2007 Sky Redline, S2000 Knockout???
Originally Posted by Intell Design
i've seen a couple of these in the Central Wisconsin area where i live. They look pretty nice in real life.....dont know how it drives but it is pretty nice. not sure of the price tag though? any one know?
Originally Posted by WestSideBilly
Why not? Solid chassis, good suspension, plenty of rubber - it has everything it needs to handle well. The base Solstice handles competitively with the MX5, which by most measures is a very good handling car.
I agree, it's ugly, but it will be fast and a close match to the S2000.
I agree, it's ugly, but it will be fast and a close match to the S2000.
The turbo Sky and Honda might have similar performance though even though I would still expect the S2K to be better around auto-X track. But with road course it might not be the case... I guess we'll wait and see.
Originally Posted by SoR
Last time I saw comparisons between Solstice and MX-5, the MX-5 was whooping it in almost everything. And that's not strange since it's over 300lbs lighter.
Evolving Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
From: Knoxville TN
Originally Posted by SoR
LOL 
Dude, Porsche Boxter *IS* a chick car.
Dude, Porsche Boxter *IS* a chick car.
If you would have done that you would have noticed that i WASNT talking about the Boxster i was talking about the Cayman S.
Nice try loser
Evolved Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
From: NYC
i have seen this on the road and it looks pretty appealing. Look like a lower version of a C6, jus more affordable and has a good performance punch. Though 28 is starting the price. So ur lookin at 30k. Ill jus get an Evo 
Evolving Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
From: Knoxville TN
Originally Posted by slt
Because Honda invented the convertible roadster
Originally Posted by il2az
You're kidding right? The styling of the s2000 is getting old? It's timeless.
The whole idea of the s2k is that you're supposed to scream to redline, that's the whole point. There's 9000 rpm to be used, not to look at. It doesn't have torque because you don't need torque unless you're drag racing.
And I'm sorry but that thing looks hideous, the lines of the car don't flow at all, and that chrome not to mention that its a saturn... Everyone I know that has owned a Saturn has had reliability problems. But hey, it has a turbo so it must be good
The whole idea of the s2k is that you're supposed to scream to redline, that's the whole point. There's 9000 rpm to be used, not to look at. It doesn't have torque because you don't need torque unless you're drag racing.
And I'm sorry but that thing looks hideous, the lines of the car don't flow at all, and that chrome
not to mention that its a saturn... Everyone I know that has owned a Saturn has had reliability problems. But hey, it has a turbo so it must be good you don't need torque unless you're drag racing? you're dumb.
Originally Posted by racerhead2
Also who knows what Honda will have by the time the S2k is phased out. Quicker, faster, prettier car than the Saturn?
Hopefully what ever is new or newer will have better visual style and performance than the older models. If not then what is the point? Everyone will be happy to drive their old cars.
Hopefully what ever is new or newer will have better visual style and performance than the older models. If not then what is the point? Everyone will be happy to drive their old cars.
Originally Posted by othreevo
Power isnt everything.
But apparently it is to you, so it's best that you stick to your econobox w/ a turbo and those awesome recaros, you don't understand the S2000 or let alone the idea of vehicle balance.
But apparently it is to you, so it's best that you stick to your econobox w/ a turbo and those awesome recaros, you don't understand the S2000 or let alone the idea of vehicle balance.
oh yeah... i'm glad that porsche knows nothing about chasis balance and relys on their 400hp AND 400 foot pounds flat 6 to power their gt3 cup and rsr cars that HAVE RACING SERIES DEDICATED TO THEM.
yeah... power doesn't mean ****... until you play with the big boys... then you shut the **** up.
Originally Posted by Grav
So a "long heritage" makes up for the fact that Lancers and Imprezas are cheap? By that logic, you should get a Camaro. It has a far longer "heritage" than either the STI or Evo. Your argument was "ok, my car is cheap, but it has heritage!" And my argument is.... who the %(*&#$% cares about heritage if the car is fast or not? The SRT-4 didn't have a nickel's worth of heritage, yet it is (admit it or not), a frighteningly fast automobile (for the money). This is what the Sky Redline is. Its cheaper than an Evo, STI, or S2000... yet has a HP/weight ratio competitive to said cars. It WILL be fast. Like it or not, its coming, and I for one am glad that its bringing down the cost of admission to that level of performance.
in fact the s2000 is a fantastic car too, in fact it's the only convertible i'd ever buy, and after i bought it i'd put a hard top on and a weld in roll bar. it's definitely one of the best handling cars, especially for the money. but i'm sorry... IT NEEDS POWER. just like THE NSX NEEDS POWER. it will never touch the upper echelons of racing, WHICH SUCKS. I WANT to see honda come up with something (production) that can hang with the big boys... honda is in f1 WHY can't they make something great for ALL OF US to enjoy, why can't they factory back something that we can touch with our two hands, that we can buy and race ourselves? god dammit you dont' even see s2ks in JGTC AND THAT'S THEIR OWN DAMN COUNTRY.
THAT'S what i wanna see... until then i will take the s2k's 20+ miles to the gallon when i beat it around town hard to 9k redline. unless the sky handles better (which i hope it does but highly doubt).
until then... calm down with the dori dori ranting and realise that a true race car has EVERYTHING. not just one or the other.
Originally Posted by GPTourer
I beg to differ. But only because you consider Nissan to be building better quality cars. They rank lower in both JD Powers and Consumer Reports then Mitsu.
Originally Posted by x838nwy
^^I agree with you on that totally. There's nothing more annoying that a company putting on new turn signals and a new bumper and calling it a new model. I'm not one of those sad cases that has to drive the very newest, but it really bugg3rs the re-sale and makes parts that much more difficult to get. You end up having to scour the earth for parts of models made between March and July of a particular year or something.
The thing is though, they might have over-done it slightly with these two. The NSX certainly
IMO. They're great cars and there have been updates here and there and I'm sure a competent driver in an NSX can run several rings round the evo but the point is that you feel that Honda can do better, and really they should. The real master at this are Porsche. Ignore the silly codes and they're all 911's. The old ones are still extremely cool and yet the new ones look every bit the part. They should try to achieve a similar effect on these two (nsx and s2k)...
The thing is though, they might have over-done it slightly with these two. The NSX certainly
IMO. They're great cars and there have been updates here and there and I'm sure a competent driver in an NSX can run several rings round the evo but the point is that you feel that Honda can do better, and really they should. The real master at this are Porsche. Ignore the silly codes and they're all 911's. The old ones are still extremely cool and yet the new ones look every bit the part. They should try to achieve a similar effect on these two (nsx and s2k)...