005, 07:44 AM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Crack house in Norton, MA
Posts: 6,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Ridgeline is also going to make Honda exponentially more money than the S2000. It makes sense that they're doing their best to make people aware of that vehicle and not the S.
05-03-2005, 07:46 AM
#18
"I had honestly forgotten just how good a sports car the S2000 is. The gearbox is quite simply the best in the world, with wonderfully short, extremely positive throws. This current S2000 is less twitchy than the original, and was the easiest with which to execute beautiful 4-wheel drifts through the Bottonwillow's faster corners. Man, is it fun," said Mike Monticello, Associate Editor.
