S2000 impressions ...

[Sharp11]

The local dealer has two of these, both 08's and both discounted heavily.

One in laguna blue, the other black, both with black interiors.

I last drove an S2k two years ago and decided I needed a refresher.

We took an extensive interstate and back road bumpy twisty run - I know the salesman, so it was a socially relaxing test drive.

For some reason, either I remembered it wrong or the seven pounds or so I've taken off since then made the car a perfect fit - cars without adjustable steering columns usually don't work for me, but this one was perfect - perfect reach, height and distance from the pedals. The seats were comfortable, too.

There's a good amount of room in the cockpit, too - decent headroom - it's snug, but it feels good.

Dumb key - you put it in the ignition, turn it, then push the starter button - why?

Huge blindspot backing up, no worse than in my vert, just closer - I'd forgotten about that in the Z4.

Once underway, the shifter and clutch in this car are magical - perfect throws and an easy to modulate clutch - I had perfect shifts going without effort - it's all very Honda-like.

I have no problem with the torque in this engine - around town it felt just fine to me, like most small displacement engines - in fact, it was all quite normal, until.....

First up, the interstate:

Here, I had a chance to check three things of importance; high speed stability, noise and opening up the Vtech - the latter item is pretty cool, happens around 6k plus and is hard to describe - let's just say there's a ton of raucousness and a feeling of being pushed back in your seat - it's very addictive and extremely uncivilized, but it makes you feel great :)

The noise levels in this car at speed are pretty high - the salesman and I were having to almost yell to hold a conversation, and that was true at 65mph in sixth gear, where the tach registered around 3.5k. (owners claim it's as quiet as any vert top down, I'll defer to ff on this one).

Felt stable at high speed (apparently an improvement over earlier models).

Next, the back roads:

Here's where I do most of my driving and I wanted to enjoy Z4 levels of rigidity again - however, while stiffer than my E46 vert, it's only marginally so, and I'm not even so sure about that - certain types of surfaces seemed to upset the structure of this car that leave the ZHP unfazed, chalk it up to weight and wheelbases I guess, but I was expecting big improvements, instead, the little Honda shakes and shimmies. The E46 comes across as more solid, more substantial, which in fact it is (the Z4 is in a different league than either of these cars in terms of chassis rigidity, though).

I walked away from the Honda a bit underwhelmed - while I loved driving it, I don't think I'd want to drive it everyday - as a third car, absolutely, and if I hadn't sunk so much money in my rapidly depreciating ZHP, I'd probably have one.

It's made well, but it's not built to the same levels of finish and materials as a bimmer, even the Z4 - there's something about it that reminds you it's a 30g car - the paint is thin, the trunk lid is suspended by non-hydraulic hinges, the steering wheel doesn't adjust, there's no headliner nor insulation for the convertible top and, as with verts of yore, you have to snap a stupid tonneau cover around the retracted top.

It's a great value and it's murderously fun to drive - wish I had a third bay and the economy didn't suck so bad - just as an aside, Herb Chambers in the Boston area has an 08 with a thousand plus on the odometer for 26 and change and there's one available through my dealer, same color as ff's with 2500 on the clock for around the same price. :yikes:

Ed

[Nick M3]

FWIW, I'm told that the S2000 is actually quieter with the top down.

It's on my list of, um, 4th cars, along with a Miata and an E30 M3.

[lupinsea]

It's made well, but it's not built to the same levels of finish and materials as a bimmer, even the Z4 - there's something about it that reminds you it's a 30g car

Um, could it be because it IS a $30g car? :eeps::scratch::D



Thanks for the review, Ed. Really interesting to hear your input on it. Especially about the chassis flex. That's one area of the NB Miata that started to get to me after a while. But it took 3 years for me to figure it out. I "think" the S2k is supposed to be stiffer. And I know the NC MX-5 is about 50% stiffer than the old NBs. How they compare I don't know. But on my very short test drive of the NC it seemed fine. Though I may have been having too much fun to pay attention to a lot of the subtleties of that car.

Anyways, it seems important to keep price points in consideration when reviewing car. For the ~$26k cost could you get a Z4 with the same year / miles that you can with the S2000? It's like reading in magazines about any comparisons between the Corvette and Ferraris or other high-end sports cars. Articles come out and complain about fit and finish or lack of refinement in the steering, or a clunky shifter, or the blah interiors of the 'Vettes compared to the other cars. Well, duh! The other cars it's being compared to in terms of performance cost anywhere from $30g to $100g+ more so I'd expect the other cars to be nigh perfect.

[equ]

This year's Komen drive, I took a n52 3.0si out... The only MT they had. It was beautifully shifting, I was told it was on its 4th clutch (at 40k test drive miles). I could also tell the flywheel was lighter than the e90. I thought its pedal placement was better too, all in all, the most fun I had shifting a modern day bmw.

The issue was its torque or tuning or I don't know what. It felt a good bit slower than either e90 330 that I've owned. I seriously believed it felt like a 2.5. Very nice car in general, but nothing really stood out, e.g. in a way a 3er sport sedan stands out.

I thought the s2000 stood out, when I drove them extensively in the summer of '06. The high rev nature is positively animal. My then issue was a lack of torque/mellowness at lower rpms, as well as a feeling of edge in the handling. I'm beginning to think the benign seeming little croc has a bit of edge as well (undiscovered in test drives).

Ed, I think most of the draw and high resale (% terms) of the s2k is the perceived build quality and the honda name plate. You lift the hood and see the red powdercoated engine, you feel the doors, etc. To you it's not up to bmw spec, and true, it's not luxo. But it's really really good quality. You really get the sense of purity. Honda came out and built one of the best little cars they could build. There are no options, marketing games, etc.

[John V]

The pushbutton start in the S2000 is one of the stupidest ideas ever. On the only long-ish trip I ever took in one on the freeway, I was wishing for earplugs about thirty minutes into the trip. It's great for blasting around backroads but not my cup of tea for much else. I still think the Boxster is as much or more fun on backroads and much more usable and livable as a daily driver.

[Biggins]

Have you guys driven Solstices/Skys to compare, or would they not even be in the picture?

[clyde]

Have you guys driven Solstices/Skys to compare, or would they not even be in the picture?
The non-GXP Solstices I've driven are the industrial hacksaws to the S2K's scalpel.

[Rob]

Hmm - hacksaws.

[Sharp11]

Lupe and equ,

The s2k is tremendous value for the money - one of the reasons I've been interested in it is I don't expect we'll see another new car like this for quite some time, if ever. Whatever Honda puts out to replace this car, if they decide to even do it, will likely be duller and fancier.

However, I thought it was worth mentioning its shortcomings, particularly coming from a more expensive marque - it's something you immediately notice. Would it bother me to lose the niceties going from the BMW to the Honda? Not really, especially since clean, low mileage examples go for the low 20's and even high teens, but I do think the noise is a serious issue - I'm not sure that would work for me long term, if the car were a bit better insulated I'd probably have pulled the trigger.

After driving the S2k today, getting in my car felt like stepping into someone's living room on wheels - I've never, ever thought of my car as a luxo-mobile, till today. :lol:

By tonight, the ZHP felt more like its old self (and less like a boat) as the exhilaration of the Honda wears off. Still, the BMW is no sports car, but it's damned nice for what it is.......

Ed

[lupinsea]

The non-GXP Solstices I've driven are the industrial hacksaws to the S2K's scalpel.

Yes. . . but they're at least nice looking hacksaws.





On the only long-ish trip I ever took in one on the freeway, I was wishing for earplugs about thirty minutes into the trip.

Hm. I thought the S2000's cabin was quieter . . . or at least, I just figured it was quieter) than the Miata. And I've driven the Miata on 5000 mile, 10 day road trips up and down Pacific Coast highway. . . most of that time with the top down. Seemed fine to me. :D

[ff]

certain types of surfaces seemed to upset the structure of this car that leave the ZHP unfazed, chalk it up to weight and wheelbases I guess, but I was expecting big improvements, instead, the little Honda shakes and shimmies.
It does take some getting used to. BMW has done an excellent job of tuning the E46's suspension to inspire confidence in the driver (at least I believe that to be true). It feels unflappable and steady under most circumstances. Subtract 500 lbs of weight, stiffen the suspension, and remove most of the cushy isolation between the driver's butt and the road, and you end up with something that better communicates what's really going on with the road.

Sometimes the signals are alarming, and you realize that you're pushing things a little harder than you should be. So you snap off the accelerator... and watch the back end come around and face the wrong direction. With the BMW, you keep pushing until the DSC kicks and ruins the fun. :D

The pushbutton start in the S2000 is one of the stupidest ideas ever.
+1

[lupinsea]

The pushbutton start in the S2000 is one of the stupidest ideas ever.

Pfttt... yeah,that's so MY 2000.

I actually like the idea of a push to start button. But having to put a physical key into a cylinder and then hit a separate button seems dumb. The newer systems (I think on the Corvette, maybe the MX-5, some others) where you keep a transonder keyfob in your pocket and it unlocks the car as you get near and let's you just push a botton to start are much better (no fumbling with keys).

[Rob]

The noise of convertible tops is one reason why I would never consider one as a daily driver. I understand that well made tops aren't nearly as noisy as cheap ones, but it's a mental hurdle I won't bother to try and get past. It's why I would consider a hard top convertible over a soft top.

The other big reason is memories of my childhood getting buffetted in the back seat for hours at a time.

[Sharp11]

The noise of convertible tops is one reason why I would never consider one as a daily driver. I understand that well made tops aren't nearly as noisy as cheap ones, but it's a mental hurdle I won't bother to try and get past. It's why I would consider a hard top convertible over a soft top.

The other big reason is memories of my childhood getting buffetted in the back seat for hours at a time.

Modern convertibles with triple-insulated tops are pretty nice - top up, they drive much like coupes - quiet and comfy.

The problem with the S2k is it lacks an insulated top (though the top appeared to be of good quality). You can get a nice aluminum hardtop for it, but it's pricey.

I hate retractable steel tops - to me, what BMW did to the 3 series vert is a horror; heavier, full of complexity, less cargo room (because you have to store three large steel panels), higher center of gravity - I can't see any advantage to this type of roof system, but people seem to want them.

Ed

[Rob]

B/c people like me perceivce that the solid top will avoid the parts of a convertible that they hate. Then there is the part where people realize that *other* people have convertible hard tops, so they have to have one too.

I agree that the concept of a convertible hard top doesn't make all that much sense when you consider the quality of well designed triple insulated tops and compare it to the mass and complexity you add when you go the hard top route. But my wife is still much more likely to sell me on the hard top version (assuming the mechanism could be protected by an extended warranty, anyway).

[ff]

I hate retractable steel tops - to me, what BMW did to the 3 series vert is a horror;

Though still not as silly as this idea (GMC Envoy):

http://images.autobytel.com/Web/Carpics/NCTD/05-envoy-int-xuvbed.jpg

[John V]

The roll top truck! I love those!

[lupinsea]

Hm. The soft tops are noisier than fixed hard tops. . . even the insulated tops. But the noise isn't bad to my ears and I'm willing to accept the elevated noise levels for the great feeling of top down open air driving. It makes living with the soft tops worth it. For what it's worth, I used my Miata as my daily driver and fun weekend toy (when not offroading on the weekends) for 3 straight years.

[Sharp11]

B/c people like me perceivce that the solid top will avoid the parts of a convertible that they hate. Then there is the part where people realize that *other* people have convertible hard tops, so they have to have one too.

I agree that the concept of a convertible hard top doesn't make all that much sense when you consider the quality of well designed triple insulated tops and compare it to the mass and complexity you add when you go the hard top route. But my wife is still much more likely to sell me on the hard top version (assuming the mechanism could be protected by an extended warranty, anyway).

Here's an idea for a new advert slogan "steel, retractable roofs, for those who hate convertibles, but really want one".

I jest of course, but there's a grain of truth there. :)

Ed

[Rob]

Here's an idea for a new advert slogan "steel, retractable roofs, for those who hate convertibles, but whose wives really want one".

Fixed. :)

Or it could be "whose wives make them endure one." Of course, my wife is a white skinned red head who can't really tolerate tons of sun, but really, really wants us to get a convertible. Go figure.

[Sharp11]

Fixed. :)

Or it could be "whose wives make them endure one." Of course, my wife is a white skinned red head who can't really tolerate tons of sun, but really, really wants us to get a convertible. Go figure.

Red head huh? Nice ;)

Ed

[Plaz]

Red head huh? Nice ;)

Ed

:lol:

You dog!

[Sharp11]

:lol:

You dog!

Mrs Sharp's fair skinned too, but a blonde :)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3137/3030531492_4c67d25329.jpg

[Plaz]

Mrs Sharp's fair skinned too, but a blonde :)


:thumbup:

But wouldn't that be "Mrs. 11?" :D

And shouldn't she change her name to Lydia? :lol:

[Sharp11]

:thumbup:

But wouldn't that be "Mrs. 11?" :D

And shouldn't she change her name to Lydia? :lol:

:lol:

Mrs. Lydia is an 11 ......

Badaboom....

[Sharp11]

Music, art, cars, blondes and redheads - I'm going to miss life when it's over :lol:

Ed

[Plaz]

Music, art, cars, blondes and redheads - I'm going to miss life when it's over :lol:

Ed

No you won't. :lol:

[Sharp11]

Thanks for the review, Ed. Really interesting to hear your input on it. Especially about the chassis flex. That's one area of the NB Miata that started to get to me after a while. But it took 3 years for me to figure it out. I "think" the S2k is supposed to be stiffer. And I know the NC MX-5 is about 50% stiffer than the old NBs. How they compare I don't know. But on my very short test drive of the NC it seemed fine. Though I may have been having too much fun to pay attention to a lot of the subtleties of that car.



Lupe,

While wasting time perusing the web last night for torsional rigidity numbers, I learned the Honda S2k has a number of 7100 nm - less than that of the newest MX5 (which is purportedly in the 8k+ range) and quite a bit less than my E46 vert at 10,500 nm.

I haven't any idea as to how these numbers relate across manufacturers or even better yet, class of cars - for intance, the E46 is a much larger car with a wider opening and longer wheel base - is 10,500 nm significantly stiffer when taking all that into account? Who knows......, but it does help to explain why the S2k felt less stiff than my car. I think.

I'm seeing clean, low mileage M Roadsters in the mid 30's - with a torsional rating of 14,500 nm, it's the stiffness champ. Makes me wish I had a little extra cash on hand, I'd be back in - the one thing I always really liked about the standard Zed was its rigidity - the M adds the better steering and better shorter-throw gearbox.

Ed

[lemming]

Lupe,

While wasting time perusing the web last night for torsional rigidity numbers, I learned the Honda S2k has a number of 7100 nm - less than that of the newest MX5 (which is purportedly in the 8k+ range) and quite a bit less than my E46 vert at 10,500 nm.

I haven't any idea as to how these numbers relate across manufacturers or even better yet, class of cars - for intance, the E46 is a much larger car with a wider opening and longer wheel base - is 10,500 nm significantly stiffer when taking all that into account? Who knows......, but it does help to explain why the S2k felt less stiff than my car. I think.

I'm seeing clean, low mileage M Roadsters in the mid 30's - with a torsional rating of 14,500 nm, it's the stiffness champ. Makes me wish I had a little extra cash on hand, I'd be back in - the one thing I always really liked about the standard Zed was its rigidity - the M adds the better steering and better shorter-throw gearbox.

Ed

you should buyout Fil's car 'cause his lease is done soon.

[lupinsea]

Lupe,

While wasting time perusing the web last night for torsional rigidity numbers, I learned the Honda S2k has a number of 7100 nm - less than that of the newest MX5 (which is purportedly in the 8k+ range) and quite a bit less than my E46 vert at 10,500 nm.

I haven't any idea as to how these numbers relate across manufacturers or even better yet, class of cars - for intance, the E46 is a much larger car with a wider opening and longer wheel base - is 10,500 nm significantly stiffer when taking all that into account? Who knows......, but it does help to explain why the S2k felt less stiff than my car. I think.

I'm seeing clean, low mileage M Roadsters in the mid 30's - with a torsional rating of 14,500 nm, it's the stiffness champ. Makes me wish I had a little extra cash on hand, I'd be back in - the one thing I always really liked about the standard Zed was its rigidity - the M adds the better steering and better shorter-throw gearbox.

Ed

Hm.

Interesting. Thanks for digging up those numbers.

If you're up for spending more time test driving I'd be curious on your feed back from a fresh NC MX-5 test drive. Especially after having test drove an S2000 recently. I know you've driven one previously but that was a while ago, no?

[John V]

I've driven an NC MX-5 and AP1 S2000 back to back. What do you want to know? They're such different cars it's hard to compare them. If the S2000 has a looser structure, it doesn't really translate into a degraded driving experience. The MC MX-5's suspension is so soft the stiff structure is kind of useless.

[Sharp11]

Hm.

Interesting. Thanks for digging up those numbers.

If you're up for spending more time test driving I'd be curious on your feed back from a fresh NC MX-5 test drive. Especially after having test drove an S2000 recently. I know you've driven one previously but that was a while ago, no?

Lupe,

I drove the Miata back in May of 06 - I liked it save for some high speed instability (90mph +) and highway noise.

I think the structure issue is splitting hairs - I don't recall having any problems with the NC - and that was driving it after getting out of my then super-stiff Z4.

The Honda probably wouldn't bother you much - curiously though, where scuttle shake shows up with the BMW (either the E46 or the Z4) it's at the top of the windshield, usually manifested as a side to side motion of the rear view mirror - with the Honda, the shake was most apparent lower in the structure - kind of as if the entire cowl moved a bit too much ( the side mirrors moved a lot). I only felt it over extreme surfaces - especially diagonal crevices, RR tracks etc., but it was there.

My gut feeling, rigidity aside, is you'd probably be happiest with the NC - it's a bit roomier, rides better, is less high strung, is just as fun to drive around town and probably a bit more civil for the type of driving you're likely to be doing 99.9 percent of the time. Plus, it's the spiritual successor to your former car, a car you really seemed to love and enjoy.

It's cheaper, too!!

If convertibles float your boat, there's always going to be a structural issue - if we really wanted to forget all about it, we'd stay with sedans and coupes, but where's the fun in that ;)

Ed

[lupinsea]

Thanks John and Ed.

I don't doubt the S2k and the MX-5 are different cars. Even if they had similar rigidity, I think the MX-5 would feel stiffer because of it's smaller dimensions. After all, if it takes X amount of force to twist the chassis Y amount, that will be felt less if the structural dimension are smaller which (I think) would equate to a shorter "lever" to do the twisting.

As for the suspension, I'm figuring I'd be "fixing" the suspension a bit with an MX-5 anyways. At the very least the car needs to be lowered slightly to get rid of the massive wheel gappage. :rolleyes: Yeesh. I don't want that slammed look but a nice even gap around the tires. So at minimum new springs. And I might want a little firmer riding shocks. Gotta see at the time, though.

I think you're right, Ed, I probably would be happiest in MX-5. Part of it is the easy-to-live-with nature of the car. That encompasses everything from worrying (or not) about it's reliability, doing any maintenance, not worrying about it when parking around town, comfortability driving it, comfortability affording it, comfortability with the insurance, etc. etc. etc.

Still, the S2000 brings a bit more . . . something. Cache, power, speed, styling, something. And given used prices would probably be similar I'd be foolish not to take it for a test drive when I'm in the market.

Then, too, there are a bunch of up coming 4 cyl, RWD, 200-ish hp, fixed-top sports cars coming out in a year or so from Toyota and Subaru. Plus the Nissan 370z that's dropping some weight and adding some hp. By the time I'm in the market these should be a couple years old. I wouldn't get the top down driving fun but . . .