Edmunds 2003 Econosport Comparison...
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,674
Likes: 0
From: Columbia, MD
Too bad there was no Lancer Ralliart. Guess we'll just all have to wait till the 2004 comparison. Anyhow, here's a pic of the cars... Guess who won?


The SRT-4 won that battle.
It's at Edmunds.com as Purecoda said.
http://edmunds.com/reviews/compariso...2/article.html
It's at Edmunds.com as Purecoda said.
http://edmunds.com/reviews/compariso...2/article.html
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,674
Likes: 0
From: Columbia, MD
haha, i completely forgot to post the link. whoops.
/purecoda fumbles the ball! but wait! lancerevolution recovers and takes it for the touchdown!
/purecoda fumbles the ball! but wait! lancerevolution recovers and takes it for the touchdown!
Last edited by purecoda; Aug 21, 2003 at 03:56 PM.
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,674
Likes: 0
From: Columbia, MD
i test drove the svt and absolutely HATED it. didn't feel very quick, hated the shifting (the stick felt very weak, and wasn't smooth at all), interior was really odd looking, not enough headroom for me (6'3"), and its a FORD. resale is jack. for the price, get the srt-4 or the spec-v. both are better for the money.
Trending Topics
They are all great cars that offer something different. Well, in my opinion the SVT is far behind all the others. The SRT-4 offers straight line speed, the MAZDASPEED offers some speed with a superior suspension, and the Spec-V offers a decent suspension with speed right between the SPEED and the SRT-4. There is a reason why they are all in D-Stock for autocross.
I feel the issue between the three is looks and modifiability. The SPEED is the best looking out of the three imo, but you really can't up the boost or do anything till the internals are changed. The turbo kit for the Spec-V was just released and it ups the engine output to around 250hp at the crank, and while the front of the car looks awesome, the back end looks like crap, while the 2004 looks like crap all the way around. Then there's the Neon. First of all it's a Neon, and in my opinion all neons are crap, this one is just fast. It's ugly, the seats are uncomfortable after 15 minutes, and I'm not sure about the modifiability of the engine. As usual though, it's really whatever your preference and pocket book like.
I feel the issue between the three is looks and modifiability. The SPEED is the best looking out of the three imo, but you really can't up the boost or do anything till the internals are changed. The turbo kit for the Spec-V was just released and it ups the engine output to around 250hp at the crank, and while the front of the car looks awesome, the back end looks like crap, while the 2004 looks like crap all the way around. Then there's the Neon. First of all it's a Neon, and in my opinion all neons are crap, this one is just fast. It's ugly, the seats are uncomfortable after 15 minutes, and I'm not sure about the modifiability of the engine. As usual though, it's really whatever your preference and pocket book like.
Originally posted by purecoda
i test drove the svt and absolutely HATED it. didn't feel very quick, hated the shifting (the stick felt very weak, and wasn't smooth at all), interior was really odd looking, not enough headroom for me (6'3"), and its a FORD. resale is jack. for the price, get the srt-4 or the spec-v. both are better for the money.
i test drove the svt and absolutely HATED it. didn't feel very quick, hated the shifting (the stick felt very weak, and wasn't smooth at all), interior was really odd looking, not enough headroom for me (6'3"), and its a FORD. resale is jack. for the price, get the srt-4 or the spec-v. both are better for the money.


