SRT4 vs Evo 8

Ok, this debate was started on the "Most overrated cars" thread, so I think we should take it from here cause its a good match up. Lets keep it civil.

Im comparing them stock to stock: These ratings are from Mitsubishi, Dodge, Evo Forums, and the SRT Forums.

Evo Injectors: 525cc Stock SRT4: 577cc
Evo: Engine size: 2.0 SRT4: 2.4
Evo: 1/4 13.6 @101 SRT4: 13.9@ 103mph (BOTH #'s from Car and Driver)
Evo 0-60: 5.1 SRT4: 5.3 ( BOTH #'s from Car and Driver)
Evo: 0-100: 13.5 SRT:4: 13.4 (BOTH #'s from Car and Driver)
Evo Weight: 3250lbs SRT:4 2984lbs (BOTH #'s from Car and Driver)
Evo Horsepower: 271@6500 RPMs SRT4: 230@5300 (Motor Trend)
Evo Torque: 273@3500 RPMs SRT4: 250@2200 (Motor Trend)
Evo Trany: 5 speed SRT4: 5 speed
Evo Road Holding: .90g SRT4: .86g

Ok thats my point. The one thing I did not mention is that the SRT4 stock axles can handle 500+ HP. The Evo is breaking at 350HP (as seen on Evo forums) Now I dont trust magazines as most of you are saying.. but I used the same magazine for the comparisons aside from the power output. And compared, its a damn close race folks, the EVO is faster and handles better.. only slightly though as the numbers show.. is it really 10,000 dollars more of performance. I dont think so. Also look at the prices of aftermarket parts for the EVO and SRT4. you can go spend the extra 10K on the Evo, but I know where my money is going. Sorry but anyone can see what the better buy is here.

Styling will always be debatable, but that is something which is in the eye of the beholder, and I have never chosen style over performance value.

Quote: "the performance bargan of the decade" refering to the SRT4 (Car and Driver review)

I hate to admit it, but the SRT-4 is superior. C&D's new magazine, Boost, did an article showing how you can make a fully-fledged, competitive rally car out of an SRT-4 for $30,000 (including the price of the car). Also, an SRT-4 with $10,000 in performance mods is going to be running high 11's or low 12's in the quarter mile.

is the srt4 fwd?

..we dont have it here in england

I hate to admit it, but the SRT-4 is superior. C&D's new magazine, Boost, did an article showing how you can make a fully-fledged, competitive rally car out of an SRT-4 for $30,000 (including the price of the car). Also, an SRT-4 with $10,000 in performance mods is going to be running high 11's or low 12's in the quarter mile.

This is so stupid, sorry nothing about the SRT-4 spells superior, an EVO with $3,000 worth of mods is running high 11s and low 12s. This is one of the dumbest comparisons I've seen. The EVO can't handle 350AWHP, are you straight serious? That right there shows me that the author doesn't know what the heck you are talking about. Now are we talking stock to stock, or is the author going to continue to use a modified car to compare to a stock one? perhaps, because stock for stock it's no competetion, and modded for modded it's no competetion.

Ok, this debate was started on the "Most overrated cars" thread, so I think we should take it from here cause its a good match up. Lets keep it civil.

Im comparing them stock to stock: These ratings are from Mitsubishi, Dodge, Evo Forums, and the SRT Forums.

Evo Injectors: 525cc Stock SRT4: 577cc
Evo: Engine size: 2.0 SRT4: 2.4
Evo: 1/4 13.6 @101 SRT4: 13.9@ 103mph (BOTH #'s from Car and Driver)
Evo 0-60: 5.1 SRT4: 5.3 ( BOTH #'s from Car and Driver)
Evo: 0-100: 13.5 SRT:4: 13.4 (BOTH #'s from Car and Driver)
Evo Weight: 3250lbs SRT:4 2984lbs (BOTH #'s from Car and Driver)
Evo Horsepower: 271@6500 RPMs SRT4: 230@5300 (Motor Trend)
Evo Torque: 273@3500 RPMs SRT4: 250@2200 (Motor Trend)
Evo Trany: 5 speed SRT4: 5 speed
Evo Road Holding: .90g SRT4: .86g

Ok thats my point. The one thing I did not mention is that the SRT4 stock axles can handle 500+ HP. The Evo is breaking at 350HP (as seen on Evo forums) Now I dont trust magazines as most of you are saying.. but I used the same magazine for the comparisons aside from the power output. And compared, its a damn close race folks, the EVO is faster and handles better.. only slightly though as the numbers show.. is it really 10,000 dollars more of performance. I dont think so. Also look at the prices of aftermarket parts for the EVO and SRT4. you can go spend the extra 10K on the Evo, but I know where my money is going. Sorry but anyone can see what the better buy is here.

Styling will always be debatable, but that is something which is in the eye of the beholder, and I have never chosen style over performance value.

Quote: "the performance bargan of the decade" refering to the SRT4 (Car and Driver review)

Also the EVO handling abilities would be tough for the SRT-4 to match, ok sure an SRT-4 can slap on some coil overs and pull some decent skipad numbers, but that still will not give it the handling feel and abilities of the EVO, with it's razor quick steering and AWD, come on author drive both cars and then you'll see the difference. The brakes is also something you forgot to mention, the EVO brakes stop on the a dime, the SRT-4 stops on a half dollar, sorry, no competwtion. Also this comparing stock cars to modified cars isn't really fair, because like I said modified vs. modified is a whole different story. Sorry the EVO is just the better car, and some stock EVOs have hit 13.1 and 13.2 seconds, and man please provide some proof when you say EVOs are breaking there axles at 350AWHP, cuz that's news to me, the clutch is an issue, but your axle theory is just straight dumb. Also since you insist on this bang for the buck, is the Cobra really worth 15K more, is the Corvette ZO6 really worth 25K more, is the Mach 1 really worth 8K more, is the STI really worth 12K more, in my opinion hell yeah! Also if your gonna ask if something is 10K more atleast know the price tag, the 2005 EVO RS starts at around $27,000 (7K more) the 2005 EVO GSR starts at around $29,000 (9K more) and the 2005 EVO MR starts at around $33,000 (13K more) and the 7k costing (more than the SRT-4) RS is faster, lighter, and handles better than the base GSR. Also all 2005 EVO RS and GSR get a power and torque increase in 2005, doesn't really matter because the SRT-4 was no match for the 2004 models and definitly won't be for the 2005 models.

Also, I'm so flattered you created a whole thread in reply to me, what's a matter couldn't come up with your own arguments to combat me, perhaps because there weren't many.

One last thing because I'm done with this thread. I asked you to provide me with some evidence of the SRT-4 being better, and all you can give me is price. Sorry that's sad, and that's sad to create a whole thread on arguing this one point. Don't get me wrong price is an important factor, but in this comparison it is not a worthy factor in determining which of these cars is better especially when your talking about a $7K difference.

Please reply with only one post. Also lets keep this discussion civil or the tread will be closed.

Yo, 300, I knew you'd be the first to respond to support the Evo... I'm not trying to start a war here, but you pretty much told me I was on the Corvette's nuts, when you have made it very clear that you are definitely on the Evo's nuts. I'm just saying, don't tell me about the splinter in my eye when you hve a log in in yours... and with Mopar upgrades that keep your waranty, the SRT-4 is very tempting.

Yo, 300, I knew you'd be the first to respond to support the Evo... I'm not trying to start a war here, but you pretty much told me I was on the Corvette's nuts, when you have made it very clear that you are definitely on the Evo's nuts. I'm just saying, don't tell me about the splinter in my eye when you hve a log in in yours... and with Mopar upgrades that keep your waranty, the SRT-4 is very tempting.

Ok your right, we all have are favorites and I'm on the EVO's nuts, but you would do the samething if somebody came and started spitting out inaccurate facts about the Corvette. How about a Corvette vs. SRT-4, is the Corvette really worth $25K more, see my point. Don't get me wrong I like the SRT-4 a lot, but this guy keeps posting modified cars against stock cars and that's not fair, the SRT-4 is a great bang for your buck, but last time I checked bang for your buck meant stock vs. stock, the Corvette ZO6 is considered such a great bang for your buck because it can hang or beat Vipers or 911 Turbos stock for stock, now that's bang for your buck as far as I am concerned. Stock for stock the SRT-4 is a great bang for your buck, but it cannot hang with EVOs stock for stock. Both cars are great, but let's not start overrating one and underrating another. I mean what does a car (EVO) have to do to gain some respect in here, how about get 1st in it's class in the One Lap of America (in the top 5 overall). Or how about 1st in it's class in SCC Time Attack Challenge (3rd place overall). Or how about 2nd in it's class in the Car and Driver Tuner Challenge (including fastest 1/4 Mile run overall). Or how about run a 9.75@148MPH (street legal). Or how about be named car of the year by Automobile Magazine and Sport Compact Car Magazine. Or how about be able to go off road in the sand or snow and race and also beat a Champion Dirt Bike in a head to head comparison (including running a faster lap on a dirt course). Look the SRT-4 is a great car, but once again give respect were it is due, the SRT-4 is no EVO. Now I am done with this thread =).

3000ways, you are forgetting one thing: The SRT-4 costs nearly $10,000 less than the Evo. The fact that remains that although the Evo may be slightly better out of the box, the SRT-4 is much better bang-for-buck. I'm not trying to compare modified vs. stock, I'm just saying that if you are trying to buy the most performance you can for $30,000, buying an SRT-4 makes a lot more sense. Now of course once you modify the Evo, it's going to keep up with the modified SRT-4, but that costs more money, and not everyone has unlimited money to spend.

I agree with 3000's last post. Its unfair to the stock car to compare it to a modified car. I have seen a professionally modified Honda Civic with 600+ HP that costs less then my S2 M3, and would probably take me pretty easily on a 1/4 mile. But would I want that civic simply because it could outrun my M3? The answer would have to be no.

When you compare modified cars against stock cars, odds are the modded car will win. Its been shown numerous times that you can make cheap cars go faster then more expensive cars for less then the difference.

As for the arguement between SRT4 and Evo VIII, I bet the SRT4 would win in 0-60 or 1/4 mile with sufficient modification. However you would have to buy more then just coil overs to make the SRT4 outhandle the Evo. The Evo is considered to be the best handling car under $30,000. The SRT4 is FWD, which everyone who understands cars knows is not very good. The Evo's AWD system eclipses the SRT4's FWD. So if you want a drag car, the SRT4 might be a better choice. If you want a better handling, better looking (argueable I guess) car, get the Evo.

3000ways, you are forgetting one thing: The SRT-4 costs nearly $10,000 less than the Evo. The fact that remains that although the Evo may be slightly better out of the box, the SRT-4 is much better bang-for-buck. I'm not trying to compare modified vs. stock, I'm just saying that if you are trying to buy the most performance you can for $30,000, buying an SRT-4 makes a lot more sense. Now of course once you modify the Evo, it's going to keep up with the modified SRT-4, but that costs more money, and not everyone has unlimited money to spend.

It's the other way around, the SRT-4 is trying to keep up with the EVO. Also I already explained the price difference (not $10K), and once again stop comparing a modified car to a stock one. With your reasoning, your basically saying the SRT-4 is the best car in the world, sorry but like I said bang for it's buck is stock vs. stock. The EVO is a very easy car to drive very fast, with it's quick steering and AWD and etc. it's takes a lot more than a simple coil over upgrade to get the SRT-4 where the EVO is. Still waiting on an argument to explain how the SRT-4 is better and if all you can give me is price, then ok bye, your obviously not getting the point. Also research alittle I know all about the SRT-4 and many other cars, I would ask that before you diss the EVO, you atleast know alittle bit about it, cuz to me seems like you don't know a lot about it.

I know plenty about the Evo. My best friend owns one, and I drive it nearly every day. I know how fast it is. But you are seriously underestimating the SRT-4. Right out of the box, it can almost keep up with the Evo on any course. That's a hard pill to swallow, but it's just the way it is. The fact that the SRT-4 is that close in performance to the Evo, and it costs nearly $10,000 less, makes it the better car in my opinion. Like I said, not everyone has unlimited money, and we can't all afford to go out and buy Evos, so the SRT-4 is a more than suitable replacement.

It's still a friggin Neon. As I recall a few years back, Dodge/Plymouth Neons were crappy cars, even as a rental. So many damn problems. Don't know what sort of "revolutionary changes" they made just for the SRT-4. I mean the recently coined term SRT for Neons, lol, are they actually implying the engine is good as the Viper? Kinda like how they decided to call their V8 Ram 1500 - SRT-10. :rofl: I don't think they had much of a choice but to keep the price tag under $20K, it's a Neon!

I don't give two shits what it "is". It's still got a great motor and a great suspension, and that's what really matters. It's not like the Evo doesn't have any problems, they've already had to do a recall because of a faulty 5th gear synchro and lots of people have been losing their clutch at under 5,000 miles. Mitsubishi is not a good company to buy from right now, seeing as how they're nearly bankrupt.

I don't care for Evos, rather get a 350Z as a Sport Tourer; though it may not be the best Z incarnation. But even with Evos malfunctions, it's engine will be far more reliable in the long run than a Neon. :grinno: And wait til you start hearing all the SRT-4 recalls, er... "parts setbacks."

Well, I'd rather get a WRX than either one, so I don't know why I'm arguing in this thread :P

may be because you have a fetish toward sedan ricer/ugly cars? :iceslolan

Actually that makes it a great comany to buy from since all their products are going to be heavily discounted.

Comparing their clutches isn't fair because, awd launches are so much harder on the drivetrain than fwd or rwd.

On which one is faster, at the local dragstrip, there was no comparison. Stock Evo's were running low 14's, and stock SRT-4's running low 15's. Keep in mind that this is all at around 6200 ft.

On the street, there is no comparison. I have personally raced over 5 SRT-4's. I smoked every one of them. I have raced 3 Evos, I lost to 2, and barely pulled on the other.

Down here at nearly sea level, the SRT-4 runs a low 14, the Evo runs a high 13. So they are pretty damn close, within half a second. Since all I do is drag race, paying $10,000 for an extra half a second in the quarter mile doesn't make much sense, when I could put that $10,000 towards the SRT-4 and have an 11-second car...

If all you want to do is drag the SRT might just be the better car. But thats a pretty narrow reason for buying a car. The Evo is a far better road/track car then a FWD Dodge.

Agreed, but I don't do road racing, can't afford all the damn tires.

I don't care for Evos, rather get a 350Z as a Sport Tourer; though it may not be the best Z incarnation. But even with Evos malfunctions, it's engine will be far more reliable in the long run than a Neon. :grinno: And wait til you start hearing all the SRT-4 recalls, er... "parts setbacks."


Are you freaking joking me? The Mitsu motor is no where /near/ as reliable as the SRT4.. And I'll give you the reason and an example. 1. The engine is freakin forged, do you know what that means? It means, that Dodge Mopar car can run 1000+ hp on stock Block, crank, and head. Their is no NO! Mitsu running 1000+ hp on stock block crank and head, I know that for a fact.

And as for what 3000ways is saying and most others trying to defend the mitsu, is all opinion, not fact. I gave you a stock to stock match up, as given by Car and Driver. If you can only come up with .. its a neon... then the debate should easily be settled since the evo is just a freakin Box with wheels. But then again thats a styling opinion.

everyone has their own preferences, some will like the evo cause its all wheel drive, and some wont care. if they were both using street tires for drag, id rather go with the evo. lets say you were making 400hp at the wheels, your definately gonna benefit from awd. on a twisty track, or autocross style, the evo will definately outhandle the srt-4, and i dont think its only going to perform slightly better. now the srt-4 costs a lot less, and some people wont care for the evos awd, or other things that it has, but some people do, they would rather just have the evo for what it is.

dude, once I rented a plymouth neon... 2 weeks rental, so 2nd day of rent, the engine stalled and thing's brake FAILED! I called them to take it back to the agency (on my expense!), they said.. yeah all the Neons are out of order, some recalls... blah blah, so I said :wtf: why didn't you tell me that before? they said, oh, what were the odds of this one failing too? then they stuck me with the early 90s version of eclipse, what a cramped ass car! but at least it lasted rest of the week. if anyone says Neon is "da bomb", shit, you're a dumb ass! as for SRT-4, well we'll see how long it lasts. As for Mitsu, they gotten better with their motors, there are Eclipses that lasted over 200K. Though I wouldn't buy a Mitsu, since the maintenance is ridiculous.

dude, once I rented a plymouth neon... 2 weeks rental, so 2nd day of rent, the engine stalled and thing's brake FAILED! I called them to take it back to the agency (on my expense!), they said.. yeah all the Neons are out of order, some recalls... blah blah, so I said :wtf: why didn't you tell me that before? they said, oh, what were the odds of this one failing too? then they stuck me with the early 90s version of eclipse, what a cramped ass car! but at least it lasted rest of the week. if anyone says Neon is "da bomb", shit, you're a dumb ass! as for SRT-4, well we'll see how long it lasts. As for Mitsu, they gotten better with their motors, there are Eclipses that lasted over 200K. Though I wouldn't buy a Mitsu, since the maintenance is ridiculous.



What did I tell you about flaming? All your posts that I see in car comparison contain flames. Stop it or be prepared for a vacation.


Anyway back to the tread. I really don't see why people get so upset about this comparison. I see both cars as great buys.


I consider the EVO as an overall better car due to stock superior chassis, better stock brakes, and AWD setup and not to mention those amazing recaros.


That is not to say the srt4 doesn't have plenty of strengths. I personally consider its engine superior - not that i don't love the 4g63 in the evos - but the srt has a much better powerband and turbo response. This is due to its superior displacement, turbo built into the manifold, exaust layout, and last but even more important one of the most advanced ECUs on the market.


The rest of the srt4's package is also quite good even though maybe not quite as good as te evo's but it has excellent brakes, quaife diff up front, good chassis.

Also the Mopar upgrades are simply cool. I wish the other manufacturers would learn and offer simmilar support to their cars.

About the evo's malfunctions, that can be atrubuted to two things IMO. Either the USDM version got a bunch of sub par parts considering an EVO costs in the rest of the world 10K-15K USD more (the GSR starts at about 32K pounds in Britain i belive). Or all the 16 year old kids that bought it in the US are beating the crap out of it and then complaining it sucks.


Anyway bottom line they are both great cars, both have been declared car of the year by SCC. So if you have 30K buy the EVO if you whan to keep it stock, or buy the srt4 if you love modding or just what to save 10k do whatever with them.

actually you didn't tell me anything about flames other than what you consider "contribution." as far as i can tell, i dont see where I went ahead and insulted a particular individual. but thanks for the tip, I appreciate your supervision, especially on a blatant comparison topic.

actually you didn't tell me anything about flames other than what you consider "contribution." as far as i can tell, i dont see where I went ahead and insulted a particular individual. but thanks for the tip, I appreciate your supervision, especially on a blatant comparison topic.


Its your posts that are rather agressive borderlining or potentially sparkling flames. If you would just tone them down a bit I would greatly apreciate that.



BUT anyway back to the thread. I wonder if anyone has noticed this:

The different aproaches to modding that the EVO owners have compared to srt4 owners.

The EVO forum is full of questions like: is the $1500 AEM ecu better than the $800 Xede, where can I get the $4000 Ohlin coilovers, or where can I buy some $2000 full titanium exaust.

On the other hand the srt4 forums are like a McGuyver episode with questions and howtos: how can i get into the 11 using a chewing gum a rubber band and a stapler(ok I'm j/k a bit here), but they do come up some cheap and rather effective mods like the dolar spring mod which acts a a boost controler by keeping the wastegate open longer, or wallmart heaters to heat up the temp sensor therfore fooling the ECU into thinking its hotter and compesating with more boost.

as far as i can tell, i dont see where I went ahead and insulted a particular individual.
may be because you have a fetish toward sedan ricer/ugly cars? :iceslolan

Yeah, I took that as an insult.

Yup I'm back, just couldn't stay away from you guys in the thick of the argument =) (ghetto smile). Anyhow is it just me or this SRT-4 vs. the World getting old and annoying. Don't get me wrong, I think the SRT-4 is a great car, and it's bang for the buck cannot be denied, I mean for just over $20,000 for a brand new 2004 SRT-4 you can take out a $30,000 350Z in the 1/4 mile. Still while I have respect for the car, the owners of these cars I find annoying, childlish, and suffering from a severe case of Napleon complex. I mean have you read some of the stories over at their forum, absolute rubbish. Still like I said regardless of price stock for stock, the EVO owns the SRT-4, the STI owns the SRT-4, the Mach 1 owns the SRT-4, the Cobra owns the SRT-4, the Camaro SS owns the SRT-4, the Firebird Trans AM WS6 owns the SRT-4, the Supra Twin Turbo owns the SRT-4, and the RX-7 owns the SRT-4. If the SRT-4 chooses to mod his or her car to beat these cars, the great job major props. Still remember that straight out of the factory your car was not better than these cars. I mean stop talking purchase price, I just talking performance, because after I wrecked my VR4, I bought a 98 Sentra GXE for $4,000 and I'm sure with $60,000 worth of mods I can take out many high end super cars now couldn't I, so how about that bang for the buck =) (ghetto smile).

Are you freaking joking me? The Mitsu motor is no where /near/ as reliable as the SRT4.. And I'll give you the reason and an example. 1. The engine is freakin forged, do you know what that means? It means, that Dodge Mopar car can run 1000+ hp on stock Block, crank, and head. Their is no NO! Mitsu running 1000+ hp on stock block crank and head, I know that for a fact.

And as for what 3000ways is saying and most others trying to defend the mitsu, is all opinion, not fact. I gave you a stock to stock match up, as given by Car and Driver. If you can only come up with .. its a neon... then the debate should easily be settled since the evo is just a freakin Box with wheels. But then again thats a styling opinion.

Again with you drag racing Mopar SRT-4, if your talking about the one driven by Shaun Carlson, then please that engine and car is not even close to street legal and to a true Neon SRT-4. Now the 9 Second one driven by Shawn Carlson is closer to a real street legal SRT-4, but it still is not street legal either, while on the other hand an EVO has already hit 9s and remained street legal with full interior. Again please refrain from comparing professional drag cars to street cars.

Second what opinions, you seem to be more opinion than I am, especially since you ended your last post with the word opinion now didn't you? All the races and victories of the EVOs are opinion, no there fact! the faster 0-60 times, 1/4 mile times, better handling, and better braking are also fact! Your comparison of drag cars to street legal cars and modified cars to stock EVOs is not opinion, but just sad that that is the best arguments you can come up with. Speaking of styling, if the evo looks like a box, then the SRT-4 looks like an egg with wheels (which it does).

Yup I'm back, just couldn't stay away from you guys in the thick of the argument =) (ghetto smile). Anyhow is it just me or this SRT-4 vs. the World getting old and annoying. Don't get me wrong, I think the SRT-4 is a great car, and it's bang for the buck cannot be denied, I mean for just over $20,000 for a brand new 2004 SRT-4 you can take out a $30,000 350Z in the 1/4 mile. Still while I have respect for the car, the owners of these cars I find annoying, childlish, and suffering from a severe case of Napleon complex. I mean have you read some of the stories over at their forum, absolute rubbish. Still like I said regardless of price stock for stock, the EVO owns the SRT-4, the STI owns the SRT-4, the Mach 1 owns the SRT-4, the Cobra owns the SRT-4, the Camaro SS owns the SRT-4, the Firebird Trans AM WS6 owns the SRT-4, the Supra Twin Turbo owns the SRT-4, and the RX-7 owns the SRT-4. If the SRT-4 chooses to mod his or her car to beat these cars, the great job major props. Still remember that straight out of the factory your car was not better than these cars. I mean stop talking purchase price, I just talking performance, because after I wrecked my VR4, I bought a 98 Sentra GXE for $4,000 and I'm sure with $60,000 worth of mods I can take out many high end super cars now couldn't I, so how about that bang for the buck =) (ghetto smile).

:iamwithst

Oh okay, so your claim to fame is, "My car is better out of the factory than yours!" Who gives a fuck, once both owners have spent the same amount of money, the SRT-4 owns the Evo.

why dont you guys just say this.. lets say there are 2 people.. one guy has a srt4 and one guy has a evo 8.. if u give $10,000 to each guy its pretty obvious who would come out on top.. wasn't there also a forum where the evo mr was right behind the corvette zo6

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=230980&highlight=king

yea that one.. started by 3000.. if the srt4 can come close to.. or even beat the evo.. then why dont you guys start comparing it to the z06? anyways have fun.. just my 2cents

hehehe, that must be something that really bothered you.

and why can a srt-4 own the evo mod for mod?
that sounds kinda stupid.

lol one thing that is REALLY FUNNY.. for $21k.. the srt4 is the BEST overall value/performance.. why doesn't everyone just buy the srt4? and stop comparing cars that cost so much more.. if you have $21k just buy the dam thing.. if you have more $ then buy something else and stop comparing this car.. it's been overkilled already.. if you search this forum.. you'll see that the srt4 has been compared to ALOT and i mean ALOT of cars

Ok, as for which car is "better" is a matter of opinion, one car has superiority while the other costs about $10K less... as for which one is the better performer STOCK... it is undeniably the Evo.

That is not to say the srt4 doesn't have plenty of strengths. I personally consider its engine superior - not that i don't love the 4g63 in the evos - but the srt has a much better powerband and turbo


hmmm... doesnt the SRT-4 have the EVO turbo in it? isnt Mitsu's half owner the Chrylser/Daimler Corp.?

so the point of my questions are how are you going to compare a car that is damn near the same parts in it.. Mopar parts shelf is the same parts shelf as Mitsu now days


with the EVO the only thing you are getting better is the AWD system and tuned suspension for some nasty racing.

:2cents:

Oh okay, so your claim to fame is, "My car is better out of the factory than yours!" Who gives a fuck, once both owners have spent the same amount of money, the SRT-4 owns the Evo.

Once again kman10587 I'm losing a lot of respect for you, first off if your talking about both the SRT-4 owner and EVO owner spending the same amount on modifications, and the SRT-4 owns the EVO, then should be banned for stupidity. Now if your talking modifications and stock EVO, then once again how many times have I asked you to stop comparing modified cars to stock ones, that would seem to be your claim to fame. Well it's not so bad though, atleast your not like Zflasher and comparing professional drag cars to street cars, cuz that's just sad. I'm sorry if I have offended you, but all I ask is some evidence of superiority and you and your homie haven't given any yet, except price and sorry I'm just not sold on cheapness. I guess I just rather pay for the better product even if it costs more money, hasn't that always been the American way. Sorry if I have offended some SRT-4 owners, because I have mad respect for the car, for it's price it is amazing, but what gets me is that this whole thing started because Zflasher was calling the SRT-4 a rival for the EVO's performance stock for stock, and then when I challenge that, both these guys immediately jump to the aftermarket? What happend to stock for stock? Look this thread is dead now, I thought I could have a good discussion about this with these guys, but obviously that's not gonna happend. I mean what's next for these guys- SRT-4 vs. Porsche 911 Turbo, is the Porsche really worth $100,000 more?

Also look at the prices of aftermarket parts for the EVO and SRT4. you can go spend the extra 10K on the Evo, but I know where my money is going. Sorry but anyone can see what the better buy is here.

Read the guy's original post. He asked if the Evo is really worth the extra ten thousand over the SRT-4, and to consider the aftermarket possiblities for both cars. That's exactly what I did, and in my opinion, the Evo doesn't give enough performance over the SRT-4 to warrant costing ten thosuand dollars more. If you wanna blow that ten thousand on the Evo rather than mod the SRT-4, just you can have a "stock vs. stock" race, go right ahead, it's your loss.

First off, 3000ways, you have it in your head that Im comparing a drag car to a stock Evo. Im saying the drag car is using /stock/ SRT4 parts in the car. Block, crank, and head. Thats impressive to /anyone/ who knows anything about racing. That means you can take those stock parts, from the 13.9, all the way to the 8.2's if you so desire. The evo is not doing that, and Im sure you will claim it is, but you have yet given solid fact as I have. Second of all, the SRT4 engineering is not done by Mitsu as 96 someone was suggesting. The turbo is from mitsubishi but nothing else was designed, used, or substituted for mitsu parts. And mitsubishi does /not/ own any of Dimmler Chrysler. Chrysler has been the one pulling mitsu out of bankruptcy since the early 90's. And now their going back under because Dodge wont bail them out again. Thirdly, as for Kmans suggestion about 10k to both cars from stock in aftermarket parts, who would be faster.. and the answer to that is the SRT4. Because the evo's aftermarket parts are /way/ overpriced as is the car itself. Where as the SRT4 parts is moderatly priced for what you get. The fact is in most cases if you pay more for the car, you pay more for the parts. And my original question was, do you think the evo is worth the 10k, and I think a resounding No, besides 3000ways and a few other DSM diehards, was the consencous. I think this thread should be ended because I think its getting to personal, and not factual. Which provoks flaming.

SRT-4 - 2.4L 4-Cylinder DOHC 16V HO Turbo Engine, 220 HP FWD
Weight - 2970.
$21K

EVO - 2.0L Inline 4 Twin Scroll Turbine Tubocharger, 271 HP AWD
Weight - 3263
$30K


WRX Sti - 2.5-Liter DOHC aluminum-alloy 16-valve 4-cylinder horizontally opposed Subaru Turbo Boxer engine with Active Valve Control System (AVCS). Sodium-filled exhaust valves. Iridium spark plugs, 300 HP AWD.
Weight - 3298
$32K

Sorry Z Fanatic, but its 230 hp 250 torque FWD for the SRT4. And the weight is 2750. And the thing alot of you arent understanding is rotating mass, even though the SRT4 is FWD, and the other cars are AWD, the AWD cars are going to loose a modest amount of power to the wheels then from the flywheel. They have rotating mass and twice the amount of the SRT4. So where as the STI is rated at 300 HP.. its going to loose roughly 40-50hp trying to put that to the wheels. Same with the Evo

go to the website, and enter your zipcode, it's based on where you live genius. I got it from DODGE.COM!

Don't even bother telling us FWD cars handles better than AWD and uses its HP profusely. :rofl:

The First SRT-4s were 215HP but now they are 230HP he is right... I test drove one and have the book sitting in my room, it has the car in solar yellow on the beach on the cover.
Andm he is absolutely right, Duh! don't you think there will be DOUBLE the drivetrain loss driving DOUBLE the Wheels. STI's are dynoing 250-260 at the wheels. Obviuosly the SRT-4 isn't putting 180-190 down, but more... this is a 230HP car running 13.8s... cars w/ 20 less HP, GSX or GST for example, run a second or more faster, there is something about this car.

-_- please do me a favor and go the website; click on specs and enter zip codes either 33015 or 34997. I can't say it firmly, but if that's what Dodge putting up in their website, it's a little beyond reasoning.

-_- please do me a favor and go the website; click on specs and enter zip codes either 33015 or 34997. I can't say it firmly, but if that's what Dodge putting up in their website, it's a little beyond reasoning.


There is no doubt that dodge underated the power levels of the SRT4 by a wide margin.


The 03 was rated at 215 and put down 223 to the wheels
The 04 is rated at 230 flywheel and it actaully puts down 230 to the wheels

another thing worth mentioning is the torque...it has 250 tq to the wheels

thanks for clarifying.

Anyone know what a stock Evo dynos at?

even if awd cars put down less power, it will have better overall traction off the line, and pulling out of corners. when you start modifying the car for more hp, awd will help a lot. higher speeds is where its weakness mainly is, around 90-100+ mph.

do skylines have this awd system where 100% of its power can be sent to the rear wheels? if so, then i guess higher speeds shouldnt be as much of a problem.

I know, but I also think that AWD is overrated... there are people that swear it is the end all, the best thing since sliced bread... kinda the same attitude the Skyline Cult's followers have, but all I can say is that the faster cars in the world are RWD.

/\ Very True. When you think about it, the best of the supercars out there are RWD (and most are naturally aspirated). Enzo, Carrera GT, McLaren F1, SLR, Ford GT, etc. In fact I beleive the best AWD car out there has to be the RS6 and soon to be the LeMans Quattro. But when you think about it, these supercars are meant to shine on the track in good conditions. Most owners of these cars wouldnt dream of even bringing these cars out when its raining, let alone onto dirt or mud. The advantage of AWD sports cars like the STi and the EVO lies in these conditions. The are basically street legal WRC cars.

/\ Very True. When you think about it, the best of the supercars out there are RWD (and most are naturally aspirated). Enzo, Carrera GT, McLaren F1, SLR, Ford GT, etc. In fact I beleive the best AWD car out there has to be the RS6 and soon to be the LeMans Quattro. But when you think about it, these supercars are meant to shine on the track in good conditions. Most owners of these cars wouldnt dream of even bringing these cars out when its raining, let alone onto dirt or mud. The advantage of AWD sports cars like the STi and the EVO lies in these conditions. The are basically street legal WRC cars.

Isn't the Porsche 911 Turbo and 911 GT2 AWD, isn't the new Bugatti Veyron suppose to have AWD also. The Lamborghini Murcielago is also AWD, and there are others. Anyhow there may be a super EVO time attack challenge, it's in the works. Big dawgs like Vishnu, Sparco, Buschur, and XS Engineering have already signed up. Maybe a SRT-4 can try and enter the competetion too, see how you do? I doubt an SRT-4 will do well.

As much as I love the 911 (possibly more then my M3), they don't compare very well against the likes of the McLaren and the CGT. As for the Veyron, the only thing I know about that monstrosity is that its been delayed at least a few times because it just doesnt seem to work right.

i'm a SRT-4 supporter. but you cant just go on saying that is the evo worth 10K more? why don't you try putting an awd system with a torsen style center diff, or fully alumium suspension compenents, or brembo brakes in a srt 4 and see that it will cost around 30K or even more. the evo cost more simpily becsuae it has more inside. granted to some it may not be that important, but still its there and everything serves a purpose whether you like it or not.

also the neon has a extremely weak chassis, once you put a stiffer suspension in, and get rid of the grease filled suspension bushings with polyurethen bushings, and the chassis will flex like crazy. all it needs for a evo is a 1 mm wider rear sway bar, and some R compound tires, and it will pull a .99 G on the skid pad. the EVO is compared to a NSX type S zero, its compared to a Skyline GT-R, etc etc. the SRT-4 is in the Civic Si, the SE-R class. it just happens to be soo quick that its compared to the 350Z, the mustang GT, and the S2000.

if your gonna compared the fastest stock times, road and track got the car to do 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, and the 1/4 mile in 13.3 at 103 mph. while hte SRT-4's best time is 5.4 seconds to 60 and 13.9 at 102.7 mph.

so from a highway roll the evo and the stock SRT-4 will be a very close race. but the EVO is not a drag racer, its a all out back road burner, and a rally car for the street.

soo in the end, to some the extra 10K may not be worth it. but just think about tryin to put all that parts into the SRT-4 and you will see where the extra 10K went.

why don't you try putting an awd system with a torsen style center diff,


sorry to be picky but the center on the USDM evo is viscous. Only the RS version gets a torsen up front.

That's the thing, I pick the SRT-4 because all I would do with either car is stoplight racing and occasionally taking it to the drag strip. I can see why the Evo would be a better choice for rally racing. That said, the SRT-4 is doing extremely well in SCCA open-class rally and autocross, well enough to give the WRX and Rabbit GTI a run for their money.

First off, 3000ways, you have it in your head that Im comparing a drag car to a stock Evo. Im saying the drag car is using /stock/ SRT4 parts in the car. Block, crank, and head. Thats impressive to /anyone/ who knows anything about racing. That means you can take those stock parts, from the 13.9, all the way to the 8.2's if you so desire. The evo is not doing that, and Im sure you will claim it is, but you have yet given solid fact as I have. Second of all, the SRT4 engineering is not done by Mitsu as 96 someone was suggesting. The turbo is from mitsubishi but nothing else was designed, used, or substituted for mitsu parts. And mitsubishi does /not/ own any of Dimmler Chrysler. Chrysler has been the one pulling mitsu out of bankruptcy since the early 90's. And now their going back under because Dodge wont bail them out again. Thirdly, as for Kmans suggestion about 10k to both cars from stock in aftermarket parts, who would be faster.. and the answer to that is the SRT4. Because the evo's aftermarket parts are /way/ overpriced as is the car itself. Where as the SRT4 parts is moderatly priced for what you get. The fact is in most cases if you pay more for the car, you pay more for the parts. And my original question was, do you think the evo is worth the 10k, and I think a resounding No, besides 3000ways and a few other DSM diehards, was the consencous. I think this thread should be ended because I think its getting to personal, and not factual. Which provoks flaming.

First off, you seem to be the one swaying from facts, you and your homie, still can't get the non factual $10k price out of your head, I told you the 2005 EVO RS base price is around $27K and the 2005 EVO GSR is around $29K. Second off this all started when you stated the SRT-4 was a rival for the EVO performance stock for stock, I challenged that and you and your homie immediatly jump to the aftermarket and (you to professional drag cars) purchase price. Was that the argument, um no. That's like saying the SRT-4 is competetion to the Viper SRT-10 stock for stock, and I say BS. Then you respond with well is the Viper really worth $60K more than the SRT-4. Anyways I think srtforums should challenge evolutionm.net to a open track and drag racing event, anyone or anybody can enter that is street legal. Here is my prediction, the final consists of the fastest street legal SRT-4 (Dyno Works) against the fastest street legal EVO (Turbo Trix). The tree hits green and the Turbo Trix EVO was runs a 9.7 to the Dyno Works SRT-4 11.1, wow that was close. The racing portion, well I'll just leave that to your imagination, but believe me it won't be pretty for the SRT-4s. If this event happend, this would all be very much factual.

The SRT-4 will get to that level of speed eventually, keep in mind that the Evo and it's engine have been around way longer than the SRT-4.