240hp, do you have the dyno sheet?

Wish I did. It was in amongst my dad's files which are still at the old house.

For the record, that's not brake. And the dyno pulls were made at the RaceRace America team shop, which was part of USIC, a tool and die shop owned by my dad's late friend Ken Boldman.

Mr. Boldman was at one point an off-shore powerboat racer and was the owner of the RaceRace America Supermodified team, which fielded two 1996 Bodnar chassis Supers (two chassis commissioned by Mr. Boldman) with, in their last season, Kevin Enders engines. The crew consisted of Jim Bodnar himself as chief, DJ Shullick as shop b*tch, and Dick Lavati as tire man. The driver was Dave Shullick, Ohio's winningest Supermodified driver, who retired two seasons after Mr. Boldman's death.

I will admit, it's a high number for a 2.0L engine, and I will also admit to never having personally seen the dyno sheet (this was, after all, my dad's car) but for the mods done (no doubt with some milling for compression and airflow) it sounds reasonable.

Guess I'll have to dig it out of my dad's files next time I go back to the old place for more of my stuff.

And yes, I know that this sounds like a cop out. But I really have no good reason to make this up. Hell, the car doesn't even exist anymore. All that we have now is a front clip, mostly because the car's unibody got thrashed after Dad spun into a pole last winter.

We actually thought long and hard about how to get the Neon engine into Layla. :biggrin:

The other reason why I would take a WRX over the SRT is I would plan on modding the cars. Seeing as this is the streat racing forum I think most people here would too. Now I would go for numbers in the 300+hp range. I just cant see the SRT putting down that kind of power that easily with out compromising the handling.


The SRT4 already puts down more horse power than the WRX in stock form...

Whats average numbers for a stock 04 srt4? 230ish? And for a WRX? isn't it like around 170ish? See, the SRT4 is already at an advantage. And ontop of that, the WRX's gear box will grenade once you hit the 300hp mark... and thats 300hp at the crank :icon16:

Here's a thread with a graph(near the bottom of page 2) showing 330hp on 100 octane. It makes 297 on 93 Octane. The mods are shown on the first post of the thread. http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=25216&perpage=15&highlight=300%20horsepower&pagenumber=2




How does putting down a lot of power compromise handling anyways?

The SRT4 already puts down more horse power than the WRX in stock form...

And yet it's not any faster... at least not through the 1/4

the WRX's gear box will grenade once you hit the 300hp mark...

Au contraire, many people make more power than that on the stock trans with no problems... I've be one of them soon :biggrin:

How does putting down a lot of power compromise handling anyways?

Because it's FWD, if you have a lot of power in a FWD, when you try to accelerate out of the corner it can overpower the wheels and understeer off the corner. If you have a really steep power curve (like most turbo 4 cylinders) it makes it that much harder to get power down without breaking the tires loose.

And yet it's not any faster... at least not through the 1/4



Au contraire, many people make more power than that on the stock trans with no problems... I've be one of them soon :biggrin:



Because it's FWD, if you have a lot of power in a FWD, when you try to accelerate out of the corner it can overpower the wheels and understeer off the corner. If you have a really steep power curve (like most turbo 4 cylinders) it makes it that much harder to get power down without breaking the tires loose.

Stock SRT-4's have been regularly clocked as low as 13.8 seconds in the 1/4 mile. I've never heard of stock WRX's even going under 14 when I was researching which of the 2 cars to buy. Most 1/4 mile times I saw for the WRX were around 14.3-14.4.

As far as breaking the tires loose out of turns...that was a problem on the 2003 SRT-4's so they added a Qualfe LSD for '04.

plus don't forget how high the trap speeds are for those srts'

And the Daytona really was not fast at all unless you were lucky enough to have a turbo model and even that was only a 15sec car no?

The N/A Daytonas were faster than the Hondas of their day. If you did get a Turbo model then depending on which one you got you could be running low 14s to high 15s in the 1/4. My personal best in the LeBaron, which is the same car just a little heavier, was 14.6 @ 98 MPH.

And yet it's not any faster... at least not through the 1/4

Because it's FWD, if you have a lot of power in a FWD, when you try to accelerate out of the corner it can overpower the wheels and understeer off the corner. If you have a really steep power curve (like most turbo 4 cylinders) it makes it that much harder to get power down without breaking the tires loose.

1. A stock WRX can't keep up with the SRT-4 down the 1/4. The STi, now that’s a different story.

2. I fully agree that front wheel drive is one of the worst drive-trains for performance. On the drag strip when you accelerate the weight of the car shifts to the rear and the front of the car begins to lift. This takes traction from the front wheels. This is why rear wheel drive is the ultimate drive-train for drag racing. Another problem is wheel hop. This isn't only a problem for front wheel drive vehicles either. Any car with half-shafts can be hurt by wheel hop and any form of drive-train can produce it. The problem is that half-shafts aren't even close to as strong as a solid rear axle and wheel hop can snap CV joints and even tear the end right off the axle and in some cases even damage the gearbox. This can be circumvented with using slicks, however. On the other hand a solid rear axle is horrible when it comes to handling. Now, if you have a front wheel drive or all wheel drive vehicle then you have half shafts which is one of a few reasons that all wheel drive and front wheel drive is not meant for the drag strip. However; there are a lot of rear wheel drive cars that don't have solid rear axles. There also is the problem of torque steer. This is a problem on the strip and on the track. This can be circumvented by using an LSD which the 2004 SRT-4 already has from the factory, and it is a Quafi at that.

Because it's FWD, if you have a lot of power in a FWD, when you try to accelerate out of the corner it can overpower the wheels and understeer off the corner. If you have a really steep power curve (like most turbo 4 cylinders) it makes it that much harder to get power down without breaking the tires loose.

I do agree that FWD is the worst out of the three drivetrains. But I don't think a srt4 with about 300hp would have that steep of a power curve for it to be a big problem anyways. The engine is pretty big for a 4 cylinder(2.4L), and the turbo just needs an upgraded compressor to make 300+hp. No huge turbo needed here, so combined with the displacement, I would assume that the turbo should spool quickly have have a pretty steady power curve. Just my assumption though.

Stock SRT-4's have been regularly clocked as low as 13.8 seconds in the 1/4 mile. I've never heard of stock WRX's even going under 14 when I was researching which of the 2 cars to buy. Most 1/4 mile times I saw for the WRX were around 14.3-14.4.

There are many people who get 14.0-14.2 in stock WRX's. There are even a few that have gotten into 13's and one I remember that did a 13.89 stock. The average person probably won't get quicker than a 14.3, but what's the average person get in an SRT4? I know I've only seen 3 SRT4's at the track here, one is modded and the stock 2 are more competition for lightly modded Civic SI's than a WRX :lol:

Regardless, 2 cars with times within 2-3 tenths of each other are equal for all practical purposes. Too many other factors come into play, including the skill of the drivers in the real world, for 3 tenths to be considered a significant amount.

As far as breaking the tires loose out of turns...that was a problem on the 2003 SRT-4's so they added a Qualfe LSD for '04.

You don't understand...

P.S. I think you guys might think I'm bashing SRT4's... If you'll look back on page 1 of this thread you'll see I was the 2nd person to step in and defend them, oh, 9 months and 2 days ago was it? Plus there were other threads, both on AF and on other forums, before this, plus a few PM's with the starter of this thread where I've also defended them. My feelings haven't changed since then.

Great little cars, I'll buy one when hell freezes over :biggrin:

i seriously think the 03 WRX would win 1/4... on the highway, the SRT-4. the Evo 8 will win both...jus bcuz i like the Evo 8!

There are many people who get 14.0-14.2 in stock WRX's. There are even a few that have gotten into 13's and one I remember that did a 13.89 stock.
Please document this for me, as I browse various car-forums most of the time including Subaru ones, and MOST are running MID-14's stock, while SRT-4 are MOSTLY running LOW-14's and high-13's. No drive-train-pounding launch or high-skill-dependent precision clutch-slip launches either.

Here's a 13.7 @ 100mph run from a stock 2003: http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22064&highlight=fastest+stock

We all know that the 2004's have bit more power, and better ability to hook with the LSD's.

Those times are more common for SRT-4's than for WRXs. Here's an almost-stock one with a bad '60: http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20849

I don't know why you can't accept what even the WRX guys themselves have accepted: http://www.clubwrx.net/forums/showthread.php?threadid=46765

Here's a discussion about average WRX times: http://www.clubwrx.net/forums/showthread.php?threadid=34579&highlight=stock

Let's not even get into trap-speeds, as the SRT averages between 7-10mph FASTER than the WRX at the end of the track.

I'm not biased towards either car, and I'd be hard-pressed to choose if I ever had to between the two (if it was free, I'd pick the WRX because it's more expensive, and sell it for an STi), but c'mon...you just GOTTA accept when the other car is faster, plain-and-simple.

No drive-train-pounding launch or high-skill-dependent precision clutch-slip launches either.

Well hell, if I can't quote times from skilled WRX drivers, then why can you quote times from skilled SRT4 drivers? Cuz I've seen what the "average" new SRT4 owner is capable of at my local strip, and lemme tell ya, I'm not afraid, and neither am I afraid of the average new WRX owner.

"my stock WRX ran a 14.2 at 92 (or something) MPH on a hot day" - from the last link you posted. Now was that guy the best driver in the world, or is it reasonable to assume people are quicker than him? Especially since he mentioned he ran in heat. IIRC even Car and Driver got 14.1

Anyways, I don't doubt that the quickest time a stock SRT4 has ever ran is quicker than the quickest time a stock WRX has ever ran, the point is they're so close they're even in all practical purposes.

I also just saw a guy that went 12.8 in a stock STi :eek: but I still say STis and EVOs are even.

And about the trap speeds, I said this 9 months, 2 days, 9 hours, and 3 minutes ago, and I'll say it again:

the srt4 has a 100mph trap speed stock, much faster than any stock wrx. any idiot who knows how to shift should be able to waste a stock wrx in a stock srt4 anywhere above 30mph.

So when did a total car's worth come down to what it can do in the 1/4mile?

Both cars are very quick, and modable. If I had to chose, I would want the EVO, but I could very easly see why someone would want the SRT-4, or the STi.

The way I see it is the SRT4 is a good car if you want to keep it stock. Any thing over 300hp and I just don't see the SRT putting it down effectively at all. It would need something like slicks and who wants to drive a car around like that? The SRT4 may have more HP potential but the WRX will always be fast in the long. The SRT is still a great car though and yes I agree it is faster than a WRX stock for stock, but hey like ldelaysionl said their so close its a drivers race.

like ldelaysionl said their so close its a drivers race.

Therein lies my point: Saying that the two is a driver's race is like saying a 13-second LS1 is a driver's race against a 14-second Mustang GT...we both know each car is fast in their own rights, and a mistake by the LS1-driver compared to good driving by the Mustang might result in the 'Stang winning but, we all know and admit which one is the faster car...which you guys can't seem to admit about the SRT-4.

Let's quote |delaysion|'s quote of himself:

any idiot who knows how to shift should be able to waste a stock wrx in a stock srt4 anywhere above 30mph.

Last I checked, even a quarter-mile went WAY past 30mph?

And before you guys talk about turns, Neon ACRs have been wasting WRXs long before the SRT came out, and PVO used whatever Dodge has learned with that car on the SRT.

An SRT-4 also wasted all the AWD-class cars at Pikes Peak, except one: http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21290

Just admit it. Especially in straight-line speed: STi > SRT-4 > WRX...plain and simple.

Just as I go to SRTforums and challenge the SRT fanb0is, I am on here doing the same to the opposite side.

ANd lastly, RACER D12: The SRTs are doing JUST fine over 300HP: http://fastattack.org/srtgurl/Fastest%20Times%20List.htm

Have you read the article in SCC about how strong the 2.4 motor is?

Therein lies my point: Saying that the two is a driver's race is like saying a 13-second LS1 is a driver's race against a 14-second Mustang GT...

But it's not like there's a full second difference between them, it's a couple tenths. My runs vary by more than a few tenths in a night when I go to the strip, and that's the same car, same driver, same conditions. My point is that even with equal drivers, nobody is perfect and nobody can make a perfect run every time, and their times are so close one could win 1 race, then they line up again 5 minutes later and the other could win. Or maybe it's hot out, and 1 is more affected by it than the other, so with equal drivers the SRT4 might win in hot weather and the WRX in cold. There's just not enough of a difference to give an SRT4 owner an assured victory every time he comes up against a stock WRX, even if he is one of those guys who can pull a 13.8.

Last I checked, even a quarter-mile went WAY past 30mph?

I was talking about going from a 30 mph roll.

carnutt its right...the srt4 can do pretty good even from a stand still despite being FF...srtgurl's still has an open diff and pulled a 12.6

the 04 will do much better with the quaifee though

and about its handling...its very good...as i said just testdrive one and you'll be hooked

the srt4 was very nimble its brakes were fenomenal and the engine pulled like a V8

ANd lastly, RACER D12: The SRTs are doing JUST fine over 300HP: http://fastattack.org/srtgurl/Fastest%20Times%20List.htm

If you read my post again you will see that I said the SRT can make over 300hp. What I was saying though was good luck driving that on the street. Think of what a bitch that would be driving around town and maybe racing here or there. All the the SRTs toward the top of that list had some kind of slicks. Are you going to use slicks on the street? However a 300hp WRX would be very streetable and put its power down on and off the track with out slicks.

This is one of the longest threads I have seen that has not broke out into a flame war :comprage1

If you read my post again you will see that I said the SRT can make over 300hp. What I was saying though was good luck driving that on the street. Think of what a bitch that would be driving around town and maybe racing here or there. All the the SRTs toward the top of that list had some kind of slicks. Are you going to use slicks on the street? However a 300hp WRX would be very streetable and put its power down on and off the track with out slicks.

This is one of the longest threads I have seen that has not broke out into a flame war :comprage1

I think I see what your saying, but using that logic you would have to say that any 300hp non AWD car would be a bitch to drive around town. Why would driving a 300hp 3000lb FWD car to the liquor store be any more difficult than driving a 400hp 3500lb RWD car to the grocery store? A slip of the foot on either car and you can lose control.

If you're talking about daily driveable SRT-4's that can run sub 13 second 1/4 miles...yes you're probably right. A 12 second WRX can do it on the factory tires because of AWD, but the SRT-4 has to stop at the garage and swap out the street tires for some slicks if they wanna get the best times possible.

True but RWD is set up to get a lot better traction than FWD. However we are comparing the WRX vs the SRT so I was just making my case for those two. The second half of your post is what I was saying once you start going over that 300hp mark any FWD car is going to start having traction issues. Which is why the WRX will always be the fastest on the street. The SRT can only go so far on the street before it becomes "nose happy".


Edit:I mean in the end if you mod both, the WRX will be faster because the SRT can only go so far before it needs slicks

I think you just have feather the clutch a little more w/FWD. Once you get moving it won't be an issue. We're talking 300hp not 800hp. I've heard SRT-4 drivers are pulling low 13 second and high 12 second times on street tires. Of course w/slicks the 60ft times are better, but the traps speeds are comparable.

and if i'm not wrong the ecu is programed for less boost in 1st gear so peeling out will not be a problem

even if you get over 300hp you can get a profec b and run very low boost in 1st then use the remote button to switch to high boost in second

Just in case everyone has forgotten...Torque spins wheels, not horsepower. A 300hp fwd car isn't that big of a deal people. Especially not coming from a smaller motor with not all that much torque. You can have 900hp and 100lbs of tq and not spin the wheels. I don't think that 300hp in an srt would really be that hard to drive around on a daily basis(at least not as far as tires go). I mean, give it a couple years and that's what the Accord will be putting down.

Self has a good point, but then again he knows whats up :iceslolan

There are so many variables, as well.

Yes Self I did not forget that tq is what makes wheels spin. The SRT motor though makes simular tq and hp numbers.

Steiner and Neutrino ya you can feather clutch reprogram the ECU like you said, but while your doing that the guy in the WRX can be going balls out. Plus then when you take into consideration the the road conditions and what not its just going to cause more problems for the SRT. So IMO WRX is the the better street racer.

and its a true an AWD car will always win the launch...but you forget one thing....AWD hard launches are murder on your transmission and clutch....why do you think everyone keeps saying that the evo and sti are not drag racers

If you read my post again you will see that I said the SRT can make over 300hp. What I was saying though was good luck driving that on the street. Think of what a bitch that would be driving around town and maybe racing here or there.

For daily driving applications, you can use an electronic boost controller to turn down the boost.. you wont be needing 300hp if you're just driving to the grocery store 5 minutes away anyways.

And a high powered FWD doesnt ALWAYS need slicks to go fast when drag racing..... example: Hybrid & DohcCam's CRX.

Yes Self I did not forget that tq is what makes wheels spin. The SRT motor though makes simular tq and hp numbers.

Steiner and Neutrino ya you can feather clutch reprogram the ECU like you said, but while your doing that the guy in the WRX can be going balls out. Plus then when you take into consideration the the road conditions and what not its just going to cause more problems for the SRT. So IMO WRX is the the better street racer.

In theory that makes sense, but in reality the SRT-4 starts pulling on the WRX big time at about 30mph. If you're talking about a street race to 30mph ;)...well then the WRX will win every time...but so will an AWD Toyota Matrix and an AWD Volvo Cross Country wagon if you drop the clutch as 5k.

I've seen a couple videos of "SRT-4 vs. WRX" races. From a roll the SRT-4 pulls from the 3rd beep of the horn and doesn't stop until the race is over. From a dig the WRX hooks up impressively, but the SRT-4 pulls like a mutha once the driver shifts into 2nd gear.

If you guys are questioning driveability of a high powered car of any type. You got to remember it's your right foot that controls the throttle. The car will only go as fast as you want it to.

I learned that when I learned how to ride my motorcycle. It'll only go as fast as I let it.

If you guys are questioning driveability of a high powered car of any type. You got to remember it's your right foot that controls the throttle. The car will only go as fast as you want it to.

I learned that when I learned how to ride my motorcycle. It'll only go as fast as I let it.


Your right foot controlled the throttle on your motorcycle? hahahahhahahaa.... j/k j/k :icon16:



But ya.. RN is right. 300 street hp isn't that much for a street car anyways. Crap.. Using Hybrid as an example again... his FWD Del Sol has to got to push around 300hp... and it's daily driven.

Maybe Im mistaken but isnt the Del Sol RWD? And yes 300hp is not alot for most cars but for a FWD sub 3000lb car it is.

A Del Sol is a shortened two seat Civic targa. Simple as that. The only RWD vehicles to enter into the stateside Honda inventory in the past 13 years are the NSX and the S2000.

And yes, 300hp is a lot for an FF chassis. Just ask anyone with a Cadillac STS or Eldorado. Those are 300hp Northstars turned sideways in those engine bays.

Scary, isn't it?

But, as it has been said, high powered FF cars tend towards understeer when you get on the throttle, and turbo FF cars mostly have erratic understeer. Also, torque steer is always a fun item. Just ask any GLH Turbo Omni driver who had the wheel practically wrenched from his hands the first time he jumped on it.

However, it's easy to learn how to get around this. Trailbraking into corners and not accelerating until the tail has rotated around the apex is the simplest way to deal with throttle-on understeer in a high powered FF car. Torque steer can be anticipated and even used to one's advantage in tight corners. (the aforementioned GLH Turbo Omni could actually powerslide around tight right hand hairpins, thanks to it's wicked torque steer)

A knowledgable driver can overcome any chassis weak point.

A Del Sol is a shortened two seat Civic targa. Simple as that. The only RWD vehicles to enter into the stateside Honda inventory in the past 13 years are the NSX and the S2000.

And yes, 300hp is a lot for an FF chassis. Just ask anyone with a Cadillac STS or Eldorado. Those are 300hp Northstars turned sideways in those engine bays.

Scary, isn't it?

But, as it has been said, high powered FF cars tend towards understeer when you get on the throttle, and turbo FF cars mostly have erratic understeer. Also, torque steer is always a fun item. Just ask any GLH Turbo Omni driver who had the wheel practically wrenched from his hands the first time he jumped on it.

However, it's easy to learn how to get around this. Trailbraking into corners and not accelerating until the tail has rotated around the apex is the simplest way to deal with throttle-on understeer in a high powered FF car. Torque steer can be anticipated and even used to one's advantage in tight corners. (the aforementioned GLH Turbo Omni could actually powerslide around tight right hand hairpins, thanks to it's wicked torque steer)

A knowledgable driver can overcome any chassis weak point.

Ok which one would you pick though? WRX or SRT. Everyone is posting but no one is saying which one they would take.



And thats my point "A knowledgable driver" theirs more room for error in the SRT and more things to compensate for. Most people are not that knowledgable and will mess something up, more often I think then if they where in a WRX. I will concede that more times than not the SRT4 will beat the WRX in a straight line but take it to the track and the WRX should beat the SRT.

Ok which one would you pick though? WRX or SRT. Everyone is posting but no one is saying which one they would take.



And thats my point "A knowledgable driver" theirs more room for error in the SRT and more things to compensate for. Most people are not that knowledgable and will mess something up, more often I think then if they where in a WRX. I will concede that more times than not the SRT4 will beat the WRX in a straight line but take it to the track and the WRX should beat the SRT.

Your right, the WRX is better suited for stupid people that can't control their car very well. IN the hands of someone that knows what they are doing I think the SRT-4 will take down the WRX in the turns. The WRX just seems more suited for going to the store than taking a jaunt around the track. Let's also not forget the turbo doesn't even spool up on the WRX until about 3,000 RPM!! The SRT-4 you get it just above idle. The SRT-4 is just a better race car from my experience.

With the Awd though shouldn't the WRX be able to accelerate sooner out of a turn? And the WRX has nice short rally gears isnt that a good thing for track too?

I'll take the SRT-4 anyday, what with its massive Michelin Pilot tires, huge sway bars, and big all wheel disc brakes.

Yes, the WRX is more forgiving and easier to drive. Guess what, Chevy Malibus and Ford Tauruses are also easy to drive and forgiving. At the limit, the WRX has been known to do the following;

1: Plow like a farm horse.
2: Lean over like the Tower of Pisa.
3: Dive down on the outside front like a Gato class submarine.

The WRX is a spirited family car. It's in fair company being compared to hot Nissan Maximas and BMW 325i's. The SRT-4 is a track special with a bit of streetability. No, no it's not easy to drive. In fact, it's not very fun to drive day to day. Just like its GLH forebears, the ride is buckboard stiff, there's tons of torque steer, the wide tires hate rain with a vengeance, and you do get tired of the exhaust barking in your ear all day long.

However, when my helmet's strapped on and the flag drops, I thank Mopar for that stiff ride, loud exhaust, and those wide tires because they'll keep me in front of those comfortable hot family sedans.

A knowledgable driver can overcome any chassis weak point.


Damn.. I've been trying to say that this whole time... arg.. I'm dumb.



And don't AWD cars tend to understeer even more than FWD cars??

Yes, the WRX is more forgiving and easier to drive. Guess what, Chevy Malibus and Ford Tauruses are also easy to drive and forgiving. At the limit, the WRX has been known to do the following;

1: Plow like a farm horse.
2: Lean over like the Tower of Pisa.
3: Dive down on the outside front like a Gato class submarine.

It's also an extremely well designed chassis that has a decade of racing experience in some of the harshest conditions in the world to build off. Simple sway bars will eliminate body roll and understeer. No matter how you slice it, no matter how skilled the drivers, no matter how careful you are, the fact is with 4 drive wheels you can put more power down than with 2, for the simple matter that you're putting it through twice as much rubber. Not to mention the actual acceleration force is equally distributed on both ends of the chassis, instead of all on one end.

The WRX is a spirited family car. It's in fair company being compared to hot Nissan Maximas and BMW 325i's. The SRT-4 is a track special with a bit of streetability.

I'll take the "spirited family car" with multiple world championships in arguably the most grueling form of motorsports backing it over the "track special" economy-car-with-more-power.

You bring up a good point about the SRT4 having better tires, better sway bars, etc. All that and the WRX is still comparable in handling, now which one leaves further room for improvement? Especially since tires and sway bars are possibly the absolute easiest mods you can do, one of the cheapest, and will not affect the warranty. Truly mods accesible to anyone.

Good point indeed...

So, is anyone going to change their minds on which car they would buy between the two?

My choice would be a WRX, but the Neon is a good buy as well.

I like them both, but to be honest I like four doors... I'd take the WRX personally.

SRT-4... has a bit too much boy racer looks to me. And the ass end sticks too high up for my tastes. Other than some small asthetics about it that I dislike, I do like the car alot.

I just prefer the 'practicality' of the Subaru better.

I'm with layla's keeper on this one...i would take the srt4

as i said before i testdrove both of them back to back at a subaru/chrysler dealership...polygon knew a salesman pretty well so he let me push them pretty good

the srt felt very nimble..it would answer stering input instantly...the engine was extremelly responsive...it literally felt like i had to hold down the car from smacking into the cars in front of me when the light went green...the engine is that responsive...and the brakes seem nothing special when you look at them but they stop ridiculously good


the wrx on the other hand was much more comfortable as a daily driver...more composed on the road...it wold not jump at the smallest steering imput...the engine was the same way, you had to tell it to go fast very unlike the srt which wanted to jump ahead all the time...and braking was slower...what really turned me off was the feeling of weight though..it felt a bit ponderous...anyway the wrx is by far the more comfortable car and because of that better as a daily driver


but being the autox nut that i am i would take the srt4

after mods i don't know which would be faster...i would have to mod them first and then drive them and then i could have an opinion


i took this testdrive to see what all the srt4 hype was about...i was expecting the car to be overated...well i was wrong the srt4 just blew me away

so honestly go and take a test drive you'll be surprised

- This thread will nevAr end

I might take the WRX as well, and screw drag racing I'd be throwing that bitch around in good old Virginia red clay at our various construction sites. Plus for a 4-Cylinder the WRX sounds so much tougher, its hard to describe but with just a cat-back the thing doesn't sound like your average 4-banger honda, toyota, or neon.

...The SRT-4 is a track special with a bit of streetability. No, no it's not easy to drive. In fact, it's not very fun to drive day to day. Just like its GLH forebears, the ride is buckboard stiff, there's tons of torque steer, the wide tires hate rain with a vengeance, and you do get tired of the exhaust barking in your ear all day long.

The thread that never dies...

Torque steer on an SRT-4 is very minor and very manageable because of the equal length half shafts...or something like that. My 160whp Spec V torque steered like a mutha though! It was ridiculous really. 2 hands on the wheel or you were gonna take out a row of mailboxes.

When my Spec V was totalled I had less than 3 weeks to decide which car to buy before my rental car coverage was up.

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=131968

It really only came down to 2 cars...WRX or SRT-4. The EVO 8 and STi were also nice, but a little too expensive considering I hadn't been given any time to save up for a down payment. I test drove each model...an '03 WRX and both an '03 SRT-4 and '04 SRT-4...multiple times. The Subaru dealership I went to even had a special "test drive only" WRX on their lot which was more than willing to be raped. I LOVED how both cars drove compared to my old Spec V. The WRX felt very stable and the 0-100mph acceleration was so smooth. Then I went to a Dodge dealership and test drove a repo'd '03 SRT-4 with about 12k miles on it. I had no intention of buying it because it was yellow and didn't have side-airbags, but the sales rep didn't know that. He kept telling me to punch it. I was blown away. The torque made low RPM driving effortless compared to the WRX. The car also felt much lighter and nimbler, but that high ass end gave the feeling of body roll while cornering hard. The exaust note didn't exactly sound V8-ish, but it was a distinctly non-riced out sound too. I liked everything about it...especially the price. That was the first of 3 SRT-4 test drives...the latter 2 being on the '04 model. I also took one more test drive in a WRX just to make sure it wasn't just a good cup of coffee that made me like the SRT-4 so much that one morning. It wasn't! Both models are so much more car than I thought I could afford, but the Dodge just felt like it was designed to go fast above all else, whereas the Subaru is a well built all weather, AWD sedan that just happens to haul ass if you ask it to.

BTW...after less than $300 in suspension parts my SRT-4 handles like it's on rails. No more body roll at all. I bought an Eibach Pro-Kit, stiffer polyeurothane bushings up front, and shorter end links for the rear. The install was about 3 hours with spring compressors. The drop was very moderate...1.8 in back and 1.6 up front...and the "raked" look has been dumbed down dramatically.

Steiner,

Good post.

look, this needs to end. first off, the srt-4 is faster stock than the wrx. woo hoo. (it also has .4 more litres than the wrx, and when were talking 2.0 v 2.4, it makes quite a difference.) The wrx will take it for a run anywhere else though.

i set up a street race, over about 3 miles of roads, mostly unused ones. i drove my 02 wrx WAGON, which has header back and an intake, against a srt-4 with mopar stage 2 . in the first part, it was all straight. i started to get my ass kicked pretty bad, but as soon as the roads started winding, and eventually our corse had some turns in it, i not only caught up, but i passed, and finished atleast 5 seconds before the srt-4. lets face it, the srt-4 just cant handle anything thats not straight, completely dry, and clean.

i can race my wrx in the rain, snow, and on gravel roads. id like to see an srt-4 owner who will challenge a wrx owner when it isnt 80 and sunny on fresh asphalt.

when it comes to unlocking more power from your cars engine, the wrx wins hands down. i know several people who drive wrx's with 400+ hp as their daily drivers. a neons engine will not take that very well, atleast without serious work.

not only is the srt-4 extremely tempermental when it comes to mods, it has no ability to get the added horse power to the ground. the subaru on the other hand, despite a little wheel slip from high horse power, will ground almost every ounce of what it has.

the srt-4 comes faster than the wrx, but who cares. no one who buys one, and is worried enough to read this forum, leaves their car stock anyways.

driving doesnt take place in straigh lines, it happens on roads that twist and turn. and in those turns, the wrx will ground its power and win over the srt-4 any day. when mopar comes out with a handy upgrade to make the neon AWD, let me know and ill be interested, but untill that day, in my own opinion, subaru has engineered a much more capable, mod friendly, and overall greater car.

in the end, the srt-4 is still a NEON made by lazy american workers (lets face it people, we cant wait till the end of the day so we can leave work). when straight line stock vs stock racing is all you care about, get the neon. but if you want a car that can actually use its horse power anytime, buy the wrx.

It did end, over a year ago! Close this thread. Noob be warned "Don't Bring Back Old Threads". Check the dates. There should be something about this in the rules and regulations. Late...

i set up a street race, over about 3 miles of roads, mostly unused ones. i drove my 02 wrx WAGON, which has header back and an intake,


first of all before you start BSing you might want to study that terminology of yours. In case of turbo cars a full exaust is generally refered to as turbo back and not header back.

Second you might want to avoid resurecting ancient posts. Closed