Honda considering an S2000 successor - report

[Trashed675]

Forget the 2000lbs nonsense, make it 2700-2800lbs and throw in the new turbo 2.0l from the new civic type R or Si or whatever its called. It'd still be light, but as well all know, even 200hp get people saying "but its under powered".

[rice_classic]

Give me 200hp in a 2000lb chassis and I sure as hell will not say it's slow.

[Anthony]

Considering Lotus Elise/Exiges are built around a 150lb aluminum tub and still barely make the coveted 2,000 number (Elises are ~1986lb, Exiges are ~2077) releasing a 2,000lb car that appeals to the masses would be quite a challenge. But still possible, I think. A 1.3L would help a lot and you can forget about 2+2. Safety and environmental requirements, I would imagine, are what really breaks the engineers' balls.

[rice_classic]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Safety and environmental requirements, I would imagine, are what really breaks the engineers' balls.

No doubt about it.

BTW: I've been wanting to make a MEME for awhile every time I see your sig. Something like:

Colin Chapman - Killing his drivers in unsafe cars since 1968!
Colin Chapman - Defining what it means to "give your life to motorsports"
Colin Chapman - What's really more important; races won or driver's lost? Winning.. right?!
Colin Chapman - Creating opportunities for new drivers one fragile car at a time.

Ok.. that's enough ribbing for now.

p.s. I'm named after the guy so I figured I have room to joke.

[Kelbyat07]

It needs more horsepower despite on the weight of the car..

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by rice_classic

Colin Chapman - Killing his drivers in unsafe cars since 1968!
Colin Chapman - Defining what it means to "give your life to motorsports"
Colin Chapman - What's really more important; races won or driver's lost? Winning.. right?!
Colin Chapman - Creating opportunities for new drivers one fragile car at a time.

Hahahaha! I love those. And that's cool that you're named after him. If I got an Exige, I was going to get "ACBC" on my license plate. I may still do it if all the good "86" variations are taken by the time I register my FR-S. My FR-S is going to be very light and unsafe, so it would be appropriate.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by rice_classic

I hate to say it.. I really do but throw in the 137lb IMA system from the CRZ for boost in city MPG and I'm sold. I mean, it's only 137lbs and if I could get 45mpg city in a sports car again I'd be quite interested in that.

IMA is perfect for a light car with tiny engine actually, because it gives you way more torque than a turbo that the manufacturer would feel okay with releasing from the factory, so you have great driveability and excellent power at lower speeds. Now the problem with Honda is that L15 motor which has zero performance potential that they insist on using.

The folks at Honda are a strange bunch. They produce crazy motors like the K20 and F20 once in a while, but mostly just keep on using the same old SOHC workhorses for years and years. Also when they make a crazy motor they decide the car needs more racecar and they give them these transmissions with ratios that look like they came from a racecar. Can someone please tell them that there exists something called a compromise?

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by DAEMANO

Alfa Romeo is owned by Fiat, I'm sure they are well aware of safety regulations in the U.S.

Actually the reason the Abarth only comes with a 5 speed and not a 6 is cited as being due to regulations, they had to beef up the chassis to get good crash test ratings and in doing so there was no room left for a 6 speed box.

It seems to be a running theme that the American market regulations are an afterthought for Fiat as of right now.

http://www.fiat500abarth.us/2011/6th-gear-automatic/

[Wes]

Oh no.. thats just an eye sore, and 130 hp?! Really honda? really? Go hard or go home. The S2000 was absolutely gorgeous, this is like.. just the opposite.

[strat61caster]

I can't believe how many people say the S2000 is 'gorgeous', really? It is literally the most generic convertible of the last 20 years I can imagine, blur the badge and it could have come from literally any motor company.



It's a good looking car, but gorgeous for what is literally a rounded rectangle from the side?



Guess I just don't get it.

[rice_classic]

When manufacturers think about making a car they typical consider more than 1 market. Keep in mind that in European and Asian markets, little/light/affordable sports cars are quite desirable. The American market isn't as large as a factor (IMHO) regarding production of this type of vehicle. Americans want big HP and cars and fuel are cheap compared to the rest of the world (except Dubai).


2000lbs + 132hp + rwd roadster + $20k MSRP = good idea in most non-American markets.

They needed to be selling something like this 2 years ago and I think it'll be a big hit outside of the USA and if staying true to the Honda way, they won't bother bringing it here anyway

[rice_classic]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

I can't believe how many people say the S2000 is 'gorgeous', really? It is literally the most generic convertible of the last 20 years I can imagine

My perspective:

That's why it was so beautiful. It's body was beautifully simple and subtle. Here you had a thoroughbred with a 9k rpm production engine, a track-bred chassis, bad ass suspension design, 3 pedals, 6 gears, LSD, bucket seats, a drop top and sticky tires; yet it didn't tell you all that when you looked at it. It wasn't like an STI or a EVO of the same era, it didn't need to look like two bulls trying to milk each other.

The s2000 was quite literally a lady on the street and a freak in the bed.

I feel the NSX was the same way.

Brilliance in art is taking something complicated and technical and creating simplicity and eloquence.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by rice_classic

My perspective:

Brilliance in art is taking something complicated and technical and creating simplicity and eloquence.

I like your perspective, guess it comes down to semantics. Simplicity and eloquence does not equate to gorgeous in my mind, although I completely agree with everything you said. Wonder if anyone else has an opinion...

Except that you know that the NSX is a freak in the bed when you walk by it, that thing looks like the bastard offspring of an XJ220 and F40.



But if you're going to take complication and technical and turning it into something understated and simple I think these sketches aren't headed in the wrong direction... Flame them all you want but you never comment on the new corolla in the parking lot (despite several posts here saying it looks 'good' or 'alright') but always notice that dudes Aztek or Juke or Cube or Veloster or whatever else makes you cringe a little inside.

[rice_classic]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

But if you're going to take complication and technical and turning it into something understated and simple I think these sketches aren't headed in the wrong direction... Flame them all you want but you never comment on the new corolla in the parking lot (despite several posts here saying it looks 'good' or 'alright') but always notice that dudes Aztek or Juke or Cube or Veloster or whatever else makes you cringe a little inside.

Bolded part made me chuckle.

Excellent point and yes, semantics matter as words do have meaning.

Simplicity =/= boring/vanilla/plain/dull/bland/etc etc. Proof is in the philosophy of designed held by Steve Jobs. He was king of making a very technical thing very simple and very eloquent.

The corrolla isn't complex, it's incredibly basic in design and its aesthetics reflect its reality where as cars like the S2k are more capable then they appear. This concept clearly doesn't appeal to everyone but it does appeal to me (and Rowan Atkinson). As was quoted by "Q" in 007: "It's better to be more clever than you look, than look more clever than you are."

It's part of a philosophy of life that's always appealed to me which is doing more, a lot more, with what you have then what you should have been capable of doing. To me, no other car company embraced doing more with less than Honda (of years past).

I think Rowan Atkinson said it best about his NSX:

Clarkson: "May we begin by talking, if you don't mind, about the Honda NSX. [Atkinson makes a face] You are a fan, I believe, of the Hon.."

Atkinson: "I owned one, yes."

Clarkson: "And why did you find that..."

Atkinson: "Well, I liked it's sort of modesty. I liked its sort of understatedness. I liked the fact that it was a very good...a very good car and yet it didn't shout itself and it was sort of image free and that's what I liked about it."