Where can I find info about...., honda s2k's Options

[gt_driFFter]

Well to make a long story short, I have been obsessing over s2k's for quite a while now and I am actually contemplating selling the celi and getting one. One reason being that it has 235k miles on it. Anyways, I was just wondering if anyone knew of any sites with good info on s2ks, or if anyone could answer any of these questions.

-What's a good year to get? (yes I realize that's an extremely general question but I don't know how else to word it)
-What year did they start making them?
-What would be considered a good price on a used, but still good condition s2k

Thanks,
-Josh

This post has been edited by gt_driFFter: May 8, 2005 - 10:13 PM

[Coomer]

Go to Honda-Tech. There's so much information there.

http://www.honda-tech.com

[95gtschick]

umm get a.. what year was it. 2001. more horsepower, better looks, nicer interior. (my friend works at a honda dealership and is in love with s2k's) if you wanna talk to him email him at dave_fehr@hotmail.com

[Digndoug]

The 00-03 I hear are the best. Well faster.. I cant remember to many reasons. But Im thinking about getting one too.. there so sexy and reliable.

[hioctane]

deleted

This post has been edited by hioctane: Jul 31, 2005 - 12:45 PM

[turboinduction]

2000-2003 had a 2.0. 240HP 153TQ
2004-2005 got a 2.2. Same HP but 162TQ.

All years are rougly the same. And to my knowledge, the S2K is the most powerful N/A 4-Cyl to be used in a production car. If anyone out there knows of a better, please post.

2000-2003 S2000 Info

2004 S2000 Info

2005 S2000 Info

-Ti

[Digndoug]

i heard the s2k is underpowered with barely any torque but enough to fulfill your needs.
[right][snapback]284528[/snapback][/right]

If you think a 14 1/4 mile stock is underpowerd in a vert.. then yes under powered..

How much trq do you need for a 2 seater vert that is only 2800 lbs??

[darksecret]

A 14 quarter is all the S2000 can do, man am I out of the loop. Yes that's way underpowered, the Mazdaspeed Miata is missing 60 horses and still does the 0-60 and quarter mile 1 second slower, but cost $4,000 less and has a turbo, so a few hundred on a boost controller and boom you're running with an S2000, or take that extra $4,000 and mod the Miata and you'll be tearing S2000's a new one. Of course good luck finding a used Mazdaspeed Miata for cheap.

[blu94gt]

A 14 quarter is all the S2000 can do, man am I out of the loop. Yes that's way underpowered, the Mazdaspeed Miata is missing 60 horses and still does the 0-60 and quarter mile 1 second slower, but cost $4,000 less and has a turbo, so a few hundred on a boost controller and boom you're running with an S2000, or take that extra $4,000 and mod the Miata and you'll be tearing S2000's a new one. Of course good luck finding a used Mazdaspeed Miata for cheap.
[right][snapback]284685[/snapback][/right]

The S2000 wasn't built to be a drag car, it was built for the road course. It doesn't have much torque and all it's power is in the higher RPMS (the redline is what, 9500?) I like them but I don't know if I would want one on the street

[darksecret]

Actually the RPM's are around 8700, but were talking about usable power here, of course if you want to hit 3,000 rpm's before you find any real power, not to mention the Miata's only handling flaw is the body roll, it's got a cushy ride and still pulls higher g's on a skid pad. IMO comparing the Mazdaspeed to the S2000 is like the MR2 to an NSX, the NSX is a little better, but only a little, and the price makes up for it.

This post has been edited by darksecret: May 9, 2005 - 3:23 PM

[Digndoug]

A 14 quarter is all the S2000 can do, man am I out of the loop. Yes that's way underpowered, the Mazdaspeed Miata is missing 60 horses and still does the 0-60 and quarter mile 1 second slower, but cost $4,000 less and has a turbo, so a few hundred on a boost controller and boom you're running with an S2000, or take that extra $4,000 and mod the Miata and you'll be tearing S2000's a new one. Of course good luck finding a used Mazdaspeed Miata for cheap.
[right][snapback]284685[/snapback][/right]

Your kidding right. The thing about the mazda speed.. A: Mazda are not reliable engines. B: Its turboed and is STILL Slower. C: you spend 4k to make up the comparison, but its already stressed out. Put a lil bit more money into the s2k it will spank it. Im not a honda lover, but the s2k is an awsome car.

[darksecret]

I was wrong, it's about a $7,000 difference. This is from Car and Driver when they did a comparison against the Elise and the S2000 only beat the Miata by 3.5 seconds at BeaveRun. So $7,000 in mods and you have a car that isn't far from smoking an NSX. Do you actually think they take a stock Miata engine and slap a turbo on it, of course not, they don't take a 3SGE and slap a turbo on it, without replacing the internals. Factory turbo cars tend to have stronger parts simply because if the stock parts fail, the manufacturer is liable. If you like the Miata then it's one of the best bang for the buck roadsters, besides I think the Mazdaspeed Protege is crap (i'll take a Sentra SE-R) so it's not that i'm all about Mazda either.

This post has been edited by darksecret: May 9, 2005 - 7:25 PM

[Digndoug]

I was wrong, it's about a $7,000 difference. This is from Car and Driver when they did a comparison against the Elise and the S2000 only beat the Miata by 3.5 seconds at BeaveRun. So $7,000 in mods and you have a car that isn't far  from smoking an NSX. Do you actually think they take a stock Miata engine and slap a turbo on it, of course not, they don't take a 3SGE and slap a turbo on it, without replacing the internals. Factory turbo cars tend to have stronger parts simply because if the stock parts fail, the manufacturer is liable. If you like the Miata then it's one of the best bang for the buck roadsters, besides I think the Mazdaspeed Protege is crap (i'll take a Sentra SE-R) so it's not that i'm all about Mazda either.
[right][snapback]284832[/snapback][/right]

I understand what you mean. and the mx5 is an awsome lil car too. BUT the s2k is by far better stock. and for some people its much easier to buy a car that is better stock and has a better base, so they can do simple mods.

To be honist, i n\said i would never buy a honda, but im thinking hard about buying an s2k soon.

[turboinduction]

dougy dougy... no no no - watch that quick finger of yours

1. Mazdas are FAR reliable vehicles, where do you get this non-sense. Working for Mazda/Nissan/Honda, I will shed my insight.

2. the Miata is the best handling roadster I've ever driven bar none. The S2k is fantastic, but for 33,000 dollars, I'd take a MS Miata anyday.

3. You said the MS Miata is already stressed out? The S2k is a 2.0 (edit: or 2.2) at EXTREMELY high compression - that engine is maxed out. The miata is running low boost to put the car into the badass catagory with the Elise and whatnot.

4. The S2k is the best built car ever, according to the testers. Of any car they've ever driven, the S2k is the best built vehicle. Even moreso the the NSX, which surprised me.

5. Dark secret - I like the MS Protege... but then again, look at my aviator and you'll see which of the two cars I bought. Give ya a hint, mine's got a 6-spd.

6. Dollar for Dollar - the MS Miata wins. Value - S2k wins. Build ability, they tie. Both are hit big. The Miata is already turbo, and the S2k is maxed as far as a N/A can get. Take your pic.

7. For my pick, I'd take the Flying M.

-Ti

This post has been edited by turboinduction: May 9, 2005 - 9:47 PM

[Digndoug]

I ment the mx5 is sterssed out by already having a turbop, put a turbo.. better yet the supercharger made for the 2sk on, It will have much more power and will be much faster.

I have a buddy thats into mazdas hard core because the cost.. but still says there not nearly reliable as hondas.

Also he has done 10 engine swaps and re-build 5 motors.. all mazda.

[bloodrain]

i like the looks of the s2k over the miata. So i'd take the s2k, and u gotta love the vtech when it kicks in

[Mr2_Joel]

miata's are girl cars.......

s2k > miata

[Kwanza26]

Heheh... some uninformed opinions here...

Ahem... the Miata is a great car. The Mazdaspeed version is great also... but it's not in the same class as the S2000. The S2000 runs with 350Z's and Audi TT's and such... somewhere the Miata doesn't really venture (stock for stock at least). Let's take a loot at specs:

Mazadaspeed Miata:
178hp @ 6000 rpms
166ftlbs of torque @ 4500 rpms
curb weight: ~2500 pounds
0-60 (Car&Driver tested): 6.7
1/4 mile: 15.1 @ 91mph

Honda S2000 (03+ spec):
240hp @ 7800 rpms
162 ftlbs of torque @ 6500 rpms
curb weight: ~2800
0-60 (Car&Driver tested): 5.4
1/4 mile: 14.1 @ 97mph

Both cars are built to handle the corners. The miata has a slight weight advantage, but the S2000 has the power advantage. Oh yeah, don't even get into power vs. torque unless you know what you're talking about, otherwise I'll be forced to pWN you... First off, the Miata is running an aftermarket type turbokit on an originally n/a engine. The compression is still 9:5:1, it runs only 7 psi, and is pretty much as it is. There are only minor modifications you can do to the engine until you start pushing its limits. The S2000 on the other hand has one of the most beastly n/a 4 banger ever to be mass-produced... but this engine is nearly fully tuned from the factory and only very minor gains can be squeezed with bolt-ons. Both are about equal from a tuner standpoint, both having strong aftermarket support. I'd give it to the S2000 based on engines alone. I love the way Miatas drive (tempted to pick one up myself), but the S2000 is in a whole 'nother catergory.

And darksecret: 3.5 seconds at Beaver run is a LOT of difference. Take 3.5 seconds and extend that into more laps, then the difference starts to grow.

[darksecret]

I wasn't the one that classified the Miata into that catagory, Car and Driver did that one, they are both roadsters and were not comparing the Miata to an M Roadster here, there's only a second difference between the two and the only reason the Miata didn't own the S2000 at beave was because it has a cushy ride, it wasn't made to be a track car, and it can easily run with one. It's just sad that all the engineering that Honda put into the S2000 and it doesn't take much for a basically stock Miata to smoke it. If the Miata handled a little better then I would leave it to the drivers.

Also for turboinduction ? I thought the SE-R was Nissan man, or is it the whole performance sedan thing.

[juBz86]

look at those eyes. how you say no?

[darksecret]

I think the S2000 is a great car, but either Honda needs to knock about $5000 off the price or up the horsepower by about 50.

[turboinduction]

Also for turboinduction ? I thought the SE-R was Nissan man, or is it the whole performance sedan thing.
[right][snapback]285077[/snapback][/right]

SE-R is Nissan. You said you'd take a Sentra SE-R over a MS Protege. As did I, as I now drive a 03 Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V.

-Ti

[turboinduction]

look at those eyes. how you say no?
[right][snapback]285166[/snapback][/right]

with these



-Ti

[darksecret]

Oh yeah the new Mazda is based on the RX-8 chassis also, can't you see the resemblance. Oh well i'll still take a GTO over them all, it's a boat, but how many $30,000, 3,800 lbs. cars can claim 0-60 time of 4.6 and still hold it's own big a** on the track. As far as sport sedans (non-rally based) I think that the Protege should have had it's eyes on the SRT-4, but gets whooped by a N/A Nissan of all cars. As for the Neon I think Dodge should be a little more creative when it comes to their cars, I mean it's got a PT Cruiser motor in it, I bet they would have put the HEMI in it if they could.

[gt_driFFter]

Hey guys...... can I have my topic back?

This question has yet to be answered...
What would be considered a good price on a used, but still good condition (somewhere around 2000 or 2001) s2k?

-Josh

[turboinduction]

Hey guys...... can I have my topic back?

This question has yet to be answered...
What would be considered a good price on a used, but still good condition (somewhere around 2000 or 2001) s2k?

-Josh
[right][snapback]285389[/snapback][/right]

18k 2000-01 OK shape, higher miles

-Ti

[darksecret]

Sorry, yeah between 18-20k depending on the miles.

[lil_lissa]

s2k's are sick as hell

my good buddy has one thats done up nicely... theyre amazing cars.. i love it..

he's on a site that is all about the S
prolly find a ****load of information

http://forums.s2ki.com

enjoy!

[Mr2_Joel]

buddy of mine paid 17500 for a black 01

[saleeka]

comparing a Mazdaspeed Miata to an S2000 is sooo pointless to me im shaking my head right now... its almost like comparing a Corvette to a 911, without the close performance figures- both cars are designed #1 to be drivers cars, but they appeal to completely different people... 120 HP per liter and nearly 9G redline in a piston engine is somthing the Miata could NEVER even dream of the S2000 is the closest thing to a Ducattii on 4 wheels, and thats why it rocks out with its c*ck out, period.

[Digndoug]

comparing a Mazdaspeed Miata to an S2000 is sooo pointless to me im shaking my head right now... its almost like comparing a Corvette to a 911, without the close performance figures- both cars are designed #1 to be drivers cars, but they appeal to completely different people... 120 HP per liter and nearly 9G redline in a piston engine is somthing the Miata could NEVER even dream of    the S2000 is the closest thing to a Ducattii on 4 wheels, and thats why it rocks out with its c*ck out, period.
[right][snapback]285939[/snapback][/right]

I could hug you right now.. thats what iv been thinkign but couldnt get out of my mouth...

[darksecret]

I've already said I didn't compare it, Car & Driver did. C5 or C6, the C6 would give anything less than a Turbo a hard time, the new Z06 would decimate them all except maybe the Turbo S and GT2, I do recall this one C5 a few years ago that came in first at the Supercar Challenge, you know Linginfelter, the Prosche came in second, of course in a sense it would be like comparing a Vette to a 911 or 911 to Vette. With all this engineering the S2000 has and an aftermarket company like Mazdaspeed can make a stock Miata almost keep up with the S2000, also they put the turbo on it because they could handle it, Mazda has to warrant these cars, if they thought Mazdaspeed would send out faulty motors that would break down due to stress then after 100,000 miles all of them would be lemons, it doesn't work that way, the Mazda still has some heart left in that 1.8L.

[Kwanza26]

I think the S2000 is a great car, but either Honda needs to knock about $5000 off the price or up the horsepower by about 50.
[right][snapback]285175[/snapback][/right]

heheh... you're saying that because? The S2000 is a good selling car based on its market. Why would Honda do anything different? How would you know better than Honda's well paid and experienced marketing department? Look at it this way, there aren't many cars 2800 pounds with 300 horsepower on the market. I can name a couple, but those come with pricetags worthy of a house. Who are you to say what the guys should or should not buy? He asked a question, he did not ask for you to convince him otherwise... maybe he just wants an S2000... so why not just try and help him out instead of going off on how great a Miata is? Seriously dude... just stop it already. Who cares how great you think mazda and the miata is... no one asked.

[darksecret]

If he wants it we wont convince him to get another type, I was just stating the it's a good car, but for all the money sunk into it, they could have done, better. What about 300hp, the S2000 doesn't have 300, for the same price as the S2000 you can get the 350Z Roadster and walk all over it, it even has near perfect weight distribution. Everyone goes on about how great Honda is, yes they're good, but just because they were first on the import tuner market doesn't make them the greatest, I don't care if someone can squeeze 240hp out of a 2.2 litre, Mazda did it with a 1.3 (rotory of course). Take the Solstice for instance, you have a 177hp roadster, for $20 grand, alright sink an extra $13,000 in it and that $33,000 price tag of the S2000 makes you look like you got a steal. (and don't even try to say the Ecotec can't handle it, they use the stock block in the drag cars) The S2000 along with other Hondas are over rated, you don't get what you pay for, unlike with other manufacturers, it's a status symbol not a race car. The S2000 is a good car in general, but it cost to much for what you get, when you have other roadsters that cost much less, and nearly beat it, that isn't an honor that's a go back to the drawing board.

"A nest of hornets under the hood with not enough sting" - Car and Driver

"The inflexible power band is also what makes the S2000 a somewhat unsatisfying drive in everyday traffic. The Honda is a stone in first gear until the VTEC crossover at about 33 mph, at which time any cop loitering nearby will wonder where all the noise is coming from." - Car and Driver

"The S2000 was 0.7 mph slower over its fastest lap than the porkier 350Z and only 0.5 mph faster than the clomping Mustang Mach 1. The S2000 engine's compressed power band is its downfall. You don't get all the horsepower you've paid for until the engine zings to 8300 rpm, or all the torque — that is, all 153 pound-feet — until 7500 rpm." - Car and Driver

These quotes are from a comparo, the 350Z came in first, unless you are looking for a weekend driver, an S2000 is a bad idea. Like I said before you have to floor it to get to any power. That's why I brought the Miata, good power, and a softer ride, with a much lower powerband. IMO if you want to run at 8,000 RPM's everywhere you go buy a Ducati and smoke every car on the road.

This post has been edited by darksecret: May 12, 2005 - 11:38 AM

[Kwanza26]

If he wants it we wont convince him to get another type, I was just stating the it's a good car, but for all the money sunk into it, they could have done, better. What about 300hp, the S2000 doesn't have 300, for the same price as the S2000 you can get the 350Z Roadster and walk all over it, it even has near perfect weight distribution.

Heh... the 300 number is based on your opinion that the S2000 needs an additional 50hp. And the 350Z roadster won't walk all over the S2000. The 350Z roadster is too fat to "walk all over" the S2000. The Z roadster weighs over 4000 pounds. You obviously don't know too much about track racing and the autoX scene if you think that. You're arguing like a domestic guy trying to go import. The normal 350Z maybe... but not the roadster. And since you understand you're not gonna change his mind anyway... why are you even bothering to go off and start naming others cars he "should" get? If not to convince him, then what? To show off?

Everyone goes on about how great Honda is, yes they're good, but just because they were first on the import tuner market doesn't make them the greatest, I don't care if someone can squeeze 240hp out of a 2.2 litre, Mazda did it with a 1.3 (rotory of course).

I'm sorry brother... but you just don't know what you're talking about. You're trying to compare apples and oranges when you bring up rotaries. Honda is the best of the best when it comes to n/a 4 bangers. Mazda's rotaries don't fall under the same catergory as normal piston engines as far as hp per liter goes.

Take the Solstice for instance, you have a 177hp roadster, for $20 grand, alright sink an extra $13,000 in it and that $33,000 price tag of the S2000 makes you look like you got a steal. (and don't even try to say the Ecotec can't handle it, they use the stock block in the drag cars)

Heheh... how many people buy a brand new car and then void all warantees my modding it? There is no logic in your reasoning here. I can take a 500.00 dollar startlet and with 10K turn it into a sub 9 second car if I really wanted to... but who cares really. NOBODY asked what cars are better than the S2000... You're the one trying to show off bustin on a Honda without any reason.

The S2000 along with other Hondas are over rated, you don't get what you pay for, unlike with other manufacturers, it's a status symbol not a race car. The S2000 is a good car in general, but it cost to much for what you get, when you have other roadsters that cost much less, and nearly beat it, that isn't an honor that's a go back to the drawing board.

LOL... good for you. So you now prove you have an extreme bias against Honda. If you've ever built a Honda race car, perhaps you'll understand the reason why they're so popular. Of course popular cars tend to draw in people who do stupid **** to their cars, but that by no means makes one car better or worse than another. It's ignorant to say Honda's are overrated because they're popular. Let's see here... Skunk2 built some of the FIRST sub 10 second n/a FWD drag cars powered by Honda engines. Spoon has been very dominant in 24 hour endurance races around the world (they won recently at Thunder Hill raceway)... Honda powered F1 racecars have been very dominant for over a decade (90's)... I agree their fan-base is all based on fads... but you're no better than the bandwagoneers when you dis on something based on other people's opinions.

"A nest of hornets under the hood with not enough sting" - Car and Driver

"The inflexible power band is also what makes the S2000 a somewhat unsatisfying drive in everyday traffic. The Honda is a stone in first gear until the VTEC crossover at about 33 mph, at which time any cop loitering nearby will wonder where all the noise is coming from." - Car and Driver

"The S2000 was 0.7 mph slower over its fastest lap than the porkier 350Z and only 0.5 mph faster than the clomping Mustang Mach 1. The S2000 engine's compressed power band is its downfall. You don't get all the horsepower you've paid for until the engine zings to 8300 rpm, or all the torque — that is, all 153 pound-feet — until 7500 rpm." - Car and Driver

These quotes are from a comparo, the 350Z came in first, unless you are looking for a weekend driver, an S2000 is a bad idea. Like I said before you have to floor it to get to any power. That's why I brought the Miata, good power, and a softer ride, with a much lower powerband. IMO if you want to run at 8,000 RPM's everywhere you go buy a Ducati and smoke every car on the road.
[right][snapback]286051[/snapback][/right]

So you're baseing EVERYTHING you've said on someone else's opinion? You're trying to convince people something is bad based on OTHER PEOPLE'S OPINION? If you've NEVER driven an S2000 like it's meant to be driven, how can you come to some radical conclusion (like it's lacking in power), or any conclusion at all? That's pretty silly if you're looking at it from an objective veiw point. The S2000 was pretty much the top of its class when it was first introduced, but it's not designed to be a daily driver of sorts. It's a pure enthusiast car. It's like buying a Ferrari and sulking because it gets ****ty gas mileage. Seriously now.

[darksecret]

I think Car and Driver's opinion holds more water than mine, I know I was talking about a rotory, it was a statement, I am not the one who took the 350Z Roadster to the track and ran it against the S2000, that is why Car and Driver, Motortrend, and all the other review companies are there, if nobody listened they wouldn't bother. I have driven the S2000 and I didn't like it, but I can honestly say the same for the Miata, i'm 6'2" so it's a little too cramped for me. I wasn't showing off, I was giving other options and giving facts based on un-biased roadtest, and in all actuality Car and Driver will admit they are biased towards Hondas and Fords, yeah I figured you would have mentioned the weight, just because the car is heavy doesn't mean the thing can't handle, look at the '99 Skyline, it's a boat but it handles nicely. There are too many biased Honda nuts on here, I never said they were bad just over rated, my staement was unbiased and I even brought in the pros, if you don't believe me check for your self. I've driven most Hondas and Acuras and they never feel like they have the power they claim, maybe it's the lack of torque but that is how it is with me. I feel the same towards mid '90s DSMs also, they are good but they have a lack of low end power. Woah and over 4,000 what kind of behemoth are you planning on cramming in that car, fully loaded, with the kitchen sink is 3536, try 3,225 for the manual with a 53/47 weight split. Like I was saying dollar for dollar, the 350Z Roadster has it. If you had to choose between a roadster and coupe for autox wouldn't you take the coupe even though it's only about 50lbs. less.