S2000 on TG This Week
10-30-2003, 04:23 AM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 7,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Lotusman
If it was a 2.7 why would it automatically come last ?
I doubt the whole review will be based on a 0-100 dash...and if it was and both cars executed perfectly of the line the 2.7 would be...oh....1 sec behind you at 100 (book times here mind).
If it was a 2.7 why would it automatically come last ?
I doubt the whole review will be based on a 0-100 dash...and if it was and both cars executed perfectly of the line the 2.7 would be...oh....1 sec behind you at 100 (book times here mind).
Be even funnier if it was a triptronic one too, as they are even slower than the manual.
MT I wrote the post wrong, it was meant to read "Looking that other post its looks to me that the Boxster is NOT the the S version but a 2.7"
and not read
"Looking that other post its looks to me that the Boxster is the the S version but a 2.7"
oops
10-30-2003, 04:53 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Malling
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 2.5 did it in 18 secs - the 2.7 does it in 15.5.
I am not denying that the S2000 is quicker on some vids that you have seen...it probably is quicker on a track but I was talking about the comparison that TG are going to do...and I doubt that they will base it on lap times (or cost - which they should!!!)
Your right about the tiptronic part though - that adds a couple of seconds on.
I am not denying that the S2000 is quicker on some vids that you have seen...it probably is quicker on a track but I was talking about the comparison that TG are going to do...and I doubt that they will base it on lap times (or cost - which they should!!!)
Your right about the tiptronic part though - that adds a couple of seconds on.
10-30-2003, 10:07 AM
#25
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Herts
Posts: 20,337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been in a Boxy S, and it's not too bad. Instrumentation is a bit busy, but otherwise a nice car. The shape is growing on me as well - BUT I'd rather have a S2000 AND CTR for the money.
The Z4 has a nice exhaust burble - seen quite a few of them about since release. They're at the 1:1 ratio with S2000 sightings at the moment - it'll only get worse (more common).
EDIT: Do we really want the S2000 to win & become more popular anyway ?
The Z4 has a nice exhaust burble - seen quite a few of them about since release. They're at the 1:1 ratio with S2000 sightings at the moment - it'll only get worse (more common).
EDIT: Do we really want the S2000 to win & become more popular anyway ?
10-30-2003, 10:38 AM
#26
Judging by the other thread the S they used is not a MY04, which seems a bit slack of Honda. OTOH if the S loses they can always say the new model will be better!
Clarkson re Boxster (in the Sun I think): How can I take seriously a car which looks the same at both ends?
Clarkson re Boxster (in the Sun I think): How can I take seriously a car which looks the same at both ends?
I love JC's boxster comment 
Chris. Lets keep it quiet and maintain the exclusivity 
10-30-2003, 03:24 PM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 1,563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Blurter
Aesthetically I think front engine, rear drive is the way to go. Boxster is mid engined so the driver has to sit further forward
Aesthetically I think front engine, rear drive is the way to go. Boxster is mid engined so the driver has to sit further forward
