Srt4 Vs Wrx

the evo has more peak torque than the srt-4. the evo has 273 lb ft at 3500 rpm, and the srt-4 has 245 lb ft at 3200 rpm. i dont need to hear about this displacement bs, and how you can get more out of the srt4, im talking stock.

I think the real debate right now is EVO vs. SRT-4. It sounds like the '03 SRT-4's may be a little slower than the EVO while the '04 SRT-4's may be a little quicker. Keep in mind we're talking about .1 and .2 seconds in a 1/4 mile...so it's gonna be a driver's race everytime anyhow.

now someone has went a little over board, evo-8 will destroy the srt-4 no matter what year, and so will the sti.

and in my opinion the wrx would start of faster but the srt-4 would win in the end of the 1/4

Power and times are one thing. Driving them is were you will seperate all of them.

Here is a thread of EVO 8 dynos...

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?threadid=35596

Here is a thread of SRT-4 dynos...

http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3475

You guys can argue all you want about which factory horsepower and torque ratings, but dynos provide empirical data that is not debatable. That being said, I really like both cars...especially the way the EVO handles and the way the SRT-4 sounds. Stock whp is nearly the same for '04 SRT-4's and EVO 8's...around 220-235 depending on boost and temperature. Stock torque is better in the SRT-4 whether it's an '03 or '04...usually between 240-265 depnding on boost and temperature. Stock torque at the wheels for a stock EVO is consistently under 230.

I don't know who would win a race. Probably the all wheel drive EVO if the SRT-4 driver didn't have a great launch.

And to that report of an EVO doing a 13.1 quarter mile of the showroom floor...I call bullshit! ;)

Steiner,

Dynos are the least reliable data that you can use.

You guys can argue all you want about which factory horsepower and torque ratings, but dynos provide empirical data that is not debatable.

You can argue all you want about hp numbers, but EVO's are still a LOT faster than SRT4's.

EVO owner on another forum

60: 1.72
1/4: 13.02
ets: 103.4


edit: ground kit is my only mod

You Boys, have not seen an EVO in action, at least one that has been modified. If that was the case, there would be no debate.

The HP/weight ratio is nearly identical on the EVO's and SRT-4's so it has the making of a good race. I think lots of people get taken in by the "EVO vs. Neon" thing and don't give credit where credit's due. The EVO is in a different class of car...AWD, amazing handling, etc...but it doesn't out class the SRT-4 in the straight-away. The Dodge is lighter and torquier. Maybe I'll race one if I can find one, but this thread is going nowhere.

on the dyno, the srt-4 might pull same number of torque or more than the evo, i dont know about hp, but the evos gonna actually use most of that power on take off, cause of awd. the srt 4 is dynoed on only two wheels without the driveshaft, and all that stuff that goes to the rear wheels, so of course its gonna have less loss, but out on the streets or track, its just doesnt have enough grip like the evo does. when the evo doesnt need all that traction anymore, i think most of its power is sent to its rear wheels. now on the highway, or high speed rolling acceleration, the srt 4 has the advantage, and im sure most of you know why.

im sure that the evo is faster than the srt 4 on 1/4, theres enough gap between all the times, and trap speeds that ive seen, that its obviously faster.

Ok, this might settle this a bit...

There are a lot of race stories in the SRTforums where basically stock SRT's either keep up or walk stock EVOs.

You might say they were biased, so I went ahead and searched for a race told by an EVO owner himself.

Here's the story told in evolutionm.net:
http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?threadid=39525&highlight=SRT

Same story in SRTforums.com:
http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15349

You might say that the SRT the EVO raced was modded, since it had the stage1 tune...well, the 2004 SRT-4's come with the stage1 tune STOCK, with the advantage of an LSD.

It's a driver's race.

BTW, to add, Armando (SpyderEclipseGst) went to SpeedWorld here in AZ last Wednesday, and told me story of how his buddie's EVO got chased down in the 1/4 by a 2003 SRT where, despite the obvious advantage the EVO had from the start, the SRT managed to chase it down and actually cross the finish before the EVO. Both cars were modded, I believe.

Edit: Just as I know of stock EVO's running mid-14's, and even 15's at the track, stock 2003 SRT-4's have managed 13.7's on the stock tires. Again, driver's race between a 2004 SRT-4 and a 2003 Lancer EVO.

I am pretty sure the EVOs going to the states are putting out less hp that ones they get here in Europe.

Edit: Just as I know of stock EVO's running mid-14's, and even 15's at the track, stock 2003 SRT-4's have managed 13.7's on the stock tires. Again, driver's race between a 2004 SRT-4 and a 2003 Lancer EVO.

Comparing the best possible times of an SRT4 with some monkey who can't drive in an EVO just isn't fair. I've seen an SRT4 run high 13's on our 1000 ft track repeatedly, my TS was getting 12.9 with just an intake. So can I say that 2.5TS's are faster than SRT4's now?

The HP/weight ratio is nearly identical on the EVO's and SRT-4's so it has the making of a good race.

You put too much stock in power/weight ratio. There are a grap of other factors. EVO's are faster, deal with it.

SRT4's are great cars, I never said they're not. They'd probably be my 3rd or 4th pick for the $20,000 range. But you're trying to say they're even with a car that's almost a full second faster. Stock EVO's can even trap faster than I've seen any stock SRT4 trap, so it's not just the AWD launch.

Alright just to clear some things up. No matter if 03 or 04 a SRT-4 is not gonna touch an EVO period. Just looking at the numbers out of Motortrend (which is in my opinion the best magazine) the EVO does 0-60 in 4.59 and the 1/4 mile in 13.08. Those are the actual numbers that they came up with and if anyone does not believe me read motortrend June 03. Now the numbers for the SRT-4 for 03 are 13.99 for the 1/4 mile and I'm not sure what the 0-60 was. Something like 5.6sec. The 04 was only slightly quicker and turned the 1/4 mile in 13.89.
I won't even go into handling because the EVO would make the SRT-4 cry. So much for those two cars.
As for the WRX being slightly faster through the 1/4 mile that is untrue. The WRX will do the 1/4 mile in 14.1 which is still slower than the SRT-4. The only place the WRX edges the out the SRT-4 in acceleration is 0-60, which takes the WRX 5.4 seconds.
I hope this cleared some things up and for any non-believers, this is all based on facts from a very respectable car magazine.

Yes a respectable car magazine that has had a bias against Chrysler. Also I was just reading their magazine last night with the GTO on the cover and they had two 1/4 mile times listed for the 2004 SRT-4 and they stated that traction was a problem with the new tires and that they were worse than the 2003 SRT-4's stock tires. Don't fool yourself it is a drivers race for the 1/4 mile. However; I will say that the SRT-4 won't be able to oust it on the track.

A stock 2003 SRT-4 will give an Evo a run for its money, with the Stage 1 you will be beating them, with the Stage 2 you will be dropping them, and with the Stage 3 you will be blowing their doors off. Too bad the Stage 3 isn't street legal. The 2004s come with bigger injectors and an LSD from Quafie. Don't think that the Evo is unbeatable by a car much less exspensive than it. I love the Evo, but it can be beaten the SRT-4. It is a drivers race. I would love to see a side by side with the 2004 SRT-4 and the Evo 8.

why is everyone getting all these lower times for the srt-4, and even the evo? i hope you guys arent being biased, cause im sure as hell not. of all the quickest times i ve seen with good drivers, the evos usually faster in the 1/4, of course considering the srt-4 being stock without those stage upgrades. with street races, your not always sure if you re actually going to the 1/4 mile mark, maybe you re going pass the 1/4 mile distance where the srt-4 has the advantage, and it ll probably pass the evo.

I think this has now officially become the SRT-4 vs. EVO thread. Sorry for hijacking it, but it's an interesting debate nonetheless. Anybody have an EVO that wouldn't mind racing? ;)

if both stock then i think wrx vs srt-4 is the better comparison, cause ive read in some articles that the wrx was able to edge out the srt-4 in the 1/4, but then after that the srt-4 passes it. if you did srt-4 with stage upgrade, then it would be better to compare it to the evo, or sti. the evo will definately beat the original stock srt-4.

Just as I know of stock EVO's running mid-14's, and even 15's at the track, stock 2003 SRT-4's have managed 13.7's on the stock tires.

I have never heard of times anywhere near that for a new EVO.
All the times I've ever seen for an EVO where below 13.5.
I'm not just basing this on motortrend either. This is from actual people that have raced it. I do believe though that magazines are a good source because they do basically the same thing we would do if we had those kind of cars. Also any magazine you look at the EVO does the 1/4 mile just about 1 second faster than the SRT-4.
IMO it's not a drivers race unless one of them has never driven a stick before. I stand by my oppinion that the EVO will take the SRT-4 in a race everytime.

I have never heard of times anywhere near that for a new EVO.
All the times I've ever seen for an EVO where below 13.5.
I'm not just basing this on motortrend either. This is from actual people that have raced it. I do believe though that magazines are a good source because they do basically the same thing we would do if we had those kind of cars. Also any magazine you look at the EVO does the 1/4 mile just about 1 second faster than the SRT-4.
IMO it's not a drivers race unless one of them has never driven a stick before. I stand by my oppinion that the EVO will take the SRT-4 in a race everytime.

That car in MT was a ringer, plain and simple.

In case you don't know, I lurk at evolutionm.net, and am a member at SRTforums.com.

I have yet to see a stock run by an EVO come close to a 13.08, and even then, they are track prepped (stuff taken out, tire-pressures played with, etc.).

As for the really slow times I reported from EVO's usually come from the drivers. I have also seen them reported by the domestic track-rats that have nothing to lose by lying about it.

Here's one from an owner himself:
http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?threadid=42731

And another one:
http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?threadid=42794

They got 14.09 @ 95.4mph and 14.366 @ 96.28mph. SRT-4's that get those times usually trap about 100+. That tells you that SRT's would be chasing them down at this point, and anything further, would be leaving them.

Here's a lightly-modded EVO run at almost sea-level with a 1.85 60-ft:
http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?threadid=44548

13.16 @ 104.24...if he can bring the 60 down to 1.7, he might get a 13-flat, but these times/traps are achieved with abusing the hell out of that AWD. I think we can all agree that a car's true power is better estimated by the trap-speed than the E.T.

Here's a stock 2003 SRT run:
http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21933

14.01 @ 100mph

Another one:
http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22064

13.7 @ 100mph with a 2.079 60-ft.

And another one:
http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20863

14.3 @ 104mph

Don't forget, these are all 2003's with about 10-20hp LESS than 2004's.

I am not saying all these as some fan-boy either, as I joined-up in SRTforums to keep some of the kids in there in check, as some of them tend to think that the SRT is the fastest ever. I didn't believe the EVO kills either, until I actually bucked-up and learned about the SRT.

Don't get me wrong, if given a free choice, I'd pick the EVO anyday, but if I had to finance a car, the SRT would be my choice, as it saves me considerable money.

Ya, but in the end its still a Neon. Sorry, but until Dodge changes the body style, which I wish they would, I would spen the extra cash for the EVO.

Bang for the buck the Neon gets the nod.

"It's still a Neon" is something I guess I'll have to learn to live with. If somebody had told me 5 or 10 years ago that I'd be the proud owner of a Dodge fricken' Neon I would have told them they were off their rocker. I owned a '66 Barracuda in High School and was a "there's no substitute for cubic inches" kind of guy. This SRT-4 has given me an appreciation for the other side of the coin...13-14 second quarter miles and 25+ mpg. The WRX Sti was my first choice once my insurance confirmed my '02 Spec V was a total, but I'm in the middle of planning a wedding right now. The price difference between say the $27.5k EVO, $30k Sti, and $21k SRT-4 is pretty significant, but at this time it's money better spent elsewhere. I don't regret my purchase. The SRT-4 is conversation starter. Good or bad, every car guy seems to have an opinion on it.

The 13.0 I posted on the last page was got from a search on evolutionm, I didn't spend a whole lot of time looking for the absolute fastest time for a stock EVO on there, I just posted the 1st sub-13.3 I found, which happened to be a 13.0.

I'm not saying anything about which car is a better value (EVO still IMO), I'm just saying the EVO is faster. Given the choice, I'd save money and get an EVO or STi. If I had to stay in the SRT4 price range, I'd get a Mazdaspeed Protege or another Impreza. It has nothing to do with NOT liking the SRT4, the other cars I just like more. If I was handed the keys to an SRT4 I'd be giddy as a schoolgirl (ghey moment of the day over :biggrin: ). I've been trying to convince one of my friends to buy an SRT4, since I'm not gonna get one, this way I at least get to play with it.

Ya, but in the end its still a Neon. Sorry, but until Dodge changes the body style, which I wish they would, I would spen the extra cash for the EVO.

Bang for the buck the Neon gets the nod.

Just because it looks similar to a Neon does not mean that it is just a Neon with a turbo. I happen to think it looks pretty damn good just like the Evo looks a lot like a Lancer. That is like saying oh, it is still a Lance, or oh, its still an Impreza.

Steiner,

Thats just it, the car has out of the box speed. It just needs a make over, big time. The look is well outdated, that is all I am saying. IMO

Just because it looks similar to a Neon does not mean that it is just a Neon with a turbo. I happen to think it looks pretty damn good just like the Evo looks a lot like a Lancer. That is like saying oh, it is still a Lance, or oh, its still an Impreza.


Ya but Dodge really did not make a big effort to change the look of the SRT. And is the Evo based off the same chassis as the lancer like the SRT shares the same chassis as the Neon?

Ya but Dodge really did not make a big effort to change the look of the SRT. And is the Evo based off the same chassis as the lancer like the SRT shares the same chassis as the Neon?

Yes it is. They simply take the same chassis and add new weld points to stiffen them up. Dodge did it with the SRT-4, Mitsubishi did it with the Evo, and Subaru did it with the WRX and STi. It ends up being about 60% different from the original, on the SRT-4 anyhow.

Here's another story of a stock STi, which we can all agree, is faster than the Evo, against a stock SRT-4. Story is told by the STi owner:
http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23628

And the STi still pulled away, from a 60 mph roll even. No AWD launch, just a lot of drivetrain loss.

When I see a stock SRT4 pull a 13.5 or quicker, then I'll concede that, in a drag race, it's at least in the same ballpark as an STi or EVO.

And "stage" upgrades aren't stock. They're Mopar parts, they don't come on the car from the factory. They're like TRD parts or Nismo or Ford Racing parts.

That guy's SRT-4 is stock. You don't need Stage 1, 2, 3 or anything to powershift. He has...well Stage Zero I guess. Unfortunately those SRT forums can sometimes be a breeding ground for 16 year olds with outrageous misinformation.

That car in MT was a ringer, plain and simple.


Is that an assumption or how do you know that ? I hear people say this kind of thing all the time but what are they basing it off of ? Personally I don't believe it but who knows maybe you're right. Maybe you know a guy that works there or something. I for one am still (no matter what anyone says) gonna stick with my previous posts that I believe the EVO is faster and not just based on what I've read but also what I've been told by people that have witnessed them at the track.

And "stage" upgrades aren't stock. They're Mopar parts, they don't come on the car from the factory. They're like TRD parts or Nismo or Ford Racing parts.


But the 04 already come stock with the "stage 1" kit on there. Bigger injectors and slightly more aggressive tuning(I think..). Plus a LSD. Is it a Qualfie unit??

But the 04 already come stock with the "stage 1" kit on there. Bigger injectors and slightly more aggressive tuning(I think..). Plus a LSD. Is it a Qualfie unit??

Yeah it is.

Just because it looks similar to a Neon does not mean that it is just a Neon with a turbo. I happen to think it looks pretty damn good just like the Evo looks a lot like a Lancer. That is like saying oh, it is still a Lance, or oh, its still an Impreza.

but the lancer evo, and the sti looks a lot more different to their base model counter parts, than the srt-4. like for the evo, its whole side is different, making it a wider car with wider tracks, and the front lights are wider. if you put an evo next to its base model counterpart, it looks a lot more different than an srt-4 next to a neon. i still think the srt-4 looks pretty good though.

And the STi still pulled away, from a 60 mph roll even. No AWD launch, just a lot of drivetrain loss.

It pulled ONE CAR ON AN STi to 140mph, when an STi usually pulls an Evo 2-4 cars at those speeds. Also, we don't know if he ran an '03 SRT or an '04...'04's are the topic of discussion here, as it has been documented that '04s make more HP than the '03 SRTs.

When I see a stock SRT4 pull a 13.5 or quicker, then I'll concede that, in a drag race, it's at least in the same ballpark as an STi or EVO.

So what ballparks did the Evo guys that ran low 14's come from? Besides, the 2004s (the topic of discussion here) haven't been proven yet, as most of them are probably still in their breaking-in stages. I believe 13.7 has been achieved with a stock 2003 SRT...who knows how much the extra 20HP (up to) and the LSD will help the 2004s on a track.

And "stage" upgrades aren't stock. They're Mopar parts, they don't come on the car from the factory. They're like TRD parts or Nismo or Ford Racing parts.

Like fatninja said, most of the S1 tune is already in the 2004s out of the factory.

but the lancer evo, and the sti looks a lot more different to their base model counter parts, than the srt-4. like for the evo, its whole side is different, making it a wider car with wider tracks, and the front lights are wider. if you put an evo next to its base model counterpart, it looks a lot more different than an srt-4 next to a neon. i still think the srt-4 looks pretty good though.

True, but put an Evo next to the OZ Rally Edition Lancer, they look quite similar.

I checked out evolutionm.net today and there are plenty guys on there that run low 13's in a stock evo. with $300 worth of mods they run mid 12's !! A lot of guys there are saying that learning to drive the EVO is key. So if some guy just bought an EVO and doesn't know the first thing about how to drive it then yes a SRT-4 is gonna beat him. But with equal drivers the EVO WILL beat the SRT-4.

It pulled ONE CAR ON AN STi to 140mph

Tonight we went for it again, but this time, from about 60 (now my car has about 1600 miles). I was in 3rd gear at around 3k RPMs. We hit it and I pulled about a car in front up to 140mph when we shut down.

He's saying the STi pulled a length ahead, right?

So what ballparks did the Evo guys that ran low 14's come from?

Just cuz they can't drive the car right isn't the cars fault. I beat a Viper GTS with a bad driver who did nothing but sit there and spin the tires once, but I'm not gonna say it's a "drivers race" between me and a Viper.

Besides, the 2004s (the topic of discussion here) haven't been proven yet, as most of them are probably still in their breaking-in stages. I believe 13.7 has been achieved with a stock 2003 SRT...who knows how much the extra 20HP (up to) and the LSD will help the 2004s on a track.

Like fatninja said, most of the S1 tune is already in the 2004s out of the factory.

Well, the '04's may or may not be a different story. But as it is, the only thing an EVO owner needs to worry about from a stock '03 is going from a hig speed roll.

True, but put an Evo next to the OZ Rally Edition Lancer, they look quite similar.

the oz is still basically like the base model lancer. the evos lights, and fenders all around are still different.

Y does everyone always go off topic. Who cares what it looks like. The neon and ST4 are very simmilar, the Lancer and LANCER EVO look similar. Who the f*** cares . The point is an EVo would beat a SR4. Hands down. But the problem is the drivers. If the guy cant drive then it could go either way. The peopel on here argue more than my gf.
DAM

Tim

...The peopel on here argue more than my gf.
DAM

Tim

I thought it actually sounded like more of an intelligent discussion irregardless of where people stood. People have been posting some good info to back up their opinions. You didn't though.

Y does everyone always go off topic. Who cares what it looks like. The neon and ST4 are very simmilar, the Lancer and LANCER EVO look similar. Who the f*** cares . The point is an EVo would beat a SR4. Hands down. But the problem is the drivers. If the guy cant drive then it could go either way. The peopel on here argue more than my gf.
DAM

Tim

Appearance became another topic due to phrases like "... but you're still driving a Neon."

A neon is a neon and a lancer is a lancer. There in different states of tune but they are the same vehicles, despite modificatins to there apperance and mechanicals:)

Tim

Found a good, credible post in the SRT forums. The race is a stock '04 SRT-4 vs. an EVO 8. Somebody in the EVO apparently videotaped the race, but I doubt that tape will materialize. ;)

http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28002

Sounds like EVO from a dig and SRT-4 from a roll.

well there are several videos of srt4 just murdering evos...true they were a bit modified...but srt4 take so well to mods its ridiculous...1500 $ and you'll be almost mid 12's

still if i would have 8k more available i would get the evo

however between an srt4 and a wrx i would get the srt...i drove them back to back and the torque curve on the srt is so smooth its not even funny plus its very nimble and brakes amazingly

the wrx on the other hand was more composed on the freeway but if felt just a bit too heavy for my tastes

To stay on topic--
An Srt-4 will walk a Wrx (stock for stock). From a dead stop a Wrx will jump out to a .3-.5 sec lead to 60 feet.

Actually '03 Srt4's put out more hp to the wheels than they were rated at(according to Jackson racing and I believe SCC Mag.). So I'm not convinced that Dodge gave the '04 too much extra power.

As for the Evo--any true Evo owner/enthusiast will tell you that this car wasn't truely made to be a drag racing car. This car handles unbelievably--the steering is light, short and crisp, and the gearing is very short for a turbo car. When going to the dragstrip, my trap speeds are very close to SRT4's; but my ETs are .3-.5 secs quicker due to the launch. It's a great feeling to launch an Evo and hook up right away-the Srt4's were peeling out almost all of 1st gear.

By the way--my Evo looks almost exactly like an OZ Lancer---except for:the bulging fenders, Enkei 17's, Brembo calipers, hood, intercooler, front bumper, front grill, rear window wiper--otherwise-it looks the same.

To stay on topic--
An Srt-4 will walk a Wrx (stock for stock). From a dead stop a Wrx will jump out to a .3-.5 sec lead to 60 feet.

Actually '03 Srt4's put out more hp to the wheels than they were rated at(according to Jackson racing and I believe SCC Mag.). So I'm not convinced that Dodge gave the '04 too much extra power.

As for the Evo--any true Evo owner/enthusiast will tell you that this car wasn't truely made to be a drag racing car. This car handles unbelievably--the steering is light, short and crisp, and the gearing is very short for a turbo car. When going to the dragstrip, my trap speeds are very close to SRT4's; but my ETs are .3-.5 secs quicker due to the launch. It's a great feeling to launch an Evo and hook up right away-the Srt4's were peeling out almost all of 1st gear.

By the way--my Evo looks almost exactly like an OZ Lancer---except for:the bulging fenders, Enkei 17's, Brembo calipers, hood, intercooler, front bumper, front grill, rear window wiper--otherwise-it looks the same.

You own a nice car man. I love those EVO's. As far as the differences between '03 and '04 SRT-4's: The '03 puts down about 215-220 whp out of the factory. The '04, like mine, puts down about 225-235 whp out of the factory. The SRT-4 got a LSD for '04. The '04 already has the Mopar Stage 1 injectors from the factory, but an '03 w/Stage 1 (injectors and ECM) will beat an '04 in the 1/4 mile by about .2 or .3 seconds depending on the driver. That being said, an '04 with Mopar Stage 1 (just the ECM) will beat an '03 Stage 1 SRT-4 by about .1 or .2 seconds in the 1/4 mile. Stage 1 costs about $350 despite the year of the car. The beauty of Stage 1 isn't neccesarily the horsepower gains (about 15-25whp depending on the year of the car), but rather how the engine's torque curve is broadened.

How is the aftermarket support so far for the EVO?

http://www.arimport.com/pics/srt4.JPG

:lol:

To stay on topic--
An Srt-4 will walk a Wrx (stock for stock). From a dead stop a Wrx will jump out to a .3-.5 sec lead to 60 feet.

Actually '03 Srt4's put out more hp to the wheels than they were rated at(according to Jackson racing and I believe SCC Mag.). So I'm not convinced that Dodge gave the '04 too much extra power.

As for the Evo--any true Evo owner/enthusiast will tell you that this car wasn't truely made to be a drag racing car. This car handles unbelievably--the steering is light, short and crisp, and the gearing is very short for a turbo car. When going to the dragstrip, my trap speeds are very close to SRT4's; but my ETs are .3-.5 secs quicker due to the launch. It's a great feeling to launch an Evo and hook up right away-the Srt4's were peeling out almost all of 1st gear.

By the way--my Evo looks almost exactly like an OZ Lancer---except for:the bulging fenders, Enkei 17's, Brembo calipers, hood, intercooler, front bumper, front grill, rear window wiper--otherwise-it looks the same.

and the front lights, the shape of the lights are different, its wider and more angular. the shape of the rear lights are the same i think, the only difference is that the evo has euros/altezzas, you must have not had your car very long?

OoNismooO--I can go on and on about the differences between the Evo and OZ--someone above pointed out they look similar.


Steiner--nice choice in cars--I bet you're glad you waited till '04. That's a great ride. As for my Evo--there is good aftermarket support(because of the 4g63 engine). The only problem is getting dyno time for fuel tuning(AWD). So far I have a 3" SS Turbo back exhaust, MBC, Intake.

I'd take the WRX over the SRT4 because the WRX has RWD biased AWD were as the SRT4 has FWD (Also known as the worst set up EVER!) I trust Subaru's motor more than I trust Dodges. Subaru has just been making sport compacts longer.

I'd take the WRX over the SRT4 because the WRX has RWD biased AWD were as the SRT4 has FWD (Also known as the worst set up EVER!) I trust Subaru's motor more than I trust Dodges. Subaru has just been making sport compacts longer.


Well, if you knew the whole story about the SRT-4.. you'd know that the motor was completely redesigned to take boost from the factory. It's got all sorts of turbo friendly goodies done to it. It's by no means a standard 4 cylinder with a turbo slapped on.

And Dodge/Chrysler have been making sporty compacts since the eary 80s with the Omni GLH and other such random oddities.

When Mopar gets its shit together, they tend to make cool cars. Like the Viper, Omni GLH, and SRT-4.

Well, if you knew the whole story about the SRT-4.. you'd know that the motor was completely redesigned to take boost from the factory. It's got all sorts of turbo friendly goodies done to it. It's by no means a standard 4 cylinder with a turbo slapped on.

And Dodge/Chrysler have been making sporty compacts since the eary 80s with the Omni GLH and other such random oddities.

When Mopar gets its shit together, they tend to make cool cars. Like the Viper, Omni GLH, and SRT-4.



excelent point polygon....ummm i meant redneck;)




on a serious note....redneck is right...that srt4 engine is ridiculously strong...and mopar has a great history making some insane cars

excelent point polygon....ummm i meant redneck;)




on a serious note....redneck is right...that srt4 engine is ridiculously strong...and mopar has a great history making some insane cars

lol..... yea i almost thought that was polygon talking hahaha, but i did think of polygon when i read rednecks post.

Well, if you knew the whole story about the SRT-4.. you'd know that the motor was completely redesigned to take boost from the factory. It's got all sorts of turbo friendly goodies done to it. It's by no means a standard 4 cylinder with a turbo slapped on.

And Dodge/Chrysler have been making sporty compacts since the eary 80s with the Omni GLH and other such random oddities.

When Mopar gets its shit together, they tend to make cool cars. Like the Viper, Omni GLH, and SRT-4.

Didnt say it was a bad motor. I said I didnt trust it as much as the Subaru motor. And yes Dodge has made some great sport compacts but what have they been doing the past 10yrs? Other than the Viper because the Viper is not really a sport compact and its why out of the WRX's or STI's league. The way it seems to me is Dodge just jumped back in the game wheres Subaru has been doing this almost non stop. So I just want to wait and see. With me I think its just a loyalty issue. I just need some time to come around to Neon=fast car thing. My only legit gripe is that its FWD. I just dont get why car companies do that? It seems to be the trend in a lot of car companies, making FWD sports cars. Is it cheaper or something?

A neon is a neon and a lancer is a lancer. There in different states of tune but they are the same vehicles, despite modificatins to there apperance and mechanicals:)

Tim

No they aren't. They sahre very little with the base models besides a little sheet metal and a few interior bits. The Evo 8, WRX STi, and SRT-4 are over 70% different from the base models. They are not the same.

excelent point polygon....ummm i meant redneck;)




on a serious note....redneck is right...that srt4 engine is ridiculously strong...and mopar has a great history making some insane cars

:biggrin2:

Good one Kojak.

I like all fast cars, but I can only afford to own one at a time...that why I got the SRT-4. It's not exactly the Stanley Cup or the Heisman Trophy, but the SRT-4 gets the award for being the fastest production FWD car ever. I know many people will say that's about as significant as winning a gold medal in the special olympics, but there have been some quick FWD cars made over the last 15-20 years.

As far as the SRT-4 engine...the 2.4L turbo was more or less an answer to Dodge's last minute request for a more powerfull option for the '03 PT Cruiser...a vehicle with the power of a Neon and the handling of a Caravan...woo hoo. :(

PVO was given the 2.4L turbo as the power plant for the SRT-4 but, because of their short deadline, they didn't have months of tests to nickel and dime the engine to death for Dodge. My understanding, based on some of the things I've read, is that DCX marketing recognized the goldmine of revenue in the Mopar aftermarket for this car. PVO knew the engine had to be strong to take well to the mods DCX & Mopar would developing so they more or less overbuilt it. Last I heard there was an SRT-4 with stock internals and the factory turbo running in the low 12's. There is also a 600hp modified SRT-4 with a bigger turbo doing 200mph top speed runs on the salt flats.

Time will tell how well the rest of the car holds up, but the engine (at least on paper) should be the least of concerns.

Hmmm, last 10 years? Well, the Neon's been storming around in the SCCA Showroom Stock ranks. Where've you been?

The ACR package Neon, with it's 160hp 2.0L DOHC four, Koni adjustable struts, great shifting 5speed, and four wheel disc brakes will and consistently has beat on Civic Si's, Nissan Sentra SE-R's, and Golf GTi's. The street version, the Neon Sport Coupe, had 150hp (different computer, the ACR comp being available through Mopar) and lacked the Konis and the rear discs. However, speaking from personal experience, it'll still walk comparable Hondas and Volkswagens.

The Sentra is a bit of another story. It's a wee bit lighter than the street spec Neon Sport Coupe.

Of course, you could also look at the DSM cars and the V6 and turbo 4 Daytonas, but that would make too much sense.

Bottom line: Hot compacts have always been a part of the Chryco product line, they just haven't always been as flamboyant about it as they are now.

Hmmm, last 10 years? Well, the Neon's been storming around in the SCCA Showroom Stock ranks. Where've you been?

The ACR package Neon, with it's 160hp 2.0L DOHC four, Koni adjustable struts, great shifting 5speed, and four wheel disc brakes will and consistently has beat on Civic Si's, Nissan Sentra SE-R's, and Golf GTi's. The street version, the Neon Sport Coupe, had 150hp (different computer, the ACR comp being available through Mopar) and lacked the Konis and the rear discs. However, speaking from personal experience, it'll still walk comparable Hondas and Volkswagens.

The Sentra is a bit of another story. It's a wee bit lighter than the street spec Neon Sport Coupe.

Of course, you could also look at the DSM cars and the V6 and turbo 4 Daytonas, but that would make too much sense.

Bottom line: Hot compacts have always been a part of the Chryco product line, they just haven't always been as flamboyant about it as they are now.

I was saying besides the Neon. Im not talking about race tuned cars or special package ones. And even with ACR package the Neon only made 160hp? That’s a joke. 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? And I said the past 10yrs and Dodge stopped making the Daytona in 93 so yes it is in the past 10yrs but come on it barley makes it. Also true the DSM's were probably the best Sport Compacts Dodge made but you can’t give them all the credit. I would only give them partial credit for them.

So the only good example you gave me was the DSM. And even they were rather problem stricken. So hey Subaru has been making the Impreza in the US sense 93 and its been making fast ones pretty much the whole time (over seas). And what? Dodge just started making a fast Neon in 03. So I say again “I” would take the WRX any day over the SRT4 because it comes from a long line fast reliable sport compacts. However this is just my opinion. But I guess I don't make any sense?

The best thing is to drive them side by side....I've done it and while there are some things i like better about the wrx i would still take the srt4 in a heartbeat

Only 160hp? How much more do you need in a sub 2,600lb FF coupe?

Not to mention, few NA 2.0L fours respond better to baisc tweaks than the Neon twin-cam. My Dad's '96 Sport Coupe received a set of custom ground cams, Mopar header, larger throttle body and injectors from a junkyard Caravan 2.4, Borla muffler, and polished intake manifold.

End result; 240hp NA four cylinder.

Problem, Neon Sport Coupes weigh in at somewhere around 2,900-3,100lbs. Hence, it wasn't the quickest thing out of the hole, but it still had enough to walk the local 5.0 Mustang crowd.

Let's take a look at some other power numbers in the Neon Sport Coupe's class. Off the top of my head, Civic Si's made about 138hp, Sentra SE-R's were 140-150hp, Hyundai Tiburons made 140-150hp, and Escort ZX2's made 130hp.

The Neon Sport Coupe was an incredible bargain in performance, and is highly credible in amongst its peers. To deny that is to be oblivious to a real performer.

Only 160hp? How much more do you need in a sub 2,600lb FF coupe?

Not to mention, few NA 2.0L fours respond better to baisc tweaks than the Neon twin-cam. My Dad's '96 Sport Coupe received a set of custom ground cams, Mopar header, larger throttle body and injectors from a junkyard Caravan 2.4, Borla muffler, and polished intake manifold.

End result; 240hp NA four cylinder.

Problem, Neon Sport Coupes weigh in at somewhere around 2,900-3,100lbs. Hence, it wasn't the quickest thing out of the hole, but it still had enough to walk the local 5.0 Mustang crowd.

Let's take a look at some other power numbers in the Neon Sport Coupe's class. Off the top of my head, Civic Si's made about 138hp, Sentra SE-R's were 140-150hp, Hyundai Tiburons made 140-150hp, and Escort ZX2's made 130hp.

The Neon Sport Coupe was an incredible bargain in performance, and is highly credible in amongst its peers. To deny that is to be oblivious to a real performer.


Ok that is true I didnt think about the power to weight
ratio. And 240hp is pretty impressive with just those mods. Like I said though Im not saying SRT's motor is crap. I just want to see how these cars hold up as a whole in a few years. 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.