Learn me S2000

Someone I work with is exploring getting an S2000 but on the cheaper side. Is it possible to buy one for $5-$7k?

Probably a very needy one. At least on this side of the country. 

So that local one with all records and a hardtop for $8k was priced really low?

Now I have retroactive regret.

Knurled. said:

So that local one with all records and a hardtop for $8k was priced really low?

 

Now I have retroactive regret.

Low enough to be a scam. Assume it was

When I bought my hardtop new from Honda I paid $2600. I saw them advertised used for $4500 on S2ki.com. 

So, yes something  fishy at that price or a hell of a deal. 

 They feel heavy to me. Vtec makes me do bad things cause I hate the engines below threshold and love them above, so I tend to just stay in vtec/attack mode all the time then it turns into worlds wildest police chases. 

All that said, they will absolutely without a fraction of a doubt be valuable soon. 

dxman92 said:

Someone I work with is exploring getting an S2000 but on the cheaper side. Is it possible to buy one for $5-$7k?

My guess - and I’ve been looking for one off and on for a while - is that’ll it’ll be of the “one careful owner (and sixteen careless ones that couldn’t afford to maintain it)”. Plus it’s probably got a rebuilt title and still more bent than a banana.

I had an 03' S2000 for 6 years and 60,000 miles, and it was my only car though all six Chicagoland winters I had it for. They are remarkably reliable performance cars. I only had to deal with the timing chain tensioner ($150 part and an hour or so of labor) and a soft top replacement outside of the usual maintenance. My car ate tons of oil. To the point of me having a compression and leak down test done, but everything came back in spec.

As someone else mentioned, to get one in the price range you are talking about, you will end up with a car with needs. Second gear syncros are a known weakness for the AP1's (99-03) and valve retainers can be an issue on cars that have had mechanical overrevs.  In general a later car (AP2 - 04-09), it a bit more dynamically sorted and robust. The AP2 got traction control in 05 (VSC) and drive by wire throttle. They are a little more neutral handling and the additional torque from the F22 makes the car a little more tractable than the rev happy F20.

As for driving experience, it really depends on how you plan to use the car. Shifter is lovely and throttle response is immediate, but the lack of torque can be an issue if you're commuting. Steering feel is a little number than you might expect. If you take the rest of the internet's word for it the early cars will kill you with snap oversteer. Personally, I think it's a bit overblown and can be somewhat mitigated by a more progressive modern tire and alignment settings. It'll probably feel heavy if you've owned truly light cars, but I think the "heaviness" of the S2000 comes down to the lack of torque for normal driving situations. I found the car to be somewhat miserable with the top up. It really cut down the fun of the driving experience.

In my opinion it's a car dependant on context. If you're able to really ring the car out on a regular basis then it's quite good fun, if not you'd probably be happier with something else. Another issue with them is they are quite expensive to modify when it comes to extracting more performance. Simply put, don't bother with mods for naturally aspirated power. 

If you want a real VTEC screamer look for a late AP1. You still get the 9k redline, but you get a real rear window and a slightly better interior. If you want more liveable car for daily duties look at an early AP2 (04-05).

In reply to MTechnically :

-06 and up for the traction control (VSA) and drive by wire. 

I bought my 2006 brand new after saving for the previous 7 years. I still remember going to the dealership in ‘99 when the first 2000 model years came out. It wanted one ever since. 

I have driven mine across the country twice from Florida to California and back and twice to the dragon and back from Florida. One of the best cars I have ever owned, so much so I still have it and cant convince myself to sell it.  

In reply to Slippery :

I stand corrected on the VSC. I did like my S2000, but I didn't end up loving it, so after 6 years it had to go. I honestly think that daily driving it all year kind of spoiled the magic of that car for me for some reason. Ended up sitting in traffic way too much and not enough time in VTEC. They are still great cars and I'd recommend them to most enthusiasts.

To me you can really feel the weight of the car, likely because they make so little torque on the bottom end. However I drive a car of similar weight, almost identical WHP, and 70 ft*lbs more torque. I'm used to 1/4 throttle and 3k shifts commuting, but the S2K doesn't like that. What it likes is living up in VTEC, from roughly 6000(I can't find an exact number) up to 9000. It makes great noises but it's kinda tough to drive it like that all the time.

The shifter is fine, but not Miata 5 speed good.

Steve_Jones said:

Knurled. said:

So that local one with all records and a hardtop for $8k was priced really low?

 

Now I have retroactive regret.

Low enough to be a scam. Assume it was

If it was a scam, it was a very good one - had lots of pictures, paragraphs full of info, and IIRC it had 180k or 240k miles or something like that.

In reply to buzzboy :

Don't they pretty much weigh what an NC weighs?

Having driven S2000s casually, I think the "no low end" is a psychological effect similar to the one rotaries suffer.  It's not that they have no low end, it's that they have an incredible top end charge that makes the low end feel soft in comparison.

Another example is the Ford DOHC 5-liter.  Looking at the torque curve, it is all top end charge.  Overlay it on the "torquier" pushrod 5.0, and you see the DOHC makes more torque everywhere, even the low end.

In reply to Knurled. :

I think you're on to something with the top end charge idea.

The S2000 is geared pretty short and has a remarkably flat torque curve. That doesn't change the fact that the car often feels sluggish if it's below 4,000RPM. I often felt the need to drop down two or three gears to pass effectively. 

Knurled. said:

In reply to buzzboy :

Don't they pretty much weigh what an NC weighs?

Nope, more like 2800 lbs.

Agree on the overblown comment of being gutless at low rpm. If I didn't need to be accelerate fast I could easily lug around at 2500-3000 rpm on my ap1. 

Knurled. said:

Having driven S2000s casually, I think the "no low end" is a psychological effect similar to the one rotaries suffer.  It's not that they have no low end, it's that they have an incredible top end charge that makes the low end feel soft in comparison.

It is absolutely this.  

This discussion resurfaces every few years here.  There is a graph I supplied in a previous thread comparing S2000 (percieved as 'weak low end') to the 2.5RS motor (percieved as 'torquey'), and it is similar in power through all the low end stuff, then just obliterates it up top.

Its this post:  https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/quickesteasiest-four-cylinder-at-350-hp-for-typica/64471/page5/#post1196896

Side note 1:  When you link directly to a post here, the post is immediately below the edge of the page, so you have to scroll down

Side note 2:  To link directly to a post you need to inspect in chrome to determine the post ID, then construct your own URL.  It would be better if the forum had this functionality built in.

My impression of driving an S2000 is if you can't beat the hell out of it, you won't like it. It's cool looking but generally unpleasant in normal use (tiny, gutless, noisy cruise rpm, etc). It's kind of funny that it IS like a Miata turned to 11 even in that sense. An  na/nb miata has the same problems, but you're missing out on slightly less of a miata's performance while driving normally so the problem actually seems more severe when cruising around an s2000. 

In my particular case it also has the 911 problem. It doesn't really do anything better than a 996 911 that's very close in price (assuming you are shopping nicer s2000s), and there is a whole list of things it's comparably terrible at. 

I end up thinking the two biggest strengths of the s2000 are near-limit handling and reliability, and it feels like the days have mostly passed when any one person will put 150k+ on one anyway (starting in 2019). So, if you're not going to be racing it often, i'd consider other options. 

I bought an 04 new and commuted with it in DC area and brought to NC when I retired. I never found the low end to be a problem and my previous car was 95 z28. I found it drove better in all situations than an NB or NC Miata. Loved it and only sold it to buy my 991. Still miss the car. 

I never thought the s2000 was lacking the low end, but then again, I thought the non VTEC B18b1 was perfectly acceptable for everyday driving. The one thing I noticed when I went VTEC, the power felt the similar it just went revved higher than before. 

I get the same impression when I drive an s2000. Both felt fine to me in the low end and in day to day use even when short shifting. The sensation of speed was different autocrossing and being near the limiter at 7000 rpm vs 8600 rpm, but after a while you just get used to it. 

It's a different feeling from the 2.0t in my GTI, where its instant torque and power, but falls flat after 5k. 

z31maniac said:

Knurled. said:

In reply to buzzboy :

Don't they pretty much weigh what an NC weighs?

Nope, more like 2800 lbs.

...I thought that was how much NCs weighed.

Knurled. said:

z31maniac said:

Knurled. said:

In reply to buzzboy :

Don't they pretty much weigh what an NC weighs?

Nope, more like 2800 lbs.

...I thought that was how much NCs weighed.

STR S2000s are mid 2600s, STR NC Miatas are mid 2300s

Wouldn't the additional power of the STR S2000 negate the weight advantage of the NC?

BoxheadTim said:

Wouldn't the additional power of the STR S2000 negate the weight advantage of the NC?

In a drag race/on track, yes.  Autox, they are pretty closely matched.  They used to trade places up in the trophy spots all the time, but I'm not sure if one ever came out as superior before the ND showed up.

In reply to ProDarwin :

Which chassis has more room for tire?  Looks can be deceiving but it seems like the NC has more room for rubber.

(I am casually interested in finding a S2000, any year, in servicable condition for to become a hot SR rallycross car, since M3s are pretty hard to find that haven't been all hacked up)