a quote..

"The VTEC system is only tunable in one aspect.. where in the RPM range the more extreme third cam lobe is switched in. Once the lift and duration of this lobe has been determined for a particular installation it remains fixed for the life of the cam, just like a conventional camshaft.

The VVC mechanism can be made continuously variable and as such presents a better opportunity for 'tunability' given sufficient dyno and calibration time. Both valve acceleration and duration are variable. The only area that is not adjustable is of course valve lift.""

 

Tuscun 380

 

job done

 

Well if you can keep it running anyway

 

<flatcapdriver>

Cue BMW's Valvetronic

</>

 

dunno but I've owned two fab BMW's a 1996 328i coupe and a 2003 330i coupe - v.nice I thankee sai

 

It's not that they can't accept it; it's that they don't need to or see the point. Any time I felt the S2000 wasn't making the desired progress I'd snick the box and off you go. It was as natural as having a fart when you feel a little bloated. You don't question it, you don't loath it, you secretly want to do it and your only real worry is whether it's social acceptable to take it on!

As many of you know I replaced the S2000 with an STI 5 running in the region of 300-315bhp and the mid-range on that thing was phenomenal. However, when both in maximum attack mode the S2000 wasn't that much slower but the difference was you could make the Subaru go fast with about half throttle in any gear. The crazy thing was I took on many overtakes in the Impreza where I dropped to 2nd/3rd when 4th/5th would have been sufficient to complete the overtake safely. I did so because I enjoy the feeling of acceleration and 'pushing' a car so I dropped to give maximum performance. This is probably why the S2000 suited me so much - it was never a chore and always a joy.

I also used the S2000 every day in mixed conditions and did over 30,000 miles in it. The only time I ever felt that I really needed more from it was when I was flat out watching an R33 Skyline in front of my absolutely disappear! The rest of the time the performance was perfectly adequate and often more than enough off vtec. Interestingly my flatmate at the time had a VTS and thought that in a 'non-vtec' race the saxo would mug the S2000. Side by side at 20mph and 1500rpm we planted it and the Honda left the VTS for dead.

 

Yes and I don't doubt it, but it was made by Rover. :

Now let me see -

a Honda VTEC system that is simple and does the job perfectly and has never failed in any engine it has been built into

OR

a more complex variable timning system designed and made by Rover.

QED!!

 

Actually they do fail; notably the pistons that locks the middle rocker arms can jam or stick.

No biggy, but a failure none the less.

Oh, and the filter mesh in the spool valve can get clogged up as well.

 

just a look at the sensible side of things not great i know!! have you checked the new tax prices?? it might help way things up?? have a look here:
Road tax - Parker's

 

You got it the wrong way round. Limitations are facts, not perceptions. Limitation = my car only has two seats, therefore I cannot fit four people in it.

I don't think anyone's telling you not to like your car, just that it has limitations that all too often many S2000 owners seem unwilling to admit and then jump on the bandwagon denigrating anyone who points out its flaws.

The OP was asking for opinions on the S2000/RX8 and I pointed out a few of the flaws affecting both vehicles, that's all.

As for it not being perfect, no it isn't and there isn't a car on the road that is but why can't people just admit it instead of endlessly trying to justify their perspective? I've had some good times in the S2000, the Scoob, the MCS and my current car but none of them have been perfect and have their drawbacks and I'll quite happily discuss both their positive and negative points but for me the S2000's negative aspects outweighed the benefits as an everyday driver.

 

All fair comment and like I say I don't care whether someone else likes the S2000 or not, I do and that is all that matters to me.

I think we need to meet half way on the limitations thing. You are right what you say about the seats issue, but you also say it has a limitation torque wise that means you need to rev it. To me that is not a limitation as I will quite happily rev it, but to you it is and that is fine.

Horses for courses.

 

I think the problem is you describing them as limitations. S2000 fans don't see them as such, but rather see the things you mention as traits of the car. There were very few things that niggled me about the S2000 compared to the other cars I have owned or driven and things like lack of low down grunt are instantly forgiven. On the other hand, no matter how whizz-bang fast the Subaru was I could never forgive the fact that ultimately it handled and drove like a tricked up saloon car.

I think the difference is that after an enthusiastic thrash of the Subaru I found myself focusing on what was bad about it or missing from the experience. After a hard drive of the S2000 all I can think about it that noise, the way I hung the *** out of that corner and how good the experience was. Anything remotely negative is just set aside and forgiven straight away. The only other car I have ever driven like that is an Exige. I recall hitting the second cam and being disappointed that it wasn't as fast as I hoped. Then I linked up two corners and I couldn't care if it's 0-60 was 4s or 25; all failings were instantly forgiven.

What I would say though is that I drive like a **** pretty much all of the time. I'm up and down the box, I'll drive most roundabouts at 95%+ and I'll get into **** waving fights with other drivers regularly. The S2000 suits that hooligan nature in many ways and sort of eggs you on. However, a more civil driver that likes to drive at no more than 80% even when pressing on and who spends most of his a-b journeys in a driving mode that wouldn't raise an eyebrow from other road users probably would be frustrated by an S2000 as it feels quite ordinary when driven like that. I see those sorts all the time; driving their boxters at 65mph with their ipod on and I wonder if the car has ever truly been pushed. I go past at nuclear speed and they probably think I'm a total tool...and, well, they are right. The difference is I know I'm a tool! Do they know they are a mongo for buying a nice car and not driving it like it's capable of being driven though

Back to S2000 vs RX8 I personally think the winning argument here is roof down vs roof not down. Both will give a similar driving experience and nearly similar practicality, running costs, etc. The difference is on a day like today; monday holiday and scortchio outside. Laura and are already planning a trip down the coast for a walk or to go to the beach and our options are a 1.1 fiesta or the puma. Believe me a small part of me dies on days like this when I don't have the Honda at my disposal. Wind in your hair, cocooned in a tight but simple/functional cockpit, willing 9k engine, exhaust tone to die for and a gearchange so beautifully engineered; what more could you possibly want!

 

All good points Saxo Boy but I was using it as an everyday driver and whilst it was good for thrashing its simply impossible to do it all the time. When I'm talking to clients on the hands free I'm not going to start caning the vehicle, nor is having the power and torque that far up the rev range useful on motorways or pulling out of junctions in town - that's where it let itself down although there were other issues that I won't go into.

A good car for hooning but in the real world, or at least the world of 30k per annum for business mileage its a rare opportunity to beast the thing and that's the only point I was making before everyone jumped on my statements.

 

Just for the record....no VTEC system has ever failed. Other part of the engines have but the VTEC system itself has been totally reliable.

 

See post #39

Components of the VTEC system can and do fail.

 

Yup, I read your post. However, I don't know you, but I do know Honda and when they put out a press release on the Xth anniversary of VTEC saying there has never been a failure I am inclined to believe them. I don't mean that to sound at all rude but Honda will have to have facts to back up their statement while you don't. If you have come across problems I would be very interested to know whether the engine in question had been modified as that would effectively make it a different engine to the one Honda designed and therefore not really fair to criticise. I also wonder if your definition of the VTEC system is exactly the same as Honda's.

Regards BB

 

I believe that statement was for warranty claims. Which is probably true (unlike Subaru's claimed top ranking reliability records - when another report proved otherwise )

Failures are generally from varnish deposits, sludge and oil pressure related. One only has to look at various worldwide Honda forums to realise this. The blocked filter mesh on the spool valve is quite a common problem.

 

Fair enough - I can't remember the statement that well to disagree. However, from what you say the problems do seem to be the type that affects older cars. No car is going to last forever - although if I keep driving my Civic diesel the way I do I'm going to have a good crack at the record!

 

Exactly, it is a very reliable system. But nothing is indestructable.

So yes, its the old cars that have done lots of miles that the the most prone. Especially if they are neglected or abused.

The most important point is its fail-safe. No harm is done, barring a lack of power.

 

I found it odd moving from a Turbo car to n/a but it was nice to get back to proper driving.

Roof off is the only way to go though