Honda S2000 2004 vs Volkswagen EOS 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 240 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 208 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.2 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Honda S2000 is more dynamic to drive. Honda S2000 engine produces 90 HP more power than Volkswagen EOS, whereas torque is 8 NM more than Volkswagen EOS. Thanks to more power Honda S2000 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.9 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen EOS is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda S2000 consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen EOS, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda S2000 could require 210 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda S2000 consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 500 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| 500 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen EOS gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volkswagen EOS) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Honda S2000) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volkswagen EOS engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A3, Seat Altea, Seat Leon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen EOS engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.14 m | 4.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.28 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Honda S2000 is smaller. Honda S2000 is 27 cm shorter than the Volkswagen EOS, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Honda S2000 is 16 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 143 litres | 205 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 380 litres | |
|
Volkswagen EOS has more luggage space. Honda S2000 has 62 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda S2000 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`220 | 1`950 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 5600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda S2000 has
|
Volkswagen EOS has
| |