srt-4vsS2000vs350z

pick who would win 1/4 then post who would come in 2nd and 3rd.

1ST:350Z
2nd SRT-4
3RD S2000

really? thats crazy i thought it would go 1s2000 2srt-4 3350z
ive only seen the 350run at my track and it didnt seem that quick he ran 15.3 with a good launch.

the administrater of the site has done 13.69 in his stock 350
thats faster than a SRT-4
and the S2000 isnt really that fast, to hard to launch

the administrater of the site has done 13.69 in his stock 350
thats faster than a SRT-4
and the S2000 isnt really that fast, to hard to launch
if heard its hard to launch before, why is that? is just cuz of the v-tec?
cause my honda w/gsr engine is hard to launch like if i launch at 7000 right when its start to cetch the road v-tec kicks and then it will just keep burning out. but i fixed that by getting slicks now i just get a hard launch and improved my 330 times from 2.3 to 2.1
but ya i deffinatley gonna get the 350z or s2000 for my next ride.
im leaning twards the s2000. but launching is a concern.
if i got the s2000 id nos it and the 350z id turbo it.

Well the S2000 is hard to launch cause it has very little tourque. And you have to rev it so high to get a good launch. But i have seen a few quick ones before.

well in the real world those cars are close enough that will come down to the drivers

although i can see the 350Z getting the most consistent times being RWD with a nice powerband


with perfect identical drivers....i think the 350Z should edge out an srt4 folowed by the s2000

another thing to mention is that the srt4 will be by far the cheapest and easiest to modify for power gains

The SRT-4 is deffinetly the cheaper f the bunch. It will offer the cheapest tunability, but reliability may suffer. And quality is not as high as the other cars. But it is a great little car.

Not to flame anybody or jump down anybody's throat, not wanting to cause hostility, but i just can't stand how people are always questioning the SRT-4's reliability. Oooo, it's a domestic, even worse, it's a Dodge, it's gonna fall apart! Come on people. First off, the entire engine in that car is built rock solid. It can hold 600hp no problem. I'd even go so far as to say 700-800. Not that anybody needs that much horsepower unless it's being made strictly a drag car, but the ability is there if you want it. Not only is the engine solid, the transmission is built like a rock as well. Granted, a clutch upgrade will be needed after you add a certain amount of horsepower, but isn't that the case with every car, even the 350Z? Some people say the interior is cheap, that it sucks cause it has no rear power windows. Oh well, that sucks if you're in the back seat, but most people that buy the car will most likely be driving it, not sitting in the back seat. And the interior is plenty good for my tastes. I don't scrutinize the interior. OOOO! There's plastic in here! Big deal. If it holds me in good and everything works, and looks halfway decent, then i'm a happy camper.

The most important thing about this car is that if something DOES go wrong, remember, it's under warranty. All of the Mopar performance parts are covered by the warranty. And seeing as how the parts available for it are top notch, as will the ones coming soon, what more could you ask for? An outstanding, fast as hell little car that spanks guys with more expensive cars and makes people who spent 10-20 grand in performance parts go home crying cause they just got beat by a Neon, whose every performance part is covered by a full factory warranty. That's nice to know.

Okay, i'm done ranting. BTW, although this poll is stupid cause it compares two rwd cars against one fwd car, i believe this would be the outcome:

350Z by the hair of it's chinny-chin chin over the SRT-4, the S2000 trying it's best to keep up in third.

I believe I can say with some certainly on this subject. I have raced all of these vehicles. Its is a drivers race between 350z and SRT-4. I have beaten two but they drove it like a civic. 1 350 who I race from time to time to put on show for watchers is driven by a guy I consider an excellent driver he launch against me better then any EVO or STI has every match with him ends the same way him winning by half car. Now the s2000 I dont car what year has no chance against either my neighbor owns one( which he will have fast after he gets taxes he plans on throwing all of it at car$4,000) Any ways I even launch from second so not to put were and tear on my motor mounts and beat him. But he looks good syling down road. I believe s2000 to be disappointment it was supposed to be faster then VW corrado that was ripping up street racing scenes with vr6 engine.

You can talk to me about reliability in a few years. After all the engine recalls and other things are worked out. Then maby we will see if it is reliable. The 2.4 in the PT Cruser(same engine ) has had many problems. So im not to enthusiastic about those.

You can talk to me about reliability in a few years. After all the engine recalls and other things are worked out. Then maby we will see if it is reliable. The 2.4 in the PT Cruser(same engine ) has had many problems. So im not to enthusiastic about those.


You need to see this engine. They did an amazing job. i would be very very surprised if it would prove to be unreliable.

check this link it will give you a very good picture

http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/projectcars/0310scc_projneon/

You can talk to me about reliability in a few years. After all the engine recalls and other things are worked out. Then maby we will see if it is reliable. The 2.4 in the PT Cruser(same engine ) has had many problems. So im not to enthusiastic about those.

??? You don't know what you're talking about. First, the NA 2.4L is not the same engine, at least not until the '04s come out, and only then it will have the same castings and not much else. Second the PT has been extremely problem-free, which is something 350Z owners can not say about their cars.

As a matter of fact i happen to know exactly waht im talking about. The PT Cruser with the 2.4 liter turvocharged 4 cylinder engine contains the EXACT same engine as the SRT-4. The only difference is an additional 10 hp from a better flowing filter, and exhaust.

As for problems. The first batch of Turbo PT Crusers had many many problems. I know my friends mother drives one. And its a pile. I hope that they have worked all the bugs out for the SRT-4 but you can not call an brand new car with a brnad new engine reliable. Give it a few years and tell me its reliable.

Yes i have seen 850whp SRT-4's. But the only part that is OEM in the engine is maby the valve cover and block.

And for 350Z, would you please elaborate on the problems we have had with our cars. So far i know of a window seal problem, tranny problem, and a few other not very important recalls. For an engine that is brand new with that few problems it good. Anyway, we are not discussing weather the car has reliability issues, its which is faster, and the 350Z is faster in a straight line. Unless you know of SRT-4's runnig low 13's COMPLETLY STOCK the there is no debate.

As a matter of fact i happen to know exactly waht im talking about. The PT Cruser with the 2.4 liter turvocharged 4 cylinder engine contains the EXACT same engine as the SRT-4. The only difference is an additional 10 hp from a better flowing filter, and exhaust.

I see. You said nothing about the turbo PT. Two different animals.

As for problems. The first batch of Turbo PT Crusers had many many problems. I know my friends mother drives one. And its a pile. I hope that they have worked all the bugs out for the SRT-4 but you can not call an brand new car with a brnad new engine reliable. Give it a few years and tell me its reliable.

Anyway, there was (and maybe still is?) a cooling issue with the PT turbo, but that has nothing to do with the engine. ...Even if it causes an engine problem, it's another issue.

Yes i have seen 850whp SRT-4's. But the only part that is OEM in the engine is maby the valve cover and block.

Show me the company that makes an aftermarket head for the SRT-4. Hell, show me ANY engine that can take an additional 600hp on stock internals. :rolleyes:

And for 350Z, would you please elaborate on the problems we have had with our cars. So far i know of a window seal problem, tranny problem, and a few other not very important recalls. For an engine that is brand new with that few problems it good.

Hmm, I see. So while you've had all those problems with your 350Z, it's OK. But when someone has a couple problems with a PT turbo, it's a pile.

Anyway, I guess you haven't heard about the tire wear problems (factory misaligned), weak paint, TONS and TONS of tranny problems (OK, you heard about that ;) ), differential problems, suspension noises, cheap interior bits breaking, the window problems (you heard about that too)

I'm not knocking the 350Z, I'm just saying it's got problems too.

Anyway, we are not discussing weather the car has reliability issues, its which is faster, and the 350Z is faster in a straight line. Unless you know of SRT-4's runnig low 13's COMPLETLY STOCK the there is no debate.

Heh. You're the one who started on the reliability crap. I just called you on it. Besides, I don't doubt that a 350Z could whip a stock SRT-4's ass. It damn well should, considering it's mission as a car.

Well i cant say that i know of any companties that make an aftermarket head for the SRT-4. But im sure there is one. Or one that fortifies stock ones.

I never ment to say that the 350Z has no problems, just that the problems that are related to the car are mainly on thinsg that do not effect performanc.

They have had alot of troule making the 2.4liter turbo motor to work properly. But it seems that all the bugs are out. Im just saying that you can not call a motor that has very little road time reliable. You need a couple years behind the motor for that. Like you can call the 2JZ out of a Supra reliable. But not the SRT-4 motor.

PS Supra engines have taken 600hp additional hp on stock internals.

i have an srt-4, it's my slower car, they do have some problems but nothing big, most complaints are of hard shifting at low speeds, when your winding it out it shifts fine, i've run 14.05@102mph bone stock with it, there are 2 350z's here in town and i smoked both of them in streat races and they will no longer rise to the bait, the beauty of the srt is it's low cost and the factory up grades, i now have stage 1 and will soon go to stage 2 when it comes out this spring, stage 2 takes it to 280hp 300lbtq at 20 psi boost, yeah it's just a neon, thats why your looking at it's tail lights, never ran a s2000 but i would anytime, people want to run my buick i tell them you have to beat the neon first, few do, i know of no z's that run low 13's stock, the mopor srt-4 drag car does run a stock block, head and rods but has forged race pistons and giant turbo with ice water intercooler system, it puts out over 800whp, the z and s2000 are nice cars but there in a higher class than the srt and not really comparable, although the srt does more for less, if you but the money of the cost deference in mods to the srt you would have one fast car, also srtgirl on srtforums.com runs low 12's with verry few mods, she has a stack of time slips 3" high with no breakage

well after reading all of your posts it seams like most everybody agreas it would go srt-4,350z then s2000. by the way thank you all for voting!(lol)

Well i cant say that i know of any companties that make an aftermarket head for the SRT-4. But im sure there is one. Or one that fortifies stock ones.

Unless you can show me companies that have done it, you're just talking out your ass. I know that the SRT-4 head will take at least 750-800hp out of the box because I've seen it.

I never ment to say that the 350Z has no problems, just that the problems that are related to the car are mainly on thinsg that do not effect performanc.

I'll bet tranny and diff issues affect performance. ;)

They have had alot of troule making the 2.4liter turbo motor to work properly. But it seems that all the bugs are out.

They certainly have. I still don't know what engine trouble you're talking about.

Im just saying that you can not call a motor that has very little road time reliable. You need a couple years behind the motor for that. Like you can call the 2JZ out of a Supra reliable. But not the SRT-4 motor.

Funny, you don't mind calling the 350Z reliable ("good" is the word you used).

PS Supra engines have taken 600hp additional hp on stock internals.

Not ones that lived the tell the tale. You can get nearly any engine to take a bunch of extra power on stock internals... for five minutes.

Not ones that lived the tell the tale. You can get nearly any engine to take a bunch of extra power on stock internals... for five minutes.


Actually the 2jz supra engines seem to have been the brainchild of overeager engineers with the net result in ridiculously strong engines. Similar philisophy as with the srt4 engine but with an 0.6L advantage and many more years of experience in modding them since the markIV is been out for quite a while now.

heres the specs from car and driver, s2000 14.1 srt-4 14.2 350z 14.4, they also said to get that # the s2000 had to be driven like you stole it, theres no doubt the supra engine is one of the best ever made

Very evenly matched cars from the looks of things. Driver skill looks like the determining factor in this contest.

Actually the 2jz supra engines seem to have been the brainchild of overeager engineers with the net result in ridiculously strong engines. Similar philisophy as with the srt4 engine but with an 0.6L advantage and many more years of experience in modding them since the markIV is been out for quite a while now.

They sure are. Beautiful engine, that 2JZ-GTE. But throw an 600 extra HP at it, and it won't last long without mods. Even those 1000 hp 2JZ monsters, with tons of internal mods, need frequent rebuilds if they are driven much.

s2000 ran faster than the 350z in car and driver. Thats proffesional drivers.
The SRT-4 ran 14.4 in car and driver. So, based on FACTS.

S2000 1st
350Z 2nd
SRT-4 3rd

14.4? That by far the slowest I've ever heard for the SRT-4. 1320 times are 14.1 - 13.9 nearly every time.

They sure are. Beautiful engine, that 2JZ-GTE. But throw an 600 extra HP at it, and it won't last long without mods. Even those 1000 hp 2JZ monsters, with tons of internal mods, need frequent rebuilds if they are driven much.

true higly tuned engines have to be treated very gently since they are often tuned within inches of their deaths


s2000 ran faster than the 350z in car and driver. Thats proffesional drivers.
The SRT-4 ran 14.4 in car and driver. So, based on FACTS.

S2000 1st
350Z 2nd
SRT-4 3rd


the srt4 will be the hardest to launch since its FF and has lots of torque but they are known to get into the 13's quite often with good drivers even the 03 models

and 04 are quite a bit quiker than the 03's


also the SRT4 will be by far the easyeast and cheapest to upgrade


btw the magazine editors have good experience with cars but their skills are a far cry from true profesionals

seldon though magazines do employ pro drivers as in the case of Justin Bell during the speed shootout.


of course as resale value, fit and finish, handling, the s2000 and the Z have the upper hand

the srt4 will be the hardest to launch since its FF and has lots of torque but they are known to get into the 13's quite often with good drivers even the 03 models

I always heard that S2000 was quite a PITA to launch due to its low torque. I suspect that will change considerably with the new, larger engine, though.

of course as resale value, fit and finish, handling, the s2000 and the Z have the upper hand

hehe The good ol' resale and fit & finish argument. I'm surprised it didn't come up before now. :) Anyway, for the extra several thousand dollars I'd expect all the above. I think the other two cars look better too, but that's subjective.

And for FAR less than the cost difference between the SRT-4 and the "base" 350Z, the SRT-4 can be made into a track car that would embarass the others badly. ;) I couldn't resist.

I think it's cool that the SRT-4 is even being compared to these cars. :D

i'd say 350z, srt4, than s2000 but the srt 4 wouldnt need much tuning to beat a 350z

To bad the SRT-4 just had to be FWD, that just takes all the fun out of it. Unless it was designed like the Gti...but I doubt it has a significant amount of lift-off oversteer incorporated into its geometry. I may be wrong, but I couldn't see it being tuned like that.

I would probably have to say its a bargain between all of the cars considering how close they all are against each other, which would be 1st? Well (IMO) the 350Z with its torque advantage could consistently pull slightly quicker than the rest. Then maybe the SRT-4, followed by the S2000.

You could just buy a used Rx-7 and have a very good car on the roads in terms of handling... And it's quite a contender for speed as well.

You could just buy a used Rx-7 and have a very good car on the roads in terms of handling... And it's quite a contender for speed as well.



srt4, s2000, 350Z - no RX7 in that list

you can start your own thread if you would like involving an RX7

You could just buy a used Rx-7 and have a very good car on the roads in terms of handling... And it's quite a contender for speed as well.

Hmm, smells like red herring. ;)

I think 1st or 2nd place would either be the Z or S2000. From different magazines it seems like S2k and Z avg around 5.5s 0-60 and 14.1 in the 1/4. Well srt-4 avg 5.8s 0-60 and 14.3s 1/4.

Strange. The 1/4 mile times I've seen for the SRT-4 vary around 14.1-13.9, with the majority around 14.1. Like most people here have said, it would be a driver's race.

It still amazes me that the SRT-4 is even being compared to these much more expensive cars...

Strange. The 1/4 mile times I've seen for the SRT-4 vary around 14.1-13.9, with the majority around 14.1. Like most people here have said, it would be a driver's race.

It still amazes me that the SRT-4 is even being compared to these much more expensive cars...

well its only for the quarter mile, and its quick i know, i think its the fastest car for under 20 grand, but fwd vs two rwd cars with more sophisticated suspensions, plus other things like overall design of the car like chassis, engine placement etc, and think of cars more expensive that the srt-4 can also compete with in the quarter mile.

by the way, does ayone know if the s2000, and the 350z are imported? i know some import name brand cars are built here in the us, but some of their models arent, if they are, that also effect the cars price.

do u guys think the 4 banger engine in the srt4 can really hold 600-800hp with no probs? in strongly doubt that.. the rb26 engine used in skylines can hold 500-600hp on stock internals and still be reliable for years.. and thats a friggin SOLID engine.. even flat 4 engines from subaru top out around 400-500hp.. i really doubt a domestic engine can do that with stock internals.. and if you think that an american car can hold up against imports in terms of reliability then ur wrong.. my dads dodge went down 75% down in value since he got it.. and my accord (same year) went down only 50% theres a reason the value goes down so much.. o well its up to u.. out of the 3 cars i would pick the 350z.. then the s2k.. then the srt4.. the s2k got a bigger engien with more torque now.. i duno how much it really helps compared with the old one.. but it should be better for everyday driving

do u guys think the 4 banger engine in the srt4 can really hold 600-800hp with no probs? in strongly doubt that.. the rb26 engine used in skylines can hold 500-600hp on stock internals and still be reliable for years.. and thats a friggin SOLID engine.. even flat 4 engines from subaru top out around 400-500hp.. i really doubt a domestic engine can do that with stock internals.. and if you think that an american car can hold up against imports in terms of reliability then ur wrong.. my dads dodge went down 75% down in value since he got it.. and my accord (same year) went down only 50% theres a reason the value goes down so much.. o well its up to u.. out of the 3 cars i would pick the 350z.. then the s2k.. then the srt4.. the s2k got a bigger engien with more torque now.. i duno how much it really helps compared with the old one.. but it should be better for everyday driving


How about some research before posting?

here is a good start
http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/projectcars/0310scc_projneon/

and if you know so much about subaru engines and their tremendous power levels please look at those pics and tell what the main difference between this subaru block and the srt4 block is and how it relates to turbocharging. And i'm not talking about the layout(boxter, inline) Hint the srt4 engine shares this design with a trully rock solid turbo 4 banger the 4g63
http://www.cgperformance.com/images/cg%20stk%20block%20WP.jpg
http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/projectcars/0310scc_projneon12_s.jpg

I think ppl are just pissed cause theres a fast turbo'd domestic worth buying over the imports.. I actually just bought my 99 Cobra like 5 months ago, but before that i was weighing out all my options.. i test drove about 15 cars in the past yr.. i drove the srt4 with the LSD, RSX type S, 03 cobra, mustang GT, celica TRD, eclipse GTS, 98 eclipse GST spyder, sentra spec V, 99 eclipse GSX,2000 Z28 and a bunch others that i can't think of right now.. In my opion, if you want a fast, reliable car with endless cheap potential, then its SRT4 100%... The 350Z is over priced i feel.. i was semi interested in buying one last year when they first came out and the jacked up the price in a crazy manner... on a lease they wanted over 650 bucks a month with a couple grand down.. FOR A CAR UNDER 30K...i wasn't even going for the track.. thats just insane.. Same for the s2000, way too much a month for a car with limited potential.. the s2000 with the Supercharger only makes it go mid 13's in the 1/4.. it's been tested.. So now you have a car that you spent 35-38K on and it can't even keep up with a slightly moded neon.. As for the last chance at a F-body, i passed that up mainly because i hate GM and every tom dick and harry has a trans am... i would had purchased the 03 super charger Cobra, but it just wasn't in my budget at 500 a month.. instead i found myself a 99 SVT Cobra with 40K on it and i love it.. Dyno'd it stock at 279 RWHP and only payed 15K for it.. I also bought myself a bumper to bumper warranty to cover my ass.. In all honesty it isn't worth it to buy an import brand new unless its a civic DX or something.. Only car worth buying that is new is an SRT4.. hands down..

Thought I'd chime in: These three cars are not really comparable. I mean, you CAN, but it's not really logical in any sort of way.

The thread name is "srt-4vsS2000vs350z" ...NOT "srt-4vsS2000vs350z quarter mile comparison". This is why it's not really a logical comparison, because all of you (most of the replies I've seen) have been about who has the quickest 1/4 mile, not about the cars overall. The interior of the SRT-4 is going to be lacking compared to the 350z and S2000. MSRP for either of those cars are $10,000 more than the Dodge.

The SRT-4 is definitely the odd-ball in this comparison, but even the 350z and S2000 are oddly matched. The S2000 is a purists car, devoid of creature comforts and luxery components. Options such as DVD nav or 6 speaker stereo systems that are availiable on the 350z cannot be had on the Honda. This is a good/bad thing, depending on what kind of driver you are. Then there are the obvious factors: 350z is a "gran touring" coupe with a pretty bulky and torque-ful V6. S2000 is a 2-seat roadster with a sub 3000 llb weight. More likley compared to Miatas.

The point is, it's kind of ridiculous to compare cars just because of similar performance. You might as well call it what I mentioned earlier: "srt-4vsS2000vs350z quarter mile comparison"

well its only for the quarter mile, and its quick i know, i think its the fastest car for under 20 grand, but fwd vs two rwd cars with more sophisticated suspensions, plus other things like overall design of the car like chassis, engine placement etc, and think of cars more expensive that the srt-4 can also compete with in the quarter mile.

Those sophisticated suspensions don't do a great deal for them apparently, as the Neon/SRT-4 does quite well on the circuit against much more powerful cars. Just look at the SRT-4's 8th place overall at One Lap. Damned impressive stuff.

by the way, does ayone know if the s2000, and the 350z are imported? i know some import name brand cars are built here in the us, but some of their models arent, if they are, that also effect the cars price.

I'm quite certain they are both made in Japan. I can't think of any low-volume Japanese cars made in the US.

Can anyone tell me why Honda didn't change the name from S2000 to S2200 when they went the larger engine? Why buck DECADES of convention? Sounds kinda silly to me. Maybe they thought we'd get confused? :p

Neutrino: Thanks for posting that. I had no idea the Subie was an open deck motor. Stupid for a turbo engine...

Those sophisticated suspensions don't do a great deal for them apparently, as the Neon/SRT-4 does quite well on the circuit against much more powerful cars. Just look at the SRT-4's 8th place overall at One Lap. Damned impressive stuff.



I'm quite certain they are both made in Japan. I can't think of any low-volume Japanese cars made in the US.

Can anyone tell me why Honda didn't change the name from S2000 to S2200 when they went the larger engine? Why buck DECADES of convention? Sounds kinda silly to me. Maybe they thought we'd get confused? :p

Neutrino: Thanks for posting that. I had no idea the Subie was an open deck motor. Stupid for a turbo engine...

well you gotta understand the type of suspension they are using, the srt-4 uses struts all around, vs double wishbone all around for the other two. struts leave more room, and are cheaper to produce. although some strut suspensions do a pretty good job in handling, the double wishbone setup is known to provide more predictibility, provide better overall grip, and give better balance between ride comfort, and handling. i also think the s2000, and the 350z are made in japan, which means they re imported, so that would make them cost more too.

Sorry, didn't realize he DID ask for just 1/4 mile comparisons on the very first post. :banghead: my bad

well you gotta understand the type of suspension they are using, the srt-4 uses struts all around, vs double wishbone all around for the other two. struts leave more room, and are cheaper to produce.

I understand the difference. All I'm saying is that the Neon does very well with its all-strut suspension.

although some strut suspensions do a pretty good job in handling, the double wishbone setup is known to provide more predictibility, provide better overall grip, and give better balance between ride comfort, and handling.

Hmm. BMW does quite well with struts, as does Porsche.

1/4 miles don't mean a damn thing!

Out of the three the s2000 is the better car. Its very smooth, balanced and comfortable.

The srt-4 is overpowered, anything more than 250bhp in a fwd street car and you lose balance by having to worry about keeping the car in check.

The 350z is a good car but just doesn't feel right. Its interior is cheap and just isnt comfortable to me. The engine is pretty powerful but I hate the tranny, it doesn't feel accurate and is clunky. I didn't realy like the ride either.

Ive yet to drive an srt-4 but if its anything like a saab turbo then its too powerful for the chassis. Out of the three I like the s2000 the best. :2cents:

I'll take over powered. Thats fine with me. If 1/4 mile doesnt mean damn thing what will the s2000 beat the 350z and srt-4 at? I like srt-4 I drive all the time. Freeway driving nither car will keep up with it. light to light is drivers race. Twists, road coarse, Oval. Come on how often does anyone do this. I mean practical. Even so I doubt s2000 or 350z does as well or better. I've given my .02 cents on subject a few times.

I understand the difference. All I'm saying is that the Neon does very well with its all-strut suspension.



Hmm. BMW does quite well with struts, as does Porsche.

yea...and so does the subaru wrx, except subaru uses it all around, while porsche, and bmw only use them on the front. i think the multilink/strut setup is better than the strut/strut setup though. the basics of the struts are the same, but remember that not all struts are designed the same, so not all struts perform the same, therefore they vary in cost to produce. while some strut suspensions come really close, its been proven that the double wishbone design still provides better overall performance.

If the SRT-4 was proven to be a excellent handling FWD car, then I would retract my statement.



http://www.onelapofamerica.com/



Cumulative Overall Points as of - Sat May 10 01:08:07 2003
Page 1
Results sorted by position
Pos Car # Vehicle Class Points

1 2 chev MTI Z-07 SSGT1 6590
Ronald Adee, John Myrick
2 4 Chevy Corvette Z06 SSGT1 6525
John Boos, Ronald Marks
3 1 Dodge Viper SSGT1 6515
David Zelkowski, Brian Smith
4 3 RUF RGT SSGT1 6415
Gary Church, Paul Gerrard
5 8 Porsche 996 Twin Turbo SSGT1 6380
Mark DaVia, Chuck Veth

6 5 Toyota Supra Turbo SSGT1 5945
Andi Baritchi, Clint Pohler
7 20 CHEVROLET CORVETTE ZR1 SSGT1 5665
Scott Ahlgrim, Steve Ahlgrim
8 52 Dodge SRT-4 MidPri Sed 5595
Cory O`Brien, Erich Heuschele
9 10 Lamborghini Diablo SSGT1 5545
Karl H. Troy, Mike Appleby
10 50 Audi S-4 Luxury Sed 5315
Norman Babcock, Michael Babcock

Not enough..........
Itll need to be compaired to something like an ITR which is considered the best handling FWD car in the world. I say this because the SRT is FWD and FWD cars need to be pretty damn good to be compaired to a RWD sports car like the S2000 and 350z in terms of handling and balance.



You got to be joking! Look at the cars it’s keeping company with: RUF, Viper, Vette, Diablo, S4 and you’re complaining it’s not a comparison against an ITR.

And I'm not sure if you realize this One Lap is not one race. It’s a combination of very diverse events. You have to do good on each one to get a high score. So the srt4 win was not a fluke.

You wanted proof that srt4 can handle excellent, how is the info I posted not proof of that?

True stock srt4 don't handle quite as well as they should due to some minor settings (0 camber up front, slight rear toe out during very high speed sweeps). To rectify this you just need a 60$ realignment and a thicker rear antiroll bar.

Or if you want even better handling get the German made stage3 coilovers KW suspensions custom made for mopar.

An SRT-4 keeping up with Porsches in an Amateur event is nothing special.

Im not gonna continue, your not gonna convince me. I need more proof that its a good car and that proof isn't around.


Could you be more close minded. The one lap drivers are not your "going just for fun to autox" drivers. True they are not pros of WRC or F1 level but they are still very very good drivers and till you get even close to their driving skills please drop the condecending act.


I gave you irefutable proof that the srt4 handles well and with a few mods it can handle even better. I even gave you details about its suspension setup.

I brought you actual facts while all you did was state your opinion.

Bottom line lets see you win the one lap or other equally impresive competition then you can comment how easy it is to be competitive in it. I mean it must be easy since those drivers are so bad that their RUF or 996 cars were being folowed by sone "shitty handling neon"

Ive yet to drive an srt-4 but if its anything like a saab turbo then its too powerful for the chassis. Out of the three I like the s2000 the best. :2cents:

So in other words, you're just talking out your ass.

I just read your other posts... nevermind. :rolleyes:

the basics of the struts are the same, but remember that not all struts are designed the same, so not all struts perform the same, therefore they vary in cost to produce. while some strut suspensions come really close, its been proven that the double wishbone design still provides better overall performance.

Fair enough. My only point is that the Neon/SRT-4 does quite well for a strut/strut setup, ESPECIALLY at that price point. Furthermore, in spite of its rather pedestrian suspension setup, it keeps up with much more powerful, more expensive, supposedly better cars.

Well spool I'd like to know what car you were talking about that makes 250 HP from 2.0 liter and no FI. I'm guessing you mean S2000 but S2000 is:
" this elegant roadster's new 2.2-liter, 240-horsepower engine will leave you feeling breathless. Track-inspired, street-admired, the S2000. It's time to drive."
Or 350z which I believe is A 3.5L 287-hp engine.

By the way you say you need proof to change you mind. Well instaed of me showing you proof of what the SRT-4 is doing. How about you show me were the S2000 and 350z are doing so great. How about how they perform in there class. The thing is this as I see it. SRT-4 is a middle weight champ that can stand its own ground (and win some) against most Heavyweights. Everyone wants to put it up against the heavyweight champ. Which it does last but may not win. Maybe even catch them off gaurd from time to time with a win in a round or two.

Please spool tell where S2000 and 350Z are proving there great Handling/Balance/Great Engine/ Styling/Engineering/ and Refinement. Please At least four if not all of those are going to be Taste.

Condecending? I have a conviction about something that needs proof in order to change and so that means I'm some high and mighty dickhead?


What more proof would you like?

I don't think your a dickhead, just give credit where credit is due. Your talking as this SRT-4 hasn't a clue of what good handling is except for going straight. I as well as many others, believe it deserves more. Expect opinions to be challenged. I don't see your proof that its not worthy. Sway me the other way..

Screw it Im going simple.

S2000 is Better. SRT-4 sucks.

The S2000 has gotten kudos from everyone thats driven it to the edge. The fact a FWD car has 250hp is more than enough to prove that you can't take the engine to the edge because the chassis can't keep up. Ask any auto engineer what the max hp a FWD car can handle. They'll all say 250 is too much.
But this don't mean squat.

You tell me you don't see proof that it isnt worthy... I don't see proof that it is... You got nothing I got nothing, end of story.

How a car handles is an opinion.....

Umm, no.

What irefutable proof? It did ok in some event.

Just OK? LOL

I haven't seen any great praise on the car nor have seen it used a nothing much more than a drag car.

Then you haven't looked. At all.

My opinion is so strong because of my impressions of the neon.

And no one can confuse you with the truth.

My sister has one and I can only
describe it as "A bucket of shit with wheels."

So your sister has a POS. She probably treats it like shit, too. That is in no way indicative of all Neons, and certainly not of the SRT-4. But of course you'll say she doesn't just to make your point...

Now granted it isn't an SRT but a Turbo and 250hp on the same basic chassis isn't enough.

That shows how little you actually know about the SRT-4. Again, I can't confuse you with the truth, so why bother? Some people just CAN'T be taught. Their little brains are filled to the brim already...

Screw it Im going simple.

I wouldn't expect anything more than simple answers from you.

S2000 is Better. SRT-4 sucks.

The S2000 has gotten kudos from everyone thats driven it to the edge.

The SRT-4 is also highly lauded. But that's not enough for you. :rolleyes:

The fact a FWD car has 250hp is more than enough to prove that you can't take the engine to the edge because the chassis can't keep up. Ask any auto engineer what the max hp a FWD car can handle. They'll all say 250 is too much.
But this don't mean squat.

Oh, they ALL say that, do they? Makes you wonder why there are so many 250hp FWD cars coming from the factories. Even your beloved Honda makes 250+hp FWD cars.

Besides that, I've never read anyone say that the SRT-4 is over-powered, only that it's a hoot to drive.

You tell me you don't see proof that it isnt worthy... I don't see proof that it is... You got nothing I got nothing, end of story.

It's not our fault you can't see the truth when it smacks you on the head.

Keep this clean guys :nono:

Their little brains are filled to the brim already...


Don't insult my intelligence you fuck!

My whole point goes to that the S2000 is a better car. People say the SRT-4 is a great car for its class. Your not gonna see a compairsion of an SRT vs. an S2000 because their not in the same class because the S2000 has the SRT-4 outgunned. The S2000 is a sports car, the SRT-4 is a Neon with 250hp; and a few suspension mods aren't gonna dampen that fact. FWD cars were never designed as performance autos, the ITR is the best handling FWD car in the world and even it has a few FWD bugs, namely understeer in high speed corners.

If you want me to say the SRT is a decent car your not gonna here it when its compair to an S2000.

Why are FWD becoming more abundent with 250+hp. Because HP sells cars, an everyday driver is not gonna push their car to the limit to where the drivetrain is gonna hamper the engines potential and cause handling problem.

And WTF is this Truth you keep talking about.... Is the SRT-4 an impressive FWD car, yes. Is it impressive when compaired to a sports car, no.

Your stupidity amazes me :screwy:

Making that post immediately after my warning lands you a one week ban. Read this (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=162405) when you get back and dont for a second think of coming back to this thread to flame anyone.

Your stupidity amazes me :screwy:

Making that post immediately after my warning lands you a one week ban. Read this (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=162405) when you get back and dont for a second think of coming back to this thread to flame anyone.

Once again Ive been called an idiot........... by a mod as well.......... Hey lets insult that guy but not swearing so its legit.......... Stupid insults me just as much a being called a F**k would.

Maybe I saw your post after I submitted my last post. I went to edit F out but when I clicked submit, I was locked from doing so somehow. If I had gotten a PM before the ban, this wouldn't have been a problem though.

You were called an idiot because quite frankly, it’s not the smartest thing to do to go against:
1) AF Guidelines, and
2) A moderator’s warning.
Maybe you didn’t see 2) but you should be well aware of 1) by now.

So your new username is banned, courtesy of Neutrino, and let this be a warning for anyone reading this to not try to get around a temporary ban by signing up as a new user. If you feel you were harshly banned, send an email to a mod, don’t come back and post on the forum under a new username. All that will do is improve your chances of making your temporary ban a permanent one.

Spool you can come back in a week on your original username. Any new accounts will be banned and with them your first one.

Well i think that leaves this thread well and truly dead, don't you? If anyone feels differently PM me and the thread may be re-opened.