It sounds like it's really car specific...either you get a good one or you get one that needs some TLC to give you what you want from it. As to the tooling...aren't they using this motor in the 06 SRT-4 Caliber? If the neons have this problem than I feel really bad for that car when it comes out.

 

the times that you read in the magazines aren't correct. there was a huge thing about this on one of the other forums a few months back. there was a test done, and they gave ratings to the srt of a 0-100 13.9 and 1/4 mile of 14.4@100, or similar numbers. now tell me how you can get a 0-100 time of 13.9 but then get a 14.4@100 for the 1/4....doesn't make sense, right? so a few people wrote into the magazine and asked about it, as to why there was that descrepency. basically the magainze wrote back that they adjust 1/4 mile times to account for some werid *** factors that they spewed out, but basically it came down to that the reported 1/4 mile times aren't really the times that they get at the track. so basically, you can't pay attention to those times all that much because they're false. i'll see if i can find the response from the magazine, as it was really funny...basically it said in not so many words that they adjust based on certain factors, and can do whatever they want.

 

okay lemme know those top secret mods pleeze!! i just got a 05 srt and i am a little unimpressed with it after my test drive of a 04 model a couple weeks before.
Jeff

 

I know that they adjust the times to correct for altitude and perhaps for other atmospheric differences, but for any other reason is just plain f**ked up.

 

This quote couldn't be more true. Some magazines do a "street starts" some do high rpm launches, and of course there is always the "some cars run better than others" rule. Car and Driver even admitted that when they tested the 05 the motor was really green (it had 1000 miles on it) and disposed of the slower times as the car was not broken in enough. Then there is the "correction" factor someone else mentioned.

I can say this with confidence; How fast your car is depends on how you break it in, how the tolerances from the factory panned out, and mostly, THE DRIVER!

Usually C&D magazine has the most accurate times.

 

The first time I went to the track with my SRT-4, it was hot and I could not get better than 14.1 out of it. It was a much cooler day and a lot of practice runs later that I got a 13.86. While it is true the engine was 100% stock (and original except for the oil) right down to the spark plugs, I did also have a 225 street tire on it at that time. The mags also show the car capable of running over 100 mph in the qtr. I have something like 12 dragstrip runs on the car, and have never seen more than 99.5x mph trap speed. So make what you will of that. Magazine times are something to be taken with little more than a grain of salt. Years ago when I used to drag race my old 900 Ninja at the old Las Vegas dragstrip, I also worked at a popular Las Vegas motorcycle shop. I would invariabley get on the subect of drag racing with one of our younger hotdog kid customers who was riding a new crotch rocket of say 600 cc's. I would tell them my best time was an 11.30. They thought I sucked, because every 600 out at that time was supposed to be able to do that or better and all these kids could ride at least as good as some old magazine editor. I would laughingly ask them if they had ever run at the track. The response was always a predictable "no". I would always try to talk them into going out there one time, because it was cheap, fun and legal. Of course I knew what the outcome would be because I had good friends who raced out there all the time with modified 600's that would be lucky to even break into the 11's. Las Vegas was a slow track mostly due to that always "bad" air (read heat and altitude). The consensus was it was about .2 tenths slower than Los Angeles or Phoenix. My 900 Ninja circa 1985, was supposed to run 11.1 or 11.3 at about 120mph depending on what magazine you chose to believe. When I finally ran my best of 11.30 at 124, that was with a transplanted 1000cc Ninja engine, Yoshimura RACE pipe, K&N filters, Dynojetted stage 3 carbs, a homemade ram air of sorts and non stock gearing. A couple of years prior to that, a magazine had a professional drag bike rider Named Jay "Pee Wee" Gleason run a couple of bone stock superbikes (one was my exact same bike) at a dragstrip allowing him to adjust only tires and suspensions and he got a stock 900 Ninja to run a 10.7 at around 124. Nowadays, with ZX-12's and Hayabusas, any bonehead can run a 10 second qtr at a good track, but mine was back in the day when the side draft carbs sat behind the engine and 530 lbs was mighty sporty.
Moral of this story? magazines, shmagazines. All that matters is how fast you are at your track the same day as your buddy goes. Hopefully, you beat him....OR her.

 

You nailed it.

There are so many factors that come into play for a car's performance figures, that it's almost a waste of time to send post after post claiming different times and speeds. I agree and have stated before that the biggest factor in a vehicles's straight line performance is the DRIVER. That's why people like John Force win so many races......they KNOW HOW TO DRIVE.

Consider the "Flying Tigers" in WWII flying planes (P-40 Warhawks) that were, on paper, no match for a Jap Zero. Yet their kill ratio far exceeded the Jap pilots. Why? They knew how to get the best out of what they had........and they didn't read the magazines!!!!!!

Dusty

 

This has me a bit nervous too. I have an orange 05 srt-4 and i'd like to know what problem arose w/ the 05s and what mods were done. Why is it the stage 3 makes the car more mod frienldy?