dude, your post is blatantly ignorant.

im not even disagreeing with you. if some SRT-4 lover was talkin smack about how great his car was, I would reply with some of your points... but you have to realize that not everyone out there with an SRT-4 has a lame attitude about their car's superiority (or lack thereof); Many of them just can't afford an Evo and this is the next best thing. I can't see how anyone would knock that, let alone "feel sorry" for anyone who bought one.

I drive an Evo, but would LOVE to see you get smoked by a pumped SRT-4.

 

HAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

OWNED!!!

that was awesome bro!!

 

I think the neon srt-4 is a ok deal, but you will have to buy at least 2 of them to last as long as the evo. I say this because I have a friend who has one and nothing but problems. I had a neon once it was a piece of $hit. It broke down all the time. I wonder how long the neons out there will last with some major hp? My guess is not long. Yes the evo is 10k more, but I think you get what you pay for. The neon is the best in class for the money as long as it hold up longer then 50k miles.

 

I may seem ignorant but this is an Evo furum isnt it? So while others want to say that their car is better at something then they need to come up with evidence of that. I know that some people can not afford evos. Yet I also know that there are people who cant afford Ferrari either. Duh. I would like to see myself get smoked by an srt with the same mods or stock against stock. We all know that dumping money in any car makes results. Yet the Evo is superior from the factory. I already got smoked by a 2004 Ford Cobra. But that was a car costing 35k. If anyone has real prof that the SRT is better then clarify. DOnt make empty threats about wishes and dreams.

 

I have read the SRT forums and they talk a lot of $hit about the Evo so big deal. If his topic hurts your feelings just go read some bull$hit over there.

 

The only thing the SRT-4 needs is rear-wheel drive. If it had that, it would probably be the funnest car in existence. With a huge rear sway bar I would power oversteer through evey corner!

The Evo, on the other hand, sticks like glue.

 

Thread starter you are so biased and misinformed. Srt-4 is a kick butt car for 20gs and has tons of potential. Also from a roll most can at least hang with a stock Sti and edge out an Evo by 1/2 a car or so. However the beauty of the Evo and the Sti is that both cars do alot of things well. The Srt-4 is more limited and so is an 03/04 Cobra but If you base what car is better off of just straightline performance the Cobra owns all and the Evo is a pos in comparison. From a roll in stock form the pecking order is Cobra,Sti,Srt-4,Evo. All these lil races have been empiracally tested by several members from all forums and from people i associate with. At the dragstrip in stock form it goes like this Cobra,Sti,Evo,Srt-4. Now when mods come into play it plays out like this Cobra,Evo,Srt-4, Sti.The Cobra and Evo are the easiest to modify IMHO and the Srt-4 is not far behind. The Sti has some issues to work out but after they do a turbo upgrade and work out the Ecu and throttle by wire issues they will likely be more competitive but more costly. FWIW At the tracks I frequent there are more fast SRT-4s than Evos and Stis. One guy did 11.1s at 130+ i believe in an Srt-4 and many are in the high 12s and low 13s range. Maybe the guy you raced had a Srt-4 out of tune or your Rs is of the preproduction version.(better ecu tuning) Too many variables to determine why you owned him so bad. FWIW I hope you study and put more research in your Masters projects before your final deduction based off of one study with extraneous variables and nothing else to support your conclusion. OUT!

 

I raced an SRT-4 from a roll about 2 months ago. He got wasted. He said he was mopar stage 2.

 

All the srt-4's here are basically stock, and run mid 14's. But I have alot of respect for those cars, they're pretty nice

 

ya, in my "stock" evo i beat a "stock" srt4 from a roll pretty convincingly also. my buddy has a srt4 that he has built pretty soundly (450whp) and he has been racing for 11 years. he couldn't even purchase a decent 60' if he wanted to. i have been to the local track many times & any time you go, you will see 5-8 srt4's...... some stock, some not so stock & none of them are even close to 12s passes. mostly mid 14s - low 14s. i know a few of them & they are x dsm owners who for the most part had high hp fwd dsm's....so they know how to launch a fwd.

imo for the money it's a cool car. i would cruise one as a daily.... being an ex-fwd turbo dsm owner.....i would never EVER go turbo FWD again. it's either awd or i am going back to rwd. fwd is definitely the wrong wheel drive & nicknamed that for a reason.

 

Evo is a totally different car than the SRT4. They have sorta close 1/4 mile times Evo 13.5 and SRT4 14.2 but the main difference is in handling. The Evo can just about hang with a porche 911 around the corners no stock SRT4 is ganna come anywhere near that. There is much more to life than 1320' thats only where it starts the Evo has "Evolved" way beyond just the 1/4 mile the SRT4 hasn't. But hey the Evo does cost more too bottom line you get what you pay for.

 

my honest opinion on the matter is this. the SRT-4 is built for 1/4 mile runs, while the Evo and STi are built for track. now the Evo and STi can be made be tuned for 1/4 use, but their weight gives them a disadvantage against the SRT-4. now i heard SRT-4 are supposed to run 13.9 1/4 mi., Evo is a 13.4 1/4 mi., and STi 13.2 mi. (i could be a little off and this is probably done by dumping the clutch in each car.)

SRT-4 is pretty damn light compare to the Evo and STi. which makes it seems even faster than the two. if u were to add the additional weight of the awd and differientals, do u think the SRT-4 would still be a 13.9 car?

i'm not knockin the SRT-4 in anyway. i wouldn't race one until i have the few basic mods on my evo. (full exhaust, intake, boost controller). the SRT-4 to me, should not be classified with the evo and sti. but people do that because it a turbo 4-cly. evo, sti, and some audi to me fall into the same catergory. that is all wheel drive, 4 cly turbo engines. when the SRT-4 becomes all wheel drive i will think of it more as a contender with the evo, sti, and some audis.

by the way, the evo is an amazing machine in this regard. the evo engine is only 2.0 liter, while the STi and SRT-4 are 2.5 liters. we loose .5 of displacement, which is alot to a 4 cly. so those cars better be faster than an Evo.

 

Even with the .5 liter the SRT-4 if kept stock will still loose to the Evo... STi has a slight edge but as rated by most professional drivers its only .1 second.

 

FWD nuff said....1.7 60' is from slicks....

The SRT4 has an Awesome motor...500hp stock block and head....everything else is pretty weak though...

they will own in a couple years....when you can pick them up used for $5 grand.

 

Hands down Evo is the best overall bang for the buck car that is currently in production. It does many things well and the handling is confidence inspiring to say the least. However, judging an evo over an srt-4 based on straightline performance alone is not an accurate deduction of why the evo is better. I have been in several Srt-4s and they pull a lil harder than my stock evo did. My evo would puke at 6000 rpms stock but the srt-4 seemed to pull a lil harder after 6000 rpms. I guess in so cal we get the slow evos because of 91 oct and the Srt-4 runs better on 91 oct when compared to the Evo. Maybe that explains my experience that is not quite the same as many posters on this forum. I am trying to be objective about this topic so don't flame me for not saying that the evo owns the Srt-4 in a straight line from a roll. Look at their trap speeds. They are very similar with the Srt slightly a lil quicker.BTW Lets not get into magazines preproduction vehicles as we all know they are always a lil more juiced up.