Originally Posted by phobiaphobe
In real-world driving I suspect the S2000 owner would see quite a bit better mileage compared to the corvette owner.
While it's still new, we've got about 800 mi on ours now, most of it from a long highway roadtrip last weekend. We see 23-25 MPG. It is turning around 4000 RPM at 70. I'd guess Vette owners would've seen similar numbers in similar conditions.
Technically, the corvette motor is a lower performance engine compared to an S2000, with half the horsepower per litre of displacement. It is debatable as to which method is better to obtain more power; more cc's or more RPM's.
Yes, I've been looking at this motor from a fairly scientific standpoint (piston speeds, hp/l, which is about 110 for the S2000, 67 for the Vette) and am still mazed at what Honda did with the motor. It achieves literal race car performance, and it's first scheduled tune up is at 105,000 miles. It is truly a statement by Honda, the "Performance First" company. But, who cares. I don't buy cars to brag about my hp per liter to people.
As a consumer I don't care what makes the car go. I want to know my average milage, and feel my car take off when I press the gas. If the General gives me a car with more CI's, but it still gets good milage, and turns less RPM, I don't care.
G-Force, I actually think it's a pretty good comparison. The Vette and the Stang are about the same weight. The S2000 is much lighter, which should of course help it in the milage game.
I read an article several months back which had a good argument about engine efficiency. Rather than simply measuring horsepower per displacement, what about horsepower per total external volume and weight of the engine. WHen you look at it this way, the motor in the corvette is far more efficient than your average HO cammer.
YES! The S2000 motor is HUGE for a four cylinder. I can only guess at the reasons (needed room for the VTEC cam wizardry, tall deck block for long rods, etc etc) but it is very obvious.
It's a good debate.
I think so.