2002 Honda S2000 from UK and Ireland - Comments

Front drivers seat has started to wear on raised ridge by door.

In the dry from 0 to 100mph this car beats almost anything on the road.

My mate has a BMW M3 convertible and this car keeps up with it on country roads - he has tried very hard to loose me.

Build quality and ride are exceptional, coupled with my dealer being great and it made my fifth honda the best yet.

Be warned, I've had this in an icy winter, and it's very difficult. I actually didn't go out on the worst days - but in the dry - oh boy is it fun.

Picks up dents in carparks like crazy - don't know why it suffers from this so much, but it does.

The reason they pick up dents so easily is because they use high tensile pressed steel - which is good, they just do not use enough of it.

I sold my S2000 because I got totally sick of it in the wet. Granted I'm not Michael Schumacher, but I have owned a TVR Chimaera 4.5 and a Caterham 7 JPE so tail happy RWD cars aren't exactly a mystery to me.

The Honda's biggest weakness in my opinion is the engine. Sure it sounds fantastic and gives excellent performance, but when you're on the limit you need consistent throttle response and power to balance the car, not a 100 bhp bonus ball when the revs cross a certain point. To me it felt like it has 100 bhp or over 200 bhp, with nothing in between. Exciting in a straight line or in the bone dry, but on real British roads in real British weather, not exactly a recipe for driveability.

The Honda's chassis is excellent, but throttle control is everything when driving a RWD car hard, and you just cannot achieve that with an engine that gains over 100 bhp instantaneously when you pass a given point in the rev range.

If Honda fitted a slightly bigger engine with more consistent midrange delivery it would transform the car.

The s2000 is a 2 litre car, in no way is it going to deliver the torque you are expecting like a tvr's chimera engine does, even with supercharging it's doubtful. but that was the point, it was to demonstrate the engine's effeciancy, 120 bhp per litre, show me which car delivers this much power per litre. furthermore, the honda s2000 has an awesome clutch and rifle bolt gearbox setup, so downshifting should not be problem to anyone who can drive a car properly. learn to single clutch and double clutch downshift, then go on to heel and toe, it's much more rewarding then driving like a wuss. Also it's smoother, and there is less wear on the gearbox and clutch when done properly! It's a drivers car, so go drive it and have fun. Want instant monster torque, buy a car with bigger engine for starters, and preferably a straight six/ v6 at least.

Raziel.

Raziel, I think you need to re-read my post. I wasn't complaining about lack of torque relative to the TVR - of course it lacks torque with an engine less than half the size. What I was saying, was that this "efficient" engine you rave on about, with its uselessly peaky power delivery actually ruins what would otherwise be a superb driver's car. It also turns a wet weather drive into something that is equally as challenging as it would be in said TVR, without offering anything like the outright performance (the TVR hits 60 over a second quicker, and would wipe the floor with the S2000 in any "in gear" increment you want to pick).

It would have been no less of a "drivers car" with a bigger, less frenetic engine which didn't need to be thrashed to within an inch of its life to feel significantly quicker than a 2.0 repmobile! The engine is technically impressive and makes a great noise, but irritated me more than it excited me. I don't understand why Honda kept the engine size at two litres when they had to make it frustratingly flat and "average feeling" through the majority of its rev range to get the required power right at the top. Why not just make it a 3.0 and more useable? This car is a triumph of marketing and technical oneupmanship over real world thinking and ability.

Totally agree ^

The S2000 is a fantastic car, but is simply overrated by its owners.

There on comments on how it is a real "drivers" car and how you should heel & toe, and double de-clutch.. come on, we live in the real world here, the majority of these cars were sold to women! have you ever tried to heel and toe in heels? I have not, but would think it to be darn right tricky!

I found the latest 350Z with it larger engine far quicker and usable than the S2000 could ever be.

^ this guy should probably get the auto 350z, he obviously either hasn't driven the s2000 or doesn't know how to. You don't know what you're missing, but that's okay. See you later in my rear view mirror buddy :)

"I found the latest 350Z with it larger engine far quicker and usable than the S2000 could ever be."

Simply not true, do your homework. The 350z convertible is considerably slower because of the added weight, the 350z coupe is about even, maybe a sliver faster.

"This car is a triumph of marketing"

When was the last time you've seen an ad for an s2000?...yeah I thought so...

I just turned in my 2002 S2 because my lease was up. It was the saddest day of my life. This car is and was the most exciting vehicle I have ever driven. Yes, it was bad in the rain, and yes, the gears would grind sometimes between 1st and 2nd, and yes it did get rock dents easily and yes the front bumper scraped on everything, BUT it beat a lot of fast cars. It was beautiful. I never had to repair anything. The motor purred. The top went down really fast and in Florida that means a lot if it suddenly starts to rain. When the Vtec kicked in, it was breathtaking. I loved that car from top to bottom. The trunk was too small, so I put my beach chair in the front seat. It got me a lot of races and looks. I will miss the S2 and the Mercedes SLK350 that I replaced it with, will never measure up.

Danielle Olivieri USA.

When People say Usable, what they really mean is that they wan't to drive 'normally' and expect very quick performance, that's not what the s2000 was designed for! It's designed to be reVVed, if you're not willing to do that, you're not going to get anywhere near the 240bhp being delivered by the Engine!

Raziel.

0-60 time for a 350z is 6 seconds

0-60 time for an s2000 is 5.8 seconds.

The 350z has a Much Bigger engine, much more low down torque, hence why it feels so quick, and in very high speeds it will obviously be much faster as it has Much more power and torque!

People generally tend to think that torque is all that makes a car go fast, this is Incorrect!

A Fast car will Ideally have High Toirque and High HorsePower to sustain the rate of Acceleration, in addition you need to take into consideration gear ratios, power to weight ratio's etc.

Raziel.