Traded my RX-8 in on a S2000
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
From: 562 area code
nice trade
nice trade. i was actually thinking of trading my 8 for one, but after test driving two at two different dealerships, i couldn't really tell the power difference between my 8 n the s2k. i have a manual, so maybe you can tell the difference since u had the AT. the rotary is soo much smoother, and less engine noise in the 8. good choice nonetheless, better than a z.
ha. clever girl. in the past 5 years i've gotten every girl i've wanted, including a model who is a brunette version of your "s2000". but hey, whatever gets you to sleep at night.
before this gets any worse though, i'm pretty curious how the 2.2l s2k compares to the 8. reading magazine articles doesn't do it for me. i've driven the 2.0l version, but not the newer one. is the engine as flexible (relatively) as the 8? or is it as peaky as the old one? if i could put the renesis in the s2000 chassis, id be a happy man.
before this gets any worse though, i'm pretty curious how the 2.2l s2k compares to the 8. reading magazine articles doesn't do it for me. i've driven the 2.0l version, but not the newer one. is the engine as flexible (relatively) as the 8? or is it as peaky as the old one? if i could put the renesis in the s2000 chassis, id be a happy man.
Im sure you have Poindexter. Go rearrange your pocket protector.
Registered
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
Fortunately, the S2000 now accelerates quicker. It pulls to 100 mph in 15.10 seconds, which is 0.2 seconds quicker than before. And there's also an improvement in roll-on acceleration, the kind of performance you feel on the street, because it accelerates 0.18 seconds quicker to 70 mph from 50 mph. Before the clutch went, we also measured a 0-to-60-mph time of 6.4 seconds and a quarter-mile run of 14.4 seconds at 97.2 mph, which are also quicker.
And a 2004 test in Motor Trend (RX-8 came in first. Again.) TEST DATA
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
The shoebox brigade saunters home again, frustrated in it's ability to win converts to cloth upholstered, plastic appendaged , tastelessly styled and immature looking automobiles.
Last edited by MP3Guy; Sep 30, 2007 at 07:57 AM.
Blue By You
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee
From Sport Compact Car:
Fortunately, the S2000 now accelerates quicker. It pulls to 100 mph in 15.10 seconds, which is 0.2 seconds quicker than before. And there's also an improvement in roll-on acceleration, the kind of performance you feel on the street, because it accelerates 0.18 seconds quicker to 70 mph from 50 mph. Before the clutch went, we also measured a 0-to-60-mph time of 6.4 seconds and a quarter-mile run of 14.4 seconds at 97.2 mph, which are also quicker.
And a 2004 test in Motor Trend (RX-8 came in first. Again.) TEST DATA
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
The shoebox brigade saunters home again, frustrated in it's ability to win converts to cloth upholstered, plastic appendaged , tastelessly styled and immature looking automobiles.
Fortunately, the S2000 now accelerates quicker. It pulls to 100 mph in 15.10 seconds, which is 0.2 seconds quicker than before. And there's also an improvement in roll-on acceleration, the kind of performance you feel on the street, because it accelerates 0.18 seconds quicker to 70 mph from 50 mph. Before the clutch went, we also measured a 0-to-60-mph time of 6.4 seconds and a quarter-mile run of 14.4 seconds at 97.2 mph, which are also quicker.
And a 2004 test in Motor Trend (RX-8 came in first. Again.) TEST DATA
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
The shoebox brigade saunters home again, frustrated in it's ability to win converts to cloth upholstered, plastic appendaged , tastelessly styled and immature looking automobiles.
R&T 3-05 0-60: 5.4 1/4: 13.9@100
C&D 7-04 5.5 14.0@99
MT 2-00 5.4 13.8 @100
Hell, even the results from MT you posted show the S2000 is clearly faster. You fail miserably.
Last edited by Ike; Sep 30, 2007 at 09:05 PM.
Blue By You
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee
I point out incorrect information and suddenly you and your fanboi buddies are in here taking pot shots at me and my car. Grow the **** up!
Registered
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
http://www.caranddriver.com/previews...ecs-page3.html
Motor Trend got 5.8 sec 0-60 and the quarter in 14.2
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...rformance.html
R&T did manage to squeeze out the times you quoted in a comparison test done in 2005.
But who cares? Most of us don't share your adolescent fixations about cars, and prefer to enjoy them for reasons you can't fathom.
Run along now. The other children miss you.
Registered
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
Look who's talking! A friggin troll whose been baiting RX-8 owners for nearly five years on this forum telling other people to "grow the **** up." Are you ******* kidding me pal?
If we wanted to own your noisy little shitbox, we would buy one. It's not as if they cost more, or anyone here lacks the ability to own one.
We drive what we like, and apparently, due to some odd pathology of yours, you have a great deal of difficulty handling that. so you have nothing better to do than come here with your horseshit. No one here needs lessons from you on the subject of automobiles.
Go see a shrink.
Blue By You
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee
The C&D figures are for the 2008 CR version, so go scratch your ***, and don't call me a liar.
http://www.caranddriver.com/previews...ecs-page3.html
Motor Trend got 5.8 sec 0-60 and the quarter in 14.2
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...rformance.html
R&T did manage to squeeze out the times you quoted in a comparison test done in 2005.
But who cares? Most of us don't share your adolescent fixations about cars, and prefer to enjoy them for reasons you can't fathom.
Run along now. The other children miss you.
http://www.caranddriver.com/previews...ecs-page3.html
Motor Trend got 5.8 sec 0-60 and the quarter in 14.2
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...rformance.html
R&T did manage to squeeze out the times you quoted in a comparison test done in 2005.
But who cares? Most of us don't share your adolescent fixations about cars, and prefer to enjoy them for reasons you can't fathom.
Run along now. The other children miss you.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...nda-s2000.html
Someone said something incorrect, I pointed it out. You bursted into a fanboi rage looking for any posible way to prove me wrong, you failed miserably. Get over it and move on.
Last edited by Ike; Sep 30, 2007 at 09:38 PM.
Destroying Threads
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,296
Likes: 2
From: (swartsnegga state)
besides, I used to own an s2k, I still don't know why I did the trade, my mom was pwning my *** because my car was a "selfish" car 2 seater no space blah blah, if it wasn't for that I'd still be in s2ki.com....I have ran rx8s and lost, I have ran rx8s and won, in my AT rx8, I have ran s2ks and won, and I have lost too
mostly depends on the driver for that 1 second which translate to about half a cars lenght, so I think it is fitting for him to say, they are infact right on top of each other......
Blue By You
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee
this is where you're wrong ike, they are, case and point pretty much on top of each other, the +/- .5-1 second is probably based more on driver, road condition and maintainance condition man
besides, I used to own an s2k, I still don't know why I did the trade, my mom was pwning my *** because my car was a "selfish" car 2 seater no space blah blah, if it wasn't for that I'd still be in s2ki.com....I have ran rx8s and lost, I have ran rx8s and won, in my AT rx8, I have ran s2ks and won, and I have lost too
mostly depends on the driver for that 1 second which translate to about half a cars lenght, so I think it is fitting for him to say, they are infact right on top of each other......
besides, I used to own an s2k, I still don't know why I did the trade, my mom was pwning my *** because my car was a "selfish" car 2 seater no space blah blah, if it wasn't for that I'd still be in s2ki.com....I have ran rx8s and lost, I have ran rx8s and won, in my AT rx8, I have ran s2ks and won, and I have lost too
mostly depends on the driver for that 1 second which translate to about half a cars lenght, so I think it is fitting for him to say, they are infact right on top of each other......
Destroying Threads
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,296
Likes: 2
From: (swartsnegga state)
sure ike sure, confirmations are on here, somewhere
and your attitude is definitly not helping, I hope therapy (evo forum) is working out for you, normally it cures the need for power and torque, but side effect includes cockiness, god complex, and diss-every-other-car syndrome, oh well, doesn't really bother me since I've seen too many evo owners, I understand the pain of the process, so did you choose the highway or the streets yet, personally I think the highway curbs are a less painful way to go
and your attitude is definitly not helping, I hope therapy (evo forum) is working out for you, normally it cures the need for power and torque, but side effect includes cockiness, god complex, and diss-every-other-car syndrome, oh well, doesn't really bother me since I've seen too many evo owners, I understand the pain of the process, so did you choose the highway or the streets yet, personally I think the highway curbs are a less painful way to go
Registered
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
You're not a liar, but you're certainly not right. See those numbers next to the magazine name, those stand for a month and year...
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...nda-s2000.html
Someone said something incorrect, I pointed it out. You bursted into a fanboi rage looking for any posible way to prove me wrong, you failed miserably. Get over it and move on.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...nda-s2000.html
Someone said something incorrect, I pointed it out. You bursted into a fanboi rage looking for any posible way to prove me wrong, you failed miserably. Get over it and move on.
Reviewing some of your posts shows what a pathetic creature you are. Full of stupid insults, including accusing others of being trolls. This from a man with over 8600 posts on a forum for a car he doesn't own. Is this caused by owning a car built by a firm that has produced some of the ugliest things to come out of a sheet metal press in history?
Maybe it's time to banish you from RX-8 land, hmmmmm?
Registered
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
sure ike sure, confirmations are on here, somewhere
and your attitude is definitly not helping, I hope therapy (evo forum) is working out for you, normally it cures the need for power and torque, but side effect includes cockiness, god complex, and diss-every-other-car syndrome, oh well, doesn't really bother me since I've seen too many evo owners, I understand the pain of the process, so did you choose the highway or the streets yet, personally I think the highway curbs are a less painful way to go
and your attitude is definitly not helping, I hope therapy (evo forum) is working out for you, normally it cures the need for power and torque, but side effect includes cockiness, god complex, and diss-every-other-car syndrome, oh well, doesn't really bother me since I've seen too many evo owners, I understand the pain of the process, so did you choose the highway or the streets yet, personally I think the highway curbs are a less painful way to go
It's just our littles resident boy racer- with way too much time on his hands. Won't you be his friend?
Registered
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
this is where you're wrong ike, they are, case and point pretty much on top of each other, the +/- .5-1 second is probably based more on driver, road condition and maintainance condition man
besides, I used to own an s2k, I still don't know why I did the trade, my mom was pwning my *** because my car was a "selfish" car 2 seater no space blah blah, if it wasn't for that I'd still be in s2ki.com....I have ran rx8s and lost, I have ran rx8s and won, in my AT rx8, I have ran s2ks and won, and I have lost too
mostly depends on the driver for that 1 second which translate to about half a cars lenght, so I think it is fitting for him to say, they are infact right on top of each other......
besides, I used to own an s2k, I still don't know why I did the trade, my mom was pwning my *** because my car was a "selfish" car 2 seater no space blah blah, if it wasn't for that I'd still be in s2ki.com....I have ran rx8s and lost, I have ran rx8s and won, in my AT rx8, I have ran s2ks and won, and I have lost too
mostly depends on the driver for that 1 second which translate to about half a cars lenght, so I think it is fitting for him to say, they are infact right on top of each other......
The other issue is that sometimes cars supplied to the automotive press have been a bit "breathed on."
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
From: san antonio
this is probably going to stir some **** up.. wtf due u mean atleast u didnt get a Z? why the hell not? its 2 seater, power, and turning.. u guys diss it cause its alot faster compared to the 8 but in where the s2k is similar in power u dont?
Blue By You
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee
It's not even a matter of "incorrect" especially when there are such variances in trap speeds and ETs. You're not "proving" anything. People with bone stock RX-8s have squeezed out 14.5 sec 1/4 mile times, with the only mod being lower air pressure in the rear tires. And they backed it up with time slips.
Reviewing some of your posts shows what a pathetic creature you are. Full of stupid insults, including accusing others of being trolls. This from a man with over 8600 posts on a forum for a car he doesn't own. Is this caused by owning a car built by a firm that has produced some of the ugliest things to come out of a sheet metal press in history?
Maybe it's time to banish you from RX-8 land, hmmmmm?
Reviewing some of your posts shows what a pathetic creature you are. Full of stupid insults, including accusing others of being trolls. This from a man with over 8600 posts on a forum for a car he doesn't own. Is this caused by owning a car built by a firm that has produced some of the ugliest things to come out of a sheet metal press in history?
Maybe it's time to banish you from RX-8 land, hmmmmm?
"The numbers indicate that they're within a gnat's *** of each other in 0-60 and 1/4 mile, anything from even to .2/.3 respectively, depending on the magazine."
I pointed out and proved that they're not that close, nothing more, nothing less.
The only person trolling in this thread is YOU. Grip reality, grow up, and move on.
Blue By You
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee
Before anyone else has a hissy fit please notice that I'm not insulting the RX-8 in any way.
