hello , im new to the forum and was wondering if you the srt-4 neons can take evo's and or wrx's stock?? all cars look close as far as performance.

[IMG]local://upfiles/88776/2C38D3C84D7D49EB85578C5FF54177C3.jpg[/IMG]

 

if all cars are stock and equally driven, the evo should easily handle the srt4 and wrx. the sti and evo should be very close, and ive seen a stock srt4 beat a stock evo, but with ALL things equal, the evo should be the quickest of those three.

 

i see ....ya everytime one of those little fockers roll next to me i can here that bad *** blow off valves and always wondered how quick those cars are . lol i havent raced one yet, but scared too who knows what the could to me in the ram 4.7 ltr!

 

You'd get f'd in the a

 

BTW, welcome to the forum! Your truck looks sick.

 

A SRT-4 with an experienced driver can handle a wrx, no problem......the evo/stiare a bit faster, but the price is a lot higher.......speed costs money (and gas)......the SRT-4 was advertised as "Cheap Speed"........

Dusty

 

i see , ya i can see how those imports can be a little faster , as far as their upgraded models. but ya when i saw a srt -4 race , i could not believe the speed that this neon had compared to the old school model which was just a 2.2 /2.4 model ! lol maybe its just that turbo idk! thanks for the comment ........ excellent burn out in the ram!

 

acculy 2.0 possibly 2.4 if it had a swap

 

So by beating you mean in a straight line? I own an evo and an srt4, in a straight line the evo is just a bit faster, but when it gets twisted, the evo is much, much faster. And as far as price is conserned, you get what you pay for. I think there is enough added to the evo to justify the price. Check youtube and you will see comparisons of evos to lambos on road coarses, but not any srt4, exept maybe in a drag race. By the way, raced a srt8 grand cherokee with the evo(stock) and took him pretty good.

 

On a performance per dollar basis, the SRT-4 a way better deal. Case in point, I raced a brand new 39,000 dollar EVO yesterday. I destroyed him. My car cost 20,000 and I have another 1500 into it in the form of a stage 2 with exhaust. He ran 13.8, I ran 13.1. He sucked as a driver cause I thought he'd run a low 13 but whatever. Do you know how awesome you can make an SRT-4 with 19,000 dollars? If I had 19,000 to spend on my car, I can hardly imagine myself wanting awd just because that's the only thingI wouldn't have at that point. My car would be scaryfast and not just in a straight line. Sure, he'd always have his awd, but I'd always have a symbol of simple, ruggedDetroit musclewhipping his overpriced Japanese technobargea**........ and badly.

On the topic of handling. I was at an autocross last year where the fastest car there was an n/a 1st gen Neon 2.0 liter. He spanked aslew of STI's, EVO's, Mini Coops, Miatas, V-dubs, Turbo Porsches. It was my first ever autocross as a participant and I finished midpack with my SRT-4 and within whiffs of some of the STI's and EVO's. I had done nothing for handling mods except go to a slightly wider 225 streettire and it was not a serious autocross tire.So in my mind, the awd is not as much a handling advantage as everyone says.

Back to the original question of which is faster stock. Well stock, we are quicker than the WRX but not as quick as the EVO or STI but damn close. I ran a 13.6 stock with a 225 street tire.