i realize that, but what kind of intercooler is that. it doesnt look very efficient

 

Go back to interning.........

Boy you need to keep your mouth shut. Im not even going to go into why a vehicle like the Razor can be developed for so cheap. Grow up and admit when you are wrong. Ive spoken my peace.

Oh and on the crash test, the Lancer and Imprezza were two of a very small number of vehicles that got the highest rating in offset crash tests. I believe the Neon scored as "unacceptable." I can hear you now commenting that it was the Neon, and not the SRT-4, but its the same chassis, and it will react the same in the crash test. Dispute that and Ill call my friends up at DC to talk some sense into you.

 

well it looks like you cant admit when you are wrong. werent you the one who said this?

"Do you actually think they could rework a whole car, and only charge 20 grand for it. Your kidding yourself if you think it can be done." i proved they can, and i have to admit when im wrong?


http://www.crashtest.com/default.htm

u.s. 2002-2003 lancer

http://www.nhtsa.gov/NCAP/Cars/2048.html

frontal impact - driver only =good (4/5)
frontal impact - passenger only = good (4/5)
side impact - drivers side = marginal (2/5) !!!!!!!!!!!
side impact - rear seat passenger side = good (4/5)
frontal offset - drivers side = good (4/5) {NOT the highest rating}
overall = good safety, reccomended

u.s. impreza

about the same. better for side impacts.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/NCAP/Cars/2067.html

2002 -2003 neon

frontal impact - driver only = good (4/5)
frontal impact - passenger only = good (4/5)
side impact - front seat = acceptable (3/5) {BETTER THAN LANCER)
side impact - rear seat passenger = acceptable (3/5)
frontal offset - drivers side - marginal (2/5)


so the lancer and the imprezza DIDNT get the best offset crash results. the neon holds up better in a side impact for the driver, as opposed to the lancer. AND the 2002-2003 did better than the earlier models despite being the "same chassis". what makes you think the srt-4 wont be the same way. they can make improvements on chassis' without redesigning the whole thing. but i guess you already know that since you were an intern. so call up your friends at DC and have them explain why the same chassis did better in crash results in the latest models despite your claims that it isnt possible.

 

"overall = good safety, reccomended"

Thats all you have to say, wheres that for the neon?????
Man this thread should be closed, how old are you life? Once again grow up. I cant say that enough, your arguing over crash test ratings. Wasnt this about the performance of the SRT-4? If you look back I commend the performance, if your too ignorant to realize its a Neon though I dont think there is anything in this world to help you. I dont want to make a personal attack towards you, but man you are very ignorant towards facts. Lets just all agree the SRT-4 put up some damn inpressive numbers in testing, and for 20 grand its a great deal. And its a Neon, a neon that will embarrass Hondas and Acuras and many other imports. Buts its still a Neon, its based of Neon underpinnings, etc.

Ug, Im drunk. Im gona go do some more shots, lol. Peace everyone, go Evo!

 

you brought up the crash test data. i am 25, how old are you? if you are too ignorant to realize its not a neon, the no one can help YOU. i will admit it has good specs, its cheap, but not that its a neon. the lancer will be on the same platform as the neon. that doesnt make them the same.

have fun drinking.

 

Geez this is a retarded argument. Plain and simple it's a Neon. It has been a Neon from the start of the project. Just look at Dodges own website..it's referred to as Neon SRT when it was a concept:
http://www.dodge.com/inside/concept_.../neon_srt.html

AND if you go to Dodges current website..and look under the Neon section..what do you see? info for the SRT-4
Can we please stop debating it now. Was the ACR not a Neon either? Saying a Neon SRT-4 isn't a Neon is like saying a Cobra Mustang isn't really a Mustang (afterall they don't share many parts..except the platform, body, dash, etc.)

 

I have to agree! You are fighting over something that is pointless! Your arguments are are weak and assnine at that! They pose no purpose! It is a matter of semiotics..that's it!!!

OK! lets say your right...it has nothin to do with the neon. Why is it not a neon then!!! Lets look at this reasonably!

1. the srt-4 looks like a neon inside and out
2. the srt-4 roughly shares the same build as the neon(body, chassis)
3. the srt-4 comes off the same assembly line as the neon

Now why don't they call it a neon. Prolly cause they wan't to keep it as far away from the neon as possible. Cause the neon represents a crappy car at that. And most people know that!!! Even you know that!!! Head gaskets for one example!..... My brother owned a neon..All i have to say is 3 head gaskets!...even in the 420A Yes...PT cruiser also!...And all those minivans too, man thats painful!!!...you know what I am talkin about!!! The neon is a crap car!!! from the ground up. They hold no value! I sold cars, and every salesman hated when the neons pulled in on the lot. They represented a person that was buried in their car for the most part! They are worth nothin. I can understand why you want the srt- 4 not to be a neon now!!! Cause it is a crap car from the ground up. Why then is chrysler basing the new neon on the lancer platform!!! Cause the lancer is an all around better car and has far more generations behind it than the neon!! The lancer obviously presents a better car than the neon...otherwise they would do it the other way around!!!!! Put that one in you pipe and smoke it!!!

You know good and well the neon is for the most part a crap car and dodge knows that too. Thats why they want to keep the srt-4 away from the neon name. Cause when people hear neon...they RUN!!!! Why else would they do it, cause according to that list above...and that list is pretty much fact and you know it! Other than that it's all in a name! I say tomato- you say TOE-MA-TOE! Thats all it comes down to!

Peace out! This thread is over for me too! I can't stand arguing with a smarta$$ dip$hit! Cause their crap actually stinks worse than anyone else!

 

if this is a retarded argument then why are you getting involved?

http://www.dodge.com/neon/index.html?nav=top

where do you see info about the srt-4? at the bottom? that makes it a neon?

so i guess this makes it a viper?
http://www.dodge.com/viper/index.html?nav=top

please... the acr was a neon, it was under the neon package options. the srt-4 has its own section on the webpage. so does the neon. the cobra says mustang right on it. the srt-4 does not.

like you said when it was a concept they called it a neon. it also had a supercharger. they scrapped all that and started over. i already posted where they said that. do a search. dodge has already said that it is a different car twice. but if it makes you feel better to call it a neon, then go ahead.

anything else you want me to disprove for you?

 

and your arguments are valid? if this is pointless why do you feel the need to add to it?

1. inside = viper seats, new gauges, new radio. (not the same as neon)
outside = lights, 4 doors. 'bout all that looks the same. look at the 2003 neon, then look at the srt-4. they are different (imagine that)
http://www.dodge.com/neon/index.html?nav=top but the se, sxt, and r/t all look the same.
2. thats why they can sell it for 20k.
3. that makes it the same car? do you know how many other cars from different companys share the same assembly line? heres a quarter, buy a clue.

mitsubishi is running out of money and the both are trying to save where they can. too bad the lancer will be built in dodge plants. does that make it a neon?

http://www.pinnaclecda.com/DaimlerCh...mitsubishi.htm

"As earlier predicted, DaimlerChrysler is expected to take a 33.4% controlling stake in the debt-burdened Mitsubishi for 1.3 billion euros in a deal that would boost its Asian sales six times and strengthen the lower end of its product line, which has been rumoured to be a strong goal of DC in the future. The effective takeover would provide DaimlerChrysler with a much-needed Asian base and small car expertise while helping Mitsubishi with its debt, which totaled $16.3 Billion. DC would also gain the power to veto board decisions. "

"Latest reports say that the Lancer/Neon is being engineered not just by Mitsubishi, but by a team of Chrysler engineers assigned to Mitsubishi, and Mitsubishi engineers. While both are working together on a common platform, the final cars - which will be very different in character, though combining many common elements (think Opel Omega/Cadillac CTS) - will be very different. In North America and Europe, the Chrysler version will be used, even (according to current reports) when sold under the Mitsubishi name. In Asia, the Middle East, and South America, the Mitsubishi version will be used - even when sold under the Dodge name."



see ya!

 

Viper like seats, not actual viper seats, like I said grow up boy....

 

2nd gen quality is better than most other cars in it's category, in fact JD Power has it rated better than Sentra, Protege, Lancer, Accent, etc. Honda is just a touch above as well as Toyota! Consumer reports takes a 5 yr average and with only one year of the 2nd reporting it went from near bottom to mid pack! Do your homework "neon is garbage" argument is **** as you don't bring anything to back it up other than stories about the 1st gen car. Headgaskets were fixed after 97 model year as well. The PT cruiser, built on Neon chassis, is always comended for its quality and reliability. Soooo......
Oh and considering the Neon has owned many autoX events over the years against "better" cars it should have no problem handling the MS Protege or whatever else. In my 2nd gen R/T I regularly beat guys in Celica's, Integra's, etc with way more money invested into susension, etc!
Just re-educating some......

 

http://www.dodge.com/srt4/flash.html

"from its special performance viper seats..."

 

okay... I've read through this thread and I've come to this conclusion. The Srt-4 is a neon with a body kit, engine swap, turbo kit, and an upgraded suspension and transmission. thats just about it. I know people that do that to civics. Is a civic with an integra engine swap, turbo kit, new seats and stereo, upgraded suspension, brakes, transmission, etc... NOT a civic anymore? If you say yes, then the srt-4 isn't a neon. If you say no, it is.

 

read my previous post.

what you call the car has no significance on it's actual performance. call it a ****ing moo-cow if you want. not gonna drive any different.

 

none of these are swaps. it is stock. the car was built from the ground up using parts from the neon to save money. on the civics it still says civic on the car. this says srt-4, not neon. srt-4 is not a package option of the neon, like sxt or r/t. it is its own car. the lancer will share the new platform with the neon. so by your post you are saying that the lancer and the neon are the same car, with just body, engine, transmission, interior swaps?

nd you have come to that conclusion based on what? your preconceived idea that it was? dodge says its not. it is listed separately on their own website. it hardly shares anything with the neon, unlike the neon se/sxt/rt. yet because it resembles a neon it automatically is one? the new evo looks like the lancer... are they the same car?