2003 S2000 vs 2000 Camaro Z28
05-06-2008, 01:10 AM
#42
I had a friend buy a new s2000 brought it to the track and could only manage a low 15, im sure he isnt the best driver though, on the other hand all the mag tests ive seen say the s2000 runs a low 13.9 -14.0 ish
so its all in the driver on these cars i guess...
so its all in the driver on these cars i guess...
05-06-2008, 03:26 AM
#44
On The Tree
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ada, Ok
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This was a race that I was glad to get in under my belt. As some of you may know, the car i previously owned was a 2001 Honda S2000. I had quite a bit done to it, but it still didn't seem to be fast unless i used nitrous (75 shot). Since i have purchased the Z28, i felt as though it was quite a bit faster than the S2000, but thought it may just be because of how much more torque it has than the Honda. So last night, i called up a buddy of mine who owns a STOCK 03 S2000, and i decided to run him. Mind you, my car is a stock A4 with 2.73's. 
I will be switching to 4.10's in about 5 days.
The first run was a 45mph roll. That is perfect for him to be right in VTec in 2nd gear. That's not the greatest for my A4 and puts me in 2nd gear around 3,000 RPM's. Nonetheless, i honk three times (flooring it on the 2nd honk so i can catch on the third) and we both leave right at the third honk. I IMMEDIATELY begin to pull car after car. I shut down around 110mph being around 7-8 cars or so ahead.
We only got to get one more run in because he was getting scared of cops and also knew he was going to lose so i guess he didn't want to waste his gas. I left him take the hit at 30mph, which is again, PERFECT for his first gear. He takes off, and then i floor it, waiting for my car to downshift and catch. By the time my car actually catches, he's a few cars ahead. Once i do catch, i immediately stop his pull. Once i get into 2nd, around 50, i start to walk up on him hard and by 60 i am in front of him. We shut down at around 80mph with me about 3 cars ahead.
It was nice to know that my new car is that much faster than my previous car. The 2.73's will be coming out very shortly and i will run him again just to see the difference. Since my car has no mods and also has a 2.73 equipped A4, it is about as slow as a LS1 can be, yet it is still significantly faster than the S2000. There is really no comparison. I destroyed him. He and I also weigh the same, yet i had one 230lb passenger, so i was at an even larger weight disadvantage. He knows how to drive and he got to start in VTec each time, getting the hit once. I still respect the S2000, just more for it's handling capabilities.
I will be switching to 4.10's in about 5 days. The first run was a 45mph roll. That is perfect for him to be right in VTec in 2nd gear. That's not the greatest for my A4 and puts me in 2nd gear around 3,000 RPM's. Nonetheless, i honk three times (flooring it on the 2nd honk so i can catch on the third) and we both leave right at the third honk. I IMMEDIATELY begin to pull car after car. I shut down around 110mph being around 7-8 cars or so ahead.
We only got to get one more run in because he was getting scared of cops and also knew he was going to lose so i guess he didn't want to waste his gas. I left him take the hit at 30mph, which is again, PERFECT for his first gear. He takes off, and then i floor it, waiting for my car to downshift and catch. By the time my car actually catches, he's a few cars ahead. Once i do catch, i immediately stop his pull. Once i get into 2nd, around 50, i start to walk up on him hard and by 60 i am in front of him. We shut down at around 80mph with me about 3 cars ahead.
It was nice to know that my new car is that much faster than my previous car. The 2.73's will be coming out very shortly and i will run him again just to see the difference. Since my car has no mods and also has a 2.73 equipped A4, it is about as slow as a LS1 can be, yet it is still significantly faster than the S2000. There is really no comparison. I destroyed him. He and I also weigh the same, yet i had one 230lb passenger, so i was at an even larger weight disadvantage. He knows how to drive and he got to start in VTec each time, getting the hit once. I still respect the S2000, just more for it's handling capabilities.
05-06-2008, 09:30 AM
#45
11 Second Club
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: north Carolina
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends on what magazine you are reading. Look at both cars best 1/4 miles times in stock form. There pretty close with the Z28 having the edge and higher trap speed. Thats why I was assuming it would be closer. I owned the S2000 and the Formula. The formula off the line felt kinda slow...but I gotta admit..NOTHING feels slower off the line then an S2000.
05-06-2008, 11:22 AM
#47
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason that some S2000's can run a high 13 at the track is because of a very good launch. You have to rev it around 7500 RPM's (if you have an AP1) and just drop the clutch. I did it numerous times and that's the way to do it. Most people don't do it, though, because they're scared of breaking the differential, which is an extremely weak spot for the S2000's. The difference between those high 13's and the mid 14's is because of the launch. As you can see, the trap speed is still around the same.
With that being said, given that both of my races were from a roll, the typical driver error was, for the most part, taken out of the equation. He never had to launch his car. I KNOW he had it in the correct gear and he's not afraid to take it all the way to redline and have it blink before he has to shift (it blinks three times before you hit the rev limiter). Therefore, even though his car may be capable of a high 13 or a mid 14, driver error was taken out. The reason i pulled on him like i did is because my car would trap about 7 mph higher.
The race went a lot like these videos of a LID only LS1 vs a full exhaust (header, test pipe, catback) S2000.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpU2adz9AoU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5WaI...eature=related
We just didn't take it to as high of speeds, or the outcome would've been pretty much identical.
My point is, even if you had thrown in the best driver in the world it wouldn't have made much of a difference. He never had to launch his car, which is the part most driver's either mess up or are afraid to do correctly. All he had to do was shift quickly and at redline...which he did. These cars, on average, are a second apart in the 1/4 mile. One second in the 1/4 mile is a LARGE gap.
With that being said, given that both of my races were from a roll, the typical driver error was, for the most part, taken out of the equation. He never had to launch his car. I KNOW he had it in the correct gear and he's not afraid to take it all the way to redline and have it blink before he has to shift (it blinks three times before you hit the rev limiter). Therefore, even though his car may be capable of a high 13 or a mid 14, driver error was taken out. The reason i pulled on him like i did is because my car would trap about 7 mph higher.
The race went a lot like these videos of a LID only LS1 vs a full exhaust (header, test pipe, catback) S2000.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpU2adz9AoU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5WaI...eature=related
We just didn't take it to as high of speeds, or the outcome would've been pretty much identical.
My point is, even if you had thrown in the best driver in the world it wouldn't have made much of a difference. He never had to launch his car, which is the part most driver's either mess up or are afraid to do correctly. All he had to do was shift quickly and at redline...which he did. These cars, on average, are a second apart in the 1/4 mile. One second in the 1/4 mile is a LARGE gap.
05-06-2008, 11:52 AM
#48
All the magazines I've seen put them at 14.1-14.2, so I don't see it being impossible for them to hit high 13s.
But on the street they tend to be slower from my experience.
My car as I drive it every day is a low 14 second car (14.1-14.3 usually) with me manually shifting and the couple I race I beat by 2-3 cars.
I know one of them has at least exhaust, just not sure what kind or what else it has.
But on the street they tend to be slower from my experience.
My car as I drive it every day is a low 14 second car (14.1-14.3 usually) with me manually shifting and the couple I race I beat by 2-3 cars.
I know one of them has at least exhaust, just not sure what kind or what else it has.
05-06-2008, 12:05 PM
#49
well thats why you should have bought an f body. gt mustangs are barely above ricers in my book. in speed and overall driver mentality. not to mention that most of them are slow as dog ****. i honestly so not see why the gt what built. i dont see the market base other than teenage girls and ford fanboys. when i was bone stock i was beating 05+ GT ***. i love saying the old. "so my 14 year old car just beat your brand new GT mustang? thats not right is it?"
05-06-2008, 12:10 PM
#50
GT mustangs get extra credit for having one of the sweetest exhaust tones on the road though, as opposed to any rice which sounds like the bathroom at a Chili cookoff
Plus other than SN95s they look kinda nice. SN95s are gay as hell though...they just look like the epitomy of "chick car"
Plus other than SN95s they look kinda nice. SN95s are gay as hell though...they just look like the epitomy of "chick car"
05-06-2008, 12:17 PM
#51
TECH Resident
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Enid, OK
Posts: 827
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good kill.
And I wouldn't be surprised to see one of those cars run a high 13. I was riding in my friend 02 GT (bolt-ons, gears, shifter, weight reduction, yada yada) and we had some young kids in one pull beside us. My friend hasn't had a chance to hit the track with his car in the stage it is in now, but he runs right beside cars that consistantly get mid-low 13's and this little Honda wasn't too far back.
We pulled over to talk, the guy popped his hood and it looked stock as a rock under there. He was a young kid though, and he was beating the **** out of this thing.
Once we got back to my place we looked up the stats on those car and the average seemed be about a 14.0-14.2, so a high 13 would not surprise me at all.
And I wouldn't be surprised to see one of those cars run a high 13. I was riding in my friend 02 GT (bolt-ons, gears, shifter, weight reduction, yada yada) and we had some young kids in one pull beside us. My friend hasn't had a chance to hit the track with his car in the stage it is in now, but he runs right beside cars that consistantly get mid-low 13's and this little Honda wasn't too far back.
We pulled over to talk, the guy popped his hood and it looked stock as a rock under there. He was a young kid though, and he was beating the **** out of this thing.
Once we got back to my place we looked up the stats on those car and the average seemed be about a 14.0-14.2, so a high 13 would not surprise me at all.
05-06-2008, 01:51 PM
#52
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well thats why you should have bought an f body. gt mustangs are barely above ricers in my book. in speed and overall driver mentality. not to mention that most of them are slow as dog ****. i honestly so not see why the gt what built. i dont see the market base other than teenage girls and ford fanboys. when i was bone stock i was beating 05+ GT ***. i love saying the old. "so my 14 year old car just beat your brand new GT mustang? thats not right is it?"
05-06-2008, 02:25 PM
#53
fact is the s2000 may possibly beat an a4 if the s2000 launches at 7500, but once you start modding them you just wont get that much out of modding that 4 banger compared to a v8.
s2000 < ls1
end of story
...now lets all hold hands and sing koom bye ya.
http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html
1998 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 5.1 13.4
2000 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am (WS6) 4.9 13.4
1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.2 13.7
1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 SS 5.2 13.6
2000 Honda S2000 5.5 14.2
2003 Honda S2000 6.3 14.9 (Manual)
2004 Honda S2000 5.8 14.2 (MT Mar '04)
2006 Honda S2000 5.5 14.0 (C&D May '06)
s2000 < ls1
end of story
...now lets all hold hands and sing koom bye ya.
http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html
1998 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 5.1 13.4
2000 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am (WS6) 4.9 13.4
1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.2 13.7
1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 SS 5.2 13.6
2000 Honda S2000 5.5 14.2
2003 Honda S2000 6.3 14.9 (Manual)
2004 Honda S2000 5.8 14.2 (MT Mar '04)
2006 Honda S2000 5.5 14.0 (C&D May '06)
05-06-2008, 02:28 PM
#54
11 Second Club
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: north Carolina
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow... that's mature. If you don't understand why the GT was produced, you obviously have no clue about what it takes to SUCCESSFULLY market a car. The GT was moderately priced, had enough power for 90% of people, and actually SOLD CARS. Which is what Ford was kinda looking for
Don't do this...fight the urge! You can resist! LOL
05-06-2008, 02:40 PM
#55
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fact is the s2000 may possibly beat an a4 if the s2000 launches at 7500, but once you start modding them you just wont get that much out of modding that 4 banger compared to a v8.
s2000 < ls1
end of story
...now lets all hold hands and sing koom bye ya.
http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html
1998 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 5.1 13.4
2000 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am (WS6) 4.9 13.4
1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.2 13.7
1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 SS 5.2 13.6
2000 Honda S2000 5.5 14.2
2003 Honda S2000 6.3 14.9 (Manual)
2004 Honda S2000 5.8 14.2 (MT Mar '04)
2006 Honda S2000 5.5 14.0 (C&D May '06)
s2000 < ls1
end of story
...now lets all hold hands and sing koom bye ya.
http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html
1998 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am 5.1 13.4
2000 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am (WS6) 4.9 13.4
1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 5.2 13.7
1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 SS 5.2 13.6
2000 Honda S2000 5.5 14.2
2003 Honda S2000 6.3 14.9 (Manual)
2004 Honda S2000 5.8 14.2 (MT Mar '04)
2006 Honda S2000 5.5 14.0 (C&D May '06)
05-06-2008, 02:45 PM
#56
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep... the only reason I MIGHT do a CAI for mine is because I need a new air filter anyway (I'm trying to decide if I'm just gonna do a K&N, or a CAI), and because of the sound in the upper rpm range. The car MIGHT pick up 2-3 tenths with a good intake, header, and exhaust. If you pair that with a 4.77 gear set it might get another tenth or two. They're just really fun to drive 
05-06-2008, 02:55 PM
#57
11 Second Club
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: north Carolina
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If both cars are driven properly, there is no way a S2000 should beat a LS1 (even from a dig with the A4 not having a stall). You are correct by saying that the gap will be even larger once modding begins for the two. I had an Injen CAI, TODA Header, J's 70mm headerback exhaust (supposively the best one), short shifter, clutchquik, minor weight reduction and an Apexi tune in my S2000. It didn't feel hardly any faster than stock. With all of those mods, and thousands of dollars spent, a S2000 will pick up MAYBE 20hp...probably 15. They're already so strung out from the factory that modding does little. Adding a set of cams will actually lose power, believe it or not. Adding a throttle body loses power. Porting the head does little to nothing. The only way to get extra power is FI or nitrous.
I had fun in my S2000..but it did need more power. But in 2000 when they came out they did well for themselves. THey just needed to add more power over the years and did not.
05-06-2008, 03:04 PM
#58
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep... the only reason I MIGHT do a CAI for mine is because I need a new air filter anyway (I'm trying to decide if I'm just gonna do a K&N, or a CAI), and because of the sound in the upper rpm range. The car MIGHT pick up 2-3 tenths with a good intake, header, and exhaust. If you pair that with a 4.77 gear set it might get another tenth or two. They're just really fun to drive
I actually traded differentials with a guy who had his equipped with 4.77's and when i had the diff installed, it turns out the entire diff was SHOT. The fluid was a greyish/blue/black. His gears must've not been installed correctly the first time. Either way, i got my diff and money back.
I never got to see how the 4.77's felt, though. I'd definitely try it if i were you. If you don't like them, you can always trade with someone who has the stock diff and tell them to add cash on top.
05-06-2008, 03:08 PM
#59
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Honda was stubborn and seemed to refuse to add big power. I think they were afraid that if they added either a turbo or supercharger, like most entusiasts wished, that it would kill reliability, thus hurting the Honda name. Honda makes it's money off reliability. Having their leading sports car be problem prone would hurt their company more than it would help.
There main intention for the S2000 was a handling roadster. They have that covered. It handles like a go cart and can compete with the best in handling. It's in the straights where it shows it's flaws.
05-06-2008, 03:17 PM
#60
11 Second Club
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: north Carolina
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, most exhausts don't make any power, and a few actually make the car lose power. You lose power with a Spoon exhaust, DC Header, Spoon header, JIC exhaust, etc. The header that yields the most gains (still only around 6-7whp) is the Hytech. The exhaust would probably have to be the J's 70mm headerback or the Amuse 70mm headerback. Exhausts like Invidia, Greddy and HKS give sound with no power. Megan is actually a good for the money brand, believe it or not. Yes i said Megan...not Mugen.
Honda was stubborn and seemed to refuse to add big power. I think they were afraid that if they added either a turbo or supercharger, like most entusiasts wished, that it would kill reliability, thus hurting the Honda name. Honda makes it's money off reliability. Having their leading sports car be problem prone would hurt their company more than it would help.
There main intention for the S2000 was a handling roadster. They have that covered. It handles like a go cart and can compete with the best in handling. It's in the straights where it shows it's flaws.
Honda was stubborn and seemed to refuse to add big power. I think they were afraid that if they added either a turbo or supercharger, like most entusiasts wished, that it would kill reliability, thus hurting the Honda name. Honda makes it's money off reliability. Having their leading sports car be problem prone would hurt their company more than it would help.
There main intention for the S2000 was a handling roadster. They have that covered. It handles like a go cart and can compete with the best in handling. It's in the straights where it shows it's flaws.