S3000 concept

[lexy]

its ok got kind of a viper look to it.

[NutBucket]

Honda GT-R?

this looks way better IMO

Might as well call it a Honda GT-R Type S

[foamypirate]

That "S2000 Concept" is the single most disgusting render of an automobile I have ever seen. The Yugo I saw yesterday looks 100x better than that heaping pile of llama shit.

[evil_demon_01]

Looks awesome.
Does the mean it will come out in the year 3000? . . . S2000 was developed for the year 2000

That "S2000 Concept" is the single most disgusting render of an automobile I have ever seen. The Yugo I saw yesterday looks 100x better than that heaping pile of llama shit.

Its crazy aye - the S2000 is so "smooth" yet the concept is "sharp"

[kc8enb07]

i like it, and its S3000 bc they were thinking 3.0liter v6. like the S600 in the 60s was a 600cc and the orginal s2000 was a 2000cc.

[casterX]

can't find (rear) pics of the red concept, though it's in the magazine.. it looks way better than the silver one posted by skilzz..

[turbomaxx]

Why don't they just improve the s2k and give it some torque???

I mean it's a brilliant, brilliant car, don't get me wrong, but what is it, like 150 ft lbs???

Shove a 6 cylinder in some special edition s2ks... Don't create another vehicle entirely.

[owequitit]

Why don't they just improve the s2k and give it some torque???

I mean it's a brilliant, brilliant car, don't get me wrong, but what is it, like 150 ft lbs???

Shove a 6 cylinder in some special edition s2ks... Don't create another vehicle entirely.

People don't buy this type of Honda because it has torque. They buy it because it is an amazing chassis and it makes your hair stand up at 8-9K. There just is no other road going experience quite like it.

Honda's performance philosophy has always been to make more from less. They accomplish this through high revs, and low gearing. Combined with light weight and intensive engineering, it makes for a much more formidable package than internet kids want to admit. After all, it will give cars such as the 350Z and Mustang a run for their money in a straight line, and they have far more torque, so there MUST be more to it than that. Honda isn't about "I have more torque than you" it is about balance. Power without a chassis is useless. A chassis without good mileage is less useful. All of the above without a good driving experience is pointless.

This strategy has allowed them to dominate in every form of motorsports racing they have cared to enter and has gone into the upper echelons of motorsports performance. The MAIN reason a lot of Honda enthusiasts LOVE Honda is because they do things differently.

Besides, it is really fun to make some douche think you are really getting on it because it is "revving high", and they just know it is a "torqueless" Honda, and then to just let it rip, pulling off 9 grand shifts in the process.

Honda has always managed to do a good job NA of producing performance a lot of other needed either boost or displacement to achieve.

I personally wouldn't be opposed to a V6, if they keep it small, and high revving, in a lightweight, balanced chassis.

[SMseagren83]

^^ WELL SAID ^^

i was going to add, but that pretty much wraps it up.

i do believe honda is running out of things to do with the current S models. i mean..after 2005, they begin to just tinker with the car. VSA/DRLs/roll bar speakers/peak power indicator LED on cluster....etc etc. not much change in the engine/trans/susp/body. (this of course excludes the CR)

PS- 240/162 @ 2850 lbs and a 8000 redline is plenty fun! not much needing improvment....which is why bolt ons for the most part dont yield big gains.

[T3aM 83rD]

PS- 240/162 @ 2850 lbs and a 8000 redline is plenty fun! not much needing improvment....which is why bolt ons for the most part dont yield big gains.

A little S/C or turbo goes a long way in these cars also.