There's a cool idea - an S2000 with torque? Should call it an S3500, maybe.
1
2
-
April 14, 2011 2:35 p.m. jstein77 Dork
-
April 14, 2011 2:38 p.m. imirk Reader
Blasphemy
-
April 14, 2011 2:41 p.m. cwh SuperDork
What engine is that?
-
April 14, 2011 2:47 p.m. John Brown SuperDork
Saturn Vue ;)
-
April 14, 2011 2:48 p.m. jstein77 Dork
3.7 L J37A4 (305 hp) V6
Should have said S3700
-
April 14, 2011 2:48 p.m. mtn SuperDork
John Brown wrote:
Saturn Vue ;)
GM engine or the Honda engine?
-
April 14, 2011 2:56 p.m. 93EXCivic SuperDork
mtn wrote:
John Brown wrote:
Saturn Vue ;)
GM engine or the Honda engine?
Honda J-series. And dear god why?
-
April 14, 2011 3:31 p.m. Conquest351 Reader
Where's the turbo/blower? LOL
-
April 14, 2011 3:33 p.m. ReverendDexter SuperDork
93EXCivic wrote:
Honda J-series. And dear god why?
No kidding... it's like the builder didn't realize that the 350Z Roadster already exists.
-
April 14, 2011 3:40 p.m. Duke SuperDork
ReverendDexter wrote:
93EXCivic wrote:
Honda J-series. And dear god why?
No kidding... it's like the builder didn't realize that the 350Z Roadster already exists.
OK, the J isn't a spectacular choice, but I would love an S2000 with torque, but I have zero desire to own a 350Z roadster.
-
April 14, 2011 3:41 p.m. 93EXCivic SuperDork
Duke wrote:
ReverendDexter wrote:
93EXCivic wrote:
Honda J-series. And dear god why?
No kidding... it's like the builder didn't realize that the 350Z Roadster already exists.
OK, the J isn't a spectacular choice, but I would love an S2000 with torque, but I have zero desire to own a 350Z roadster.
But for the same amount of work and less money, you could chose a better engine.
-
April 14, 2011 3:45 p.m. Duke SuperDork
93EXCivic wrote:
But for the same amount of work and less money, you could chose a better engine.
Agreed! I'm just disagreeing that he should have bought a 350Z roadster instead.
-
April 14, 2011 6:17 p.m. integraguy Dork
About a week ago, I was "raked over the coals" for suggesting the builder of a rally-capable RWD Ford Escort should have used any of several available Ford 4 cylinder engines instead of using an engine out of the Honda S2000. I was sort of ticked, I guess, because when some manufacturers build decent, modern engines, the folks "hot rodding" some cars (and trucks) pass over that manufacturers engine lineup and go with the engine from another manufacturer. Since this car (supposedly?) uses a Honda/Acura engine, I'm a fan. If it had been a Chevy or Ford engine? Not so much.
-
April 14, 2011 6:46 p.m. John Brown SuperDork
I applaud the effort, Honda has a tasty engine in that 300hp lump. I still think a 3.7L NC Miata sounds like a lot of fun as well. When I win the Lotto I will have to try it out.
-
April 14, 2011 7:08 p.m. imirk Reader
In reply to John Brown:
The eco-boost NC
-
April 14, 2011 7:17 p.m. gamby SuperDork
The coolest thing about an S2K is experiencing it screaming over 8k. That is fun--lack of grunt notwithstanding.
A nose-heavy, low-revving S2k is like Scarlett Johannson getting anorexia and cutting her hair super-short--i.e. much less fun.
-
April 14, 2011 7:27 p.m. John Brown SuperDork
I would not hesitate in donkey punching Scarlett Johannson regardless of weight, hair or sobriety... just ride that burro and keep it motivated, baby!
-
April 14, 2011 7:28 p.m. WilberM3 HalfDork
it sounds like everyone is assuming it does actually change the weight distribution. i know nothing about the weights of the two engines so i cant comment other than i'd like to drive it and see how it feels, as when i test drove a 2.0L S2000 i said both my favorite and least favorite things about the car were the engine (well i really do hate the digital tach...)
-
April 14, 2011 7:37 p.m. Rustspecs13 Reader
Im surprised it hasn't happened before now.
I guess honda tuners are just now getting that 6cyls are awesome.
I'm not really a s2k fan, but I hate the huge rage that is LS1. Yes its a good motor, but god quiet down already I dont want to hear LS1's every where, have some pride in your OE manufacture!
~Alex
-
April 14, 2011 8:06 p.m. John Brown SuperDork
WilberM3 wrote: (well i really do hate the digital tach...)
ughhh... yes
-
April 14, 2011 9:55 p.m. Nitroracer SuperDork
Wait.. Isn't that the same formula as this car that everyone seems to love?
-
April 14, 2011 10:08 p.m. carguy123 SuperDork
Old news.
That picture is a factory team effort. Not factory sponsored but a bunch of guys who said "Hmmmm, I wonder what it'd be like if we . . ."
I have a friend who has done that same swap on his own and does it for other people as well. Intake was a special problem area along with transmission. Lots of mixing and matching of parts available to be able to build just about any configuration you want.
80 hp improvement and cruiser style torque. It doesn't feel like an S2000. It's not all that much more nose heavy, but heavy enough you need to adjust suspension a bit.
It definitely doesn't feel as heavy and numb as a 350Z
-
April 15, 2011 7:31 a.m. bravenrace SuperDork
Duke wrote:
ReverendDexter wrote:
93EXCivic wrote:
Honda J-series. And dear god why?
No kidding... it's like the builder didn't realize that the 350Z Roadster already exists.
OK, the J isn't a spectacular choice, but I would love an S2000 with torque, but I have zero desire to own a 350Z roadster.
A turbo on the stock engine would take care of the torque issue, and make more power than a stock J-series.
-
April 15, 2011 8:09 a.m. carguy123 SuperDork
Yes a turbo would have been cheaper, but given a totally different result.
As far as torque goes the S has plenty.
-
April 15, 2011 8:44 a.m. sobe_death Reader
In reply to carguy123:
I have never used the words "torque" and "plenty" in the same sentence when describing my S2000.
I have been known to use "insane" and "fun" in the same sentence though!
