Hey guys, on a roll of 40mph..what would be the out come, say to like 120mph..? I'm thinking the srt4 might be behind alittle..but not by much. Both are stock ofcoarse and the 04 GT being a manual 4.6 V8.

Here's what makes me ask this question.... Last night i was driving and listening to some music, just chilling (nothing else to do on LI at 2am).. So i'm in massapequa on sunrise highway, a silver 05 srt4 drives up to me..and it sounded awesome (blow off valve). At the light we where side by side, and i told him that turbo sounds great, he said he just put on a bov..but not much else. So the light turns green, we're just coasting..and i shouted it..let's both floor it at 40.. He agrees (smiling then honks his horn 3 times).. Now i gun it, and it sounded like he went from 3rd to 2nd..got a car length ahead..shifted to 3rd..as i'm catching up to him.. By 80mph i had my front bumper on his rear..got up to 90 or so and then he took off getting like 2 car's on me..i stopped at 100mph..

Now, i drive a tired 4.6 v8 95 tbird..with 3.27 gears and removed air silencer w/cold air intake (and no mufflers for some sound :-) My car has 133K miles also. There is no way i'd be able to hang with that car past 90/100...but would a 04 GT..? When i raced my bud in the GT from a stop, he got like 4 car's on me by 90mph... His is completely stock also.

PS, that's the only time when my car is fast...is from like 40 to 80....i want a faster car :-(

Also, i don't think he shifted past 4500...cause if he did, i'd be WAY behind.

Well I'd think in the bottom end it'd be a drivers race with whoever takes the line gets the lead. I've drove an '04 GT and I think it'd pull hard on the SRT once they got around 110.

I've never had the chance though to driver or ride in a SRT though. I know a guy who knows a guy who owns one and he says once you get past 100 it loses a bit of its punch.

If i was in a 95 supercoupe w/5speed...i would have slayed him up to 130. Those supercoupes haul ass.

From a roll the srt-4 would win.

If i was in a 95 supercoupe w/5speed...i would have slayed him up to 130. Those supercoupes haul ass.

yep... :grinyes:

PS, yer LX has 3.27's. I hate you. I'm stuck with 3,08's in my LX..

very close race, i did it once, we reached 125mph stang had me by his front fender up to 100 then i started to edge ahead and once we reached 125 i had him by a front fender as well. this was way before i got my turbo timer and the stang had mufflers.

From everything I have heard its a pretty decent race stock to stock. Those SRT4s can be quick though.

Probably the SRT-4, but depends on the driver.

very close race, i did it once, we reached 125mph stang had me by his front fender up to 100 then i started to edge ahead and once we reached 125 i had him by a front fender as well. this was way before i got my turbo timer and the stang had mufflers.

Your trying to say that your turbo timer is a mod? That gives HP?

SRT-4's are lighter, and are pumping out as much as, if not more then, a 99-04 Mustang GT. It would most likely win a GT. A Mach 1/ 05 Mustang GT/ 03 Cobra would murder it though. This is of course assuming the cars are stock though.

SRT-4's are lighter, and are pumping out as much as, if not more then, a 99-04 Mustang GT. It would most likely win a GT. A Mach 1/ 05 Mustang GT/ 03 Cobra would murder it though. This is of course assuming the cars are stock though.

I thought the 99-04 GT made 260 hp?

I thought the 99-04 GT made 260 hp?

Yeah 260hp and 302 pounds of torque. He is likely thinking about the earlier 4.6 motor, a 96-98 GT would get beat by an SRT 4 for sure. The SRT4 and the GT run pretty comparable times, I would say its a drivers race.

I'd put money on the 05 Srt-4 from a roll because it has the advantage there but the 99-04 GT stangs are no slouches.

who hear knows what a mustang is? yes the srt-4 is quick, but it cant beat a 04 mustang stock for stock. although it would be close, i guess if the driver was an idiot he could lose

who hear knows what a mustang is? yes the srt-4 is quick, but it cant beat a 04 mustang stock for stock. although it would be close, i guess if the driver was an idiot he could lose

Has a stock 99-04 ever run a 13.9 quarter mile?

Has a stock 99-04 ever run a 13.9 quarter mile?


Downhill maybe... :lol2:



Kidding... I'm sure they have. I have no proof... nor do I care to search the web at 2:30am for it... but they're so close to it... I don't see why not with a perfect launch.

I found these times at a site with factory times. Some times though are from Car & Driver or Motortrend. Anyway, it's just to help things out.

1999 Ford Mustang GT 5.5 14.1
2004 Ford Mustang GT 6.3 14.8
(Now this is weird considering these are pretty much the same)

2005 Ford Mustang GT Convertible 5.2 13.8 (MT Apr 05)
2005 Ford Mustang GT 4.6L V8 5.1 13.5 (MT Jan 05)

2003 Dodge SRT-4 5.6 14.1
2004 Dodge SRT-4 5.3 13.9

SOURCE: http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60times.html

Anyway, I hope that helps out the debate here a little bit.

The 05 stangs are another story. I highly doubt a 04 mustang could pull of a 13.9, but if so I have never heard of it happening. Plus a 13.9 for the 2004+ Srts is a decent time, yet I have seen many 13.8's and a few 13.7s as well- so given the "perfect launch" who knows how well these can do. So Im just saying, if the srt would win from a stop it would do even better from a roll due to it being fwd.

I have heard of it happening that a 99+ has run a 13.9 stock. Its certainly not the norm or anywhere close to being expected.

"1999 Ford Mustang GT 5.5 14.1
2004 Ford Mustang GT 6.3 14.8
(Now this is weird considering these are pretty much the same)"

I would be willing to bet that the 2004 was automatic in that test. The auto stangs until 05 were at a seious disadvantage in stock form. Either way neither car to me really outclasses the other in terms of performance. I would race an SRT-4 but not necessarily expect to win.

My friend has an '05 SRT4 and got murdered on the freeway last night by a Mustang (5+ cars). From what he told me about it on the phone though, it sounded like a Mach1, because he said it had a weird hood scoop (shaker hood I'm guessing). It was all black though, so he wasn't for sure what kind it was. If it was a GT it was heavily modded to beat an SRT4 that handidly.

Yeah if that was a GT it was surely not stock to kick its ass that bad.

well according to dampachi b4 he dissapeared... he ran a 13.9. but who knows about that. and i certainly dont see why with a perfect launch one wouldnt run a 13.9

1/4 mile times can be deceiving especially when comparing 1 or 2 tenths. Weather and altitude play a huge roll. If both the SRT-4 and a 99-04 GT were raced on the same day at the same location, their times could be up to a full second slower or faster depending on the altitude. These times we are comparing are in different cities with weather and altitude prob. being different. But i think from a stand still the SRT-4 would win. On a 40 mph roll, the GT would beat it, as i have had this experience first hand.

Probably the SRT-4, but depends on the driver.



Your trying to say that your turbo timer is a mod? That gives HP?

NOpe it doesnt do shit except cool down my turbo, but none the less its one of the olny mods i have aside from my mopar bov

NOpe it doesnt do shit except cool down my turbo, but none the less its one of the olny mods i have aside from my mopar bov

Then why mention "this was before I got my turbo timer" about a race against a Mustang? I'm confused, you say it like "this was before I got my manual boost controller". I don't see that you not having your turbo timer at the time of the race against the Mustang GT has any bearing on the outcome of said race.

If you want to know which car has more power look at the trap speeds in the 1/4 mile. I've never seen any '04 Mustang GT's trap over 100mph. There may be some but I haven't seen them. On the other hand even the most amateurish SRT-4 drivers trap 100mph+. I've also seen a plenty of stock SRT-4 traps at 102mph and even 103mph.

Back when the SRT-4 came out in March of '03 the first thing my buddy's local tuner shop did was dyno it against a Mustang GT. At the time those were the main 2 tuner cars...remember this is pre SVT Cobra, GTO, Cobalt SS, STi, Evo, etc...

The Mustang put down 202whp. The SRT-4 put down 221whp.

I watched a Bullit Mustang race a 350Z at a stop light about 2 years ago. The 350Z put a good 20 or 30 feet between the two cars. I never had any problem with a 350Z when I was stock or modded. I think the SRT-4 is a faster, quicker, more powerfull car than an '04 Mustang.

Then why mention "this was before I got my turbo timer" about a race against a Mustang? I'm confused, you say it like "this was before I got my manual boost controller". I don't see that you not having your turbo timer at the time of the race against the Mustang GT has any bearing on the outcome of said race.

Meaning it not the fact that it did shit or not, meaning that was a LONG ASS time Ago. This is how i book mark alot of my good races by remembering some thing that happen within a time period. and THAT SON Was one GOOD ASS RACE!

I watched a Bullit Mustang race a 350Z at a stop light about 2 years ago. The 350Z put a good 20 or 30 feet between the two cars. I never had any problem with a 350Z when I was stock or modded. I think the SRT-4 is a faster, quicker, more powerfull car than an '04 Mustang.

Wasn't the Bullit just a special ed. Color and wheels?

Wasn't the Bullit just a special ed. Color and wheels?

Yeah I think so. IIRC It had maybe 5 more hp or something insignifant like that over the standard GT.

I thought the 99-04 GT made 260 hp?
They do make 260 flywheel horsepower. Alot of them dyno in the 220-225 whp area. SRT-4's dyno from 223-230 whp. They are heavily underrated. Combine that with the fact that the SRT-4 is 300+ pounds lighter and one can see why a GT Stang loses. I see GT's all the time at the track, and the 99+ models aren't touching the SRT-4's stock for stock. Heck SRT-4's are very close to LS1 territory. They can hang with the best of them, especially with the mopar goodies.

Yeah I think so. IIRC It had maybe 5 more hp or something insignifant like that over the standard GT.

Yeah but the mods on it gave it a wider torque curve as well.

If you want to know which car has more power look at the trap speeds in the 1/4 mile. I've never seen any '04 Mustang GT's trap over 100mph. There may be some but I haven't seen them. On the other hand even the most amateurish SRT-4 drivers trap 100mph+. I've also seen a plenty of stock SRT-4 traps at 102mph and even 103mph.

Back when the SRT-4 came out in March of '03 the first thing my buddy's local tuner shop did was dyno it against a Mustang GT. At the time those were the main 2 tuner cars...remember this is pre SVT Cobra, GTO, Cobalt SS, STi, Evo, etc...

The Mustang put down 202whp. The SRT-4 put down 221whp.

I watched a Bullit Mustang race a 350Z at a stop light about 2 years ago. The 350Z put a good 20 or 30 feet between the two cars. I never had any problem with a 350Z when I was stock or modded. I think the SRT-4 is a faster, quicker, more powerfull car than an '04 Mustang.

I agree that they do usually trap higher, but the fastest ones I have seen at the track were the ones with the mopar mods on them. I had a friend back there that ran I think a 13.2 with a bunch of those mopar parts. I have seen them run high 14's as well on the same day with a different SRT4. Also, just a piece of information, all cobras from 93 to current were SVT. I do fail to see how a car looses nearly 60 hp by the time the power hits the wheels. Not calling it BS but I am sceptical as to weather thats typical or not. For that bullit racing the 350z, sure that can happen they are fairly equal cars, one person being slightly slower reacting can have those kind of results.

I do fail to see how a car looses nearly 60 hp by the time the power hits the wheels.

This can be true depending on where the Dyno is performed. If it is at 6000+ altitude, like mine is, i am almost guaranteed to lose 30-35% HP and Torque to the wheels. Also Steiner, a stock SRT-4 isn't going to Dyno 221 whp stock. The car is rated for 215 bhp in 2003. Even if it were to be underrated, in perfect driving conditions you still have drivetrain loss. Not saying the car isn't powerful but flywheel HP is not true HP. Check out these links.....

http://www.fast-autos.net/dodge/dodgesrt4.html
http://www.internetautoguide.com/car-specifications/09-int/2003/dodge/srt-4/

i highly highly doubt a car is going to lose 60hp through the drivetrain. the only way i could possibly see that happening ever is if it was a auto tranny, cause those auto trannys in pre 05 mustangs did eat a good amount of power. cars like mine, 190fwhp, comonly dyno around 170hp. so i dont see how it could lose 60.

i highly highly doubt a car is going to lose 60hp through the drivetrain. the only way i could possibly see that happening ever is if it was a auto tranny, cause those auto trannys in pre 05 mustangs did eat a good amount of power. cars like mine, 190fwhp, comonly dyno around 170hp. so i dont see how it could lose 60.

My 2003 GT is rated 260 HP at the fly. My buddies 2002 stock 5-speed with a Tremec 3650 tranny Dynoed somewhere around 180 HP. 80 HP less than what is supposed to be an "underrated" engine. When mine was Dynoed at sea level i put on average about 225 to the wheels. Altitude literally kills HP in n/a engines. Thats why in the Denver area a good rule of thumb is to estimate 30-35% loss to the wheels. Hence the reason my car is 9/10's slower currently in Denver than when i raced at Houston Raceway park.

This can be true depending on where the Dyno is performed. If it is at 6000+ altitude, like mine is, i am almost guaranteed to lose 30-35% HP and Torque to the wheels. Also Steiner, a stock SRT-4 isn't going to Dyno 221 whp stock. The car is rated for 215 bhp in 2003. Even if it were to be underrated, in perfect driving conditions you still have drivetrain loss. Not saying the car isn't powerful but flywheel HP is not true HP. Check out these links.....

http://www.fast-autos.net/dodge/dodgesrt4.html
http://www.internetautoguide.com/car-specifications/09-int/2003/dodge/srt-4/

I made sure to mention that the SRT-4 and Mustang were dyno'd on the same machine and on the same day. Dynometers provide a point of reference. The shop I was talking about has a Mustang dyno which is generally on the conservative side. Chances are another dyno may have put the SRT-4 at 240whp and the Mustang at 215whp. Still it provides a consistent frame of reference even if the numbers vary.

And most SRT-4's dyno between 220whp and 240whp. The factory HP ratings are extremely conservative. You didn't know about that? My buddy pulled 238whp/256wtq on his bone-stock SRT-4. I stood there and watched. Others have had even higher numbers. I think Dodge rated it like this for insurance purposes. Most tuners agrere that if Dodge rated HP/TQ on the SRT-4 like other manufacturers rate their cars it would probably be around 265hp/280tq.

Most tuners agrere that if Dodge rated HP/TQ on the SRT-4 like other manufacturers rate their cars it would probably be around 265hp/280tq.

I find that very hard to believe. That much power in that cheap of a car would mean Dodge had to cut corners somewhere. If that's the case don't expect to be buying a 100,000 mile car.

I think Dodge rated it like this for insurance purposes. Most tuners agrere that if Dodge rated HP/TQ on the SRT-4 like other manufacturers rate their cars it would probably be around 265hp/280tq.

So are you saying 265HP/280TQ to the wheels or at the flywheel? If your talking to the wheels, that would put the srt-4 close to 300HP at the fly. Subaru's STi has 300HP at the flywheel and they cost $30,000, if the srt-4 produces so much power why would they sell it for so cheap?

Subaru's STi has 300HP at the flywheel and they cost $30,000, if the srt-4 produces so much power why would they sell it for so cheap?

As I said, either the SRT-4 is rather overrated in the horsepower department OR Dodge cut corners to make it cheap but powerful. If that's the case expect to hear about many SRT-4s blowing their tops soon.

So are you saying 265HP/280TQ to the wheels or at the flywheel? If your talking to the wheels, that would put the srt-4 close to 300HP at the fly. Subaru's STi has 300HP at the flywheel and they cost $30,000, if the srt-4 produces so much power why would they sell it for so cheap?

Manufacturers don't rate horsepower at the wheels. They rate it at the flywheel or the crank I believe. Subaru's STi puts down about 250whp so, once you fugure in all-wheel drivetrain loss, 300hp is a pretty accurate claim by the manufacturer. The SRT-4 puts down about 225-240whp, and has almost half the drivetrain loss of the STi, so that's where the 265hp comes in to play.

I don't know why or how Dodge decided to match up the SRT-4's power with a $20k price tag, but they did. You guys need to get around a little more. The SRT-4 has been out for almost 3 years now. This isn't exactly cutting edge info that I'm posting.

Drivers race.

Well I'd think in the bottom end it'd be a drivers race with whoever takes the line gets the lead. I've drove an '04 GT and I think it'd pull hard on the SRT once they got around 110.

I've never had the chance though to driver or ride in a SRT though. I know a guy who knows a guy who owns one and he says once you get past 100 it loses a bit of its punch.
I hear otherwise. Never driven one though. But from what I understand, they do great up top.

As I said, either the SRT-4 is rather overrated in the horsepower department OR Dodge cut corners to make it cheap but powerful. If that's the case expect to hear about many SRT-4s blowing their tops soon.
The SRT-4 has a great foundation. 450 horsepower is safe. Neon wrapped around a great motor. Tranny isn't the best though.

Drive both an STi and the SRT-4, and you will see why the STi is that much more money.

My buddy pulled 238whp/256wtq on his bone-stock SRT-4.
I find this hard to believe, can you post a scan of the dyno sheet?

I find this hard to believe, can you post a scan of the dyno sheet?
Here you go my skeptical friend. These pulls are all SAE corrected. Without the correction he was closer to 250whp than 240whp. This is a 100% bone-stock 2004 SRT-4.

http://home.comcast.net/~blackhandclan/dyno.doc

Here's a couple dyno threads on the SRT forums so you guys don't think I'm pulling this out of my ass...

http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161231&highlight=dyno+stock

http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151891&highlight=dyno+stock

http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41741&highlight=dyno+stock

http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129487&highlight=dyno+stock

Here you go my skeptical friend. These pulls are all SAE corrected. Without the correction he was closer to 250whp than 240whp. This is a 100% bone-stock 2004 SRT-4.

http://home.comcast.net/~blackhandclan/dyno.doc

Here's a couple dyno threads on the SRT forums so you guys don't think I'm pulling this out of my ass...

http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161231&highlight=dyno+stock

http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151891&highlight=dyno+stock

http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41741&highlight=dyno+stock

http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129487&highlight=dyno+stock

I saw 215-236 WHP, again without a scan of the dyno sheet I find 338 WHP hard to believe.

I saw 215-236 WHP, again without a scan of the dyno sheet I find 338 WHP hard to believe.

Well let me post it a second time for you then...

http://home.comcast.net/~blackhandclan/dyno.doc

This thread is still going???

2crunk....where do you live?? ANY dyno I have seen at my altitude (Denver) has been corrected for altitude. Like most dyno's anywhere, corrected for the weather and variables.

Either way....I will run an SRT-4 OR an '04 Mustang GT. :icon16:

Well let me post it a second time for you then...

http://home.comcast.net/~blackhandclan/dyno.doc
That says "max power 232". You said:
My buddy pulled 238whp/256wtq on his bone-stock SRT-4.

Did you mean 228 WHP?

That says "max power 232". You said:


Did you mean 228 WHP?

It's been a while. The car put down 232whp. We're splitting hairs. Whether it's putting down 232whp or 222whp, for Dodge to rate the horsepower at 240 is extremely overrated - even moreso for the '03 models which were rated at 215. Anyways I don't own an SRT-4 anymore but I have tons of respect for the 2.4L turbo Mopar threw in them. The car is underrated from the factory. That's the only point I was trying to make.

wow whats so hard to believe about the SRT-4 putting down 230+whp stock? there are plenty of bone stock dynos around and i saw plenty of dyno videos of stock SRT4's putting down 230+whp stock. some are freaks and will even put 240whp stock. the car is underrated deal with it. no one complains when the 00+ LS1's dyno at 315whp when its rated at 315 crank hp.

the reason why the SRT-4 is so cheap is becasue the car is made from the chrysler parts bin. the turbo and engine is from teh turbo pt cruiser. its still a stout engine, the interior is cheap as hell, the stock motor mounts are cheap. the rear windows aren't power windows, and the interior is mostly made from rubbermaid ( not really but sure feels liek it ) also the car that its based off is a damn neon. so a base neon is like 14K then add another 7K to it and you can see why the SRT-4 is the way it is.

a 2900lb car trappin up to 102mph would have a whp of around 230+.

Thank you TatII.

2crunk....where do you live?? ANY dyno I have seen at my altitude (Denver) has been corrected for altitude. Like most dyno's anywhere, corrected for the weather and variables.:icon16:

I'm not talking about corrected averages and so forth, i'm talking raw power that the car is actually putting out at that time. Not a given estimate of what it could throw down elsewhere.

so your saying that its fair to put up a uncorrected dyno chart up on the web from somewhere up in denver as compared to nyc where its sea level? they have a correction factor for a reason. even though altitude matters alot less with boost cars compared to n/a cars. it usually the heat that kills us.

so your saying that its fair to put up a uncorrected dyno chart up on the web from somewhere up in denver as compared to nyc where its sea level? they have a correction factor for a reason. even though altitude matters alot less with boost cars compared to n/a cars. it usually the heat that kills us.

Heat comes nowhere remotely close to the affects of altitude. And yes it gets very hot up here. Maybe i used to many big words for you so this is what i am saying. The power your car puts to the ground is the power your car puts to the ground....Bottom Line.

Heat comes nowhere remotely close to the affects of altitude. And yes it gets very hot up here. Maybe i used to many big words for you so this is what i am saying. The power your car puts to the ground is the power your car puts to the ground....Bottom Line.

then your a dumb ass for thinkin that the same car will run exactly the same speed and put down the same power no matter where you are. and you obviously know shit about forced induced cars. mr luo's car should be running 12's if he was at sea level but hes only running high 13's. so technically speaking if his car was to put down uncorrected raw power his car is only making like 350whp right? wrong down here by sea level he should be making a noticable amount more.

and heat doesn't effect nowhere near as much as altitude? then how come turbo cars can lose as much as 20whp when dynoing in a hot 100 degree day vs a cool 65 degree day? when i was only the dyno i lost up to 30whp after 5 pulls on a hot day. in high altitude places, a boosted car will still have its combustion chamber pressurized by the blower or the turbo. so therefore the guage will still be reading X amount of psi above ambient atmosphereic pressure.

since you drive a n/a ( naturally aspirated for your dumb ass ) it needs the weight of earths atmosphere which would be the high pressure vs. the low pressure of the engine's internal combustion chamber to breathe. and engine breathes with fluidy dynamic's which means a higher pressure area will always flow towards lower pressure area. since your up higher, the pressure differential is not as great therefore your n/a will have a harder time breathing. this will greatly reduce your hp.

for a boosted car as i have mentioned already has a blower or a compressor forcing air through. thats why if you were to put your hand inbetween the intake and the throttle body of your n/a car it would be sucking air in ( high pressure goin into low pressure ) and on a boosted car under boost, you would feel air being blown into the engine.

now for temperature it would effect your car less becasue theres no excess heat caused by compressing the air. so heat matters less. for us boosted guys, even in ambient air, running a certain amount of boost depending on the efficeny of the compressor wheel, and the amount of flow your engine can handle, it will produce atleast 200 degrees to 350 degrees of hot air into the inlet of the intercooler. the intercooler's main cause of efficiency is how much cool air it can have flow through it so it can exchange heat to drop the compressed air by usually 100-150 degrees. so on a hot day or after the intercooler got heat soaked in traffic, we would lose as much as 30whp ( as i have observed on my own car )

am i goin to fast for you dumb ass? am i using words that are too big for you? do you finally understand why we need correction factor? do you see how big of a variation one engine can get from place to place? my professor races pro stock and builds race engines. he dynos at over 800hp on the engine dyno for his big block mopars here in ny. if he decides to sell that engine to someone in denver and they put it on the dyno and they're seeing 100hp short becasue of altitude, whos fault is that? its not my proffessors shody work, its because the dumb asses didn't use corrected hp.

and you not believing a 04-05 SRT-4 putting down 230-240whp stock is like you not knowin my car or 240's are RWD. ( i wouldn't be surprised if you didn't know that ) well if your so sure they only put down 210whp why don't you go find one on the highway and race one?

BTW....

Corrected = 376.8 RWHP
Uncorrected = About 320 RWHP depending on the day. Some are much worse than others.
When I trapped 105.5 it was 100 degrees on the track.

then your a dumb ass for thinkin that the same car will run exactly the same speed and put down the same power no matter where you are. and you obviously know shit about forced induced cars. mr luo's car should be running 12's if he was at sea level but hes only running high 13's. so technically speaking if his car was to put down uncorrected raw power his car is only making like 350whp right? wrong down here by sea level he should be making a noticable amount more.

I never said a car will run the same time at sea level and altitude. In fact, if you had paid attention earlier in this thread you would have seen that i Clearly Stated my car is faster at sea level. Do your research before you TRY andget on me.

and heat doesn't effect nowhere near as much as altitude? then how come turbo cars can lose as much as 20whp when dynoing in a hot 100 degree day vs a cool 65 degree day? when i was only the dyno i lost up to 30whp after 5 pulls on a hot day. in high altitude places, a boosted car will still have its combustion chamber pressurized by the blower or the turbo. so therefore the guage will still be reading X amount of psi above ambient atmosphereic pressure.

20 whp what a joke. At altitude compared to sea level we lose 25-35% HP. My friends car with the same mods lost 45HP compared to when my car was at sea level in Houston in 95 degree weather and 99% humidity. Forced induction cars do feel the hurt of altitude BUT the loss is not at all close when comparing a N/A ( naturally aspirated for your dumb ass ) car with it. N/A cars feel the hurt ALOT more.

since you drive a n/a ( naturally aspirated for your dumb ass ) it needs the weight of earths atmosphere which would be the high pressure vs. the low pressure of the engine's internal combustion chamber to breathe. and engine breathes with fluidy dynamic's which means a higher pressure area will always flow towards lower pressure area. since your up higher, the pressure differential is not as great therefore your n/a will have a harder time breathing. this will greatly reduce your hp.

NO SHIT. Hence the reason N/A cars feel the affects of altitude greater than forced induction vehicles.

for a boosted car as i have mentioned already has a blower or a compressor forcing air through. thats why if you were to put your hand inbetween the intake and the throttle body of your n/a car it would be sucking air in ( high pressure goin into low pressure ) and on a boosted car under boost, you would feel air being blown into the engine.

Your still rambling, get to your point.

now for temperature it would effect your car less becasue theres no excess heat caused by compressing the air. so heat matters less. for us boosted guys, even in ambient air, running a certain amount of boost depending on the efficeny of the compressor wheel, and the amount of flow your engine can handle, it will produce atleast 200 degrees to 350 degrees of hot air into the inlet of the intercooler. the intercooler's main cause of efficiency is how much cool air it can have flow through it so it can exchange heat to drop the compressed air by usually 100-150 degrees. so on a hot day or after the intercooler got heat soaked in traffic, we would lose as much as 30whp ( as i have observed on my own car )

am i goin to fast for you dumb ass? am i using words that are too big for you? do you finally understand why we need correction factor? do you see how big of a variation one engine can get from place to place? my professor races pro stock and builds race engines. he dynos at over 800hp on the engine dyno for his big block mopars here in ny. if he decides to sell that engine to someone in denver and they put it on the dyno and they're seeing 100hp short becasue of altitude, whos fault is that? its not my proffessors shody work, its because the dumb asses didn't use corrected hp.

Then i'll tell you what, instead of stopping at sea level vs altitude why not Dyno cars on fucking mars??? Who knows maybe your professor will dyno 1500hp their and he can say he has a 1500hp car. Like i said earlier......WHAT YOUR CAR PUTS TO THE WHEELS IS WHAT YOUR CAR THROWS DOWN PERIOD!!!

and you not believing a 04-05 SRT-4 putting down 230-240whp stock is like you not knowin my car or 240's are RWD. ( i wouldn't be surprised if you didn't know that ) well if your so sure they only put down 210whp why don't you go find one on the highway and race one?

Been there done that have witnesses. We shut down at 130 and had a car length on the SRT-4. From a roll that is, off the line the SRT-4 beat us and we couldn't catch up but from 60 we had him. I'll race you in your 240 son anyday!!!

I'll just say this that Tat makes a very good point. When you get higher, the air gets thinner and you don't get as much air into the combustion chamber. A forced induction car runs better higher because more air is shoved into the combustion chamber. Easy to understand, right?

As for the heat, he's right there to. As we know in a forced induction car, air is compressed and forced down into the combustion chamber. Now as we know from basic science, when matter is forced together into a smaller area, it gets hotter. Also, when air gets hotter, there isn't as much oxygen in it, the less oxygen, the less of a bang in your combustion chamber. We getting this?

So Tat is right on how your engine can run better in a lower and cooler atmosphere.

So Tat is right on how your engine can run better in a lower and cooler atmosphere.

I agree with this 100% and never said otherwise. The point i'm stressing to him is this.....forget altitude, heat, humidity, time zone, blood type, forget it all. What Tat is saying makes sense, BUT what i am saying is that my car at altitude puts about 40HP less than at sea level. My car dynoed at sea level 225. I am not going to say my car puts 225HP to the wheels up here because it doesn't. It puts out less, far less.

the original arguement was that you didn't believe a SRT-4 can possibly put down 230+whp stock. then steiner goes on and shows you threads on stock dynoed srt4's ( i must admit that i didn't see if they actually contained dyno charts or not ) then you go on saying i don't care what those threads say, but what the car puts down at the wheels is what the car puts down at the wheels no matter where. so your point is that you want us to find you a dyno chart of someone in denver with a srt-4? casue as you agreed with me before that whp can vary greatly.

and you come to mock my intelligence saying that i had to research what i just typed to you or how about that you were using too many complicated words for me to comprehend? what i said is very basic if i wanted to lecture you i would pull out my note book and put down a bunch of engineering formulas. i built my car mostly myself, when shit breaks, i fix it myself, i constanly monitor my cars air fuel ratio with my wideband 02 sensor and i'm always checking my total ignition timing with my apexi multichecker.i'm always fine tuning my car's engine parameters. an idiot cannot keep a stock bottom end KA24DET running the amount off boost i'm running for the time and miles i had. i've had this car boosted for 40K miles and my odometer is reading past 117K miles. you don't more then double the factory output of the a car and keep it running for almost 3 years by being an idiot.

you piss me off, now that i think about it, you must think i'm a typical rice boy who doesn't know shit becasue i'm asian right? thats bullshit. ask anyone here on this forum that i'm one of the more knowledgable members, and i was a mechanic at a speedshop in nyc for 2 years.

you piss me off, now that i think about it, you must think i'm a typical rice boy who doesn't know shit becasue i'm asian right?

Up until this point i actually had respect for you and what you were saying. Now saying stupid comments like this throws everything out the window.

Do your research before you TRY andget on me.


Then i'll tell you what, instead of stopping at sea level vs altitude why not Dyno cars on fucking mars??? Who knows maybe your professor will dyno 1500hp their and he can say he has a 1500hp car. Like i said earlier......WHAT YOUR CAR PUTS TO THE WHEELS IS WHAT YOUR CAR THROWS DOWN PERIOD!!!



Been there done that have witnesses. We shut down at 130 and had a car length on the SRT-4. From a roll that is, off the line the SRT-4 beat us and we couldn't catch up but from 60 we had him. I'll race you in your 240 son anyday!!!


i'm not stupid, if you had respected me before, you wouldn't have been an ass in the first place. you clearly had been a wise ass first and insulted me. this is becoming a pointless arguement. you can go on minding your own business and i'll do the same.

very close race, i did it once, we reached 125mph stang had me by his front fender up to 100 then i started to edge ahead and once we reached 125 i had him by a front fender as well. this was way before i got my turbo timer and the stang had mufflers.

i'm sorry i just read this

what does your turbo timer have to do with anything?

only reason i checked this thread is cause me and a srt-4 were playing around and i tire to play catch up with him and it wasnt working.
i've beat one before but i think this guy had maybe a stage 2 or 3 cause he was moving just a little too fast