S2000 vs 86 - 3 Years Development Later

[rice_classic]

Originally Posted by D K

I never said the frs is a grocery getter!!

I said it races against grocery getters.


Why does everyone have their panties in a bunch?

I'm on your side, but even if you had referred to the FT as a grocery getter I wouldn't blame you.. I would agree. 4 seats, Prius tires, a trunk.

Yup, that's a grocery getter. Just because it's not FWD doesn't make it any less a grocery getter. My Expedition is RWD with double A-arm suspension front and rear and that doesn't make it a race car. The FT just competes with other groceries getters, most of which are FWD.

Semantics are fun eh?

[D K]

Im heavily invested into the development of the FT, just like I was into the AP over 10 years ago.

Comparing the two, I will say that the AP developed much faster, which is my concern over the FT.

I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong about this chassis

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by D K

Im heavily invested into the development of the FT, just like I was into the AP over 10 years ago.

Comparing the two, I will say that the AP developed much faster, which is my concern over the FT.

I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong about this chassis

The chassis is excellent.

Do it. Tube the front. Put in a S2k suspension. I dare you.

[raul]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

The chassis is excellent.

Do it. Tube the front. Put in a S2k suspension. I dare you.

Where are you going with this? What should we expect?

[rice_classic]

Originally Posted by D K

Comparing the two, I will say that the AP developed much faster, which is my concern over the FT.

Will you define "developed"? I tend to agree about the AP but that term "developed" is rather ambiguous.

When it comes to "developing" a chassis, it could be limited by a rule set or if it isn't then what is the limiting factor in said development? Also, at what point in "development" is the chassis reflect any semblance of original self?

As the money burn progressed between the platforms, did the lap times with the AP lower faster during the money burn vs the FT?

Did both chassis' get caged? The S2k was notoriously stiff and I suspect the FT isn't despite being a closed roof. I would imagine this variance would be negated once cages are introduced.

[D K]

The S was fully caged as in the picture above, the frs only has a weld in roll bar at the moment.

The S did lap times with 270hp that the FRS is doing with 350ish.

But in any case, something we have to see how its behaving now that we have a bunch of new stuff ready.

I remember dropping weight in the S2, adding about 20hp and the car was smoking fast.
As in qualifying ahead of most of the GT1 class and ahead of all the other GT classes when Honda Cup was the equivalent of ITE at the time.

I just dont see this happening with this car.

Maybe at some point with a 700hp engine, making 3000lbs of downforce, it will be faster than a 700hp S2 with 3000lbs of downforce - I dont know.

But a 300hp S2 weighing 2500lbs will be faster than an FT making 300 at 2500lbs.

And this has been my point all along.
Im not badmouthing the chassis as Im an owner, but I think the S2 is easier to make fast.

D

[juliog]

Originally Posted by D K

The S did lap times with 270hp that the FRS is doing with 350ish.

So, assuming similar preparation, why is the S2K faster than the supercharged 86 when it's down on power? Does your data show it's faster on the straights, or corners? Better torque curve? Better gearing? Superior front-end grip?

[D K]

Im at sea at moment and dont have my old data logs handy.

If I was to list pros and cons for each car, they would be:

FRS:

Pros
Looks - its an awesome looking car.
Steering feel - very good feedback
Stock brakes - amazing how far we got with just stock brakes
Aftermarket support
Aero
Rear end break away - progressive

Cons
Drivetrain - engine and trans are made out of glass and Im just waiting to see what happens with the diff.
Balance - stupidly front heavy.
Front geometry - I suspect something is amiss there, need to tune more with telemetry (AIM Evo4 installed)
Lack of real world racing data - seems there are only a handul of people who are seriously interested in developing this car.
Too many people are interested in just shark fin antennaes.
A bitch to work on - time consuming


AP1/2
Pros
Chassis very stiff from factory
Front end bite - initial turn in is very precise
Rear end grip - very good (to a point - see below)
Engine - very well flowing head and generally bulletproof (in 32 races we lost only one engine and that was our fault for letting someone build it who shouldnt have)
Simple to work on

Cons
Looks - not crazy about them
Aero - not so good
Steering feel - numb and not much feedback
Transmission shifting - after a number of hard laps, feeling got even more vague and it was easy to mis shift.
Rear end break away - combined with the lack of steering feel, this was not ideal
Diff - only real weak point in the drivetrain - eventually we would show up with 2-3 built diffs and just swap them after a number of sessions.
Aftermarket support - much better now, but at the time we were one of the first to actually race an AP.
Expensive - parts are not cheap
Hubs - didnt like big wide slicks
Suspension mounting points - they were pretty weak and needed reinforcing
Stock brakes - rotors were only good for 3-4 sessions before cracking



This is the best that I can come up with off the cuff from memory.

I would be happy to provide more technical and precise feedback at a later date.


These are my opinions and they may not reflect yours.

Im cool with that.

D

[juliog]

That's quite fair. I might add "brakes" to the S2K Cons

[EAGLE5]

Rear seats, anybody?

[D K]

Originally Posted by juliog

That's quite fair. I might add "brakes" to the S2K Cons

Fixed

[D K]

Originally Posted by jsimon7777

Rear seats, anybody?

No rear seats with a roll bar/cage...

[EAGLE5]

I think you should have started with a vette or porsche - better bones. How many engines and trannies have you lost on the frs?

[D K]

Originally Posted by jsimon7777

I think you should have started with a vette or porsche - better bones. How many engines and trannies have you lost on the frs?

Good question!


Ironically enough - zero!

I must be the only one and I am counting my blessings.

Ive received a lot of help from the csg guys, Jackson Racing and Church Automotive Tuning.
I really think without the right ingredients, I would have been on my 9th engine right now.


As far as a vette or a porch is concerned, I didnt want to do that.
I wanted the nimbleness of a small, lightweight coupe.



Maybe after my next track day, I will unlock some big secret and fall in love with this car??
Who knows