Boosted CRX vs SRT-4

[BadA$$Snake]

Wow, now that this is getting way out of hand...MERRY CHRISTMAS, happy hanchuaku(spelling?!) happy Kwanza, and FESTIVUS FOR THE REST OF US! stop the hate guys, we all love fast cars period.

[qr25sentra]

215 hp and 230 tq on 03s with no lsd and i believe these were making about 220 whp.

05's were rated at 230 and 250 and dyned that at the wheels.. they had lsd and i think had stage 1 injectors stock? correct me if im wrong.

i love that car, it makes all that tq at low rpms( fun for crusing in the city).. its just too hard to launch and most kids cant drive them. down here everyone got new cars bc of the hurricane and 2 kids bought srts and both lost to an experience driver in a rsx type s who previously owned a wrx(modded it and beat a modded evo right b4 the hurricane)

this is also the first stick car for both srt drivers.(wonder how long their trannys gonna last?)

[2000LS1Z28]

Good kill. Sounds like you have a quick ride. Most people think SRT-4's are high 13 sec. cars, but on the average they are low 14 sec. rides. I've raced one before. I believe they have axle hop issues. To beat it by 7 car lengths means, to me, that he must've been somewhat modded, as i'm sure your car should be in the 12's.

Oh, and i'd say 7 car lengths is more like 4-5 tenths of a sec. 1/4 mile wise, judging by my times at the track versus slower cars.

[98StangGT]

On a track with good traction I would more than likely be in the 12's. However on the street on a dusty dirty road I wasn't running as well as I probably should. And the place we raced at wasnt exactly a quartermile since it was just some random road with markings that have been there since I can remember (probably made by some kids). As for mods on the SRT-4 i think it has intake exhaust and a bigger downpipe not positive tho, just what ive been told.

[209 SRT]

Originally Posted by qr25sentra

215 hp and 230 tq on 03s with no lsd and i believe these were making about 220 whp.

05's were rated at 230 and 250 and dyned that at the wheels.. they had lsd and i think had stage 1 injectors stock? correct me if im wrong.

i love that car, it makes all that tq at low rpms( fun for crusing in the city).. its just too hard to launch and most kids cant drive them. down here everyone got new cars bc of the hurricane and 2 kids bought srts and both lost to an experience driver in a rsx type s who previously owned a wrx(modded it and beat a modded evo right b4 the hurricane)

this is also the first stick car for both srt drivers.(wonder how long their trannys gonna last?)

I would have to agree with you on that one......all info is correct and about kids buying them and thinking they could beat the world just gives us real srt tuners a bad name.......

[209 SRT]

[quote=2000LS1Z28]Good kill. Sounds like you have a quick ride. Most people think SRT-4's are high 13 sec. cars, but on the average they are low 14 sec. rides. I've raced one before. I believe they have axle hop QUOTE]

for most part they are high 13s cars.......the majority of people that drive them cant drive and are just kids............. thus them hitting low 14s........and yes they do have tons of wheel hop due too mounts that cant handle the power......

[CassiesMan]

Originally Posted by 98StangGT

It's not just Mustang guys that SRT-4s are econoboxes, though I'm sure a vast majority of them do, since mustang's were designed to be fast fun cars from day 1

And thus begun a long line of tradition of Ford failing miserably at their project goals...

[Slo S14]

Mustangs designed to be fast from day 1.... I test drove an 02 gt 5spd while the dealer was detailing my nissan right before I bought it, and it was far from "fast". Lets look back at the 96-98 gt's shall we? Those things are dogs from the factory, and the sn95 5.0's werent all that far behind them. Even the foxbody mustangs could see a high 14-low 15 stock. So I'd re-think that arguement. I'm not sure about the costs to mod an srt-4, but have you seen the prices for a built 2v or 4v modular shortblock?

[209 SRT]

well for starters about 5000 give or take will get you in to low 11s....high 10s....not bad for a 4banger.....

[Ace$nyper]

Originally Posted by 209 SRT

well for starters about 5000 give or take will get you in to low 11s....high 10s....not bad for a 4banger.....

I wonder can you make sig pic a little bigger? I'm still squinting to make it out.


B18c1 and boost is a great combo 10psi can net 300WHP stock guts with good turbine and tuning.

[TheStang00]

Originally Posted by Slo S14

Mustangs designed to be fast from day 1.... I test drove an 02 gt 5spd while the dealer was detailing my nissan right before I bought it, and it was far from "fast". Lets look back at the 96-98 gt's shall we? Those things are dogs from the factory, and the sn95 5.0's werent all that far behind them. Even the foxbody mustangs could see a high 14-low 15 stock. So I'd re-think that arguement. I'm not sure about the costs to mod an srt-4, but have you seen the prices for a built 2v or 4v modular shortblock?

hey... comon every one has a couple off years... they are runnin mid 13s now on a regular basis. and the fox mustang may not have been blazin fast stock, but that is one of the most easily modded cars out there, tremendous aftermarket and its so easy to get them to go fast. im gonna admit tho... the 94-98 mustangs were nothing special. the 4.6 improved in 99 though and wasnt to bad, now its better... i think they are goin in the right direction with it. all we need now is some weight reduction and about 50 more ponies. which i see comin in the near future.


oh shit i didnt realize i just jumped in the middle of a mustangs suck thread... crap. im glad i never saw this thread before... i probably would have gotten pissed at someone. you guys, this is what it comes down too, mustangs from day 1 have been the car every one wants to beat, so everyone that doesnt have one talks shit about em. they have had tremendous success in racing and on the street for years.

[98StangGT]

^^ amen to that.

[Right_LiRrr]

It's sad that no one cares about driveability anymore, just dyno numbers and OTHER PEOPLE'S quarter mile times.

I can tell you a 230whp FWD car does not sound appealing to me.

And dynos aren't all accurate.

More importantly, at the end of the day, a dyno gives you a number, you being able to handle the power and drive it to the end of the 1/4 mile gives you the speed.

What's sad is someone with a slow car trying to race, but what is even sadder is someone with a high hp car who can't drive it.

I hear too much of "Car A can do high 13's with good driver and low 14s with bad so it is faster" and not enough of "I run xx.xx, can you beat that?"

People too quckly defend their own car by referencing someone else's car of the same model. And too easily brush off a loss because of a "bad driver" - racing is as much about the driver as it is about the car!

Too much triabalism.

Last note, a car's power is no longer about cc's and no. of cylinders...we should all know that by now. I'm so sick of people bringing those two factors into it.

/end rant

[Right_LiRrr]

One last thing, a question if I may.

Why would a car manufacturer underrate a sports car? Yes in Japan it was because of the Gentlemen's agreement, but why in America would a car company do that? Is it illegal to have a certain power to weight ratio?

[209 SRT]

Originally Posted by Right_LiRrr

One last thing, a question if I may.

Why would a car manufacturer underrate a sports car? Yes in Japan it was because of the Gentlemen's agreement, but why in America would a car company do that? Is it illegal to have a certain power to weight ratio?

............Insurance purposes and marketing.......good question..