its ok though, because .. it was an srt-4 and i only lost by about 1/2 a car length, race started and we both had pretty shitty starts, peeling out half way through first, at first i didnt know it was an srt-4 just thougt it was a regular neon. that is until he pulls next to me and i here that damn turbo whining :eek7: , at this point im thinkin aw shit, he ended up beatin me by about 1/2 a car length, ...... he also had two other people in his car. well i had 3 other kills that night so 3 outa 4 aint bad.

Right. You lost to an SRT-4 by only half a car length...you guys only went to 60' right?

You don't happen to know a certain Cavalier owner, do you?

Was it yellow? I always see the yellow ones. Do they even make other colors? lol The srt4 I saw at the track ran consistent 13.5s.

I always c, yellow and silver ones. Those r the only cars that I have seen on the srt4's

13.5? Wow, thats around what the new GTO is running, kind of sad :cwm27:

Those SRT-4s are very attractive though, expecially in the blue.

I think they look cute. What is sad about a 13.5? Isn't the stock SRT4 1/4 times roughly 13.9s? I heard the 05GTO will have 400hp.

:bs:, unless you're heavily modded or you own a VR4 and for some reason named yourself after the SL.

i pulled out behind one the other day and it took off and i tried to stay behind him to no avail; he was easily 2 cars ahead in no time. tell me how a car with 30 less hp, 40 less lbs of tq and the same body weight as me stayed within 1/2 car.

maybe because he's a better driver, but still there is no way a stock SL can beat an SRT4

seen a red and 2 black ones in town along with a blue one.

I'm hoping the other guy in the black one wants to go at it (already schooled 1 black one) :grinno: guess some black srt4 around this area said he schooled a 3800 fiero formula.. he'll get it soon.

Not sure what an SL runs.. but good run? I think? maybe he couldn't drive?

"thought it was a regular neon"

:bs:

stfu kid, no need to lie.

Lighten up Frances :rolleyes: He said he lost by half a car length. He should have lost by more then that. Is the SRT faster then the SL - yes it is, nobody said it wasn't. He also didn't say he beat the car. He said he lost. He didn't say how far the race was. Holy christ - from the sounds of a few of you people, we should all be in worship of the fact anyone was allowed on the road with the fucking neon. :disappoin


Nice try though 3k - its not easy going into a race with a car that you know is faster then your own.

It in fact would've been a good (and believable) race if you had a 3000GT VR4 .

You may have raced an SRT-4, Yes, and i respect you for that, most people don't have the balls to race a car that fast. But quit the BS. You came nowhere near 1/2 a car length away from him. I know this because I come nowhere near 1/2 a car length to an SRT-4, and my car is faster than yours.

:bs:

Heck i'm with Yogs here maybe he sucked at driving? and the thread starting hit every shift well maybe he was only 80% throttle i buy it. Do we know if the neons are weight sesntive cause 2 other ppl in the car. But how can you mistake it man?
godd run though i give you props!

My friend Simeon who died was racing an srt4 and beat it and he ran 14.2.

alot of bullshitters around here lately...

I attribute it to the fresh wave of n00bs.

Geee, I know there's been alot of BS threads popping up recently, but that doesn't mean you need to wave that BS flag for everything. He said he lost, I don't see any benefit for him in BSing about the fact he "only" lost by 1/2 car, cause losing is losing! None of you were there when the race happened, so just cause you've seen SRT4's pulling 13.5s before, that don't mean this particular driver can do that same! So why don't yall just stop biting his ass and get on with life! :2cents:

I agree. The guy I saw running at the track wasn't stock.

i personally dont think neons are very attractive cars, even the srt4's. they are just to small, remind me of a geo. I know my car isnt much bigger, but it feels big when ur driving it.

Oh for gods sake people, it's an SRT-4, it's not a Viper. Now I don't mean to bash the car, but the fact is it's a mid 13 second car with a professional driver. If someone gets a bad launch, short shifts or bounces off the rev limiter a bit, we could be talking high 14s or low 15s. He had several people in the car as well.

If you guys start waving the bullshit flag at every race that gets posted here that doesn't go exactly like you predict it will, especially involving SRT-4s :p then people are going to stop posting stories.

Lighten up guys, try to have a good time, and don't automatically go calling someone out because their race didn't turn out exactly like you hoped.

LOL

You guys don't get it.

Granted, a horrible driver is capable of running a 15 in an SRT. Believe me, it's happened before.

Thing is, it takes a moderate to excellent driver to pull such a time in a 3000GT SL.

I guess you can assume that a combination of the above is the case. But my assessment is tempered by something else - the original poster's history.

He has assumed that he'd be faster than a Mustang GT, even though he has no proof, no experience relating to such, basing the assumption on pure speculation of numbers. This shows inexperience...in many things.

Strike one.

He mentioned "other races" in which he won. Although it might be possible that they were insignificant, thus not really worth the post, I find that unlikely, based on the poster. He is capable of "wasting" time, posting about a theoretical race, but yet, cannot post a real race - one in which he won.

Strike two.

He cannot even mention the distance, or how far in gears he got in the race. Too ashamed maybe? Did the race only last till 50 mph? I know when I race anybody, especially in a car that I expected to beat me, I would be proud to mention that "I hung with him till X gear" or something to that effect. Check my race posts, if you wish.

I guess I'll reserve strike three until he clarifies the race, such as my last paragraph would require. He's not quite out yet...I've never claimed to be a perfect pitcher. He's going to have to very quick with the bat on his next shot though.

hey carrnut, i once was on the freeway and a rsx-s pulled up next to me. he pucnhed it and i thought lets see if i can beat him without downshifting, so i tried and i lost by about 2 car lengths(meaning this guy thinks he's faster than me). he could have raced this guy and the srt-4 didn't recognize it was a race yet when he did he hit it and pulled on him by half a car and still going. also could have been toying with him as i have lots of civics and crx and tegs and others.

as far as his knowledge of cars, i once thought that a base mustang was a lot faster than a eclipse gsx. not everyone is very knowledgable about cars and there speed, he's probably just learning. everyone starts somewhere and 17 is about when i started really learning about cars myself. just because you like cars and like racing doesnt mean you gotta know everything about them, yet :icon16:

yeah, now leave em alone :p

hey carrnutt chill dude, come on you always have to be talking smack to any 3000gt owner. were you there when it happen? i dont think so. be quiet and let the guy tell us about his loss. if it happen or didnt happen who cares this is suppose to be all about fun. stop picking on the guy and go drive your little sentra.

hey carrnutt chill dude, come on you always have to be talking smack to any 3000gt owner. were you there when it happen? i dont think so. be quiet and let the guy tell us about his loss. if it happen or didnt happen who cares this is suppose to be all about fun. stop picking on the guy and go drive your little sentra.


That little Sentra will put to shame alot of cars that way out of its price range. Slamming him cause he has a Sentra is lame... especially since his little SE-R has spanked many a car even with it's slipping clutch.

lol people who come on and whine about being slammed for their car... and then slam someone for what they drive. I love the st33t r4c3r attitude some kids have... amusing.

whats up with people and posting threads about racing turbo compacts srts, stis, evos, these days it seems like the thing to do, lets all jump on the band wagon, lol j/k. No but I wouldnt doubt an se-r simply due to the fact that my friend has one and he races it at the track and when he pulls up nobody wants to run him because they think its a not worth running, but little do they no its a sleeper. Little red two door no dropped a cam, intake and a pair of street slikes running low 14s pretty quick in my book

that srt must have been stock....unless you have alot of work done to your car...my srt has about 300 hp and im in the mid to high 12s...but thats just me

OK let me clear some stuff up, first of all my SL is NOT stock and the srt-4 was, we raced from a stop we lined up honked 3 times and launched on the third we raced all the way up to 3rd when we finally shut down. just before we shut down he started to pull. i also mentionedd the fact that he had a bad start, i beat him off the line, but then he started pulling on me. Jees you guys have taken flaming to a new level, by the way thank you to all that stood up for me i apreciate it greatly and, here are the stock specs for an srt-4 215hp 0-60 in 5.3 1/4 in 14.2 the site i got these from is fast-autos.net. your welcome to look it up, geez :disappoin

by the way for anyone who was wondering i have a pretty decent knowledge of most cars and their abilities and carrrnut you need to go back and retake psychology because your personality evaluation was way off,...... ass

Jees you guys have taken flaming to a new level, by the way thank you to all that stood up for me i apreciate it greatly and, here are the stock specs for an srt-4 215hp 0-60 in 5.3 1/4 in 14.2 the site i got these from is fast-autos.net. your welcome to look it up, geez
Not if it is the 2004 SRT-4. They come with a 230 horsepower engine, and a LSD. They are about 2-3 tenths of a sec. faster. I can see keeping up with him until he hit 3rd, provided he had a piss poor launch. I believe that wasn't a full 1/4 mile race though. I'm almost 100 percent positive that SRT-4's go through 4 gears in the 1/4 mile.

by the way for anyone who was wondering i have a pretty decent knowledge of most cars and their abilities and carrrnut you need to go back and retake psychology because your personality evaluation was way off,...... ass

So defensiiiive. Relax it's only the internet bud. And all that's extremely debatable... we only have your word to take and you're just some kid on the internet with a 3kgt.

what the fuck does anyone care anyways. He said he lost. Does it really matter if he said it wasn't alot.

Christ no wonder there's hardly any racing stories everyone calls fucking BS all the time.

Besides if he was a proper BS'er he would've said he drove a VR4 with quad turbo's or something.

well you know what the old saying is
you lie with dogs you get carpel tunnel syndrome

Well, seeing as how he failed to mention at the very first that his car wasn't stock, keeping up with an SRT4 in a 3kGT SL and only losing by half a car even when the srt4 takes off bad is quite a stretch. If he had mentioned he had mods, he wouldn't have been called out so damn fast.

well you know what they say
if it aint broke dont go walking in the dark alone

who says that? Crazy old people thats who! Enough with the sayings.

thats some funny stuff

lol that was pretty funny.. but no it was not a quarter mile race in fact i have no idea how long it was just that we shut down just after shifting to third.

Was it yellow? I always see the yellow ones. Do they even make other colors? lol The srt4 I saw at the track ran consistent 13.5s.

Yeah, the also make them in Red, Blue, Black, and Silver. They only painted some of the first runs of the 2004 models Yellow to use up the paint. They don't paint them Yellow anymore.

the thread is pretty much dead what happend to inocent till proven guilty any way geeeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzz :uhoh: , lol j/k any ways nice death 3ksl95 may be next time you could beat an srt and video tape it so nobody can call bs :iceslolan

It in fact would've been a good (and believable) race if you had a 3000GT VR4 .

You may have raced an SRT-4, Yes, and i respect you for that, most people don't have the balls to race a car that fast. But quit the BS. You came nowhere near 1/2 a car length away from him. I know this because I come nowhere near 1/2 a car length to an SRT-4, and my car is faster than yours.

:bs:


GOOD RACE????? the SRT-4 is no were in the same league as the VR4. The VR4 will put the SRT-4 in it's place in first gear through sixth gear.

...

You're a fucking retard.



That is all.

hey a VR4 WILL DEFINITELY KICK A STOCK SRT4'S ASS SO BE QUIET!!!

you guys sound like kids. a srt4 will take a vr4 if you make 1 little mistake. and as for a stock 1st gen vr4 to a srt-4 that is a drivers race. only the newr vr4's are really faster than the srt-4 by about .5 sec give a little take a little

hey a VR4 WILL DEFINITELY KICK A STOCK SRT4'S ASS SO BE QUIET!!!

Sorry, but I just looked at 1/4 mile times for the VR4 and stock for stock they are about dead even so it would come down to drivers.

sounds good to me, and both definately good cars :iceslolan

check it out, srt-4's are running about 13.8.
yeah sure you seen one run 13.5 and he seen it run 14.2, all in all they are running about 13.8, you saying a srt-4 is as fast as a vr4 is saying that a srt-4 is as fast as a camaro ss, its not.

check it out, srt-4's are running about 13.8.
yeah sure you seen one run 13.5 and he seen it run 14.2, all in all they are running about 13.8, you saying a srt-4 is as fast as a vr4 is saying that a srt-4 is as fast as a camaro ss, its not.

Well, 13.8 is the averge time I have seen for a stock VR4's 1/4 mile time. So I can say that the SRT-4 is as fast as a VR4. The cars are equally capable. If the VR4 wasn't such a pig then it would be a much different story.

Sorry, but I just looked at 1/4 mile times for the VR4 and stock for stock they are about dead even so it would come down to drivers.

Yea on the internet specs i havent seen one website that has said the stock VR4 can run under 14 secs. Besides 3si and other 3000GT websites. When i first got my car i was able to run a 13.9 with a back second gear. And after i got that fixed my best time 13.55 secs.

And your here trying to tell me that an srt4 will keep up with a VR4 from launch all the way through every gear. I can tell you that the srt4 is very fast but it's not close to the VR4. Sure maybe it "MIGHT" start pulling alittle in second gear but that would be short lived. I also read some that the srt4 goes from 0-60 in 5.7 secs i my turbo timer reads me in at 4.8 sec 0-60 bone stock. That's almost a full second ahead.

And to back up my statement i will personally go out thier and find a srt4 and iam gonna race him and teach the neons a litle lesson. I mean saying a srt4 can run with VR4 is saying it can run with a new GTO, because i barley lost to the GTO and those things are putting out 350HP and 360ft/lbs torque.

I ran my 96 vr4 at 13.59 the first time I took it to the track. Just my .02 but with AWD I could destroy a srt4 to 60. If he has a good launch he will start narrowing the lead after the first 1/8th mile, but providing equally good drivers, the srt4 will not catch up, and the vr4 will take it in top end speed as well. So, IMHO, with equal drivers and no mistakes on either part, the vr4 wont have much of a problem with the srt4.

The vr4 runs even stock with the Supra...what happens? The vr4 takes it off the line, but the RWD Supra has less drivetrain loss than the AWD vr4 so the Supra catches up the 2nd half. Are you going to tell me the SRT4 keeps up with the Supra?
I don't mean to downplay the SRT4, it's a good car. I just get annoyed that every week, this same thing arises where people underestimate the 3000gt and people get defensive and arguments ensue. I have done the same thing, and underestimated other cars I haven't driven.

Regardless, for future reference, 91-93 vr4 stock runs high 13s-14.1
94-99 vr4s run 13.6ish stock
SLs have broken 14.9 stock, but that is with a damn good driver. Typically low-mid 15s can be expected.
Drivers, tires, conditions, everything can go into the race, but stock these are the typical times.
I don't mean to come off as a bastard, I just find that every week an argument ensues due to the 20 different sites people use to find statistics, and then everyone gets defensive about everything and the same arguments occur. If anyone with an SRT4 wishes to add their personal experience, I am sure that would help.

I dont think that the supra catches up mainly cause of drivetrain loss i think it's more of weight issue. If the 3000GT weighs as much as a supra i bet it could do a 1/4 mile in the very low 13's. Like 13.1-13.2, And i wont believe and cant believe until i see it that a Srt4 will even give a VR4 a good run. By the time 1/4mile comes around i can garentee that the VR4 will have at least 2 or 3 car lengths. Note that two or 3 car lengths in 1/4 is proably .2 or .3 seconds faster.

GOOD RACE????? the SRT-4 is no were in the same league as the VR4. The VR4 will put the SRT-4 in it's place in first gear through sixth gear.

:rolleyes:

Sorry, but I just looked at 1/4 mile times for the VR4 and stock for stock they are about dead even so it would come down to drivers.

:iagree:

:rolleyes:



:iagree:



i find that halrious a srt4 "NEON" can keep up with a VR4. :disappoin That will be the day hell freezes over. That's like comparing apples and oranges. If you want a good comparison on how the srt4 runs try putting up up agisnt a S2000. Thats what the srt4's should be racing.

I am not underestimating the 3000GT VR4. I have a friend that owns a Stealth RT/TT and I love driving it. However, the SRT-4 is capable of mid 13 second 1/4 mile times, and that is about what the VR4 is capable of, stock for stock. I am talking about right off the showroom floor. The problem is that you're overestimating your car, not me underestimating it. They are about even and it would depend on the driver in a race. I don't think you realize that your car weighs about 3,800 pounds. That is a VERY heavy car.

Have you people not heard of a power to weight ratio? The SRT-4 is putting down 235HP or so to the wheels while a stock VR4 will put less than 300 to the wheels.

You do the math.

The problem with some people who think their cars are the absolute bombest is the fact that theyve never driven anything else...

I thought my blazer was fast...
till I got my mx6.
and I thought it was pretty fast...
till my girlfriend let me drive her 99 TA...

I think that on the average a 3000GT VR4 will beat the SRT4 from a dig. The main reason I say that is due to the AWD launch. It's is probably near impossible to launch the SRT-4 from a dig. Most people don't have the skills to drive a high powered FWD car within it's limits. From a roll I don't care what anybody says though, an SRT-4 will clean a 3000GT VR4 a new one. They trap about 2 mph faster in the quarter mile. I actually think the SRT-4 dynos almost as high as the 3000 (230whp versus 250 awhp).

sorry....i just read my last post and i sounded kinda snotty,i didnt mean to come off like that,i was just trying to say that the srt is a pretty quick car,and for you keeping up with it i give you props!....no matter what kinda car you have....believe me,i give credit to anyone who enjoys cars and fixing them up( fast, loud,"pretty" whatever!) i hate when people argue about whos car does this or that, you dont have to love every car just dont hate on mine,or just dont tell me you think it sucks,you know what i mean?? sorry im just rambling now....

dude shut up an SRT4 shouldnt even be compared to a 3000gt vr4. so stop comparing those cars. instead you should be comparing a vr4 with supras,rx7s or 300zxs. and an srt4 with cars in its league. and by the way im not saying an SL is in the srt4s league because that is not true.

...

Is someone a little defensive?

You're hopeless kid... utterly hopeless.

dude shut up an SRT4 shouldnt even be compared to a 3000gt vr4. so stop comparing those cars. instead you should be comparing a vr4 with supras,rx7s or 300zxs. and an srt4 with cars in its league. and by the way im not saying an SL is in the srt4s league because that is not true.

Dude, you need to pull your head out of your butt and open your mind. Also, drop the attitude, I am sick of people acting like assholes in here and I won't tolerate it anymore.

dude shut up an SRT4 shouldnt even be compared to a 3000gt vr4. so stop comparing those cars. instead you should be comparing a vr4 with supras,rx7s or 300zxs. and an srt4 with cars in its league. and by the way im not saying an SL is in the srt4s league because that is not true.
Where shall I start with this comment. First off you need mature automotively speaking. Secondly that has about the same amount of logic as saying in the 80's that a Gran National shouldn't be compared to a corvette. Well they were faster then them for awhile, so they can be compared. Actually I remember when a automotive mag tested a Syclone versus a Ferrari. It blew it away at the strip too. Any cars can be compared that are soo close performance wise. In fact the Supra and the RX7 can be compared to the SRT-4 as well.

check this out, moderators and all. if you know me i am not biased towards anything, check my posts. i raced a srt-4, if i was stock that would have been a good race, meaning equal times neck and neck. but i have a 1st gen vr4, the 2nd gens will blow me away and an srt-4.

i believe it was what motor trend that ran the supra and vr4 at the same time 13.6

yes srt-4 is capable of 13.5 as a supra is capable of 12.9, if you ask any 3kgt owner and ask them whats the fastest time a vr4 has did the 1320 stock you will hear 13.0, so yeah we are capable of 13.0 but we normaly run more like 13.5. if you like i will show you some sites that show you our times for the 2nd gens.

http://popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars_trucks/1999/7/comparison_test_13_quickest_cars/images/tb_mitsubishi.jpg
10 MITSUBISHI 3000GT

Putting the power to the pavement is the name of the acceleration game. The Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4 has 320 hp, much less than the Jag and Lightning, and the same power rating as the Mustang Cobra. So what gives the Mitsubishi the advantage over them? Traction.

This is the only all-wheel-drive car in this test. That means no wheelspin. Launching the Mitsubishi is so simple, it's like flying into outer space - even a monkey can do it. Just tach up the DOHC twin-turbocharged V6 up near its 6000 rpm power peak and drop that clutch. Granted, this isn't the best thing for the car's durability, but it sure gets this 2+2 off the line like a slingshot. All four 18-in. tires dig in, the 3000GT squats like Mike Piazza, and you are gone.

Don't expect any rubber when you throw gears, either. Tire slip in this car is harder to come by than a date with Pamela Anderson. Shifter action and clutch takeup could be a bit smoother, so quick gear changes aren't easy. But the V6's surprising amount of low-end torque really gets the heavy Mitsubishi going. And the motor pulls right up to its 7000 rpm redline.

One thing missing from the Mitsubishi's stellar performance: the right sounds. Its hair dryer exhaust note just doesn't cut it.

Test Summary:
Mitsubishi 3000GT

Base price: $44,600, Price as tested: $45,140
Engine: 3.0L/181.0 CID DOHC 24v twin turbo V6
HP: 320 @ 6000 rpm, Torque: 315 ft.-lb. @ 2500 rpm
Trans: 6M, Drivetrain: front engine/awd
Final drive: 3.87:1 w/center viscous coupling
Curb weight: 3737 lb, Weight/HP ratio: 11.7
Horsepower/liter: 106.7, Tires: 245/40ZR18
Acceleration: 0-30 mph: 1.70 sec. 0-60 mph: 5.00 sec.
1/4 mile: 13.44 sec. @ 101.79 mph

an srt-4 is a good match for the vr4 is like saying the 350z is a good match for the vr4, no a evo-8 is a good match for a vr4 and an sti is a good match for the vr4 the supra the trans am the camaro ss, the nsx in the 1320 these cars are comparebale to the vr4 not the sti. only for the 1st gens. and btw here are some more stats

1994-1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4

This Mitsubishi has only undergone minor changes for a decade since its 1990 release. The Spyder came in 1995. Numerous facelifts have kept the styling fresh. It was sold in USA till 1999. Sold as GTO in Japan till 2001.

Base price : $30,000 (used '99) Get a free price quote

Engine : V6, turbocharged, DOHC, front engine AWD
Displacement : 2,972 cc
Valve : 24 valves, 4 valves per cylinder
Transmission : 6-spd manual
Fuel economy : city - 18 mpg
highway - 24 mpg

Suspension : F - Independent MacPherson strut
R - Independent upper and lower A-arms
Brakes : F - Vented discs
R - Vented discs

Horsepower : 320 hp @ 6000 rpm
Torque : 315 lb-ft @ 2500 rpm
Redline : 7000 rpm

Top speed : 155 mph(electronically limited)
0-60 mph : 5.0 sec.
0-¼ mile : 13.5 sec @ 105.0 mph
60-0 braking distance : 125 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.90 g

Curb Weight : 3760 lbs(coupe), 3995 lbs(Spyder)
Overall length : 180.7 in.
Wheelbase : 97.2 in.
Overall Width : 72.4 in.
Height : 50.6 in.(coupe), 49.3 lbs(Spyder)

Press Reviews and Road Tests

Competitors :
Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo (1990-1996)
Nissan Skyline R32 GT-R (1990-1994)
Toyota Supra Turbo (1993-1998)

http://www.modernracer.com/mitsubishi3000gtvr4.html

I think that on the average a 3000GT VR4 will beat the SRT4 from a dig. The main reason I say that is due to the AWD launch. It's is probably near impossible to launch the SRT-4 from a dig. Most people don't have the skills to drive a high powered FWD car within it's limits. From a roll I don't care what anybody says though, an SRT-4 will clean a 3000GT VR4 a new one. They trap about 2 mph faster in the quarter mile. I actually think the SRT-4 dynos almost as high as the 3000 (230whp versus 250 awhp).


So it traps 2 mile hr more in the 1/4 but the VR4 is still ahead in the 1/4 mile and ask any VR4 driver the VR4 has a very good top end due to it's gearing. From a roll i dont think the Srt4 can take it either. It's peak power is at 5300rpms. That is not nearly as close as the VR4's powerband. If you were at a role from 65 mph i can garentee you the VR4 will take it and keep its lead through every gear.

So it traps 2 mile hr more in the 1/4 but the VR4 is still ahead in the 1/4 mile and ask any VR4 driver the VR4 has a very good top end due to it's gearing.
No offense but I call BS on that. I use to own a Stealth R/T twin turbo, and can vouch for it sucking from a roll. BTW some of you guys are posting the fastest times for VR4's that I have seen. I have a subscription to several mags and most VR4's are in the high 13's 1/4 mile wise. Heck some of the early ones had a 14 sec. flat quarter mile time. They have decent top end, but they also have alot of reciprocating mass.

13.55 the fastest???? That's not nearly as good as what a professional driver can do. I take my self as a good driver but iam only a begginer compared to alot of drivers out thier. 13.55-13.6 are my consistant times.

wow you owned a stealth tt and you think its slow from a roll? how fast did you go in that car? my car with just exh, out ran a trans am ls1 at 150mph and keeping with him form 70 all the way to 145 as i passed him. by turning up my boost to 11 that makes me equal with a 2nd gen vr4 and i was even with a damn c5 vette, what were you doing just simply hitting in 4th and not downshifting to 3rd? or were you downshifting to third at 50mph? every ohter vr4 owner i know knows that our top end is monsterous. look if you don't know you don't know, i can't convince you guys otherwise obviously. so beleive what you beleive, a srt-4 is faster than a vr4 or the same speed or whatever. and keep thinking a 2nd gen vr4 runs high 13's and get your ass handed to you. ask yogs what his time is in the heaviest of all the spyder, ask him what his other car ran that he gave away. i'm done with this one guys, NO LOVE LOST, i'm simply tired of trying to ecucate those about the VR4.

No I am referring to the 13 sec. flat quarter mile time. You don't see me posting a 13.1 sec. 1/4 mile time for my EVO. I'd say a VR4 could pull off a mid 13 sec. pass in the most ideal situation.

thats what i said, i said it can run 13.0 but it usually runs 13.5, check it agian. i'm not tryna be rude man your cool and all, but it does get irritating ya know

yea it does. people just dont seem to believe anything about a 3000gt, it doesnt matter if its an SL or the monstruous VR4 they just think what they want to think. oh and by the way, sorry to POLYGON its just that i get frustrated when it comes to my dearly loved cars. please forgive me! and to the rest of you guys, you dont have to believe anything we say. hopefully one of these days you guys will encounter a 3000GT VR4 and then will truly find out what it is capable of doing.

I have seen some low 13s stock Stealth R/T TT timeslips. The mags all seem to agree on 13.5s. Youngvr4 have you ever ran your car?

no not yet, my trannie is horrible synchro's are very bad, so im afraid to launch and can't shift into 2nd or third without grind unless i do it slowly. once i get my tranny fixed i will def go to the track, but i'll only run once or twice, don't like dropping the clutch at 5800 rpm.

hopefully one of these days you guys will encounter a 3000GT VR4 and then will truly find out what it is capable of doing.
Been there got bitch slapped by one when I had the 98 Cobra. Oh and I mean BITCHSLAPPED!!!! I know what they are capable of. I also know that some mags have ringer cars in them (i.e. the EVO in MT that ran a 13.1 sec. 1/4 mile). Kinda like the Subaru XT that ran a high 13 sec. 1/4 mile time. I knew a dude from another board that had larger turbos and fuel upgrades. His car was sick. I'd say low 11 sec. quick. BTW I also had problems with my Stealth and the synchros. Back then you couldn't buy synchros seperately.

So what you saying is dont put up the lowest time for each car then that means you shouldnt put the lowest times for the srt4. I have been to 7 websites all the highest one i seen was 14.2 lowest was 13.9 and i average them out and the srt4 came in at a 14 flat. That's still no where near close to what the vr4 average out is.

yea it does. people just dont seem to believe anything about a 3000gt, it doesnt matter if its an SL or the monstruous VR4 they just think what they want to think. oh and by the way, sorry to POLYGON its just that i get frustrated when it comes to my dearly loved cars. please forgive me! and to the rest of you guys, you dont have to believe anything we say. hopefully one of these days you guys will encounter a 3000GT VR4 and then will truly find out what it is capable of doing.

Hey, I know how you feel. If you think people ridicule and underestimate your car, try driving my GTC. I know what the VR4 is capable of, I have driven many stock and modified. I am just saying that performance wise the VR4 and SRT-4 are in the same class. The VR4 isn't much faster and it will depend mostly on the driver. That is all I am saying. Trust me, I love the VR4 and Stealth RT/TT they are awesome cars.

it seems to me that every one that races an srt the srt owner 99.9% is a little baby boomer or cant drive worth of sh...t, but I not being pro srt and anti vr4 just want to state so factors in this conversation such as the the vr4 has the hp advantage, the traction advantage on street, but the srt basicaly only has the weight advantage, not to metion most of the comparisons are a v6 turo awd car against and 4 banger fwd turbo car, you figure. but to say that its not even compared in its performance class is a load of crap. im not saying its faster stock to stock but you cant say it wont give them a run for its money and not to mention ITS JUST A NEON :grinno:

well ive seen first hand what the srt-4 can do and its fast but i dont think it could recover from the awd launch of the vr4, the most important part of a race is the launch and the vr4 has the undeniable advantage in that aspect. so my doughs on the vr4 but with some slight mod s the srt-4 could definitley give it a run for its money.

with no doubt awd has a devistating blow on the diggs, but they do have disadvantages like distributing power to all four wheels and keeping the power band going through top end, and yes stock to stock the vr4 can beat the srt with the simple factors of both good drivers and both good running motors, but once again your comparing v6 awd tt against a 4 banger single turbo NEON :uhoh:

And thats why the neon is not in the VR4's performance comparison. And thats what i been trying to get across.

in its category no, such as supras tt, 300 tt, rx7 tt, skylines tt ect..... but competing in performance its not that far away, you get what im saying

i agree 100%

See, the SRT-4 is not in the same class as the VR4 and similar cars, but it blows the doors off everything in it's class and it's performance is about on par with the VR4 and similar car.

yeah and so is the 350Z. there the best speed for the buck, brand new. but i would never own one, interior and looks and what not doesn't fit me.

I see the performance of the Srt4 compared to is a s2000. They very similar specs except in some catagory as the srt4 has more torque but the s2000 has more HP and weighs less.

what the hell are you talking about?
there are so many die hard 3kgt fans in here, that you're forgetting that less expensive cars can, and do, run with your car.

get off your high horses, and realize that it can run with you. and it does.

sounds like some people don't like that.

if you can get an srt4 into the mid 13's stock with a good driver, and a good driver can get a vr4 in the mid 13's, why can't you compare?

the vr4 is an overly electronically controlled cow of a car.
it's heavy, very.
too many electronic controls and gizmos.

yay.

so since the srt4 isn't in it's class, you can't compare them?
it should be compared to an s2k?
how do you figure?

you shouldn't compare a car with a price tag twice that of an srt4, should you?

your replies aren't making all that much sense, just trying to get people off the back of an overweight car...

(and please, don't get me wrong, i'm WELL aware of the capabilities of the vr4. the shop that built my car has 5-6 that they've done work on, including some VERY sick cars, 500+hp. so i know my vr4's. and i know their headaches. and i know their stock capability)

See your using the lowest time with a "GOOD DRIVER" and good condition meaning good launch and everthing. The VR4 can run mid 13s "NO PROBLEM" while the srt4 has to work at it evertying has to be good and a damn good driver to run a mid 13 sec. Meaning the average joe will be runnign 13.8-14.2

And that is what s2000's run are 13.9-14.2

what the hell are you talking about?
there are so many die hard 3kgt fans in here, that you're forgetting that less expensive cars can, and do, run with your car.

get off your high horses, and realize that it can run with you. and it does.

sounds like some people don't like that.

if you can get an srt4 into the mid 13's stock with a good driver, and a good driver can get a vr4 in the mid 13's, why can't you compare?

the vr4 is an overly electronically controlled cow of a car.
it's heavy, very.
too many electronic controls and gizmos.

yay.

so since the srt4 isn't in it's class, you can't compare them?
it should be compared to an s2k?
how do you figure?

you shouldn't compare a car with a price tag twice that of an srt4, should you?

your replies aren't making all that much sense, just trying to get people off the back of an overweight car...

(and please, don't get me wrong, i'm WELL aware of the capabilities of the vr4. the shop that built my car has 5-6 that they've done work on, including some VERY sick cars, 500+hp. so i know my vr4's. and i know their headaches. and i know their stock capability)

:grinno:

i don't follow your smiley, except that i hope we're on the same page.

why are people not allowed to compare 2 cars from different categories?

there were alot of people defending the skyline when it was compared to a ferrari, which isn't in its class/category.

so what gives, exactly? (and i know it was some of the pro vr4 people in this thread, and you know who i'm talking about)

so if i show up with an s10 with a v8 and corvette suspension that outhandles and outruns your vr4, it's not worth racing, b/c it's not in the same category, right?

hmm...

a good driver?
i'll bet you that a good driver in a neon srt4 (same driver) could get the same time from a vr4.

and the driver getting mid 13's in a vr4 could get a similar time in a neon.

if you know how to drive, it's not hard to do.

so b/c you've got to work harder to get the same time STOCK from a neon srt4, it's not in the same category?

no sense? yep.

because fly, with a good driver the vr4 will run down to 13.0 with ok drivers average drivers they run 13.5, whith and amazing driver a srt-4 runs 13.5(probably a factory freak) and the average driver will run more like a 14.0, meaning with 2 average drivers the vr4 wins. this all depends on the year of the vr4, 1st gens will battle it out with a srt-4 as they run similar times, but the 2nd gen vr4's are clearly faster in the 1/4 or at tops speeds.

i don't follow your smiley, except that i hope we're on the same page.

why are people not allowed to compare 2 cars from different categories?

there were alot of people defending the skyline when it was compared to a ferrari, which isn't in its class/category.

so what gives, exactly? (and i know it was some of the pro vr4 people in this thread, and you know who i'm talking about)

so if i show up with an s10 with a v8 and corvette suspension that outhandles and outruns your vr4, it's not worth racing, b/c it's not in the same category, right?

hmm...

Thats a whole diffrent set up if you came in with a s10 with a v8 and corvette suspension because that's not a stock car. This isnt an argument about why or why cant you compare these two cars. What we are arguing about is the performance comparison and how the Srt4 is no were in the VR4's class in performance wise. So next time read all the post first "MORON" You can compare a srt4 and VR4 all you want what we are arguing about is performance and how a srt4 is slower in every aspect of the VR4.

no need for name calling

Numbers racing sure is fun... :screwy:
Run 'em at the track.

A SRT4 can do mid 13.7s stock before everyone on the SRT4Forums calls BS.
Looks like a VR4 runs comparible times, possibly a little faster (when new... as I bet all VR4s were totally babied... :rofl:)

Total driver's race.

Let's keep the name calling to a minimum...

This debate is interesting... I'd hate to have to close it. :disappoin

You can say that the VR-4 is a fat ass with a Turbod V-6. Compare it to a 4 Cylinder Neon with a turbo and it weighs a hell of a lot less. It Evens out. VR-4 has AWD, probably its only true advantage, show me a AWD SRT4 and then i will compare them.

You can say that the VR-4 is a fat ass with a Turbod V-6. Compare it to a 4 Cylinder Neon with a turbo and it weighs a hell of a lot less. It Evens out. VR-4 has AWD, probably its only true advantage, show me a AWD SRT4 and then i will compare them.



How does that make any sense?

'97 3000GT VR4: 3737 lbs.
'03 Dodge SRT4: 2939 lbs.

Ok... so now that we're comparing weight. How does the VR4 suddenly weigh a hell of a lot less?

Just because the SRT-4 isn't AWD doesn't mean you can't compare the two cars.

That's like saying, You can't compare a Supra TT to a Skyline GT-R cause it's not AWD.

Gimme a break. :rolleyes:

Just bad wording, i was saying the SRT4 weighs a lot less. Saying a 3000gt weighs less is just retarded. If the VR-4 wins off the line every time and beats the SRT4 EVERYTIME i dont see how you can compare a car to something it beats EVERYTIME. Unless you have a complete idiot driving.

Just bad wording, i was saying the SRT4 weighs a lot less. Saying a 3000gt weighs less is just retarded. If the VR-4 wins off the line every time and beats the SRT4 EVERYTIME i dont see how you can compare a car to something it beats EVERYTIME. Unless you have a complete idiot driving.

Of course it gets the hole shot, but we're not just talking about 60' times here.

See your using the lowest time with a "GOOD DRIVER" and good condition meaning good launch and everthing. The VR4 can run mid 13s "NO PROBLEM" while the srt4 has to work at it evertying has to be good and a damn good driver to run a mid 13 sec. Meaning the average joe will be runnign 13.8-14.2
Hmm that' odd, I have read alot of mags where the 3000 GT/VR4 has run a 14 flat 1/4 mile. This kinda reminds me of when I use to go to the illegal races. I remember my buddy Steve smacking VR4's around like it was going out of style. At the time I had just purchased a Stealth twin turbo. Anyways, an Armenian guy came up to give me props on my car. He then proceeded to tell my buddy that his car was shit (1999 Z28, which now runs 11's). My buddy later told me that he challenged the guy, and that the guy wouldn't race him. I think some people put their cars on a pillar too high to wanna race other cars. Personally that is a shame, because no matter what the cost of the car is so long as it is close it is always fun.

its a shame that someone like you owned a Stealth. makes me sad. VR4S running 14's? must be with someone who doesnt know how to drive. vr4s run 13.5 average. seems you dont understand that. Come on an SL with a awesome driver can get into 14.9s. and you're saying that vr4 runs 14s. thats funny!!!!

Yea i do not know were ur getting the idea that a VR4 runs 14's maybe if you launced bad missed second gear and just all around suck at driving you can get 14. I said this many of times already When i first got my car it had a bad second gear syncro and i still run under 14 secs.

i agree. well said

1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 Pictures and Specifications
... 1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4. General Information ... 14.0 sec. Quarter Mile: 13.9 sec @ 102 mph ...
www.fast-autos.net/mitsubishi/mitsubishi3000gt.html

Uh... did 3kgt just diss the stealth rt tt while praising the vr4 like it's gods gift to racing?

Dude... seriously... become educated on cars before you come here.

0-100 mph: 14.0 sec
Quarter Mile: 13.9 sec @ 102 mph


Anyone see anything kinda WEIRD here? Atleast use a site with some kind of consistancy in what they say. Medio he was dissing the poster, not the car, atleast thats what i got out of it.

OH MY GOD! how many times will i have to say this.
1st gen vr4's 91-93 300hp 14.1-13.7 1/4 mile
2nd gen vr4's 94-99 320hp 13.5-13.0 1/4 mile

damn and usually they dont bs. I will get another site http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/roadtests/roadtest/44178/article.html

"quarter-mile in 14 seconds flat at 105 mph"

hey you guys do you want me to post times from sites, actually i already have, read the whole thread please and look back at what i just posted

youngvr4 i believe your right on the money

Check it out. All of you self-righteous 3si.org rejects, chill the fuck out.

It's not your car, or even your fucking type of car that was being called on in this thread, at least by me. It was the PERSON behind the wheel that was being called out, as a car can't lie...or did you not know that?

Even then I didn't all-out call him a liar, I said his story did not make sense.

Jesus. The way you guys sound all over this board, you'd think that you guys own the automotive equivalent of Rodney Dangerfield.

There's two other 3000GT VR-4 owners that have been in here, and never bothered with the self-righteous crap you guys are pulling, and has even shown respect towards 'lesser' cars, be it Neon or not. Their screennames are YogsVR4, and youngvr4.

Take a lesson n00bs, and learn to get in where you fit in.