SRT4 vs Evo 8

[ZSmasher]

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)

[kman10587]

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.

[Mike (M3)]

is the srt4 fwd?

..we dont have it here in england

[3000ways]

Originally Posted by kman10587

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.

[3000ways]

Originally Posted by ZSmasher

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.

[3000ways]

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.

[3000ways]

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.

[Neutrino]

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

[Joseph1082]

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.

[3000ways]

Originally Posted by Joseph1082

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 =).

[kman10587]

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.

[DinanM3_S2]

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]

Originally Posted by kman10587

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.

[kman10587]

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.

[Z_Fanatic]

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. I don't think they had much of a choice but to keep the price tag under $20K, it's a Neon!