EVO IX vs SRT-4 with Stage 3
Evolving Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
the srt is quick, but the fact of having power front windows and manual rear windows is kinda ghetto IMO. i've heard from some ppl that come into my work(tire shop)say the build quality on them is worse than an evo 
Account Disabled
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: California
Originally Posted by kataklyzm
the srt is quick, but the fact of having power front windows and manual rear windows is kinda ghetto IMO. i've heard from some ppl that come into my work(tire shop)say the build quality on them is worse than an evo
i would research it a bit more if i were you. rumors get started by just that kind of thing "my brothers mothers sister said the side door squeaked" and by the time it gets to you its "those cars are of poor build quality" dont trust everything you hear, get the facts yourself.
like i said, im just one owner out of many. im not here to make it out to be God, but i also think people need to research before bashing something completely. regardless, the SRT may just not be your taste - and thats fine, but instead of bashing just say its not your taste. i love the internet.
Last edited by esarteefor; Apr 11, 2005 at 09:58 PM.
simmer down,your cars feelings will not be hurt, and we still think the SRT4 is cool
Originally Posted by esarteefor
although I am just one owner out of many, i have never had any problems. i didnt buy the car for the pretty interior or power windows in the rear. i researched all of that stuff before i bought the car (just as i researched the evo as well as it was a possible option). i dont consider it ghetto really, although it does get annoying with kids in the back seat - not being able to lock them from playing with the windows...ha.
i would research it a bit more if i were you. rumors get started by just that kind of thing "my brothers mothers sister said the side door squeaked" and by the time it gets to you its "those cars are of poor build quality" dont trust everything you hear, get the facts yourself.
like i said, im just one owner out of many. im not here to make it out to be God, but i also think people need to research before bashing something completely. regardless, the SRT may just not be your taste - and thats fine, but instead of bashing just say its not your taste. i love the internet.
i would research it a bit more if i were you. rumors get started by just that kind of thing "my brothers mothers sister said the side door squeaked" and by the time it gets to you its "those cars are of poor build quality" dont trust everything you hear, get the facts yourself.
like i said, im just one owner out of many. im not here to make it out to be God, but i also think people need to research before bashing something completely. regardless, the SRT may just not be your taste - and thats fine, but instead of bashing just say its not your taste. i love the internet.
Originally Posted by esarteefor
no feelings please, show me numbers and actual proof that this is the case. im not arguing the case FWD is hard to get traction, and from a 10 MPH roll I got beat by a Mustang Mach 1 the other night in my 2004 SRT-4 - I clearly understand your feelings. I just dont think you can make a statement like that and tag it to all cars. If you have deep enough pockets/skills/etc you can do whatever you want.
Getting off the line is half the battle. FWD is a big handicap in all motorsports. There is no benifit to FWD whether your drag racing or lapping a track. Anything over 300hp and you're just overpowering the chassis. The only thing the SRT-4 is good for are hwy runs.
Evolved Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
From: NA
It's commonly thought that FWD is a handicap in all motorsport, but in rally, it can be an advantage, as FWD cars are less prone to rear end spins in many conditions, making it ideal for learning the basics.
Account Disabled
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: California
Originally Posted by Kordwood
"You can strap a rocket to a turd, but it's still a turd!!"
Which car does this refer to? The Neon or the Lancer?
Which car does this refer to? The Neon or the Lancer?
Dude you want an EVO.all you need is Exhaust, cams, drop in filter, injectors and a tune thats like stage 2+ and your hitting 11's... thats also like $2,500 if you search right.
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
From: its not where you at, its where you from!
Originally Posted by esarteefor
yeah, its just like the "its still just a neon" comeback everyone likes to use. something about a pot....and a kettle....
The SRT-4 on the other hand...the list of things 'upgraded' to make it an SRT-4 can probably be counted on two hands if you don't count the engine/turbo/intercooler...
I DID THE RESEARCH on both cars before purchasing the EVO VIII...how many spots welds on the frame does the SRT-4 have compared to the NEON to stiffen the chassis? How many inches larger is the wheel base on the SRT-4 compared to the SXT? You know these answers if you are an SRT-4 owner...
I am not trying to start a pissing match, I love the SRT-4 just as much as the next guy for what is has done for the American Sport Compact Car genre, but comparing the Lancer to the EVO and the SRT-4 to the NEON is not the kettle calling the pot black...
Account Disabled
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: California
Originally Posted by FlipBoiFlava242
EVO>SRT-4
you drive a lancer ES correct?
and im not even arguing that the SRT-4 is better, and the original question is not asking about a stock SRT-4 either.