tricky_ab

I was able to drive one over the weekend with my friend who's seriously looking to buy one.

So honestly, the car was a blast! It's such a great ride! I didn't find the cabin to be noisy at all (I was reading about that). The car has a nice and real low center of gravity feel, and the handling was magnificent! Really tight feel while driving.

And for a stock 4 cyl engine and stock exhaust that engine is responsive and sounds great! I get that the Car isn't fast, but every time you accelerate that 50/50 weight distribution and rwd really makes you feel it.

Overall I loved the way it felt and I'd scoop one up. As for my friend, he's looking for a dealer who will sell at MSRP.

raz0rbladez909

Bingo

What are you talking about?? There are plenty of s2000's with high mileage on them, well over 200k on the stock engine. It will rev to 9k all fucking day and ask for more, and there are plenty of boosted examples pushing upwards of 4-700 horsepower on stock internals. I'm quite sure it's a better engine 10 times over. 120 hp per liter NA isn't exactly commonplace in the car world either and they did it without direct injection. Also looking at MPG I'm quite sure the only reason the FRS/BRZ gets even that is because of the gear ratios, I mean looking at the power to weight ratio the thing should be at least into the 15's. If you're gonna bash a car/engine at least know what you're talking about.

__________________
2004 Corvette Z06 / 1971 240z

K_style

You need to calm down with your S2000. I never "Bashed". I think you are way~ overreacting.

Without having good knowledge about S2000 can't point out specifics but I have seen many people complaining about their engine reliability issue on their forum (s2ki.com)
Sure I've seen 400~500hp with FI/stock internals.. also I have seen 400~500hp KA-T too. just matter of time it will stop handling that power. So I dont think that would be much a good example here.

I would't take S2000's side because I owned one before and I didn't like much of the car it self. You dont feel that Awesome 240hp you mentioned until you have to rev crap out it also I think Honda forgot to put Torque in that engine..

As far as Fuel consumption, I am more than quite sure Honda tried to squeeze power out of engine so they really didn't get to get better MPG.
BRZ has direct injection plus I am quite sure has more room it self to push harder to get more HP#.

But again, it is not always HP/TQ#s to determine which is "Better" engine. So school me what make F20 better than FA20 other than HP#.

silverarrow27

Come on guys, the Hyundai Veloster Turbo makes 201 hp with it's 1.6L engine. Hyundai VT 1.6 > FRS/BRZ/S2000

That car has got both those 2L engines beat!

__________________
1989 240sx XE|2002 Frontier SC CC LB 4wd|2011 Pathfinder LE V8 4wd

roboticnissan

As far as hp goes: the s2000 is pretty tapped for power to still be na and street driven. So id say its fully street built? If that makes any sense. The brz is yet to be seen how well it takes to intake and headers. As every s2k owner should know, very few intakes and exhaust gain power for an s2k. And when its a gain, its small.

120hp per liter is pretty damn impressive tho dude so idk why youre trying to count out the f22

__________________

word sux

f20's like to throw rods

Omarius Maximus

You just don't get it.

Horsepower =

torque X Revs
---------------
5250


Torque = cylinder pressure = shit breaking. An engine that can safely rev higher will need less cylinder pressure (i.e. torque) to make the same hp. That's why stock block S2000s make so much power safely.

Also, if your criteria for a better engine is gas mileage, then a turbodiesel VW > Lamborghini V12. Let's be real here, as sports car engines, the F20 is head and shoulders above the crap engine in the BRZ.

Omarius Maximus

1. The size of the combustion chamber for both the ft86 and S2000 are equal (both 2 liters).

2. Provided that you throw every bolt on there is to maximize the amount of air the engine ingests, both cars will create the same amount of force (torque) from the combustion process.

3. In that scenario, the car that revs higher will always make more power.

I used 100ft/lbs to keep things simple.

So FT86:

100ft/lbs x 7500rpm
----------------
5250

= 142.857143hp



Let's do the S2000:

100ft/lbs x 9000rpm
-----------------
5250

=171.428571hp

240sxDavid

damn "Hate hate hate hate"
-Playa haters ball chant

__________________

word sux

so I guess rod angularity and stroke don't factor into this....

raz0rbladez909

Lol @ calm down. It's hardly overreacting when someone is spreading misinformation, especially when you flat out admit you have no real knowledge on the subject. Making a statement like "The F20C isn't reliable" or something along those lines and doing no real research on the subject just makes you a fool.

I'm also sure the "many" examples of reliability issues that you were so quick to point out are likely few and far between compared to the build numbers on the s2000. Also just because you owned one at one point doesn't mean you know anything about it, anyone can purchase a car and glance through a forum. I do find it funny how you knock it for having to rev it so high, because it shows you obviously did no real research on that part either. IT WAS MADE TO REV TO 9000 RPM's(AP1's) lol even people that have never driven an s2000 know that, it wasn't designed for low end torque.

The s2000 itself has earned countless awards for its Engine, Transmission, and chassis. I don't remember there being too much to write home about from Subaru in quite some time, unless you want to count those piston ring issues they were having in the EJ25.

I honestly have no need to "school you" on this, let alone prove anything to you. If you can't do your own research I'm not going to do it for you.

__________________
2004 Corvette Z06 / 1971 240z

ManoNegra

you can get with this



or you can get with that



I think I'll get with "that" 'cause torque is where is at


lol... but seriously, I like s2000 but they do have their flaws
and I'm sure that direct injection has something to do with the fuel economy of the FRS/BRZ other than just gearing

K_style

In the beginning I said "I am not quite sure about F20C is better than FA20". It was obviously an opinion not stating solid knowledge. And mostly I said that because I think it is little too early to know which one is "better".

I worked as State vehicle inspector before. a lot of S2000s fail to meet states standard due to their engine issues and emission equipment failure. That's most experience I have with S2000.
Maybe I was a-hole failing them because of they are Honda or maybe S2000 drivers up here in NW just suck ?? Just saying.....

You brought EJ25 but I don't think it isn't a good example you could compare to FA20.

So, S2000 won many awards, but isn't it too quick to judge it has better engine than BRZ? I mean BRZ just came out.

K_style

I never said the Gas mileage is factor of being good engine either.

You both are just being offended I think because I didn't take you guys side LOL.

Of course what make better engine than another has to with overall performance (HP/TQ, MPG, Reliability etc..)

K_style

We are talking about N/A engines... It is not fare to compare with Forced Induction engine.

raz0rbladez909

No worries man maybe I got a little defensive because I always see people knocking the car because of the brand/scene without seeing the potential. Don't get me wrong, I'm no Honda fanboy, in fact this is the first Honda I've ever owned, but when I saw the things the f20/22 were capable of with very little engine work I'm definitely impressed. You are right about the BRZ/FRS not being out long enough to make a solid judgement on its reliability/power potential though, I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Back to the FRS/BRZ discussion, I did find it interesting in this motortrend article how it did around the track, especially with the not so great tires.Hyundai Genesis Coupe, Mustang V6, and Mazda MX-5 Miata Specs - Motor Trend - Mobile

__________________
2004 Corvette Z06 / 1971 240z

K_style

I found this...
BRZ got beat !!! haha

Omarius Maximus

Keep in mind that the econo gearing of the BRZ will nullify any torque advantage it may have. They are putting very similar levels of torque to the wheels after gearing.

MWH_Photo

Sorry for the stupid question but maybe I'm missing something? It looks like the dyno sheets above are to the wheels for both vehicles.

Would the gearing not have already played its role at that point? I'd understand the gearing issue if they were numbers to the flywheel..

Full torque at just under 3k rpm is pretty sweet, but no one seems to be able to get rid of the dip after 3.2/3.5k as of this moment. Subaru/Toyota are supposedly looking into fixing this for the MY2014 vehicles though I guess.

__________________
-Mike

SoBay240guy

it is a knock prone part of the rev range as near as I can tell so far, the maps go rich and retarded on the stock ECU in that area. it almost seems like an early peak resonance inducing too much cylinder pressure, or it could be an issue with the DI/Port cross over,

Either way more will be known in the next couple of weeks, I'm getting mine this weekend and it will be a test mule...

__________________
I am SKULLWORKS

niceassfd

did you preorder it?

__________________
sorry no ebay links, i got it!

ONYX S-13

Handled! Big time.

raz0rbladez909

It would've been even bigger if they both would've had competent drivers, hell the s2000 didn't even really launch

__________________
2004 Corvette Z06 / 1971 240z

simmode1

I already posted 0-60 rimes for the FRS/BRZ versus S2000. A 1/4 mile race's outcome should have been obvious.

I think anyone searching for N/A power out of that FRS/BRZ is like a dog chasing its tail: a futile effort. Despite what the Civic lovers think, we all know that small displacement give minuscule improvements from simple N/A bolt ons. I'm betting the FRS/BRZ gives you a max of 15whp from intake, headers, exhaust & tune. So maybe around 190hp to the wheels depending on the dyno used...

Purists keep saying the ppl who want this car to have more power just don't get it. Fuck you. That's insulting. What I'd want is a motor that at least compares to the TRD Atlantic 4AGE that every AE86 owner dreamed of having... The S2000's motor is the closest to that goal. Since that type of performance is cost prohibitive for most ppl, I my focus remains steadily on the GC 2.0T.

For the guys disliking the Genesis' front bumper: do you think color matching it helps any?


I'm thinking a vinyl wrap on that front bumper's midsection will cure a lot of its ills. And maybe remove the lower cross bar grill section all together for more FMIC access and make things less busy looking. And maybe figure out a way to make those silly hood vents functional...

LoneStarSilvia

NOPE.

It helps, but does not solve the problem, I think it needs a complete redesign. Small problem in my mind, the rest of the car looks fine. You know my stand on it. Maybe it can be further improved my removing the badging and chrome accents.

__________________

simmode1

Oh, a definent Hell yes to removing the Hyundai H's and rebadging the car... I like the chrome accents though.

usdm180sx

A torqueless motor that comes alive at 6000rpm is super gay, not practical and no fun in traffic

__________________
-Norm!

LoneStarSilvia

I'd prefer that badge area to be blanked out completely. KDM badge looks cool though.

__________________

simmode1

^^^You know what? That probably would look pretty good having that entire area above and below the colormatched divider completely open. Functional too...

Edit: Oooh... Look what I found. This is the 2013's motor. Too bad the exhaust side isn't really visible though...

LoneStarSilvia

I thought that too, but I think that'd look a litte too opened mouth.

If I had a pencil and eraser, I'd say completely fill in the badge area, and raise the upper edge of the bottom big air hole so that you could draw an imaginary slightly curved line between the top corners of the fog lights.

__________________