pretty hot

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2000-Honda-S2000-600whp-Turbocharged-Hardtop-Coupe-FAST-/110851931604?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item19cf4a3dd4#ht_1742wt_1165

4/2/2012 3:43:11 AM

very nice

4/2/2012 8:37:17 AM

someone needs to take away the douchebag's HDR effect.

4/2/2012 9:04:19 AM

I always wanted one of those in a hard top, but that top is ugly

4/2/2012 9:12:13 AM

yeah it's annoying as fuck.

and it looks like everything is photoshopped together.

4/2/2012 9:14:52 AM

lol @ $50k

fuck that

4/2/2012 10:41:12 AM

man, that hard top is fucking hideous

4/2/2012 10:47:21 AM

That guy's smoking crack for $50k.

Also I hate those Spoon tops. They would look good if the panels flowed together but they don't.

The OEM hardtop is the best looking one. Very difficult to find these days though.

4/2/2012 11:20:48 AM

He thought the car didn't depreciate in value but gained 15k? bahahaha I don't care how much work you put into the car, a 10+ year old s2000 doesn't gain 15k in value.

4/2/2012 2:44:34 PM

s2000 sedan

4/2/2012 3:42:40 PM

Hardtop ftw.

4/2/2012 4:06:44 PM

I think that hardtop looks like shit.

4/2/2012 7:43:58 PM

I like the hardtop except how it ends at the rear

4/2/2012 9:31:39 PM

OEM 4 LIFE

4/3/2012 7:25:47 AM

I kind of like the hard top except that it makes the rear glove box inoperable.

4/3/2012 10:05:53 AM

^ you like it cause it's a z4 coupe ripoff

4/3/2012 10:10:36 AM

holy blindspots batman

4/3/2012 11:31:08 PM

^^^how does it make the rear glovebox inoperable?

4/4/2012 8:13:10 AM

Didn't see the panel line in the first time.

4/4/2012 1:04:00 PM

hahaha starting bid 35k, buy it now 50k for a car with 110k on the body?!

I would NEVER buy a car that has been suped up by a stranger. All that tells me is that it's been driven hard as hell, is going to have problems that only certain mechanics are willing to mess with, and it will likely run rough as hell.

I had a 99 Integra GS that I dumped tons of money into turboing it, etc. and you really can't put high performance parts on a low performance car and expect it to run properly without spending 5x what you thought you would. Got an M Roadster after that and besides the impracticality of a two-seater, it was a better car. Got an STi after that, was faster and ran properly for the power it had. Very fun car to drive. Now I have a 335i and wouldn't look back for a second on any of the others.

4/4/2012 4:15:17 PM

you cant rally a 335i.... or can you?!?!?

4/4/2012 4:50:40 PM

You can't! B/c the transmission will overheat

4/4/2012 8:00:55 PM

do the manuals over heat?

i think stone mentioned at a track day more then 2 laps it will go into limp mode?

is there any way to fix that?

4/4/2012 8:41:11 PM

Oh to dream...


Damn you Honda! Damn you...

6/7/2012 2:15:50 PM

if that car existed, I would own it

6/7/2012 2:31:29 PM

Quote :

"if that car existed, I would own it"

6/7/2012 2:33:17 PM

a welder away

6/7/2012 4:42:22 PM

Convertible is supposed to be a feature; not a flaw...What do you guys have against a drop top?

6/8/2012 10:41:45 AM

the complete compromise in handling, weight, road noise, reliability (of the sealing top), and looks.

6/8/2012 11:35:39 AM

Quote :

"if that car existed, I would own it"

close enough...
not quite... i know...

but close enough...

[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 11:46 AM. Reason : .]

6/8/2012 11:46:02 AM

Quote :

"the complete compromise in handling, weight, road noise, reliability (of the sealing top), and looks."

I assure you there is no compromise in handling. The S2000 had one of the best engineered chassis ever built. What car(s) in a similar price range from 2000-2009 had better handling? Which ones were notably lighter than the S2k? Heck...Which ones outperformed it at all for a similar price?

Road noise in a sports car...Lol.
Honda reliability an issue...Lol.

[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 12:18 PM. Reason : s]

6/8/2012 12:17:29 PM

its easy to make a car handle at the level the s2000 does.

It doesn't need a ton of grip because it doesn't have any power so all you have to do is make it balanced.

6/8/2012 12:40:03 PM

^^Spend some time on the S2000 forums and you'll see that just about everyone will tell you that Honda is horrible at making convertible tops. BTW the S2000 top wears out prematurely and there is a TSB for 2004+ models related to this. I myself had to have my top replaced at 19,000 miles. Utterly ridiculous. My dad has had the dealership address squeaks and rattles from the top on 3 occasions. Mine has 2-3 rattles that I've gone to the dealership about. What did they tell me? That they couldn't locate (or hear) the rattles and that I should go to a convertible specialist. My top also leaks in automated car washes. Never again will I own a convertible...ever.

There is a compromise in handling, b/c no matter how you slice it a fixed roof coupe WILL be more structurally sound than a convertible. A convertible design on a basic track oriented sports car is a hindrance not a feature. It is added weight and complexity and reduces roll over protection. And it is considerably louder than a fixed roof design. There's also the matter of inferior aerodynamics...

sumfoo1, stop trolling We've discussed ad nauseum that the FRS is NOT close enough. And regarding handling, I respectfully disagree. You can't slap some shit on an imbalanced classis with a high center of gravity and high polar moment of inertia and expect to equal something that was properly built from the ground up. And it's widely known that you can add 100 hp to the S2000 without negatively impacting the handling

[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 12:43 PM. Reason : w]

6/8/2012 12:40:19 PM

Yeah... i need to get out of here i have the opposite car.

Its balanced about as well as a 60 year old after 2 dozen shots. But it's got grip all damned day long lol.

6/8/2012 12:42:37 PM

lmao

6/8/2012 12:45:06 PM

what i'm saying is with a small engine and transmission the chassis is most of the weight of the car so it's not hard to shift the rest of it around and design it well. Were as you have a 700hp 700lb engine with a 400lb transmission... it's a little harder to balance again.

6/8/2012 12:54:08 PM

I'll give you the part about the tops wearing out. I considered it more of a wear item to be expected on a convertible, but maybe it's a weaker point on Hondas than on other verts. Mine was still in fine shape when I sold it at 46k. Maybe it has to do with being garaged vs stored outdoors. Maybe the previous owners didn't put it through many raising/lowering cycles. I don't know.

The key thing I think most people are missing is that the S2000 was designed from the ground up as a convertible. It wasn't a coupe that they decided to cut the roof off of and had to add a ton of chassis bracing as a result. I think those are the cars that give convertibles the stigma and rightfully so.

I'm not arguing against the engineering principles behind a fixed roof. I fully understand how triangulation works. I'm just saying this particular chassis was engineered to overcome the typical pitfalls and I don't think adding a roof will make that much of a difference. If you really think you'll get structural benefits from a roof you can always add a roll cage.

Show me some fixed roof 2WD cars that out handle it in a similar price range and I'll be more responsive. What I'm hearing right now is that the S2000 was the best handling option in it's price range, but you guys seem to think it coulda/shoulda/woulda handled better with a roof. I'm not buying it, but like I said...You can always add a cage.

Now for some friendly trolling:




What a weak design! Needs a roof!

[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 1:03 PM. Reason : s]

6/8/2012 1:02:01 PM

http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-cetera/formula-1-cars-may-get-fighter-jet-canopies-20110718/

wouldn't be so bad....

6/8/2012 1:05:07 PM

Also, in terms of weight, I'm pretty sure if you remove the motor that raises and lowers the top and do it manually it will be lighter than a metal roof with any structural integrity. Furthermore, you have to think of CoG on a car like this. Do you want the weight up top or do you want it down low?

6/8/2012 1:08:15 PM

^^^It most certainly was the best handling vehicle in it's class. And it's chassis is rock freaking solid even as a convertible. But it could have been just as good (or better) and lighter as a coupe. As to convertible top durability in the 5 years my car has been in existence it was only stored outside for 6 months. The top failed after 2.5 years.

Quote :

"The key thing I think most people are missing is that the S2000 was designed from the ground up as a convertible. It wasn't a coupe that they decided to cut the roof off of and had to add a ton of chassis bracing as a result. I think those are the cars that give convertibles the stigma and rightfully so."

Quite right.

Quote :

"what i'm saying is with a small engine and transmission the chassis is most of the weight of the car so it's not hard to shift the rest of it around and design it well. Were as you have a 700hp 700lb engine with a 400lb transmission... it's a little harder to balance again."

The F20/22C isn't as light as you think. Swapping in an LSx & transmission adds less than 100lbs to the vehicle.

[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 1:10 PM. Reason : k]

6/8/2012 1:09:44 PM

ideally you want just enough weight up top to keep the 2 ends from flopping around.

Going by your theory the ideal car would be a 1 dimensional frame that carries the wheels... well the more 3d you make it the more chassis rigidity goes up (to a point obviously)

The ideal chassis shape would be like a flattened pyramid with just enough chassis height to maintain horizontal and vertical rigidity.



make this bridge a convertible and see what happens....

ok that was a dumb comment because their are lots of bridges without structure above them right? yep... but they're considerably heavier.


basically open both doors 2 an s2k and you'll see that all the material keeping the car from folding up and resting it's belly on the ground is within 8" of the bottom of the car.

Considerably less material could be used if it was 36" from the bottom of the car.


^ everyone uses the LS engine as a heavy engine example...

its not... DOHC adds shit tons of weight to the top part of the engine... one of the main reasons chevy keeps the cam in the block. an all aluminum ohv v8 clearly isn't that heavy.

the new 5.0 liter ford is considerably larger (and heavier) then the 7 liter LS7 i wish i could find them side by side to show you but trust me its true.

The new 5.0 ford is bigger than my 427 FE motor is and that thing is a 750lb hoss (iron block deep skirt cross bolted mains)


[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 1:22 PM. Reason : .]

6/8/2012 1:16:46 PM

^you don't have to prove to me anything about engine weights. I already know the S2000's engine is no lightweight

6/8/2012 1:27:23 PM

yeah but its impossible to make a ohv 2liter make decent power without boost so what are ya gonna do?

All i'm saying is that tons of power, tons of grip and tons of weight are all things that make chassis design exponentially more difficult. the s2000 has none of those things imho.


I'm not saying its underpowered i'm just saying there were no hurtles in chassis design anyone had to leap over.

Its a great car and a great chassis but there shouldn't have been much difficulty in getting it there which is why i'm bummed about the brz/frs because it should have been the same... but they made it even easier on themselves with a flat 4 and less power.


[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 1:34 PM. Reason : .]

6/8/2012 1:31:51 PM

Whatever man! In Gran Turismo 5 my Amuse modified 600 hp S2000 can hang with McLaren F1s!

6/8/2012 1:37:23 PM

Yeah well in forza 4

my 22b can damn near anything in the game (seriously though i set it up for everything from c class to R class races and from 300hp to 700hp lol)

LOVE THAT CAR

Wish it wouldn't blow up if i built it IRL.

6/8/2012 1:40:40 PM

His 22b can almost the whole thing

6/8/2012 1:45:35 PM

Quote :

"Show me some fixed roof 2WD cars that out handle it in a similar price range and I'll be more responsive. "

and it came out in 1992!

6/8/2012 1:51:13 PM

^^, ^ lol WIN!



[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 1:53 PM. Reason : .]

6/8/2012 1:52:28 PM

^^ One car. And we don't even know if it would out handle the S2k because it wasn't made in the same era for a proper shootout to occur. What we do know is the follow on car, the RX-8, did not show any great handling achievements compared to the S2k.

Either way, the FD Rx-7 is one of the biggest pieces of junk a person could buy. A sexy piece of junk, but a piece of junk nonetheless. How can it out handle anything when it never leaves the shop?

Keep em coming. I'm all ears.

6/8/2012 10:21:08 PM

There's nothing to keep coming, because there's nothing to argue. A convertible top is a liability when it comes to performance, period, end of story. It's fun and makes sense for a casual, sporty, street toy, but not for a focused, serious sports car.

This is like when people in here used to argue that FWD is ok because an ITR outhandles (and generally outperforms) some RWD cars--that's despite its crippling layout, not because FWD is anything but a hindrance.

Quote :

"maybe it's a weaker point on Hondas than on other verts"

ohhh yeah. Both of mine failed, too (my 2nd S2k was an older, not super condition example...my first one was an immaculate, garage-kept car, and by 3-4 years old and prob 40k miles, it had holes in the top.


oh, and regarding an LSx swap into an S2k adding <100 lbs, the great majority of that is due to the T-56 transmission (which, at least, is low and centrally located). Similar story with a Miata swap.

[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 11:28 PM. Reason : ]

6/8/2012 11:28:17 PM