sobe_death wrote: In reply to carguy123: I have never used the words "torque" and "plenty" in the same sentence when describing my S2000.
How about this: "There have been plenty of times I wished my S2000 had some torque."
sobe_death wrote: I have been known to use "insane" and "fun" in the same sentence though!
Like this? "If I wasn't insane, I would've bought a Miata for less money and had the same amount of fun."
This is what I always thought SHOULD have been built. Or for cryin' out loud honda, put 2 cams per bank in that J-series and see what you can do... but an S2k that is easy to drive but has tons of torque and easy to drive like that is awesome. Plus, with the shorter V6, the entire weight of the engine is BEHIND the front wheels.
The 4 cylinder is behind the front wheel centerline. Even with an LS motor, I think the accesory pullies are JUST in front of the wheel centerline. A local S2000 here in Atlanta (of course!). While awesome, I still prefer a stupid high rev limit in a car like this.
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2011/01/ls1-powered-honda-s2000-is-deliciously-sacrilegious-videos.html
Dont. Get. It.
I have a feeling most of the people who like this idea have never driven an S2K hard.
At least an LS1 is a LOT more fun than an Accord V6.
...and DAMN, does it look hot in that engine bay!!! Zowee--such an immaculate swap!!!
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.
Now if we could only get a 350Z to turn like an S2000...though I'm sure the extra weight of a V6 doesn't do wonders for the S2K's handling.
Personally I don't care, as long as the old engine winds up in my possession
You'll need to log in to post.
