SRT-4 is still just a neon..
July-27th-2006, 10:23 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Suffolk, VA
Posts: 60
SRT-4 is still just a neon..
I 
when I saw this.. XDD I espically love the part when the shift **** comes off.. even though it was probaly some aftermarket one..
such an unfair race, the cobra should have been going in reverse to make it more fair.
here's the dumbastic stomping on the SRT-4
http://videos.streetfire.net/search/...8c3c85cc05.htm
if that ain't quality right there baby, idk what is.
when I saw this.. XDD I espically love the part when the shift **** comes off.. even though it was probaly some aftermarket one..such an unfair race, the cobra should have been going in reverse to make it more fair.
here's the dumbastic stomping on the SRT-4
http://videos.streetfire.net/search/...8c3c85cc05.htm
if that ain't quality right there baby, idk what is.
Last edited by Lozz; July-27th-2006 at 10:25 AM.
July-27th-2006, 12:13 PM
#2
Clean-Up Crew
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Pleasure Point, Ca.
Posts: 2,360
Not really much of a kill. FWD econobox VS a Mustang with a supercharged V8. I guess the guy in the Neon was a glutton for punishment or something.
The guy in the mustang oughtta be racing GTOs and ****, not claiming victory over little FWD neons.
The guy in the mustang oughtta be racing GTOs and ****, not claiming victory over little FWD neons.
July-27th-2006, 01:40 PM
#3
Moderator/ Pocket Tuner
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,150
ACTUALLY, a SRT-4 is a plenty good match for a GT Mustang.....similar hp and weight numbers...usually stock for stock a GT will kill an SRT-4, but it's just too easy to get big power gains modding the SRT-4...
A supercharged GT is a different story though....
A supercharged GT is a different story though....
July-28th-2006, 09:21 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Seguin, TX
Posts: 244
Originally Posted by eggynatey
Not really much of a kill. FWD econobox VS a Mustang with a supercharged V8. I guess the guy in the Neon was a glutton for punishment or something.
The guy in the mustang oughtta be racing GTOs and ****, not claiming victory over little FWD neons.
The guy in the mustang oughtta be racing GTOs and ****, not claiming victory over little FWD neons.
July-28th-2006, 11:30 PM
#7
Faster than you think
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 363
The power to weight ratios of a stock GT Mustang (last gen) and a stock SRT-4 are nearly identical (11.8 vs 11.9:1), with the advantage going to the GT. Now the 390 hp S/Ced Cobra that came out around '03 should demolish it no matter what (~7.8:1). Those are mean cars. But hey, you have to look at the price point of an SRT-4 (at about $20-21k new) versus a then new GT (idk? ~$25k?), and about $36k for a Cobra when it was new then.
I don't care if it's a Neon. I don't need a nice interior to go fast. The SRT-4 seats suck for me because I'm 6'5" and they hunch me over, so I'd swap those out for some decent Recaros or something. But otherwise, I think it'd be a fun car to own.
Anyways, just my thoughts.
I don't care if it's a Neon. I don't need a nice interior to go fast. The SRT-4 seats suck for me because I'm 6'5" and they hunch me over, so I'd swap those out for some decent Recaros or something. But otherwise, I think it'd be a fun car to own.
Anyways, just my thoughts.
July-29th-2006, 07:20 AM
#8
Moderator/ Pocket Tuner
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,150
Originally Posted by cornercarve98
The power to weight ratios of a stock GT Mustang (last gen) and a stock SRT-4 are nearly identical (11.8 vs 11.9:1), with the advantage going to the GT. Now the 390 hp S/Ced Cobra that came out around '03 should demolish it no matter what (~7.8:1). Those are mean cars. But hey, you have to look at the price point of an SRT-4 (at about $20-21k new) versus a then new GT (idk? ~$25k?), and about $36k for a Cobra when it was new then.
I don't care if it's a Neon. I don't need a nice interior to go fast. The SRT-4 seats suck for me because I'm 6'5" and they hunch me over, so I'd swap those out for some decent Recaros or something. But otherwise, I think it'd be a fun car to own.
Anyways, just my thoughts.
I don't care if it's a Neon. I don't need a nice interior to go fast. The SRT-4 seats suck for me because I'm 6'5" and they hunch me over, so I'd swap those out for some decent Recaros or something. But otherwise, I think it'd be a fun car to own.
Anyways, just my thoughts.
first of all, only ricers talk about power to weight ratios
and if you're talking a NEW GT...a new GT will DEMOLISH a SRT-4 stock for stock...hell a new edge GT(99-04) will take an SRT-4 stock for stock...and if you want to talk money you can get a new edge GT for roughly $12K, depending on years and mileage..I dare you to find and SRT-4 for $12K that isnt either ragged to hell, or wrecked
power to weight doesnt mean ****, especially when your talking peak numbers...
you are only considering horsepower...not TORQUE
torque wins races, horsepower just sells cars....
July-29th-2006, 10:39 AM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Seguin, TX
Posts: 244
Originally Posted by macdaddyslomo
first of all, only ricers talk about power to weight ratios
Originally Posted by macdaddyslomo
and if you're talking a NEW GT...a new GT will DEMOLISH a SRT-4 stock for stock...hell a new edge GT(99-04) will take an SRT-4 stock for stock...and if you want to talk money you can get a new edge GT for roughly $12K, depending on years and mileage..I dare you to find and SRT-4 for $12K that isnt either ragged to hell, or wrecked
power to weight doesnt mean ****, especially when your talking peak numbers...
you are only considering horsepower...not TORQUE
torque wins races, horsepower just sells cars....
power to weight doesnt mean ****, especially when your talking peak numbers...
you are only considering horsepower...not TORQUE
torque wins races, horsepower just sells cars....
July-29th-2006, 09:21 PM
#10
Faster than you think
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 363
Well, I'm glad I'm not a ricer... I did torque to weight ratios as well (if that matters to you at this point)--I just didn't post them--and the GT is at a big advantage. I am well aware of "torque wins races, horsepower just sells cars" saying. It goes along with one of my favorite quotes by whomever said it first: "There is no replacement for displacement."
I knew the new GT was going to do much better, so that's why I didn't bother with that comparison, even though it would have been relavent for an '05 to '05 comparison...I was more referring to 2003 when the SRT-4 came out. Anyways. I know I can't find a decent SRT-4 for anywhere close to $12k, so I'm not going to try.
I chucked the power to weight numbers out to show an indication (read: not final result) of performance in a comparable way. Of course there are the factors of torque (as you mentioned), power/torque curves, driver skill, drivetrain layout (in which the SRT-4 will spin it's fronts because of the weight transfer), differentials (if installed), tires, suspension, etc--that can and will vary the final result.
Maybe ricers talk about power to weight because their cars have no torque to speak of...
I knew the new GT was going to do much better, so that's why I didn't bother with that comparison, even though it would have been relavent for an '05 to '05 comparison...I was more referring to 2003 when the SRT-4 came out. Anyways. I know I can't find a decent SRT-4 for anywhere close to $12k, so I'm not going to try.
I chucked the power to weight numbers out to show an indication (read: not final result) of performance in a comparable way. Of course there are the factors of torque (as you mentioned), power/torque curves, driver skill, drivetrain layout (in which the SRT-4 will spin it's fronts because of the weight transfer), differentials (if installed), tires, suspension, etc--that can and will vary the final result.
Maybe ricers talk about power to weight because their cars have no torque to speak of...
July-30th-2006, 11:39 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: DC metro area
Posts: 866
sure you dont need a nice interior to go fast, lambo wont argue with that. but you plop down a good chunk of your income for a car, i'd expect the insides (the part youre gonna interact with the most) to stay together over the years. ive been in my fair share of dodge/chryslers, and those interior squeeks and shakes bother the heck out of me.
July-31st-2006, 09:35 PM
#13
Faster than you think
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 363
Good point. I'm used to hearing people slam the SRT-4's interior like that was what was holding them up from what was otherwise a performance bargain. I personally don't think it's that bad--which is to say that it's typical Chrysler Corp. fare. So my initial response regarding the interior was an overreaction. Sorry, guys.
Anyways...
Anyways...
