is it true that an ITR cannot keep up with cars on the highway? I don't know if you understand my question, but i read that many feel or think that an ITR, even though it can beat a Prelude off the line, cannot keep up, or is not easy(takes a long time), on the highway at speeds above the posted limit???

 

You might get more answers in the ITR forum.

 

In my opinion, your **** is backwards. I have an ITR, and I dont think they make great stoplight racers. But get on the highway and the things fly. Have you ever driven an ITR?

 

On the highway it was a beast, plus the handeling at those speeds was top notch.

 

Yeah it's true. I just get run over by Toyota echo's and minivans on the highway, and can never catch up!

 

So are you saying that if I was cruising along at 65 mph in the freeway, it would take a long time to get up to higher speeds? Like going from 65 to 100 mph? I don't know, I have never had a problem with that.

 

Uhhh...yeah if your shifter is stuck in 5th maybe.

 

ITRs run best when they're already rolling. Drop it a little below 5000RPM while you're rolling, open up the throttle, feel VTEC engage and WHEEEEEE!!!!! But if you're talking about overall top speed, the ITRs shorter gearing may make that slightly lower (but you wouldn't want to be on a highway at those speeds anyway )

 

OK i think we figured out this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. Isn't this the S2000/NSX forum anyways?


[Modified by Rob Maybach, 3:04 AM 8/17/2001]

 

i have both a S2000 and ITR....and I raced my dad in his S2000 with my ITR...

conclusion - the ITR from a rolling start is fairly close to the S2000..... handling is about the same, although one is fwd and other is rwd.......

I think the cars up to about the top of 4th gear would be a fair race (S2000 wins every time though), but once the ITR is in 5th, it takes a lifetime for it to accelerate...

oddly enough...1st-4th gears in both cars are geared about the same, but the S2000 has the advantage of 5&6th gear to help on the high speed stuff.

Scot - selling the S2000 ---$26,900!!!

 

haha, just cause the ITR can't take an S2000 on the highway doesnt make it slow....

Thats like saying a 2002 carrera is slow because the 911 turbo will roast it

 

I'll post a pic of a speedo from a recent "CRUISE" home for you...

 

the ITR is at it´s best on long cruises, I could hang with modded WRX on 160kmh-240kmh..

 

An ITR and S2K are not even in the same league.

ITR is raw, S2K is more refined.

An S2K will eat stock R. It clocks 1 sec quicker in the quarter.

 

you are smoking crack (once again). since when is an ITR a "usually mid 14-second car"?!? many, if not most, Rs never break into the 14s, much less the mid 14s! yes, there are 15 second s2ks but those are probably driven by people who've never owned anything remotely fast before and can't drive worth ****.

the fact is, whether you choose to acknowledge this or not, the S2K is a more powerful car. the 1320 trap speeds alone will tell you this...the traps of S2Ks are (on average) at least 5 mph faster than those of ITRs. i loved the ITR too but jeez, give the damn stook some credit for *** sake!

 

I've driven both I'm not talking out of my ***.

I'd pick a S2K over my R.

The interior is better in the S2K than the R in my honest opinion. All controls accessible to the driver. Nice leather surfaces, digital guage, shortest short shift I've ever felt! plus a solid smaller steering wheel.

Exterior, ITR is old design, but with the spoilers and NSX like wheels looks better than a stock S2K. Put better wheels on a stock S2K and it looks much better.

Motor S2K much quicker from the box. You really feel the added HP & Torque. Revving to 9K on a S2K is fun.

Brakes, ITR was better than the S2K.

Handling, S2K much better more balanced than the ITR. RWD more fun.

S2K is quieter, softer over bumps than the ITR.

 

Yes more practical if you have 4 people to seat.

I usually drive alone or with my girlfriend.

I have a ITR BTW.

 

RAW is WAR!!!

If ya smell what the Rock is cooking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Couldn't resist.

 

Uhm. S2K can do 0-60 in the 5.x area, while an ITR is 6.5 if it's lucky. And according to a local (nationally competitive) autocrosser, he beats 3rd gen RX-7s to the first turn at Pro Solos. Of course, with the anemic low-end powerband, you have to dump the clutch and spin the tires to get that kind of accelleration out of 1st gear in the S2K, which will toast your clutch in short order.

And I think the S2K rims look awesome.

-Mike

 

check.

definite check.

actually, as long as you dump the clutch at 6.5k+ rpms (rather than feather it) andget some wheelspin, it's less damaging than say, slipping the clutch at 5k. trust me i've tried both (and smelled the cat pee smell of fried clutch )

check.

steveC: please reconsider your statements. the S2K and ITR are not particularly close to each other with respect to acceleration to 80 mph, unless you consider over 1/2 second to be "close". the time to 60 mph is at least half a second quicker in the stook. shortly after 60, you're shifting to 3rd and i'd have to check the ratios, but i'd wager the stook's third is shorter than the ITRs given close-ratio 6-speed (vs. 5-speed). it's not much of a contest to 80 stock-for-stock, imo. i am not criticizing the ITR at all...i still consider it to be at least as fun to drive as the s2k....but be a little realistic about the numbers.


[Modified by Speedy, 2:07 PM 8/28/2001]

 

Hmm. One of the top (as in, won A-stock at the National Tour here) autoxers out here switched from the ITR to the S2K. He must have had a reason...

-buji

 

i think hondas could benefit from better 80 to 140 acceleration.
i have to hand it to euro's for having that.

 

you could say that it comes down to the driver for just about any two cars. for instance i kept up with a very late model 911 cabriolet the other day. the driver was ~60 and i heard him grind a gear or two trying to escape that damned honda. does that make my car as fast as his?

a "car or two"? probably a little more than that given equal drivers. like i said earlier, 1/2-1 second difference to 100 is not what i'd call particularly close. bear in mind, i've driven both cars here, at this altitude, a lot more than even you have, and i was convinced from day one that the s2k is significantly faster. maybe the difference is smaller at sea level but i doubt it.

your campaign of blatant disinformation is getting annoying. last year's AS national champ (g. thomasson) drove an S2K to the 3rd fastest stock class time overall, i.e. faster than all but 2 SS drivers. incidentally, his two-day time was over 5.5 seconds faster than our local hero, d.fauth's winning GS time in his ITR.

as you're aware, fauth is considering trading his ITR for a stook for next year. why would he do that if the "the S2000 is...a shitty Auto-X car"? fauth even asked me at coors last time to trade me his beat-down ITR for my S2K...pssshh..yeah right!

i'd wager that the s2k is just as close, if not closer, in acceleration to your m coupe as the ITR is to the s2k. you've yet to show up and prove me wrong.



[Modified by Speedy, 8:57 AM 8/29/2001]

 

i was waiting for that weak-*** argument to rear its ugly head. as you know, i acually pay less on a per-month basis to lease the s2k than i did to finance the ITR. regardless, price has nothing to do with my impressions of either car.

hahaha. good one. these tired cliches never seem to go out of style.

lol. you would never abuse any of your cars! (nevermind the wheels are practically falling off your ITR and you drive like more of an *** than even i do.)

the ITR is a "4 person FWD sedan"?

get your *** out of bed next weekend and prove it. oh, i told you to fly in some wednesday and we'll run the m coupe and s2k back-to-back at bandimere. i'll even let you "abuse" my car a couple of times.

 

please rethink the word "sedan"....tard boy.

next weekend works for me...if by some miracle you show up this time, i'll gladly lay the honda smack-down on your nazimobile.