|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
209.169.193.99
In Reply to: RE: Nice video posted by pictureguy on March 24, 2015 at 21:11:37
The S2K is a bit schitzophrenic, kind of a Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde scenario. Having had mine for almost a year (although the last five months were in storage) I can easily believe that the Boxster is "friendlier". Interestingly, that characteristic seems to be what a lot of people like about the S2K, though - mild mannered Clark Kent at lower RPMs, Superman above 6500 (although my '05 only revs to 8K).
People seem to love it or hate it depending on what's important to them. If the characteristics that some people regard as its faults don't bother you, it's a great car. If not, you either won't buy it or will wish you hadn't. Kind of like a lot of speakers, actually...
Follow Ups:
A few things about the S-2000 than I'll drop it.
I think they fiddled with the suspension, mainly the rear, several times during the run of car. A major change separates what is the major revision of the car. '04? '05? My '03 had a glass rear window, tweaked rear suspension and the 9000rpm engine. (2.0)
IF (big IF) you drove UNDER 6500 revs, quite a number of cars were faster. Taken to redline, you were in weird territory.
The YouTube video of the preproduction car at the 'Ring' is pretty cool. And in traffic. The driver in regular shoes and WHITE socks is one HECK of a Pilot.
Too much is never enough
As I understand it, the motor was stroked to increase lower RPM torque, some trans ratios changed to take advantage of the higher torque, and some suspension changes were made to address an oversteer issue that was taking some drivers that weren't as competent as they thought into very dangerous territory, i.e. "a two-liter sports car with an afterburner" as one pundit put it. There were a lot of people buying the cars that really couldn't handle them, and consequently getting into trouble when they found that out too late.
Yours being pre-'04, I'm guessing that you'd have preferred the updated model. Or maybe not. They still eat rear tires for lunch.
Sounds almost as if they've built an old-style turbo engine without actually using a turbo! :-)
First,
I SHOULD have owned stock in Bridgestone or Michelin. No question that REAR tires were Disposible at best.
The characteristic engine was brought on by a VERY aggressive use of the Honda VTEC system of variable valve timing.
And YES, be CAREFUL at limits. I had the rear end go 'LIGHT' on me once when blasting down the hill from Mt Palomar. I had just entered the roller coaster twisties at the bottom of the hill and going over a rise I felt the rear end WANT to come around. I corrected and BACKED OFF. Turning my S-2000 into an Ash Tray was NOT in my plans for that day.
And in point of fact, for a lower powered car, the MIATA is actually more drivable for the novice.
And FUN with all 4 wheels / tires the same size you can do a rational rotate and even get some better tire life than the S-2000 folks.
Too much is never enough
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: