YACT, video of a SRT-4 Dusting a WRX and a modded Talon

[geno]

Originally posted by: bolido2000

Originally posted by: geno
NFS, you realize how BIG of a jump 1 second is in 0-60? I mean, I love the quality and the (little bit of) prestige the Mini has, but for 20k I'm taking the car with 100 more horses.

Me too.
Hmm hopefully Nissan will bring the next gen Silvia to the US.

If they did, I doubt it'd be putting a motor in there to directly compete with the SRT-4, especially with the recent release of the Z (~250HP is a little too close to the Z'z 287...), but it'd still be cool!

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

Originally posted by: NFS4
Bah, it's still a friggen rental-class Neon with a phat engine in it. I mean, it wouldn't be so bad if it didn't look like it stepped off the set of Fast and the Furious. I HATE that these companies are adding on all of this tacky bullsh!t huge wings and scoops all over the place...bleh. If they had did a more subtle body kit, I'd be more inclined to like it. The kit on the SVT Focus is perfect. Just enough to differentiate it from a regular Focus, but not so much that it looks like rice.

I'd GLADLY give up one second 0-60 and in 1/4 mile for the superior quality, features, and nimbleness of this for $20,000.

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

But competition is good. Hopefully Honda or someone else will step up and produce a car that can smack the SRT-4 around.

LOL, if Honda competes into that sector, it'll have some high-winding I4 instead of something with some actual grunt.

The muscle cars of the 60's and 70's, GTO, Road Runner, Chevelle, etc, were big engined, tarted up versions of low ball midsize sedans.

In todays times, the Neon is a crude compact with decent handling (and now a bigger engine). The Neon consistently ranks at the bottom compared to its competition (Civic, Protege, Focus, Corolla, Lancer, etc) in just about every conceivable category. Adding a bigger engine doesn't distract from that fact.

I mean come on! Power front windows and roll-up back windows? Puhlease.

I can see all the kiddie racers flocking to the SRT-4, but it's not something that an adult would really "aspire" to have.

 

[johneetrash]

i thought htey stopped making silvias, the s15 being the last one?

this is a great car (for the price). the neon has always been a good handler, if you dont believe me, check out your local autox.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: geno

Mini Cooper S has 163HP. 100 more horses would make the SRT-4 have 263

Neons are coming off the assembly line putting down 220HP to the wheels. Unless Dodge is pumping out ringers (with that much more HP than advertised, I'm sure they're planning on leaving them like that), then I'd say the 2.4 is putting out ~260HP at the crank (259 if you calculate for 15% drivetrain loss).

I'm not talking about your "theories" on what you think it's putting out. I'm talking about the manufactuerers published numbers

 

[geno]

I'm talking about the manufactuerers published numbers

And I'm talking about the power that it's putting down from the factory. Nuts to the advertized numbers! They mean nothing at this point with this car, so why even judge it upon those numbers?

 

[bolido2000]

In todays times, the Neon is a crude compact with decent handling (and now a bigger engine). The Neon consistently ranks at the bottom compared to its competition (Civic, Protege, Focus, Corolla, Lancer, etc) in just about every conceivable category. Adding a bigger engine doesn't distract from that fact.

I mean come on! Power front windows and roll-up back windows? Puhlease.

I can see all the kiddie racers flocking to the SRT-4, but it's not something that an adult would really "aspire" to have.

Every car is designed for a segment in mind. UK magazines put the Camry in their avoid list, but that doesn't mean is a bad car. The SRT-4 will appeal to young kids who only want speed and should sell pretty quickly.

 

[bolido2000]

Originally posted by: johneetrash
i thought htey stopped making silvias, the s15 being the last one?

this is a great car (for the price). the neon has always been a good handler, if you dont believe me, check out your local autox.

Yeah that's why I said next gen Silvia (if there is one)

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: geno

I'm talking about the manufactuerers published numbers

And I'm talking about the power that it's putting down from the factory. Nuts to the advertized numbers! They mean nothing at this point with this car, so why even judge it upon those numbers?

If they didn't want it to be judged by those numbers, then they shouldn't publish those numbers I keep a running database in my head of all the horsepower numbers of every vehicle that steps onto the market and I'm pretty good at keeping it in check. But when you start mixing in published figures with @ the crank numbers, I say screw it.

The manufacturer has settled on a number for the car. If Dodge wanted to have even more bragging rights with the SRT-4, they could have published a higher number than they did...but they DIDN'T. So I hold them to the numbers they publish.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: bolido2000

In todays times, the Neon is a crude compact with decent handling (and now a bigger engine). The Neon consistently ranks at the bottom compared to its competition (Civic, Protege, Focus, Corolla, Lancer, etc) in just about every conceivable category. Adding a bigger engine doesn't distract from that fact.

I mean come on! Power front windows and roll-up back windows? Puhlease.

I can see all the kiddie racers flocking to the SRT-4, but it's not something that an adult would really "aspire" to have.

Every car is designed for a segment in mind. UK magazines put the Camry in their avoid list, but that doesn't mean is a bad car. The SRT-4 will appeal to young kids who only want speed and should sell pretty quickly.

Isn't that what I said?

 

[geno]

So I hold them to the numbers they publish

That's fine, just make a mental note that it's putting out a lot more than just 40 horsies over your precious Mini It's thinking like that which explains why that WRX got spanked... I mean, jeeze the WRX has 12 more horses...even with the AWD advantage it should've kept up a little right? Wrong, there's a noteworthy difference in power

If Dodge wanted to have even more bragging rights with the SRT-4

As it stands, they've got the fastest FWD car on the market out there that'll put an Acura RSX to shame, it'll outperform ANYTHING in the sub-20k market and many cars in the low-mid 20k range. frigging thing'll be able to pull on a 350Z on the hiway if the driver is caught off guard - what more bragging rights do you need? And just wait till modded ones start showing up!

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: geno

So I hold them to the numbers they publish

That's fine, just make a mental note that it's putting out a lot more than just 40 horsies over your precious Mini It's thinking like that which explains why that WRX got spanked... I mean, jeeze the WRX has 12 more horses...even with the AWD advantage it should've kept up a little right? Wrong, there's a noteworthy difference in power

Neon SRT-4 2939 lbs; 245 ft-lbs
WRX 3085 lbs; 217 ft-lbs

THAT could have something to do with it

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: geno

If Dodge wanted to have even more bragging rights with the SRT-4

As it stands, they've got the fastest FWD car on the market out there that'll put an Acura RSX to shame, it'll outperform ANYTHING in the sub-20k market and many cars in the low-mid 20k range. frigging thing'll be able to pull on a 350Z on the hiway if the driver is caught off guard - what more bragging rights do you need? And just wait till modded ones start showing up!

But the SRT-4 doesn't compete with the RSX. The RSX is aimed at young buyers in their 30's making 60-80k a year. The SRT-4 is aimed at kiddie ricer wannabes (~18 - 22 years old) who normally would mod a car, but now have factory rice to consider

You're typical Dodge buyers looks nothing like an Acura buyer.

 

[johneetrash]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: geno

So I hold them to the numbers they publish

That's fine, just make a mental note that it's putting out a lot more than just 40 horsies over your precious Mini It's thinking like that which explains why that WRX got spanked... I mean, jeeze the WRX has 12 more horses...even with the AWD advantage it should've kept up a little right? Wrong, there's a noteworthy difference in power

Neon SRT-4 2939 lbs; 245 ft-lbs
WRX 3085 lbs; 217 ft-lbs

THAT could have something to do with it

or it could be teh fact that the wrx isnt as fast as you think it is

and the neon isnt as slow as you think it is

 

[johneetrash]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: geno

If Dodge wanted to have even more bragging rights with the SRT-4

As it stands, they've got the fastest FWD car on the market out there that'll put an Acura RSX to shame, it'll outperform ANYTHING in the sub-20k market and many cars in the low-mid 20k range. frigging thing'll be able to pull on a 350Z on the hiway if the driver is caught off guard - what more bragging rights do you need? And just wait till modded ones start showing up!

But the SRT-4 doesn't compete with the RSX. The RSX is aimed at young buyers in their 30's making 60-80k a year. The SRT-4 is aimed at kiddie ricer wannabes (~18 - 22 years old) who normally would mod a car, but now have factory rice to consider

You're typical Dodge buyers looks nothing like an Acura buyer.

you're kidding right? the rsx the integra replacement, and i never saw any 30 year olds in any integra. well, some, but most of them were teen/low 20 year olds.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: johneetrash

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: geno

So I hold them to the numbers they publish

That's fine, just make a mental note that it's putting out a lot more than just 40 horsies over your precious Mini It's thinking like that which explains why that WRX got spanked... I mean, jeeze the WRX has 12 more horses...even with the AWD advantage it should've kept up a little right? Wrong, there's a noteworthy difference in power

Neon SRT-4 2939 lbs; 245 ft-lbs
WRX 3085 lbs; 217 ft-lbs

THAT could have something to do with it

or it could be teh fact that the wrx isnt as fast as you think it is

and the neon isnt as slow as you think it is

Where did you see me say that the WRX was fast or that the SRT-4 was slow?

 

[johneetrash]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: johneetrash

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: geno

So I hold them to the numbers they publish

That's fine, just make a mental note that it's putting out a lot more than just 40 horsies over your precious Mini It's thinking like that which explains why that WRX got spanked... I mean, jeeze the WRX has 12 more horses...even with the AWD advantage it should've kept up a little right? Wrong, there's a noteworthy difference in power

Neon SRT-4 2939 lbs; 245 ft-lbs
WRX 3085 lbs; 217 ft-lbs

THAT could have something to do with it

or it could be teh fact that the wrx isnt as fast as you think it is

and the neon isnt as slow as you think it is

Where did you see me say that the WRX was fast or that the SRT-4 was slow?

well, i meant it as a general comment.

 

[johneetrash]

Originally posted by: bolido2000

Originally posted by: johneetrash
i thought htey stopped making silvias, the s15 being the last one?

this is a great car (for the price). the neon has always been a good handler, if you dont believe me, check out your local autox.

Yeah that's why I said next gen Silvia (if there is one)

i dont htink there's gonna be a next gen silvia. it wouldnt fit into nissan's revival plan thing. the 240's here never did sell well here either

 

[geno]

Neon SRT-4 2939 lbs; 245 ft-lbs
WRX 3085 lbs; 217 ft-lbs

THAT could have something to do with it

Really? I wasn't aware that only weight/torque had to do with acceleration

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: geno

Neon SRT-4 2939 lbs; 245 ft-lbs
WRX 3085 lbs; 217 ft-lbs

THAT could have something to do with it

Really? I wasn't aware that only weight/torque had to do with acceleration

Low-end torque sure would help out a lot in getting the SRT-4 off the line. The lack of torque is what henders the S2000 in the same position.

 

[johneetrash]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: geno

Neon SRT-4 2939 lbs; 245 ft-lbs
WRX 3085 lbs; 217 ft-lbs

THAT could have something to do with it

Really? I wasn't aware that only weight/torque had to do with acceleration

Low-end torque sure would help out a lot in getting the SRT-4 off the line. The lack of torque is what henders the S2000 in the same position.

or just give it more torque steer.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: johneetrash

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: geno

Neon SRT-4 2939 lbs; 245 ft-lbs
WRX 3085 lbs; 217 ft-lbs

THAT could have something to do with it

Really? I wasn't aware that only weight/torque had to do with acceleration

Low-end torque sure would help out a lot in getting the SRT-4 off the line. The lack of torque is what henders the S2000 in the same position.

or just give it more torque steer.

Torque steer is one of the reasons why I wouldn't bother with a FWD car with alot of power. Gimme AWD or RWD anyday.

 

[geno]

orque steer is one of the reasons why I wouldn't bother with a FWD car with alot of power

Have you ever driven "a FWD car with alot of power"?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: geno

orque steer is one of the reasons why I wouldn't bother with a FWD car with alot of power

Have you ever driven "a FWD car with alot of power"?

Yes. Most of them do have torque steer. Thanks for playing.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: geno

orque steer is one of the reasons why I wouldn't bother with a FWD car with alot of power

Have you ever driven "a FWD car with alot of power"?

An automatic Altima 3.5SE and a Cadillac Seville STS. I don't like fighting with the steering wheel under acceleration.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: johneetrash

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: geno

Neon SRT-4 2939 lbs; 245 ft-lbs
WRX 3085 lbs; 217 ft-lbs

THAT could have something to do with it

Really? I wasn't aware that only weight/torque had to do with acceleration

Low-end torque sure would help out a lot in getting the SRT-4 off the line. The lack of torque is what henders the S2000 in the same position.

or just give it more torque steer.

Torque steer is one of the reasons why I wouldn't bother with a FWD car with alot of power. Gimme AWD or RWD anyday.

How much torque steer does the SRT-4 exhibit? The Car and Driver road test I read did not mention it.