SRT Or SI

[Heller]

2005 Dodge Srt 4 asking price is 13k. 32k miles, all stock except coil overs.

2006 Honda Civic SI Coupe. $13.5 40k miles all stock.


Test driving both, its expected the dodge is more fun, but thinking along the lines that civic is going to hold on to its value alot better then the dodge will, and will probably be more reliable.

The dodge is actually cheaper each month insurance wise being a sedan, everything was fine, no grinds in the gears, i have a couple friends with them and i had them tag along and check them out with me as they knew specific faults with each year etc.

I've been thinking about this for about a week and i flip flop every day, whats the AT garage think?

 

[aleckz]

If you plan on tracking any of those two then I would suggest the SRT-4 just because it has more of a fun factor. But if you want to sell one down the road, the Civic will hold its value better in comparison to the Neon.

Also depends if you want 4 doors or a 2 door coupe.

 

[Black88GTA]

I'd get the SRT. Would much rather have than than "just another Civic." Besides, the SRT is more fun and more tuneable IMO.

Of course, I keep my cars forever, so resale value isn't really an issue with me.

 

[vi edit]

Tough call. If you are wavering, I'd error on the side of caution and go with the SI. It's just a well rounded car that you should be able to offload easily down the road if you grow to hate it without taking an absolute beating.

If you have a serious hankering for speed and power, then go with the SRT-4. You'd know this after driving the two back to back if you need it or not. Fit and finish won't be as good as the Honda, but Dodge builds a decent turbo I4. The Dodge is a much more testosterone fueled vehicle both in looks (hood scoop on the front and and an aggressive front lip) and performance.

The Civic is much more tame with more subtle styling and a powerband that is fairly limp unless you really wring it out.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

if you plan to just drive this car a few years, you'll be able to get the same or similar value for the honda if u keep it in good condition.
you'll get bare bucks for the dodge once it starts to show its age (which for them, is when the engine nears 80-100k miles)

repairs for the honda will also be cheaper + aftermarket parts are more widely available for the civic, which are more tunable

 

[Dr. Detroit]

I'm gonna add one more to your list:

Cobalt SS Supercharged or Ion Redline Supercharged.

not as fast/moddable as the SRT4 but they are very quick in stock form with estimates being 230HP stock.

Best model to buy will have the limited slip differential installed from the factory.

 

[Hyperlite]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
if you plan to just drive this car a few years, you'll be able to get the same or similar value for the honda if u keep it in good condition.
you'll get bare bucks for the dodge once it starts to show its age (which for them, is when the engine nears 80-100k miles)

repairs for the honda will also be cheaper + aftermarket parts are more widely available for the civic, which are more tunable

I disagree, only because i know that the SRT isn't any less tunable than the SI. Lots and lots and tons of parts around for the SRT-4. Plus it's got a turbo, which just makes it infinitely easier to make power on.

It really is a tough call. The SRT-4 is going to be night and day a faster car. If you are intimate with engine internals and you can do mantainence yourself, i'd go with the srt. if you are not going to do modifications, i would go with the SI for reliability and resale purposes.

 

[Black88GTA]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
repairs for the honda will also be cheaper + aftermarket parts are more widely available for the civic, which are more tunable

:laugh: Um, no. Have you ever priced out OEM Honda parts? And 99 times out of 100, it is far easier to make cheap power out of a FI car (especially turbocharged) than an NA model.

 

[evident]

the SRT is def faster than the SI, but that's all it's got over it.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

Originally posted by: evident
the SRT is def faster than the SI, but that's all it's got over it.

true story

reliability: honda
resale: honda
cheaper parts&labor: honda
quality interior: honda

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS

Originally posted by: evident
the SRT is def faster than the SI, but that's all it's got over it.

true story

reliability: honda
resale: honda
cheaper parts&labor: honda
quality interior: honda

True story:

Some people want neck snapping torque and raw power without winding the crap out of an engine and don't really care about stroking a dash or resale.

 

[StageLeft]

Both are so poseur rice they're hard to recommend but the SI, though slower, will at least be a LITTLE classier and hold resale.

 

[HannibalX]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Both are so poseur rice they're hard to recommend but the SI, though slower, will at least be a LITTLE classier and hold resale.

Neon SRT4: 0-60 in 5.6 seconds, top speed 153 mph - all for $19,995. Yeah, it's just a poseur car. Moron.

As for the interior, the Neon is pretty nice for the price if you ask me. The seats in the Neon are fantastic! Anyone who has sat in one knows this to be true.

I'm not a "pocket rocket" or "hot hatch" kinda guy but I can recognize the SRT Neon is a seriously quick car and is definitely not a "show only" car.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Both are so poseur rice they're hard to recommend but the SI, though slower, will at least be a LITTLE classier and hold resale.

Poseur rice? While the SRT4 is hampered by its FWD design, the motor is highly potent and the car lightweight, resulting in a powerful combination that can put a hurting on many far more expensive, high powered, heavyweight cars. I think you're using the wrong phrase there.

Now, the two really aren't an apples to apples comparison. The Civic Si will have better features, interior, resale, and likely reliability too. But the SRT4 will be MUCH more of a driver's car, with greater performance potential and crap resale.

 

[AMCRambler]

If money is an issue, then I'd go for an SI for the resale value and because it's got no turbo. When turbos crap out they're expensive to get fixed. You've also got to replace the oil in them too right? Added pain in the ass with turbos.

 

[Strk]

How on earth is a Honda cheaper to to repair than a Dodge?

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: AMCRambler
If money is an issue, then I'd go for an SI for the resale value and because it's got no turbo. When turbos crap out they're expensive to get fixed. You've also got to replace the oil in them too right? Added pain in the ass with turbos.

not on any modern turbo car i know of

 

[bananapeel42]

Replacing the oil in a highly modified turbo or supercharged car isn't all that uncommon, but it's not like you need to change it every 5k miles, maybe every 50k.


As for the Neon, it may be fast for what it is, but god damn it's still a fucking neon...

I remember looking at purchasing one brand new and I could not get over that simple fact, it was god awful ugly and it has ROLL DOWN WINDOWS!!!


If you say the interior on the Neon is even halfway nice you're an obvious fanboi.


All things being said, get the fucking neon, it's much faster.

 

[ayabe]

Way too much for the SRT, not worth 13K.

 

[RedArmy]

Manual rear windows.

 

[scorp00]

Civic Si's have inadequate air conditioning systems. 2 coworkers of mine had one and when it was 90+ we would take my american car because it has a real ac. Get the srt, power is more fun than resale and reliability.

 

[Arkaign]

The SRT will be okay, but for that kind of budget and desire for performance, why bother with something like that? GTO will kick the snot out of it, have a higher performance ceiling, and in all probability also end up as more of a collector's item (as long as you hold on to it to the 25-year mark). Also getting parts for GM 5.7 and 6.0 will be cheaper and easier now and particularly as time goes on.

Of the two, I'd get the Civic, it will still be running and sought-after even with 150k+ miles on it. The SRT is an even-odds bet on even reaching 150k, and if it did, wouldn't be worth much of anything at that point.

 

[CRXican]

boost > vtec

I've had both

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: CRXican
boost > vtec

I've had both

Well I think the OP already knows that the SRT is the faster of the two. The question is which is a better buy. Imho, neither are a great buy, but the Civic makes a lot more sense beyond pure straight-ahead speed, of which both pretty much suck in terms of scalability. A 500hp modded SRT is barely streetable, probably on the edge of reliability with the twinkie motor pushed to the limits, whereas a decent FR V8 setup is just getting started at 500hp.

It really depends on the scenario, and I can't see many that support buying a used turbo Neon at this point in time. Even if just for temporary fun factor, it's going to be a serious negative when it comes time to get something else. I can pretty much guarantee that in 2 or 3 years, that SRT is going to be worth less than half the current asking price, while that Civic will still attract buyers with ease. Do I think the Civic Si is a compelling performance vehicle? Hell no, even the MazdaSpeed3 and Cobalt SS, which are better all-around vehicles by far than the Neon or Civic .. are just econobox pretenders with their FF 4-banger setups.

 

[thedarkwolf]

Originally posted by: bananapeel42
Replacing the oil in a highly modified turbo or supercharged car isn't all that uncommon, but it's not like you need to change it every 5k miles, maybe every 50k.

Dude the turbo uses the same oil system as the engine. Everytime you change the engine's oil you are changing the turbo's oil. Some super chargers use separate oil systems but not turbos at least in the automotive world.

The SRT's engine is BUILT bigtime. Its not just some standard engine that they slapped a turbo on. Dodge didn't screw around with it. 150k shouldn't be a big deal and the stock turbo on my 89 dodge caravan was still going fine at 150k miles when I replaced it with a bigger one which cost me a whole $100 to do. Granted my replacement was a junkyard turbo but they aren't as expensive to replace as people think and its not something you are going to need to do every 50k miles or something.