dOmestIc_rIce is totally correct on this one my brother has got an evo and what did he spend i think it was around 30,000 and i think all that money was for the intercooler sprayer it came with and what did i spend around 19,000 true to this his evo did beat me stock but not by much so what did i do i went and spent about 2000 on some really cool S*** and smoked his A** so all together i spent 21000 or so for kick a** power to stomp on cars like the evo and the turbo lag in second fells more like 1 to 2 seconds

 

Road & Track-

2005 Dodge Neon SRT-4: $21,195 as tested
Curb weight-2970 lbs
230 bhp/ 250 lb-ft
0-60: 5.8 seconds
1/4 mile: 14.5 @ 101 mph

2006 Mitsubishi Eclipse GT: $26,695 as tested
Curb weight- 3370 lbs (w/o sunroof)
263 bhp/260 lb-ft
0-60: 5.6 seconds
1/4 mile: 14.2 @ 100.2 mph

Obvious winner is... 06 Eclipse GT. There is also a member of www.club4geclipse.com that pulled 14.02 @ 101.13 in the 1/4 mile completely stock. Check out this link if not convinced... http://www.club4geclipse.com/fortopic3751-0-asc-30.html. I'm in a car club with a group of about 15 of my USAF friends. Two of them have SRT-4s and I like them except for their turning radius. One is stock and the other one has some crazy performance mods. I recently (Oct 06) purchased a GT and love it. They are heavy and are in desperate need of an LSD and have nasty torque steer. But all in all I like its redesign compared to the 3g eclipse. They are not ment to compete with the smaller of the sport compacts but are ment to compete with the 350Z and 05+ Mustang GTs. Its sad because they are in the middle of classes, cant really put them with Golfs, SRT-4s, Si's and you cant really put them with 350Zs and Mustang GTs. According to Dynojet they do however put down 247 hp/247 tq to the wheels ...thats only about a 15% loss through the drivetrain.. not bad. Only if they could shed some weight they would be serious beasts especially w/the new MIVEC system.

 

first of all some people can put down 13.8 second 1/4 times in a stock srt-4. personally i think the new eclipse looks alright. its not better than the srt-4. are you really comparing the new eclipse to a 350z and the new mustangs? cause if you did race them together all the eclipse would see is tail light.

 

Obvious winner? No... Like it's said above... some people can run 13.8-14.2

 

I must say that I do not know what the mitsu can do but 14.5 is very slow for an SRT-4. 14.1 would be a believable average for all three years and 13's are possible by all three years. Stock.

 

Possible and most likely are two different terms. The average person isnt going to get under 14.1 stock very often if at all......and I would agree that 14.5 is definitely an average for the amateur once in a blue moon driver. That's still wickedly fast compared to alot of other cars....and that's still stock.

The obvious winner is NEITHER....the GT suffers from 450lbs of extra weight and the Neon has a turbo..... The GT gets all its power from being naturally aspirated and runs a V6. The Neon a 4cyl thats one of the highest output motors around for a 4cyl.

mxrnick: your post is ridiculous....the Neon SRT-4 is faster then both the Mustang and competes with a stock 350Z almost evenly...and its a lowly 4cyl.....think before you post....the GT Eclipse is on par with the SRT-4 as far as speed goes....so why COULDNT they be compared?

Personally, I think both cars are pretty even....but the SRT-4 has the benefit of being more moddable

 

actually car and driver tested the srt-4 with a 1/4 mile time of 13.9 so its completely doable by a average or pretty good driver i havent heard of anyone doing a 14.5 stock without major driver issues

http://www.caranddriver.com/shortroa...t-4-page2.html

they also tested the 2006 eclipse and turned a 14.5 1/4 now thats by the same people so comparing driving is irrelevant cause if your going to drive your srt bad then youll drive the eclipse equally bad either way there is a .6 sec difference

http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...v-6-page3.html

 

I have to say that I agree that 14.5 with an Srt-4 is a driver issue all the way. I mean I can run 13.8's with mine and yeah sure I've got some track experience, but based on my cars runs, I know you can totally blow a shift and still run 14.5. I've done it. I'm an amature. I also weigh over 200 lbs. I could run 14.5's with a flat tire. I'm not THAT good. 14.5's is ridiculously slow for this car. Seriously. My wife could do that talking on her cell phone and screaming at the kids to stop fighting. 14.5's is slow for this car. Really slow. Do you know what the difference between 13.8 and 14.5 is? It's huge! like 10-15 car lenghts. Now what is a good average time to post for an average driver for the SRT-4? That IS the question. I say about 14.1 for the average soccer mom. The 14.2 listed above for the Eclipse was not run by the average soccer mom. I'm gonna guess the average soccer mom will run about a 14.5 to 14.7 with her pet Eclipse. So......Soccer mom A in the SRT-4 will beat soccer mom B in the fat 3.9 liter Eclipse probably 8 out of 10 times depending on if young Jeffery can not spill his juicy juice on young Jennifer when she nails the 2-3 shift like there's a sale at Wal-Mart.

 

To an Extent I agree w/ you........ It is still a Neon ........ Yet it is a BAD *** LOOKING Neon with hella more power and handeling.

Older Modle Neons were infact, IMO, Hideous - I hated them. I still dont really care for the regular Neon, but I really like the body pannles, hood, rims, colored brake calipers, spoiler, duel exaust, and front bumper of the SRT-4. All that puts it LIGHT YEARS ahead of any regular Neon.

In other words the Neon SRT-4 is a fookin sweet lookin ride. (just wish they came in 2dr)

 

And you believe a magazine? HAHA.....look...my whole point was that the average, daily driver....aka the soccer mom.....would average out 14.5......not saying she couldnt run faster.....but that it was a very attainable number on a daily basis. Also, you guys SAY you can run 13.9/14.1......post slips....dont make comments you cant back up....I am in no way saying that there arent people who can run 13.9/14.1 stock...cuz I've seen it done....all I am saying is that 14.3-14.5 is a much more realistic average for the average person.....

That's not an attack on you...just dont assume because the car CAN go that fast...that you WILL go that fast...there are owners on this forum who cant break 14.3 in their SRT-4.....so dont think that everyone can drive that car the way it was meant to be.

The Eclipse also suffers from being about 450lbs heavier BEFORE the driver....so it does lose about .3-.4 seconds on that alone...

FYI - The drivers in C&D, Road & Track, and a bunch of other magazines are PROFESSIONALS.....and they often run in prestine conditions.....