lower

the k20 engine is in a civic over here in the uk!

CoralDoc

I'm not sure how a 2-seat roadster qualifies as a "pimp ride" (that makes me think of lowered Cadilacs), but it's other attributes make it shine above the RSX, irrespective of engine power ... rear wheel drive, convertible top, 2-seat design, rigid chassis, among others.

Plus, the gains that you show in the graph (2 RWHP and 5 lb-ft of torque) look good since they're spread across the power band, but are close to or within the error of the dynomometer.

To me, the F20C engine is excellent. I enjoy having the highest specific output, normally aspirated automobile engine on the planet! That's for the 2.0 liter motor BTW

Fongu

My guess is that Honda did the basic cost vs. gain descision. I-VTEC adds the ability to continously vary valve timing. Regular VTEC has two cams, so 2 fixed valve timing and valve lift profiles. Most of the benefits of valve control are realized with normal VTEC, the "i" part just refines the VTEC transition, giving better mid-range torque. The added cost of implementing the extra mechanicals and ECU tuning in the F20C was probably not cost as cost effective as simiply stroking the motor. Remember the S2000 is still a low run car.

As far as the RSX having more potential, that's wrong. It's more correct to say it is easier to modify to get its ultimate potential. The ultimate performance limit to an engine is how much air the head can flow. The F20C head flows more than the K series head. Not much more, but that's expected since the K-series is based on the F20C R&D. The RSX engine has the benefit of being the "mass-market" version of the F20C, with I-VTEC and a flashable stock ECU. The biggest advantage is the reprogrammable ECU, which is the equivalent of buying a full-blown EMS on a S2000. If we're talking dynos, remeber that FWD has less drivetrain loss and that the 2.2L F20C is underrated (OK I don't want to argue this, believe what you want).

I agree CoralDoc, performance is more than just engine anyways. If you like turning, the S2000 has a superior chassis. RWD, better suspension geometry which is fully adjustable.

If you just want to blow people away from a roll on a highway, you are right, the S2000 is just an expensive pimp-ride, but so is a RSX-S. Get a SRT-4, factory turbo, so easy to turn up the boost. Hell, Dodge has factory staged upgrades too for monster budget horsepower.

Mr. Francesco

IMO the srt4's are currently over rated. yes they make good power, but you can't obtain it unless its from a roll on the highway, or you have the phantom lsd, which still doesnt maintain traction.

also i feel that i-vtec is eventually going to be in all honda/acura applications, but right now its preference. ill take my vtec f20c over a i-vtec k20 anyday. s2000's just seem to turn heads, they are an enginering masterpiece for what they are. the srt4 and rsx boys always give the s2000 proper respect even in stock form.

mxt_77

I don't think he was referring to the gains, I think he was showing absolute numbers.
That's a Dynojet graph indicating that an RSX-S is making almost 220whp and over 150lb-ft of torque (from 4500RPM almost to redline). How many NA S2000s do you know that are making those kinds of numbers (specifically 2.0L S2000s)? I haven't seen any (especially with reference to the torque numbers). If I could get 150lb-ft of torque from 4500 to our power peak (8300ish), I'd be ecstatic! That would mean I'd be near 240rwhp. I haven't seen a single NA 2.0L S2000 do that.

Project SSAP1

yes dont get me wrong..the s2000 is a great sports car and it was designed to be that...i do know that the k20 motor was designed off of the f20c..but in regards to the new i-vtec technology it can create some nice power in the midrance and downlow...i think honda did a great job with the newer motors....looking at the graph i posted above...i have never seen any f20c make 150hp and that much tq at 5000 rpm...yes a FWD make have less drivetrain loss...

natedoggs2k

My girlfriend has an RSX Type S, and I had originally planned on buying one when I sold my last car, but decided to get the S2K instead. I'm impressed with the RSX S for what it is, and it does have great mod potential.

Although I like the RSX and drive it some, I would never give up my S2K. Sure, the RSX holds four, has great seats, shifts smoothly and has an easy clutch, but it's no S2K and can't handle the same. Although, my girlfriend has plans for her RSX including the Hondata flash and an intake. She'll be putting out close to the same power (or more) as the S2K (in stock form), but the S2K will still be superior and the engine is unique.

It's like my 00' PY ITR. It was no GSR, and it handled better and performed better than most FWD cars available. Oh, how I wish I had kept my ITR. I loved that car. Almost as much as my S2K.

cdelena

i-vtec is variable cam timing, vtec is the use of two sets of lobes, they are two different technologies.. where the k20 has both. There are a lot of people talking about things they don't fully understand in this thread.

steven975

cdelena is right. a lot of you need to do some reading regarding exactly what the VTC in i-VTEC does. With i-VTEC, the cam still switches just like VTEC. you don't feel a kick because the VTC maximizes torque at all RPMs.

the thing with the F20C is you can't change valve timing (i have not seen cam gears like the B series). Is this because both cams are gear driven from one pulley? The K20 has that potential because it can continuously vary valve timing. That is a BIG advantage. IMO, it was too expensive to implement in the S with a 10K volume in north america/greece (for 2.2L motors).

EriS2k

The NSX and S2000 are Still

VTEC................

there's a reason for that

NSX and S2000 are The Finest Signature Sports Cars in Honda