Honda S2000 + Vortech?

Discussion in 'OT Driven' started by trickdaddie, Mar 21, 2007.

  1. trickdaddie

    trickdaddie Official Transmogrification Technician

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    3,633
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Maryland
    How reliable are blown S2000's? I know everyone on here hates S2K's really bad, but I don't care. I'm thinking about getting one soon (if I get a new job, long story) and I would love to put a Vortech Blower on it. I imagine the car would be really fun. I liked the one I test drove last year, and it was a pretty haggard bone-stock S2K. I'm wondering how the engines hold up with boost over time. Anyone here have one?
     
  2. Falconer

    Falconer OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    65,506
    Likes Received:
    1
    I swear I remember reading something where the 1/4 times stock and with a supercharger were almost the same. It was something specific to the S2000. I read the article years ago, so I might be messing something up in my head. Maybe it was 0-60 times that weren't improved. I can't remember. Some time for the S2000 was not improved more than something marginal like .1 second with the addition of a blower.
     
  3. huntz0r

    huntz0r New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Messages:
    15,951
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    Well for starters, that engine has insanely high compression, which means you cannot more than a very minimal amount of boost into it safely. Then you tack on the weight and parasitic losses of a supercharger (much greater than a turbo) and you are talking about some pretty disappointing gains for money and time invested.

    The F20C is a fantastic N/A motor, tuned to within an inch of its life and putting out a huge amount of hp per liter in stock form. Honda engineers worked hard to get it just right. I guess I don't see much point in screwing with that.
     
  4. trickdaddie

    trickdaddie Official Transmogrification Technician

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    3,633
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Maryland
    yeah I didn't think of parasitic loss. That's a good point. I guess to get any real gains you'd have to mess with all kinds of shit to go forced induction. Still a rediculously fun car to drive stock. Any opinions of the F20C over the F22C? (I think that's the engine code for the 2.2 in the '04+)
     
  5. Nezart

    Nezart OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    4,621
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    delete
     
  6. Nezart

    Nezart OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    4,621
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
  7. huntz0r

    huntz0r New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Messages:
    15,951
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    I haven't driven an S, but from what I hear, the F22C1 is more "everyday-drivable" - naturally, because it's less peaky. But you give up the sheer fun and sound of a 9,000 RPM redline (it's down to 8,000 with fuel cut at 8,200). They also changed the gear ratios with the new engine, and the suspension and wheels (wider rears) were fiddled with to make it less tail-happy. Whether that's a good or bad thing is down to personal preference, but apparently it's a bit faster all around.

    Personally, I'd probably have the early model over the late one.
     
  8. trickdaddie

    trickdaddie Official Transmogrification Technician

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    3,633
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Maryland
    I'll probably (if I get one) just lower it and get some decent wheels.. if I do anything at all. I'm not looking to spend a lot of money on it.
     

Share This Page