Frs vs s2000

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by iLuveKetchup

^ how do you know it's the aero that is providing the rear end feel?

A rear spoiler just about fixes it

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by SubieNate

David (and other S2k owners),

Why do you think the S2000 is so twitchy at the limit? I would have thought that with the double wishbones all around etc. it would be easy to tune it to be fast and predictable. Or is it a case of sacrificing some of the predictability and stability for speed with the right driver?

Nathan

The S2k has variable toe based on compression, aka bumpsteer. This is what makes the car so willing to rotate, giving it it's legendary handling status. This willingness to rotate is also what makes the car so twitchy and prone to spinning out. It always wants to turn, when you want it to, and when you don't want it to.

It's similar to current fighter jets. They're all designed to be inherently unstable, because that's what makes them maneuver so well. It's also why they all have "fly by wire" systems, because without rapid minute corrections, they will fly out of control.

The S2k toes in under compression, and toes out under lift. Lifting the throttle mid-turn unloads the rear, lifting it, and causes the rear to toe-out, causing the rear to break loose, and potentially spin. Combine this with net rear lift, and the faster you go, the less stable the S2k gets. No wonder massive wings are so popular on S2ks

This variable toe is shared with the FD and NA1/NA2. Coincidence that those cars are also known for their handling prowess? Coincidence that those cars are also known for being twitchy and spin prone? Probably not.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by iLuveKetchup

^ how do you know it's the aero that is providing the rear end feel?

We've been testing different exhaust layouts, which in turn affect the rear aerodynamics.

You'd be shocked how big the difference is at even 60 mph, less than what most of us drive on the freeway.

This is the primary reason that we haven't released an exhaust yet in conjunction with Berk Technology.

[iLuveKetchup]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

I'd guess it's an indirect observation, at higher speed the rear would probably seem to have less traction. Makes sense, the S2000 is an aero mess.

Originally Posted by fatoni

A rear spoiler just about fixes it

I can understand that the s2k might not be very aerodynamic and a wing can solve some of the issues. What I don't understand is how one can tell the difference (in two completely different cars) AND cite the difference is due to 'aero'.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by iLuveKetchup

I can understand that the s2k might not be very aerodynamic and a wing can solve some of the issues. What I don't understand is how one can tell the difference (in two completely different cars) AND cite the difference is due to 'aero'.

Drive a first gen Boxster, and a BRZ on the freeway. You'll feel right away which one is more stable at speed.

[iLuveKetchup]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Drive a first gen Boxster, and a BRZ on the freeway. You'll feel right away which one is more stable at speed.

I don't deny that. But how is it so easy for you to say its due to aero? Could it be tires? Could it be that the one car has more toe-out or zero-toe rear? One has a longer wheelbase? I don't know. What I'm saying is that it can be other variables too. But aero seems to be the default answer. Just IMO.

[vang]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

The S2k has variable toe based on compression, aka bumpsteer. This is what makes the car so willing to rotate, giving it it's legendary handling status. This willingness to rotate is also what makes the car so twitchy and prone to spinning out. It always wants to turn, when you want it to, and when you don't want it to.

It's similar to current fighter jets. They're all designed to be inherently unstable, because that's what makes them maneuver so well. It's also why they all have "fly by wire" systems, because without rapid minute corrections, they will fly out of control.

The S2k toes in under compression, and toes out under lift. Lifting the throttle mid-turn unloads the rear, lifting it, and causes the rear to toe-out, causing the rear to break loose, and potentially spin. Combine this with net rear lift, and the faster you go, the less stable the S2k gets. No wonder massive wings are so popular on S2ks

This variable toe is shared with the FD and NA1/NA2. Coincidence that those cars are also known for their handling prowess? Coincidence that those cars are also known for being twitchy and spin prone? Probably not.

Awesome information. Thanks, Mike!

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by iLuveKetchup

I don't deny that. But how is it so easy for you to say its due to aero? Could it be tires? Could it be that the one car has more toe-out or zero-toe rear? One has a longer wheelbase? I don't know. What I'm saying is that it can be other variables too. But aero seems to be the default answer. Just IMO.

We've eliminated the tire variable (I know exactly how the tires we use feel; see my tire review thread on s2ki), and we've played with multiple alignments on both my s2k and the BRZ; I've already had the BRZ's alignment changed 6 times since we got it, and that's without camber plates.

While, wheelbase does contribute to stability, the drastic difference is from aero. How do we reach this conclusion? Because at our current stage of development, we can determine whether the car understeers at 100mph steady state, or oversteers at 80mph steady state cornering, simply by changing exhausts; it affects rear aero similar to how the S2k's rear aero is affected by exhausts. (I have a J's 70RR on mine, and the car is noticeably more unstable with it than with the stock exhaust on. It directly affects my under/oversteer balance at speed, simply by changing the rear aerodynamics)

[Captain Insano]

CSG Mike - awesome information. Wow thanks!! Great to see objective expert technical information for the subject at hand.

[DanoFA20]

i like both cars , though the pro to the s2k is the 50/50 front back weight it realizes.not to mention the higher rev band allows you to enter a corner without up or down shifting, you know that annoying moment when you are right about to hit redline and theres still room to go before you brake. yah hate that shit. the s2k is great for that but again id rather have the frs or brz i like its tyle a little more, what it stands for. and is heritage. s2k is nice but im not much of a vert person. but go with your gut bud good luck on your choice.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by DanoFA20

i like both cars , though the pro to the s2k is the 50/50 front back weight it realizes.not to mention the higher rev band allows you to enter a corner without up or down shifting, you know that annoying moment when you are right about to hit redline and theres still room to go before you brake. yah hate that shit. the s2k is great for that but again id rather have the frs or brz i like its tyle a little more, what it stands for. and is heritage. s2k is nice but im not much of a vert person. but go with your gut bud good luck on your choice.

Quite the contrary. The s2k (AP2) has a peakier powerband, and requires more shifting than the FRS/BRZ to sit in its powerband. You could shift less, but you'd be going slower.

Some dynos to compare (ignore the numbers only look at the shape of the powerband)

FA20



F20C1

[DanoFA20]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Quite the contrary. The s2k (AP2) has a peakier powerband, and requires more shifting than the FRS/BRZ to sit in its powerband. You could shift less, but you'd be going slower.

Some dynos to compare (ignore the numbers only look at the shape of the powerband)

FA20



F20C1

huh interesting thanks for the info dude

i didnt know that. i guess I assumed that since it had the vtec unit and the high comp it would be able to sit higher up longer.

that makes me happy that the frs can beat it up top the honda seems to have a torque dive and the power drops a little off . thats awesome i love this engine. i cant wait till mine gets here im dying.

[TylerLieberman]

Just drove an s2000 fr the first time on monday. Drove it through the neighborhood and went up to the mountains for a small photoshoot. I absolutely loved it. It was a blast to drive it through the mountain roads and equally fun on the streets.

I enjoyed driving it on the streets more so than te FRS and BRZ. Its so enjoyable-especially with the top down. Both cars have their pros and their cons. The FRS is clearly the more practical of the two but I thought the s2000 was a more "raw" and connected car to drive.

Choosing between the two would come down to what your priorities for a new car are, in my opinion. Is practicality more important? If so, take the s2k off the list. If you're looking for fun, then that comes down to your personal opinion after driving both cars

[MattZ28]

I owned an '06 S2000 and currently have an '05 S2000. I've also had an FG2 Si, a C5 Z06, and a few other cars. I test drove an FRS yesterday and absolutely loved it.

As far as how it compares to the S2000, the S2000 definitely feels more raw and "advanced" in terms of pushing it to the limits. The FRS felt more like a toy and I was able to throw it around with more ease and predictability.

The S2000 interior is a bit more refined, but this is expected considering the retail value of each vehicle. But I'd take the new FRS interior over a used S2000 interior if that makes any sense.

In terms of acceleration, the FRS felt like the S2000 would if VTEC never engaged. Not really boring by any means, but not quite up to par in terms of excitement that S2000 provides.

With that being said, the S2000 is completely impractical to have as one's only vehicle, which is my current situation. For a weekend/track toy, it's perfect. But if you want something that does it all and can be daily driven, the FRS/BRZ is the way to go. I will most likely be selling my S2000 soon to get a BRZ Limited.