The S2000 has gone through a nice “evolution”. It still has no real competition at its price point.

I think the S2000 replacement is not going to be a roadster. Possibly it will be a hardtop 2+2.

Just because it’s replacement doesn’t come until 2009 doesn’t mean the current S2000 will continue until then. I think 2007 will be the final year of this model.

If it isn’t broke…

pirelli – that could very well be a possibility, but 2005 was the final year for the NSX, and it was introduced in the fall of 1989, as a 1990 model.
If past experience is anything from Honda, the S2000 may very well travel well into 2009.

IMO, at the price point, the S2000 will need a significant increase in power to compete enough to last. Some of the newer 4 cylinder engines in the Acura lineup would be a perfect fit and provide the much needed power lower in the powerband.

The S2000 has always been a great chassis with an average engine (well, below 6000 rpm that is). There is a lot of competition in the field now (solstice, sky, miata, bmw, mb, chrysler, etc) and is only going to get worse in the next 2-3 years.

This is good news, I thought the S2000 was being discontinued after 07. Oh and that NSX will be a beast.

Funny. Honda left the last generation RL on the market for almost 10 years – now the new model, though being a very good car, has had a hard time gaining ground – maybe its safe to say that Honda/Acura had waited to long to produce an RL replacement, giving the public time to look to other marques. (its also safe to say that Honda/Acura squandered the success of the Legend when it created the original, dismal, under-powered RL) I hope that this will not be the case for the S2000 and NSX. In the last years of NSX production they sold nearly none, and I sure S2000 sales pale in comparison to what they were in 2000.

Only here at LLN can a 237HP and 162 ft-lbs. out a 2.2L all aluminum naturally aspirated engine be considered “average”.

The torque figure is low in comparison to the horsepower rating.

237HP @ 7800rpm and 162lbft @ 6800 is absolutely considered average, at best. The power curve is an extremely gentle rolling hill with a spike above 6000rpm! below that medeocre is a very good description.

Compare this 2.2l to the new RDX 2.3l motor:
240hp @ 6000
260lbft @ 4500

The RDX motor puts the S2000 more in line with the vehicles it competes against, which is a growing and ever more powerful segment.

1952 MG TD — There is nothing average about the S2000 engine. Yeah, its a little down in the neckwrenching torque factor, but it is a dream. At the top of the tach, the car is a beast and it keeps making power almost all the way to redline. The newer 2.2 ltr is the better all around motor. It has a very race car type of power delivery, it is made to scream. Very F1. Those cars are low in torque compared to their horsepower rating. So is a BMW M motor and a Ferrari motor. A BMW M3 has 333 bhp and 262 lb/ft, an M5 has 507 bhp and 384 lb/ft.

Overall it is a very unique car that really has no competion, even though other cars may resemble it. That resemblance is only skin deep, the best part of the S2000 is its overall design and execution. Honda really sweated the details.

Renton, I agree that the S2000 is NEARLY a complete package. The one downfall IS the motor, as most owners will NOT spend their trips to the grocery store above 6000rpm the whole way… and I feel sorry for any owner of any vehicle who does and wants that engine to stay alive more than a few thousand miles.

the 2.2 WAS a great engine, but is nearly behind all competitors (sub $40k convertible/roadster) now. more power in a usable (not abusable) rpm range would be a no brainer, especially with the 2.3 in the family…

Turbos always boost torque. These engines are apples and oranges. The design parameter of an S2000 was a normaly apirated engine. As such it is one of the most powerful for its size ever.

The turbo in the RDX is much more streetable and a better fit for an SUV.

The whole size and placement of the motor is critical to the overall package, and the new Honda turbo motor is not a fit for the S2K.

I agree with Renton, 1c3, and the Jerk, 1952 — the power, as well as the nature of the delivery of said power, is fine for this sports car. Of the list you mention, at this price what can touch the S2000 on trackdays? The NC Miata? The base Z4 starts out more expensive, heavier and has a less-powerful motor.

Again, not broken…

The S2000 is hardcore. It is not a grocery getter, it is not a luxury coupe. It is most certainly not for everyone. Probably why it is not a sales leader.

The motor will hold up. Its a Honda. Of course an idiot can blow the engine on a missed shift, but that is true with any car.

Your comparing a turbo charged engine fitted to a crossover to a naturally aspirated engine fitted to a track star. Nobody will debate that the S2000 would be nearly untouchable in it’s segment with the RDX engine shoe-horned in.

the S2000 engine is hardly average for what it is, rather its a technological masterpiece. As if it’s somekind of giant revelation that engines produce less power below their peak HP and torque RPMs. You may consider the output numbers average (especially compared to a forced induction engine) but you choose to ignore how the motor obtains those numbers – specifically, it is naturally aspirated and low displacement. Can you find a naturally aspirated low displacement engine (thats not a Honda) that comes near this kind of performance?

The initial S2000 engine, which had less displacement and less torque won International Engine of the Year from 2000 to 2004 for 1.8L to 2L segment under the same principals. Not that International Engine fo the Year award is the end all to the discussion, but again – hardly average.

http://www.ukintpress.com/engineoftheyear/previous04.html

I understand all you stoplight dragsters think you need tons of torque to get the job done, but that is not what the S2000 is.

S2000 is my favorite car. Sure, it has no torque, but muscle car guys miss out on the fun of revving to 9 K.

The Personal Amusement Park

http://www.columbianshop.com/cars/2006newvehicles/Honda/s2000.cfm

Silverstone with Black/Red interior…..the only way to go with limited US color choices

I also think its rediculous that the idea of running an engine w/ a redline 8000RPM above 6000RPM is considered “thrashing” or places excessive wear on the motor. The motor was desgined with high revs in mind. Driving the S2000 w/ 7k on the tach is within normal operation
and will place no more wear on it than any other motor operating at 85% of it’s redline.

The Jerk is correct. Honda has built motorcycle and race engines for years. Those things have rev limits in the stratosphere.

This is just trickledown tech for us Joe Blows.

engine is good for couple of thousand miles? No way, S2000 s the most reliable sports car, and nothing is going to happen if you go past 6000 rpm lots of time, it was designed to do so. S2000 is very good car, its a drivers dream. I have 350z, but on track honda outshines mine without problem. If it just had a bgger trunk it was in my gaage no doubt. And never compare turbo engine to non turbo its stupid

I’m bummed out about the NSX taking longer. Even if it has been showing its age, I still think it’s just a lovely car. To me, the car is the equivalent of a MILF in auto form. But then again, how can they properly re-engineer the car now that Ayrton Senna is gone and can no longer offer his input… they probably have a supercomputer analyzing the same engineering results that he could have probably told them in a few laps. I still think Honda makes good stuff – they just need some more RWD or AWD platforms to get them going.

While there is some merit in the statement that the S2000 has the torque of a small girl, big displacement/torque wasn’t really what that roadster was designed for, is it? Plus as many people have stated already, it’s damn fine output from such a weeny little engine. Considering the previous generation GM 3.8L supercharged V6 only made 240 hp (although probably tons more grunt.) I just can’t handle a car that only has two seats unless it was made specifically for the track. I need to put things in the backseat!!

S2000s are so cheap, buy a nearly new now and put it in storage for 30 years

I’d love a Honda badged small four-door sedan that is rear wheel drive with a detuned S2000 engine. Seems like there would be a market for that in Honda’s lineup.

You could call it something catchy like “Civic”– oh wait…

I recently test drove a S2000 and must admit it is a very special car. drive it at 5k rpm, and you’ll have the torque / power of a 1.6 liter engine (that’s your average peugeot 206/renault clio etc.). it does not suprise me that I see a lot of women driving a S2000. rev it up to 7k and above – the car turns into a beast and screams like a bike engine, giving you gooseflesh. like said before, driving around the city won’t be much of fun with this engine – even on the autobahn you’ll have to rev it up above 7k to start serious overtake action. very unpractical!

consider this together with the fact that the interior is just horrid (especially the rev tach), it’s no wonder it’s no sales rocket. the average cabrio lover just does not want a car that is so focussed on its (admittedly astonishing) engine.

Honda sportscars usually come out at a glacial pace. It seems like Honda is content to always making minute changes to its sports cars. I wish they could redo the S2000’s nose to make it look like the shark-like nose of the original concept. As for the next NSX, maybe the cold reception of the NSX concept shown a while back that looked too much like the Ferrari Enzo convinced Honda to go back to the drawing board. Plus switching from mid-engine to front engine obviously delayed the whole project.

2009 is about right for the next “NSX”. Honda needs to equal or beat the reputation of the old NSX so they have to build a super car that would last for many many years. Which is a very hard thing to do now given the HP numbers of standard cars nowadays and the BMW handling.

Hyperion… sorry to break it to ya, but the Civic ain’t RWD.

try try again…

as far as the S2000 being “average,” who ever said that must be out of their mind for saying that!!! by no means is the S2000 average. not to mention that the S2000 can take down porsche boxster’s, bmw m roadsters, and other roadsters that are out on the road today. and the F22C engine that the S2000 fields is a masterpiece of engine technology and precision engineering.

and as far as the new NSX… if its a front-engine RWD coupe, then it shouldnt be called an NSX at all. but one thing that i’ve been waiting for from honda is that they will be using a V10 in the nexgen NSX, but i hope that the NSX’s engineers keep the car as a mid-engine RWD “ferrari killer”. i just hope that the V10 the nexgen NSX is using will have the same (if not better) VTEC system that made the NSX what it was before it was discontinued