BIGA10k

The problem is that this neon will be fast. Fast enough to make most of our civics (even modded one's) look slow, especially on the highway where the torque of the turbo neon will kick *** at 200km/h. The only thing we have potentially going for us is that the at 14? lbs of boost, there is not much room to grow. We'll all have to turbo our civics or put in h22a's or b18c5's to not be embaressed.

The other day I tried pulling away on a new (stock?) sunfire gt and I was never able to drop him. The civic may be a stupid little car, but a little american car such as a cavalier or neon is worse.

I also keep hearing these little rumors that laws are trying to be made to ban racing parts? This basically will force us all the buy these Turbo Neons or GTi's as the new SiR is just not fun enough in stock form.

NoSpleeny

That won't happen.. unless the government started hating money.

Remember.. after market modifications in North America alone is a MULTI-BILLION dollar industry.

It will never happen.

Besides.. Turbo can be argued and said to be used for practical reasons. I'll even give a kick at the can if you want to argue with me.

imported_SiR_Speed

But the Neon is almost 10,000 less then the WRX i believe.

imported_JookSingKid

Yah man! Those SRT-4s are fast!

finally someone sees the point.

It doesn't really matter if its a crappy little neon, you can cry poor quality all you like, but wish you could only go that fast... with a manufacturers warranty too.

imported_SiR_Speed

14.2 @ 99+ dyno'd at 223whp 250wtq by SCC

http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/ro.../012scc_dodge/

99mph is quick and its riding on 17's.


The WRX has about 170whp and 165wtq while doing a 1/4 mile in mid 14's only going 93mph.

bbarbulo

iTrader: (2)

JSK, I see your point....it's an impressive little car for the money. I'd want one if I didn't know any better. But to me, cars are about personalization, expression, quality, feel.... as long as it puts a smile on my face...I'm happy. Don't have to win races (since I don't race ) nor draw thumbs-up anywhere...just has to please me enough to say "**** money in my pocket...it looks better on my car " So though I get your point, I still don't think buying one is justified.

imported_JookSingKid

bbarlulo, think about this. I like to go to the track and I like to auto-x so my eyes light up when i see numbers like that...

and those numbers are stock!

Now just imagine what you can do if you threw a little cash at it, because you said "**** money in my pocket...it looks better on my car "

imagine what numbers you can push then!



"lets go viper hunting!"

bbarbulo

iTrader: (2)

See, I don't race at all anymore. Maybe a track day here or there, but I like the feel and look of the car myself. Now, to go from that to a Neon... I can't say....I'd have to drive it to really be able to tell. I bet it's gonna be quick, but if I wanted quick, I wouldn't want FWD...I'd buy me a 1992 Mustang LX 5.0, do the good ol' pony tricks to it, and run low 12 second ETs all day within a month of ownership for under $10,000. Get my drift?? It's not about the numbers...it's about making a car your own. I've put so much work in my Civic, I don't think I could ever give it up, and I mean that. I think my Samurai will be the same way and it has like 75 hp or something

imported_JookSingKid

bbarbulo,

have no fear, the JSK EH3 lives on!
I have no plans to sell my car in favour of a SRT-4
I love my civic!

But you gotta give respect where respect is due

thats all

bbarbulo

iTrader: (2)

respect for JSK EH3

for the SRT-4

for my Civic

SilverCRXSi

Ok so yes a WRX costs less anyways than an SRT, but which car is built better? Which one has the Championship rally racing heritage? The WRX ofcoarse.
I'd rather have a car that can go through anything (snow, mud, hail) and still look good and not to mention is reliable.
Of coarse, I just wish my CRX would run...

But as for going 200kph, when can you actually do that w/o risking the lives of others? It doesn't matter what you drive just be responsible. Remember that the OPP are cracking down hard core on crazy drivers...

EL_Sport

But it is still no where near on par with the Japanese manufacturers in terms of build quality standards. I'm talking about fit and finish of the interior, the materials used, and the gaps on the exterior body panels. No doubt, there are SOME American cars out there are better in terms of reliability, but the build quality and materials used are still not on par with the Japanese. Drive a newer model Civic and then drive a newer model Cavalier and you'll see what I mean.

bbarbulo

iTrader: (2)

American quality has not improved... it was best in the late 60s IMO. The 80s were disasterous, and it's only a little better now. Chrysler still can't build an engine to last 100K kms w/o blowing something up, Ford can't put together a car w/o having to recall it a dozen times, and GM makes... well....the Aztec GM actually has the ability to build good engines (3.8 is a great, dturdy engine, 1.9 Saturn Twin Cam - mine is still rockin after 340+K kms, and the almighty 350 - LS1 5.7L). Dodge brought the Hemi back, so that's a good thing I guess. Chrysler has dabbled in 4 banger turbos before...Shelby turbo Z, Omni GLH, Shadow ES, etc. and those were okay. They just sound like crap after 120K kms...they sound like they are on their death bed cuz their tolerances are sooooo loose all the internals are clanking around practically.

imported_SiR_Speed

How can you talk about the interior of the cars? I hate the interior of my civic and i have the most expensive civic (SiR). I guess you can say the opposite about a lot of things though. I see many more Hondas rusting then i do Chrysler, so what does that say about the external quality about the Hondas?


Also to the guy that said something about the rally heritage of the WRX. Its nice that it was desinged after a rally car and all but how many people are out there that will actually drive it to its capabilities. Most of the drivers on the road know only how to drive in a straight line, and most are still bad at that. The SRT seems to be a car that will be good for what people do the most, accerlate in a straight line. And don't give me this entire, "I don't race" thing cause we all know that is bs, everyone races.

bbarbulo

iTrader: (2)

Maybe you think everyone races... but I assure you, I know many ppl with modded cars who don't race, and that includes me. I don't compete with my car in any way...show, drag, auto-x,.... nothing! I drive for the pleasure of driving, and I mod for the same reason. I determine the quality of a vehicle by the number of clunks and odd noises that it makes. Like squeaks, rattles, etc. Same with the interior...quality is more than the look or feel. About Hondas rusting...ppl don't know how to take care of a Honda. BTW...have you seen how many Neons (Chryslers in general) have the paint lifting and peeling. My ex-g/fs Neon had to get repainted under warranty since the roof and trunk had about 1/4 of the paint peel off!!!

SilverCRXSi

SiR_Speed: You're right that most people don't use their cars for the reasons they were designed for. Personally I would, hence the reason I'd get a WRX over pretty much any SUV. I'd prefer a car that handles like its on rails than one that goes quick in a straight line, that its easier and quick to get on the highway.
I have to agree with bbarbulo on this one. All cars rust.

Personally I think GM could make better cars, but I think they're stretched out too thin in terms of production. I think they should cut back and then work on reliability. If anyone can do it, its GM.

imported_SiR_Speed

We were talking about Daimler Chrysler here not General Motors. I think GM makes some horrible cars, some of the worst.

http://pictures.waspnest.net/srt-video/SRT4VsWRX.mpg

There's a vid. The only point i guess i wanted to say was that the SRT-4 is one hell of a car for the price and overall.
(now watch the thing get recalled a month after it comes out :lol)

redfox

Flaws of the SRT:

The figures you guys got for the SRT is pre release. The released version won't push quite that much. That's a fact. What's the actual numbers? I heard rumors that it's sitting at 207 horses at the flywheel. But I could be wrong.

All that power on the FWD car, with 65/35 weight balance and no traction control? Can you say Torque steer?

No differential of any kind for a car with that kind of power/weight ratio. What the hell were they thinking?

High lift and high drag coeff = lack of stability at high speeds, if it gets there.

Final thought:

Sure it's easy to turbo a factory engine, make it nice a fast in a straight line. Any car manufacturer can do that. But the key is to create a balanced car with just the right about of power, to complement the handling characteristics of the car. Why do you think the WRX is 10k more than the SRT? Don't look at just the engine and you'll see.

imported_SiR_Speed

Well its true that the WRX beats the SRT on many levels but the one thing that was probably forgotten was the fact that the SRT wasn't built in competition with the WRX. It was built to compete with sport compacts. And pretty much hands down it destroys alot of the out there.

SilverCRXSi

Ya but like you said, watch the thing get recalled within a month. LOL

RedFox is right though. Gimme a WRX Sti and I'll be happy. I'll drive it in the winter the way it was designed to be driven.