So I test drove a S2k..
01-18-2009, 08:59 PM
#22
I got a friend with a g35, and one ride in a S2K and he's convinced, that's it's the better car. It's not faster but it's way fun, can't wait till I finally pick up one. I drive an EP3 and I only have a light flywheel and a CAI, and I dyno 150whp, either way the S2k is the more fun car
01-18-2009, 09:13 PM
#23
Originally Posted by starchland' date='Jan 18 2009, 09:52 PM
150whp is easily attainable with basic bolt ons on a rsx
You couldn't serious have meant +150whp over stock with BASIC BOLTONS
right?
01-18-2009, 09:30 PM
#25
Registered User
Originally Posted by Dark_Sub_Rosa' date='Jan 19 2009, 05:25 AM
Are you factoring in weight, drive train loss, gearing... etc. Just because the S has 240 crank stock doesn't mean its going to take 40 more whp for an RSX to keep up. It's a pretty known common knowledge fact FF cars lose less power from drive train than an FR car. The K series is way more mod friendly and dare I say a better motor than the F20 overall. I wouldn't be so quick to judge and say his car can't beat a stock S2k in a straight line.
The F20C is a better engine than the K20. Fully forged, Fibre reinforced liners, over square, higher comp, higher rpm.
The K20 is a budget F20C.
It isn't the torque per se that makes a car feel fast, it is the change in the gradient of the power curve that gives that impression - thus when a turbo car comes on boost, you think you are going to the moon!
I am not calling the K20 a poor engine - far from it.
But the numbers from 'Bolt-ons' should be taken with a pinch of salt.
01-18-2009, 09:59 PM
#27
i was under the impression that the f20 was the "father" of the the k-series engines. but not necessarily in the budget sense that someone else said..
i love the k20 though. for those that have never driven it, it really is an amazing engine. like OP said, it can make a lot of power off bolt-ons. i actually did race my stock ap1 vs. a type-s with i/h/e/ kpro reflash and believe you me it was a close close few races.
hmm...i feel like watching some old rsx vids now...
i love the k20 though. for those that have never driven it, it really is an amazing engine. like OP said, it can make a lot of power off bolt-ons. i actually did race my stock ap1 vs. a type-s with i/h/e/ kpro reflash and believe you me it was a close close few races.
hmm...i feel like watching some old rsx vids now...
01-18-2009, 11:56 PM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hypersonik' date='Jan 18 2009, 10:30 PM
What I am actually trying to say is that with the small differences in power (including the 17% vs 20% drivetrain loss FF vs FR), the difference in straightline speed would be negligible.
The F20C is a better engine than the K20. Fully forged, Fibre reinforced liners, over square, higher comp, higher rpm.
The K20 is a budget F20C.
It isn't the torque per se that makes a car feel fast, it is the change in the gradient of the power curve that gives that impression - thus when a turbo car comes on boost, you think you are going to the moon!
I am not calling the K20 a poor engine - far from it.
But the numbers from 'Bolt-ons' should be taken with a pinch of salt.
The F20C is a better engine than the K20. Fully forged, Fibre reinforced liners, over square, higher comp, higher rpm.
The K20 is a budget F20C.
It isn't the torque per se that makes a car feel fast, it is the change in the gradient of the power curve that gives that impression - thus when a turbo car comes on boost, you think you are going to the moon!
I am not calling the K20 a poor engine - far from it.
But the numbers from 'Bolt-ons' should be taken with a pinch of salt.
01-19-2009, 12:04 AM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by starchland' date='Jan 18 2009, 08:50 PM
I guess if your playing the 1/4 number game then yes, but the Z cars feel faster...isnt that what were all about? the feel (not including the S cuz it feels awesome )
)
01-19-2009, 12:14 AM
#30
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 2003s2k2003' date='Jan 18 2009, 07:32 PM
I had an Eclipse GST with fully built motor and turbo and all. Was a ton faster than the S2000 but felt like crap besides that. I'm sure the rsx has better handling than my eclipse did, but man the S2000 was such an upgrade it feel from the GST.
Used supercharger kits for the S2000 are now really cheap if you wanted to go that route. I have seen them for as low as $2,000 for a nice used kit. Bolt on adds you 100whp.
Used supercharger kits for the S2000 are now really cheap if you wanted to go that route. I have seen them for as low as $2,000 for a nice used kit. Bolt on adds you 100whp.