RX-8 vs SRT-4!!
This guy I know (OBNOXIOUS AS EVER!!) with his precious little srt-4 acts like any car on the road is trash compared to his ride. He thinks because he has a turbo charger and can basically outrun the majority of everyday cars on the road, that he's superior. He's even trashed the 8, because it's "a torque-less clunker, that's not designed to be like a real sports car...and doesn't compare to the SRT-4 as far as 'hardcore' driving/shifting."
Can I get comparisons that range from practical to technical; including: cost, comfort, features, performance, design...etc whatever else I've missed. Let's use the Sports Package Manual 8 for the sake of fairness. Thank you. |
did ya search?? plenty on here about the SRT-4.
long story short: SRT is just a hopped up Neon. a yet questionable motor (is the block Mitsu derived, or is it a modified Mopar unit?). i cannot comment on the ride or gearbox. suspension is archaic next to the RX-8. awful weight distribution and generally inferior chassis. aesthetics designed by a blind ricer with a chainsaw (note the NON-FUNCTIONAL hood scoop: suxor). last but not least, it's wrong wheel drive. edit: whoops, forgot brakes. RX-8 probably eats it for breakfast. the list, obviously, goes on and on... |
i don't think it's even worth anyone's time to compare and contrast...how bout this...next time he speaks, just remind him that he's driving a Neon! yes, no matter how you dress it up, it's still, eh, a Neon...
|
The RX8 will lose in straight line acceleration and price.
The SRT-4 will lose in handling, creature comforts, cool factor...etc. |
Sit down with him, and calmly and gently as possible, tell him that yes, his car is pretty fast in a straight line and yes, he will probably win a lot of stoplight races, but, at the end of the day, when he parks it in his garage, it's STILL just a Dodge Neon.
|
lol
c'mon guys, you dont want to make him feel that bad do you? although he might deserve it after all his mouth-running... |
Originally posted by wakeech long story short: SRT is just a hopped up Neon. a yet questionable motor (is the block Mitsu derived, or is it a modified Mopar unit?). i cannot comment on the ride or gearbox. suspension is archaic next to the RX-8. awful weight distribution and generally inferior chassis. aesthetics designed by a blind ricer with a chainsaw (note the NON-FUNCTIONAL hood scoop: suxor). last but not least, it's wrong wheel drive. edit: whoops, forgot brakes. RX-8 probably eats it for breakfast. the list, obviously, goes on and on... I always enjoy your posts, as they're so well articulated...not to mention very well-informed...in short, you're a smart one! But, anyway...I just wish I could see the two of you square off in a debate over which is the better car, because you know a lot. He's also a mod in some srt-4 and he seems to know a lot about his...awesome....neon :D The past two months I've heard nothing but him ranting and raving about how awesome his car is, and how everything, including G35, 350Z, several BMWs, etc don't compare to his car. I guess he's just really ignorant/stupid and i should let him talk...but it's just really gotten to me lately, and felt I'd need some help from you all to point out some technical advantages our 8s got over his non-japanese ricemobile. |
The only thing that Neon has is motor. It's claimed 215hp fell short of what was dynoed in Road and Track June 2003.
It was listed 222bhp with 246lb./ft., and that was running rich to keep temp in check. Then they used a coast-down test and noted drivetrain loss at 16bhp, which had the SRT-4 noted at 238bhp at the crank. Car is all engine. |
neons, blah
Actually, I don't really have anything against neons. And as far as bang for the buck goes, you don't get too much better than the srt-4. People who say that it is getting LESS power are wrong. it is showing more at the wheels (actually, wheel, heh, no limited slip diff) than dodge is advertising at the crank. a peppy little thing.
it's not perfect (see above about differential). And I've heard that the transmission is pretty sloppy feeling. And the body lines look like somebody slapped together a baloney sandwich. It's a screaming fast little car though. You are paying for a little torquey 4-banger. (the 250 ft lbs is pretty smoking too). If you want performance at the cost of all else, you could do worse than look in the direction of the srt-4. But that's exactly what it is. performance at the cost of all else. I'd much prefer an rx-8, just for the sheer style, cool factor, and all around beautiful car. Blah blah, my .02 is done |
It has an open diff, who the hell builds a "sporty car" with an open diff.
Not Mazda |
In the 1960's the Air Force, Navy and Marines began recieving the F4 Phantom II jet fighter. The Air Force pilots quickly characterized the aircraft such:
"The F4 proves that if you put a big enough engine on a brick it will fly" To paraphase: The SRT-4 proves that if you put a big enough turbo, stiff enough suspension and sticky enough tires on a car you can make a brick fast. BUT, in the end it's still a brick! |
You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
Invite your friend out to an autocross and let's see who goes home laughing. |
It sounds like your friend is taking some pretty big leaps with his generalizations. Yes, his car is faster. But speed alone doesn't put it into the RX-8's catagory.
Go to the race track sometime. I've seen rusted out station wagons stuffed with big blocks put a hurting on some majorly expensive cars...but that certainly doesn't make that junk wagon equal to them as an overall vehicle. Personally, I think the RX-8 could be powered by a gerbil running in place on a wheel beneath the hood, and it would STILL outsell the neon. |
For what it is, the SRT-4 is fast, but RomanoM explains that perfectly. As an overall vehicle, the RX-8 is clearly superior.
And if all this guy is concerned with is straghtline acceleration, the SRT-4 is not the best place to begin. The engine, similar to WRX engines, is probably all but tapped out from the factory. |
Sounds like this guy's got a very small...er...uh...foot. Yeah, that's it! He has very small feet. :D
|
Originally posted by RomanoM "The F4 proves that if you put a big enough engine on a brick it will fly" and would he really keep his neon srt4 over a 3 or 5 series bmw? doubt it. |
I would encourage him to race as many people as possible and even, if he wants... to up the boost on his Neon.
Then when he blows his POS motor you can just laugh at him. But hey... that's just me :) |
Originally posted by zoom44 and would he really keep his neon srt4 over a 3 or 5 series bmw? doubt it. My guess is he knows he got screwed, but instead of keepin his mouth shut, he's taking the other extreme and being stupid about it. Originally posted by Hercules I would encourage him to race as many people as possible and even, if he wants... to up the boost on his Neon. Then when he blows his POS motor you can just laugh at him. |
I'm glad I don't have friends as stupid as that :(
|
What's funny is, he's paying about 12% finance, and by the time he's done paying it off, he'll definitely be around the 30k range. So, he COULD have purchased something the likes of a 3 series, Z, 8 or whatever. gotten 1%? He would have paid 12% on a bimmer and ended up paying $40,000.00 Geez. As far as the motor lasting, I will let you know, as I have owned SEVEN rotaries, and have never driven a car that blows engines more easily than those. (well, my 1980 model actually went 230,000 but all the rest blew up dammit.) ~castrol |
i dont understand why everyone has to hate on the SRT...is it jealousy? if your happy with your car, then be happy w/ it. yea, this guy sounds like he is a complete jackass and needs to be put in his place....but not all SRT owners are like that. i know a couple who are REALLY cool and respect other cars including the RX8. sure it looks like a neon. but if you only had $20K to spend on a car, would you not consider it too? and if you want to get technical...it's not a neon. nowhere on the vehicle does it say neon, supposedly no where in the manual does it say neon, and insurance companies recognize it as a SRT 4. and i've seen a lot of false information given on this thread.
SRT is just a hopped up Neon. a yet questionable motor (is the block Mitsu derived, or is it a modified Mopar unit?) i cannot comment on the ride or gearbox. suspension is archaic next to the RX-8. aesthetics designed by a blind ricer with a chainsaw (note the NON-FUNCTIONAL hood scoop: suxor). And if all this guy is concerned with is straghtline acceleration, the SRT-4 is not the best place to begin. The engine, similar to WRX engines, is probably all but tapped out from the factory. It's claimed 215hp fell short of what was dynoed in Road and Track June 2003. It has an open diff, who the hell builds a "sporty car" with an open diff. so there are your facts...look it up before you start spitting jibberish. if you can't respect another car that has set the standard for sport compact performance...then you shouldnt be considered an enthusiast. many SRT owners are running consistent 14.0 all day long w/ a few stock SRT's hitting high 13's....and for $20K....how can you not respect that. and no i am not an SRT owner, i own a Honda Prelude....but i'm not ignorant enough to bash another car that can beat mine on the track. i just tend learn more about cars that spark an interest in me. thank you. |
ohhhhhh, yall call the SRT motor a piece of shit?? i guess the Rotary motor is the best thing to happen in the automotive industry since the Model T huh? my uncle use to own a FD and i dont think i've ever heard of a car being in the shop as much as his. i think my friend who owns a '97 RX7 said it best..."owning a 3rd gen RX7 is like dating a supermodel w/ a cocaine problem....although she looks good, she's got some bad problems"
|
Originally posted by dirtylude if you only had $20K to spend on a car, would you not consider it too? i guess the Rotary motor is the best thing ever huh? my uncle use to own a FD and i dont think i've ever heard of a car being in the shop as much as his. Only time will tell whether the SRT-4 motor or the Renesis will have fewer problems, but my money's on the rotary. |
Dirtylude, next time finish reading what people post.
The only thing that Neon has is motor. It's claimed 215hp fell short of what was dynoed in Road and Track June 2003. It was listed 222bhp with 246lb./ft., and that was running rich to keep temp in check. Then they used a coast-down test and noted drivetrain loss at 16bhp, which had the SRT-4 noted at 238bhp at the crank. Someone sounds defensive. |
Instead of bashing the SRT-4, we need to praise Dam-Chrys for having the guts to make a small car fast.
Yes, its easy to dislike the Neon. It's a HS girl's car, bought by daddy and given to her for her 16th, or for graduating. It's "cute" and it's cheap and its FWD. Don't be that guy that disrespects an automobile simply because it appeals to a group he doesn't want to be associated with. It's kind of like that moped/fat girl joke ... :D Call a fast car a fast car. The SRT-4 is a fast car. If I were in a race, I would choose it over a lot of much more expensive cars. The fact that this car is on the market is huge. GM could answer with a 250hp Cavalier and Ford could finally bring the cosworth Focus to our shore. The SRT-4 is, hopefully, the tip of the iceburg of small-displacement/small car domestic hotrods. I pray for the day when a small car is no longer referred to as an "economy" model. less > more I'll take mine with a 1.3 wankel, please. :cool: |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:29 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands