nikolai jaremka wrote:
>
> for all those guys wondering about the reliability of the s2000, don't you
> think honda took all that into account when they built it? it doesn't seem
> logical for honda, with a strong history of reliability, to build an engine
> with limited reliability. almost all of thier engines can go for 500,000
>miles
> before even showing signs of wear, and even with the s2000 i'm sure it will
> last at least 100,000 if not more. the engine does use a long stroke as
> compared to race cars, but not as long as compared to the prelude engine. the
> v-tec version of the prelude will rev to 8000, so why not 9000 on the s2000?
> it all seems resonable to me. the big question with the s2000 is that you get
> VERY limited power below 5000rpm. the leads to a sluggish street car for
>every
> day driving.
>
Yes, Nik; That's precisely the point. The S2000 engine was designed
apparently taking many finer points from Honda's Racing effort. All
aluminum block and head reduce weight, high power band means that in
order to reach the output that is advertised, the engine must be kept up
in that range. Not doing so just could mean that the engine might not
be as reliable as the designers hope for. I bet the race engine
designers don't have much in the way of data from running their engines
for long periods at 3000 rpm of less! :)
Joe
--
"If you can't excel with talent, triumph with effort."
-- Dave Weinbaum in National Enquirer
|