S2000 vs. WS6
11-14-2008, 08:57 AM
#21
Turbo S2000s are hitting 400rwhp+ on stock internals... it might be high compression, but it also has forged internals. So yes, any sort of decent driver in a turbo S2000 should beat a stock LS1. Especially when the F-body has a passenger and the S2000 driver is alone. Even the very basic bolt-on supercharger kits are putting down about 320rwhp on conservative tunes, and we all know that turbos are more efficient. Sounds like either a bolt-on car with a really good driver, or a turbo car with either really low boost (like, 4-6psi) or a higher boost car with a terrible driver. Good kill either way OP 
.
.I am not suprisd by the outcome at all. My buddy had an S2000 with every single bolt on NA mod you could get including a 650$ carbon fiber cold air intake and 4.77 rear gears and the car was quick but still couldent outrun my other friends 89 fox hatch with gt40 heads and an E303 cam, untuned.
11-14-2008, 03:14 PM
#25
Teching In
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dunno, could be anything, but by my guess, faster than a stock LS1.
Sure, he could have a terrible tune, and be on low boost, not know how to drive, VTEC was broken, bounced it off the rev limiter in every gear... but the point is, it's most likely not turboed given that him in his stock ls1 beat it by a few cars, which is easily the outcome versus a s2k with just bolt on or two.
But by all means, lets argue about how turboes are ineffective on S2k's, and how one time you knew this guy who had a s2k and he was gay and he talked about nothing but VTEC and murdering Camaro SS's all day, then you ran him and beat him by 12 buslengths and he did a flyby and ran a red light.
The only thing I don't get is how some people will not concede anything, never willing to admit that it's possible or likely.
Sure, he could have a terrible tune, and be on low boost, not know how to drive, VTEC was broken, bounced it off the rev limiter in every gear... but the point is, it's most likely not turboed given that him in his stock ls1 beat it by a few cars, which is easily the outcome versus a s2k with just bolt on or two.
But by all means, lets argue about how turboes are ineffective on S2k's, and how one time you knew this guy who had a s2k and he was gay and he talked about nothing but VTEC and murdering Camaro SS's all day, then you ran him and beat him by 12 buslengths and he did a flyby and ran a red light.
The only thing I don't get is how some people will not concede anything, never willing to admit that it's possible or likely.
11-14-2008, 03:31 PM
#28
Teching In
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-14-2008, 03:54 PM
#30
Before someone hops on my nuts and puts me with the other guy who thinks stock LS1s are faster than FI S2Ks I want to say my car is slow as **** and I don't think it's anything special.
11-14-2008, 04:51 PM
#31
I've heard of S2k being quite fast and putting down 500+hp ! I like them, I just don't fit in one comfortably(I'm 6'0). I know a guy who has 1 S/C and a STI and he prefers his STi cause of the torque.
S2k's really shine on the track, they not made for drag. That's why their power band starts around 4800 up to 8000, that's where VTEC kicks in and more torque aorund corners for a car thats well balanced, small, and IRS.
S2k's really shine on the track, they not made for drag. That's why their power band starts around 4800 up to 8000, that's where VTEC kicks in and more torque aorund corners for a car thats well balanced, small, and IRS.
11-14-2008, 05:27 PM
#32
Teching In
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sure some are faster than that even.. was just curious... my neighbor had a Civic that was setup with an aftermarket turbo and was rocking high 14s so I figured they should be running better than low 13s but I don't know of specific examples.
Before someone hops on my nuts and puts me with the other guy who thinks stock LS1s are faster than FI S2Ks I want to say my car is slow as **** and I don't think it's anything special.
Before someone hops on my nuts and puts me with the other guy who thinks stock LS1s are faster than FI S2Ks I want to say my car is slow as **** and I don't think it's anything special.
@Daz- Do they make 500+ on the stock block? That high powerband though is exactly what I've heard about them too, no ***** at all until the higher RPM's and utterly torqueless. A roots blower for some bottom end and a hardtop conversion and I bet that would be a fun little car.
11-14-2008, 07:40 PM
#33
[QUOTE=MyStangIsSlow;@Daz- Do they make 500+ on the stock block? That high powerband though is exactly what I've heard about them too, no ***** at all until the higher RPM's and utterly torqueless. A roots blower for some bottom end and a hardtop conversion and I bet that would be a fun little car.[/QUOTE]
I doubt it on a stock block ! I've seen them with completely carbon fiber hardtops, trunk lids, and hoods. Its not a bad looking car !
I doubt it on a stock block ! I've seen them with completely carbon fiber hardtops, trunk lids, and hoods. Its not a bad looking car !
11-14-2008, 09:01 PM
#34
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen some nearing 500rwhp on stock internals. I just read about a guy that had one running 17psi IIRC that made 471rwhp with some GOOD tuning, and that was on stock motor and the stock headgasket (stock compression). 400rwhp is fairly common and easy. Just have to have a tuner that knows what they are doing. And yeah Daz, I would love to see more people doing swaps in S2000s, but I'm sure that will start happening more now that you can get some models near $10k. There are already several examples with 2JZ-GTE and RB2xDET swaps. I personally think just the C32 V6 from the NSX would make the car nearly perfect for what it was intended for. Or of course an LS1 swap 
11-15-2008, 01:01 AM
#36
Staging Lane
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notoriously hard to launch considering the powerband. Then imagine having even more power in the upper rpm range. Not easy.
11-15-2008, 01:28 AM
#37
There one going together now. Here the link. There are some progress pics at the end.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...ct-ls2000.html
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...ct-ls2000.html
11-15-2008, 02:02 AM
#38
Banned
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: san fernando valley, california
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
you should have ripped that s2k a new butthole if it was stock, the guy probably had it fully built and he still lost, anyways i just beat a harley motorcycle, may not be a big deal but made me feel good u kno 
Last edited by ae13291; 11-15-2008 at 02:14 AM.
11-15-2008, 04:31 AM
#39
Teching In
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...it's the same one on the right in the picture below next to the turbo Saab.
11-15-2008, 04:44 AM
#40
We have a local one here. It's built and it's a stroker, 2.3L. Makes mid 400's on pump gas and more on the good fuel. Has run 11's @ 124mph on pump too. Seen these runs with my own two eyes. Traction is an issue and seems to have issues with the rear-end otherwise it would be running 10's easily. Here's a photo I took of it last year. They have excellent potential when done right and they handle really well. Turbo S2Ks are cool.
btw, 124 is not good for an *easy* 10 second pass.... especially in a turbo car, or one having problem out of the hole.. 124 is good for an *easy* low 11 second car, or 11 flat... pushing getting into 10s, and by this i mean 10.9999