Anyone drive a Honda S2000?

[Ronbo]

A friend recently picked up a new Honda S2000 and let me have a go behind the wheel. I've gotta say, I wish it never happened because I'm having trouble getting this out of my thoughts. This car far exceeded my expectations. Yes, it was a bit low on grunt below about 5,500 RPM, but what a thrilling ride when pushing it through the gears! Handling was also terrific (I drove through a twisty near deserted local canyon road), and build quality seemed superb. The gearchange was also the best I've experienced, which includes an Alfa Spyder and a Miata as my two benchmarks.

The above, coupled with A/C which actually works, has got me to thinking... The only negatives I can think of are it's a bit tighter inside than the 911, and the engine always seems to be a bit "frantic" due to the need to keep it at relatively high RPM all the time. I'm not a huge fan of the styling, but that was forgotten quickly into the drive.

Of course it doesn't have the same (or even similar) feel as a 911, but does have it's own personality. I'd like to get some opinions from others who have driven this car. I just can't get it out of my mind!!

[UconnTim97]

I liked it. I like the looks of it too. I agree it does lack low end torque. Driving and staying at such high rpms takes a little getting used too. Isn't the redline about 9000?

[s_wilwerding]

I've driven one. It was nice, but doesn't handle quite as well as my Boxster. I was also not too thrilled by the crappy convertible top and the plasticy interior. Oh yeah, and my 6'4" didn't fit too well in the car either.

I'd look at a good used Boxster over a S2K any day.

[vash]

no complaints about the car myself. typical honda styling and fit and finish. i think the car rails pretty good. i wanted to get one, but at the time the car was hot, and dealers were marking them up to criminal levels. swiss clock reliability i am sure.

[tchanson]

Originally posted by s_wilwerding
I was also not too thrilled by the plasticy interior. .

I'd look at a good used Boxster over a S2K any day.

I also like the S2000. Alot. I think the days of lurid dealer mark ups are long past, as the pipeline was filled some time ago. True, they don't have much grunt down low, but then neither does a 2.0 or 2.2 911 for that matter. No one expects them to. It's that upper range of the tach where all the fun is.

I prefer the S2000's interior styling to the Boxster's, and don't find it any more "plasticy" than a typical Boxster, especially the older, early Boxsters. I truly wish the Boxster had interior surfaces as nice as those found in a new Accord...

The S2000 is quicker 0-60, 0-100 and in the 1/4 mile than a new Boxters S, and really smokes the base Boxster.

But where it truly shines, IMHO, is on price, at $32K or so. Instead of comparing it to a much slower, 6 or 7 year old used base Boxster, I would guess that most new car buyers in reality compare new S2000s straight up with new Boxsters. And when comparing it to, for instance, a $60K "550 Commemorative Edition" Boxster, the Honda looks like a screaming bargain (any day) in my opinion.

Tim

[Jack Olsen]

The 2004 model's got a lower rev limit, but more torque down low.

The S2000 is a very impressive car, in my opinion. The styling is just so-so, but it's undeniably capable.

[Zeke]

I think Autoweek did a side by side with 3 cars last year. Two of them were the S2000 and the BoxsterS. The 3rd car (I don't remember the make) was an also ran. The Honda took a lot of the best marks, but the Boxster eked out a nod overall. I think it was the better interior and comforts that won the last point. Different cars at different prices. I've never been in the Honda, but I like to see them, They look cool. I don't want one, though.

[s_wilwerding]

Let me clarify my comments.

First, I like Hondas. Every daily driver I've had, almost since the time I started driving, has been a Honda. I couldn't be happier with their reliability.

Second, when the S2000 came out, I had a very favorable impression of it. In fact, I had a very favorable impression of it up until I drove one at the track.

Good points: It's a very well balanced car with good power. You have to get on the revs a little to really get really good power, but overall I couldn't fault the driving experience.

Bad points: I was surprised that the whole interior was plastic. My Boxster has a full leather interior, but there are still plenty of plastic parts. However, the whole inside of an S2000 is plastic - the armrests, the dash, the area behind the seats, the rollbars. Also, there was a floorpan bump running right in front of the seats. I didn't really like the way the dash was laid out - a little to "ricey" for my taste. I was also very disappointed with the quality of the soft top as compared with my Boxster.

As for driving, I can't really fault the S2000. It doesn't have quite the handling feel of a Boxster, but it does have more HP. I was just really disappointed in the quality of the rest of the car. I do know that the newer S2000s have better interiors, which I credit Honda for fixing. All in all, the S2000 is a nice car for the money, but, IMO, as a pure driver's car, the Boxster has the edge.

[Zeke]

Originally posted by SoCal911SC
Those who live in plastic cockpits shouldn't cast stones!

Brian, clarify, please. I don't think anyone, especially me (your post DID follow mine), have cast any stones here.

[djmcmath]

I test drove an S2000 before I settled on my '86 coupe. As a track car, it's really quite good -- handling was nice, power wasn't too bad (above 6K), user-interface was good. I found the feel very familiar, because I've been daily-driving Hondas most of my adult life.

Stuff I didn't like : I can't stand revving to 6K just to get power out of it. Launch is difficult, at best. Powerband is a tiny little wedge -- if you're constantly on it, it's very competitive. If you're just trying to relax and have fun, a wider powerband is very desirable, and the little-bitty band of a ricer-4 is a PITA to drive around town. The other concern is the long term reliability -- I know it's a Honda, but redline in my Civic hits at 6K, and it starts to smell funny if I routinely take it past 4K. I can't make myself believe that a 9K engine is going to last 300K miles.

The worst part? Everyone and their dog drives one around here (Navy town). Driving a Honda is like, well, driving a Honda.

Dan

[Jarrett88]

I got to drive one with a supercharger on it, and all the bushings were replaced with delrin. That thing scared me, since i had driven one without a supercharger i was expecting a lot but not that much. The supercharger takes care of the low end grunt but still top end felt like it was going to explode. I hit the rev limiter so fast i couldn't believe it. I felt like a jackass but my buddy didnt care. He said after he put on the supercharger he kept hitting rev limiter for the first couple days. I am 6'3" and the only reason i wouldnt get one is because my head scrapes the top and my thighs are a half inch away from the steering wheel. Also cruising speed on the freeway and your pulling like 4.5K if i remember right. Too bad this car is in missouri and spends the better part of winter in a garage, gives my buddy way to much time to mess with it.

[Ronbo]

My friend's car that I drove is an '04 model with the larger engine (2.2 vs 2.0), lower redline of 8,200 RPM, and greater torque. This engine didn't really feel as down on power in the lower ranges as I expected from reading road test reports. It was noticably stronger in the 5,500 to 8,000 RPM range though. I suppose this is what really caught my attention. I didn't expect anything much beyond a pumped-up Miata. I was quite surprised that this car was as serious a sports car as it was.

Regarding the plasticy interior, this is something I typically notice in a car but didn't in this one. Perhaps due to the quality of the plastics used. In any case, the car certainly didn't have a "cheap" feel to the interior. No worse than a current Boxster, IMO.