nothing out of the ordinary, in the real world 2 drivers hardly ever have equal skills, so a good driver with a slower car always has a chance to beat a faster car. better driver is the best mod

 

What year is your S2000 and what do you think about the complaints on its suspension (rear suspension?)? Everyone knows the RX8 is a little soft and has quite a bit of body roll coming out of the factory, but those issues are easily fixed with bigger swaybars, stiffer springs and shocks (or coilovers). Regardless, the fundamental design of the RX8 suspension is supposed to be superior. I test drove a 2005 S2000, in which Honda addressed some of the earlier suspension concerns, e.g., its unpredictability coming out of tight corners, and I still felt something weird was going on with the rear suspension coming out of a tight corner at high speed. I am not sure it is something that can be easily fixed with coilovers. I'm thinking Honda did what they could to improve the suspension without having to do a complete redesign of the chassis (which they couldn't unless they created an all-new S2000).

What do the S2000 AND RX8 experts think? I'd rather hear from the real S2000 drivers rather than all these other people who just jumped on the S2000 bandwagon tricking themselves psychologically that the S2000 has better handling rather than by real analysis.

Negra Modelo

 

I always love it when, based on a sample size of one race, between amateur drivers of unknown skill, one makes conclusions about the relative speed of cars in the quarter mile. Especially when the two cars in question are anything but drag-racing cars.

The RX-8 is a very fine car; it dominated B-Stock in autocross last year. The S2000, for pure performance, was kicked up to A-Stock last year (where it was highly competitive with the C-4 Corvette), after totally dominating B-Stock in previous years. The S2000 is faster, quicker, and corners better than the RX-8. Its transmission is a bit better; its brakes are not quite as good, I think. If you're only looking for performance, and you're ignoring the fact that one is a four-seat coupe, while the other is a roadster, you'll go with the S2000. If you're actually interested in comfort and the ability to carry more than a lacrosse stick with you, you'll go with the RX-8.

Or you could get both.

 

Well, if you don't make any mistakes, the rear suspension isn't a problem. Seriously, the problem is that a bunch of yahoos drive S2000s, and drive them like idiots. It is twitchy; it has to be driven judiciously. It is predictable, what it isn't is forgiving of mistakes (that's a big difference, actually). I've made mistakes on the track, and in autocross, and gone on some interesting rides (the best, perhaps, was a 180 at 80mph, heading straight for a tire wall with power assist on the cofused brakes refusing to function; adrenaline becomes helpful in such circumstances). But as I've gotten more skilled, these excursions are rarer. Well, on the track, at least; it's still pretty easy to go sideways at autocross, but that's true of any car--brake into a turn, and you're in trouble. I have a very stiff aftermarket front bar, and that helps a lot (my 2004 is identical to the 2005 model). To stay stock for autocross, you have to spend a lot of money on shocks to get any improvement over stock, so I haven't done anything. Fundamentally, the S2000 is a hard car to drive at the limit, but only an idiot, IMO, drives a car at the limit on public roads.

Well, my garage contains both a 2004 S2000, and a 2004 RX-8; do I qualify?

For my taste, the S2000 is the clear winner. I don't mind the stiffer ride at all; I love convertibles; the S2000 corners a bit better than the RX-8; I love convertibles; the S2000 is noticeably more powerful, and has a lot more low-end grunt, and did I mention that I love convertibles? Objectively, the S2000 has better handling, hence its higher placement in autocross.

But, the RX-8 is actually quite close in all categories, and it has four seats. And if you don't like convertibles, that's a plus for the RX-8. Tall people (I'm 6'2" tall) actually will fit better in the S2000 than in an RX-8 with a sunroof.

The two cars, to me, have a completely different feel, and that should be the deciding factor if you're getting the car for real-world use, rather than the track. It is, in the end, an emotional decision between the two (ignoring the utility vs. convertible differences). One will speak much more loudly to each person than the other; that doesn't make either a better car, just a car that's more attractive to a particular person.

 

pretty funny u r so quick to call me a begining driver ive been racing cars since i was 4 years old racing go karts so ive been racing for 18 years hes a pic of the car i raceed last season new car being buit for this year

 

That was a great comparison post 124. thank you.

and toca, dont take offence; it is the internet btw. and I think most reasonable people would agree with 124 given the data at hand. We are sure you are a great diver, so drop it.

 

I didn't call you a beginner. I just want to make sure we hear from the experts rather than the dumbasses. If you're an expert who happens to be a dumbass, that's fine too.

Hey, you bought that car at Toys R Us. That's a fricking toy car.

 

Yeah, Spider's account is what we want to hear.

widmer

 

lol i woundt call car 800hp with a 1200 pound car a toy car it has a 410 ci v8 in it if thats a toy thats 1 powerful toy

 

wtf, you cant be for real???

beers

 

nope im am for rear the motor dyno at on the engine dyno at 792hp 668tq the car with me in is 1200 pounds

 

whao there must be some extra-dimensional portal in that little car where you can put a 410ci V8 in there connected to that tiny little exhaust thats smaller than most motorcylce exhausts. and the frame must be made of some future material that hasnt been invented yet that can withstand the torque of a 800hp v8.... I want one.

 

the exhasut is 4in piping

 

the frame is 3/8 steel the motor is all alum. plus we dont need all the wireing that a car needs plus we have a lot of titaum and cf on the car the cost of that car is 50k

 

Either that or toca is a fricking midget.

old milwaukee

 

and for the frame yes r team as well as other top team replace r frames every 7 to 10 races

 

beers...no, champagne.

 

I wore out a 124 spider from brand new, ran and totally rebuilt my '67 MGB and my '70 911E. I also own an RX-8. And all along, I thought I knew how to evaluate a sports car. There are opinions and then there are ******** I guess.

 

whao an all aluminum engine! since aluminum has no chance at withstanding 668lb ft of torque without losing its structural integrity, there must also be a nuclear fusion reactor in the mystery dimension generating a yet to be invented force field around the engine keeping it from collapsing... now i want one even more.

 

Are you guys calling BS on him?

Asahi

 

124, you brought back memories. My first car was a used-up '67 FIAT 850 Spyder for $600. Rust through and through. Would vapor lock after driving on the freeway longer than 20 minutes. How nice to be able to have both the S2K and the RX8. Would've been a hard choice for me except I've got 5 kids (put 3 in the trunk). Some day I may go back to a convertible and the Honda would be my choice or maybe my little brother would sell me his MB SL65. Now that is a CAR!!

 

Hey, cool! My best friend had an 850 back then. A '72 I think. That car would do anything you wanted. Then I got my '73 124, then another buddy had to get the '74 X1/9 the first year it came out.

 

man you guys are old heads

 

ohh no, not at all, i just want to learn more about toca's physics defying engineering

 

oops...