has a good article "inside the fastest american 4-cylinder", goes thru engine with DaimlerChrysler tech center staff.

great nuggets like turbo unique turbo block up to 04. 04 n/a motors then get the turbo block.
oil pan gasket is also a crank scraper.
special piston features shorter skirt and hard anodized top rin land.
oil spray to cool bottom of piston
"next generation" ECU based on speed density not maf.
balance shafts can be removed in full race setup
bed plate to retain special crank.

good number of specs including:
03 rember, 215 hp, 2870# yelding 13.35 ponies per pound "smoking" the 68 roadrunner 383's 10hp/1# ratio & running right with it @14.2's

Great stuff these little cars are made of.

like the little lady said to me, "killer engine in a car that weighs nothing, how can you go wrong", I now get "he thinks his car is faster"....i think im converting her into a gearhead.

I just came across this while going thru my library of a million mags researching enging articles for the ol' blue oval, tax time ya know.

 

Yup, the power to weight ratio is something a lot of folks don't talk about nowdays, but years ago when I raced motorcycles, it was the first thing everyone wanted to know.....

Dusty

 

so many people disregard that but to me power to weight is one if not the most important thing on a car.

 

noooooooo. Not true at all. In southern california it's how many type r stickers you have.

 

If you don't learn anything else from one of the great sports car builders of our time (Caroll Shelby) remember this; it's that light is right. It affects every performance aspect. Seems simplistic I know but think about it. If 10 hp = 100lbs (ballpark) in qtr mile times, would you be more apt to go for the 10 more horspower or the 100 fewer pounds? Almost everyone will go for the 10 more hp. Why? it's cheaper and usually easier. Losing 100 lbs is hard to do and gets very expensive as the materials required to do so become more exotic. But does that extra 10 hp help you stop or turn? No, it's only good for acceleration and top end speed. Losing 100 lbs on the other hand helps acceleration, cornering, stopping, fuel economy, tire and brake wear etc. The only thing it wont change is top end speed. So if you'd ask Caroll what he'd do, I'd bet he'd lose the weight. Problem with most cars is they need to be designed from the ground up to be light. Trying to make a heavy car light and still maintain structural integrity is a difficult task for sure. This is the Neons Ace card. It is light to start with. Ever seen a 2900 lb Camaro with a full interior?

 

same in southern manitoba!

 

And that was Colin Chapman's (of Lotus fame) mantra as well.

 

Same here and I've tried to fight that type of ignorance many times, even on here, especially when talking about the new Challenger and it's portly weight, which is far heavier than the original E-body Challengers as well as being far heavier than my B-body Roadrunner. It's hard to believe that some people couldn't care less about a high performance car that they wants weight, as most opposed me and said how they couldn't care less how much it weighs, which I even made clear just how important it's weight is for both performance and fuel efficency (even though most buying such a car isn't thinking or caring much about fuel costs), not to mention the excessive wear on all the performance parts (engine, trans., drivetrain, suspension, etc.) due to the massive weight. Here's an example of what I'm talking about: https://dodgeforum.com/m_330733/mpage_5/key_/tm.htm There's no wonder as to why vehicles today are now becoming heavier than ever, when no one seems to care so long as they have their power, heated, vibrating this and that. And for those that say they don't care about the fuel mileage when buying this type of car, why is it the first thing they do when having to fill it up is cry and complain about fuel costs and fuel mileage.[sm=rant.gif]

The SRT-4 does weigh quite a bit for being a Neon, but it is less than most every other car in it's class. The weight as well as the look of the car is the main reason I wanted it as a 2 door coupe. Ideally I would love to adapt the nose and rear of the SRT-4 onto the '99 R/T I had, as well as the interior, drivetrain, suspension and wheels. To have the light weight coupe I use to have with my SRT-4's powerful engine and transmission, as well as everything previously mentioned, all molded into an even better bad a**. This is why I wanted them to make the Razor concept car a reality, it's not the best looking car ever (or even close), but it had everything I really wanted: 2 door 2 seater, SRT-4 2.4L Turbo at 250 horsepower, RWD, manual transmission and absolutely nothing else, not even carpet, but I would have to add A/C to it for the 90-100+ degree summers. It weighed just around or under a ton, just imagine how well it would perform being almost 1,000 lbs. lighter than the SRT-4 and having the added benefit of far wider wheels/tires and RWD grip, plus it's low slung roadholding curve straightening ability all priced under $15,000. It would give even the most expensive super/exotic cars one helluva run for their overpriced money. Here's a pic of the Razor for those that are unfamiliar with it:


[IMG]local://upfiles/193/C6EB5837C0C34CBEAD2DAD5939390835.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]local://upfiles/193/BC56969C9E654516BF06FDA5D2231D6E.jpg[/IMG]

 

This is why I wanted my SRT-4 without any options. No kicker to weigh me down. No sunroof, no side air bags. No big uh... I guess thats all you could get. I wanted fast! That means light as possible to me.

If Mr. Chapman was still around, I bet he would have a SRT-4 in his garage to drive now and then. He would have the back seats removed, the carpet too. Who am I kidding, he wouldn't even get in until the whole thing was stripped down to bare bones . But he would enjoy the ride!