In responding, I would simply refer you back to my explanation of how manufacturers officially regard their cars.

You can argue with me all day whether or not the SRT-4 is or is not a Neon. But all I ask of you is to call up the engineering department of Chrysler and ask them what it is. They would probably laugh and tell you straight out, "well, of course it's a Neon! I mean, I appreciate the high regard you have for our product and for recognizing the differences, but yes, it is a Neon."

And again, I guarantee you that it is certified with NHTSA as a Neon.

Let's agree on this: there are times when the pieces of a car that us car freaks regard as the most important (engine, transmission and suspension) are totally different from one car to another. A perfect example was my old 95 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX. When you compared that car to a regular Eclipse (the RS & GS models that represented about 90% of all Eclipse sales) the engine was totally different, the tranny was totally different, it had a totally different AWD setup vs a FWD setup, much more aggressive suspension and far better brakes.

But, at the end of the day, it was still an Eclipse. It said so in the sales brochures, in the magazine reviews and articles, the owners manual and on the title. Not to mention the giant "Eclipse" lettering across it's rump.

Hence, the fact that the GSX differed from a RS/GS in the same ways a Neon and SRT-4 differ, didn't change the fact that it was an Eclipse. The difference is simply that the marketing department of Mitsubishi didn't choose the same path as the marketing dept of Chrysler.

And I do stand by my desctiption of your posts as "flaming". I'm a fair guy, but the stand you've taken on this issue is pretty weak but you've defended it with such vigor that it comes across as being flaming. To me anyway.

Lastly, I didn't by any stretch say that the horsepower orgy was a bad thing! On the contrary, my point was that I've been following the auto industry for a relatively short time (ever since my dad began subsribing to Autoweek in the late 80's when I was pretty young and still lived at home.) I slowly became a gearhead and have always appreciated technological innovation and progress (hence I hate NASCAR, love CART/F1/WRC/ALMS).

The thing that caught my eye early on was all the doom and gloom comments by car nuts, including articles by the usual suspects like Patrick Bedard of Car and Driver, almost every other issue of that rag Motor Trend and various articles in Autoweek. Everytime CAFE standards went up, crash standards went up, emissions standards went up, etc., it was the end of the world. Geez, who can forget the articles in the enthusiast/tuner magazines when OBD-II came out stating that this really was then end of the world as we know it! They claimed you'll never be able to modify an OBD-II car because the computer will detect whatever you've done and simply override it. Uhh, those fears look pretty damn stupid now, dont they?

And, predictably, the end of automotive fun was the fault of greenies like me. (OK - I'm not your average treehugger, being into hp and torque and racing.) But time has proven absolutely that you can build cars with high dependability, great mileage, superior handling and of course, lots of power and bring them to market at reasonable prices. If it wasn't for the EVIL EPA and NHTSA (as much as I hate their rules regarding importing "grey market" cars) we'd be driving vehicles that are FAR less efficient, FAR less dependable, and FAR less safe.

We're living in good times to be a car nut. Enjoy it!

 

I'm sure that the NEON will be based on the LANCER.

After all the Lancer is new, the Neon is old.

The Lancer was engineered by Mitsu, the Neon was engineered by Chrysler.

As time goes by, Chrysler will probably develop less and less on their own (why waste the relationships with MB and Mitsu?)

Sadly, the things they do develop will remain crappy, poorly engineered products.

Oh, BTW - regarding paint problems, I don't know anything about that. And I don't mean to say Mitsu or Subaru are perfect, because they're not.

But it is an accepted fact accross the industry that Chrysler spends their money making interesting shapes (I stayed away from saying "pretty shapes" because I think most Chryslers are ugly, disproportioned cars, like the Intrepid/LH cars) and cuts spending in the areas of drivetrain engineering and fit and finish.

Every company has had problems with paint. But I have seen MANY, MANY very heavily rusted Neons here in Wisconsin. The number is disproportionate compared to other cars, even taking into account our winters.

 

large portions of the chassis, a pillar, maybe axles. So good for the new neon if it shares some of this too.

 

I take offense to the poorly engineered part, seeing as Im studying to be a mechanical engineer and my friend works at DC. Dont doubt the work they do, doubt the budget that managers tell them to work at. Its a money game, why wont the fit and finish on a Neon be close to that of your Audi? Because of cost, that and the American public is wildly ignorant to cars. The fact that Ford can sell soooo many Taurus's and big ole sport utes proves that,lol. Man, all this over a Neon. (SRT-4 I mean...)

Its a Neon, period. Its fast, period. Ill still take an Evo, but with my cash stapped ****, it looks like a good deal. Either that or Im making a call to RRM for a turbo kit.......

 

first, the eclipse still said ECLIPSE GSX/RS/GS. the srt-4 will not say neon on it anywhere. nowhere on the dodge website is it a neon. but whatever...

second, flaming: To make insulting criticisms or remarks, as on a computer network, to incite anger. (dictionary.com)

i was not insulting, and was not trying to cause anger. please point out where i was and i will gladly apologize, because that was not my intention. i am just letting you know that the srt-4 is not a neon "just because it looks like one"

" I didn't by any stretch say that the horsepower orgy was a bad thing!" i know you didnt, it was sarcasm. see the smilie?

 

you mean a lancer?

and be careful about how much you spend on your car or you might have to change your sig.

you should wait for them to bring out the turbo lancer in 04 (rumor, no flaming please).

 

Ill be sittin right around 20, 21 with a turbo, so Im safe.

 

another point for the srt-4 not being a neon. go to :http://www.dodge.com

on the product line bar in the middle. fifth one over is neon. eigth one over is srt-4.

 

This life or death guy must be taking a semiotics class or something. Cause he is all about signs. If it doesn't have a sign then it must not be. He only believes what he sees. I have taken several semiotics classes and yes you are arguing the difference of a sign...thats it! Nothin more. Cause dodge could call it the mini-viper and it would still be the same car based on the neon platform.

But I agree with the eclipse analogy. But I am going to take it one step further, cause these cars in theory are 2 totally different cars. I am going to use the eclipse and talon. The talon is an eclipse, and the eclipse is a talon. Whether you believe it or not it is. Same engines, same tranny's, same interior, same hood, and most body panels. In 95-96 the talon and the eclipse were almost identical. Outside of the badging on the front and the back bumber assembly, and the badging on the steering wheel. Which all could be easily switched out for a eclipse parts, and vice versa. To show my point, there are many people on or were on the talon digest that changed their talons over to eclipses, but on their registrations it still says talon. My point is here, each car is different yet the same and they don't even exsist in theory from the same company whereas the neon and srt-4 are both being sold by dodge. Yet you are trying to identify the neon and srt-4 as 2!!!! totally different cars...and they are not at all by any means (Dodge would be stupid to try to build a car from scratch just to fulfill this purpose of a fast small sport compact)....The difference in a name does not change the origin of the car...from dodge's assembly line in Belvidere(spelling) IL. Prolly coming off the same exact line as the neon.

You are fighting a battle that is over the difference 4 letters and numbers. You are also fighting for what cause?...and I'd have to agree with, if you went to dodge and asked them they'd tell you it is a neon and is classed as a neon being built on the neon assembly line.

 

as was the mitsubishi 3000gt and the dodge stealth.

the srt-4 was built ground up. they just used some parts of the neon to save costs. "Mark brought his experience with turbos and superchargers," recalls McCammon. "And Dave threw in his engine expertise, and before you knew it, we had built a car from scratch in just four months." "Under the PVO umbrella, the second SRT-4 team combined their knowledge with that of the legendary Dodge Viper development team to create a unique blend of experienced track racers and young street racers." so it was built from the ground up with pro and amateur racers.

another reason it isnt a "neon" srt-4. they call the new viper the dodge viper srt-10. they call the new ram the doge ram srt-10. they call the new srt-4 the dodge srt-4. no mention of neon.

and this line "Cause dodge could call it the mini-viper and it would still be the same car based on the neon platform." the new lancer will share a platform with the neon. what will you call the lancer? a neon? the neon a lancer? just because it is built on the same platform doesnt make it the same car.


on a side note here is some more info about the dodge alliance.

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.
The Lancer EVO will come to the US as a Dodge, and will have extensive Chrysler involvement in engineering in the two door version. The four door will be primarily worked on by Mitsubishi engineers, though reportedly members of the Neon ACR team are helping them as well, thanks to their strong rally success.
The Neon was refreshed for 2003 - (So much for a possible return to the classic styling which made it so instantly lovable and probably contributed to its early sales).

The Neon will be redesigned for the 2006 model year. The Chrysler group and Mitsubishi are jointly developing the fwd platform and transmissions for the new Dodge Neon and Mitsubishi Lancer. Although Mitsubishi has the engineering lead, each maker will design its own exterior. The cars will feature a new family of four-cylinder 1.8-liter to 2.4-liter engines jointly developed by Chrysler, Mitsubishi and Hyundai.

 

ok, well i just got off of the phone with dodge and they confirmed that the srt-4 will NOT be a neon. it will be an srt-4. and since im sure that you guys wouldnt just believe that, i also contacted them via their live chat system. here is their reply.

"Subject>Contact Us is the new srt-4 going to be a neon srt-4, or will it be a different car.
Dodge LiveChat>jeff markle has joined the session.
Dodge LiveChat>Tim has joined the session.
Tim>Thank you for contacting the Dodge Information Center, please hold while I locate the information you are requesting. Tim>Thank you for your patience. Yes, the vehicle resembles a neon, but we refer to it as the Dodge SRT-4.
jeff markle>so will it be a neon srt-4, like a neon sxt, or will it be sold as an srt-4?
Tim>It will be sold as an SRT-4.

i have also emailed them too, and will copy their response to that as well.

 

"The Lancer EVO will come to the US as a Dodge, and will have extensive Chrysler involvement in engineering in the two door version. The four door will be primarily worked on by Mitsubishi engineers, though reportedly members of the Neon ACR team are helping them as well, thanks to their strong rally success. "

Ok, this statement is enough to disbelieve everything else you have said.

Second, I love the SRT-4. Its a great cheap car. Its still a Neon. It has the same underpinnings as the Neon, Same chassis stampings, hell its going to be assembled at the Neon plant. The fact that the SRT-4 will share the base Neon's 0 degree camber set-up without adjustablility just confirms this.

And now to my engineering backgroud. Lets assume you are correct in saying the car was rebuilt from the groud up. Chrysler is in dire need of profit. 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. Now doing a Neon with some beefed up parts, new suspension and turbo motor for 20 grand, now that seems and is reasonable.

By the way, just some more fuel to the fire. I go to Purdue and am studying Mech. engineering, and have done so for the past 3 years. My freshamn year here, so 2 and half years ago, I went to the SAE callout, and they had a engineer from DC there who was responsible for the original Viper and the LeMans racer. When asked what he was working on at that time, he said the Neon, they were making a Neon that could compete with cars twice its price, in terms of performance. I assume thats the SRT-4. Notice he said Neon??? LOL

 

I love how you can't get enough of this car, and have never even driven it lifeisdeath, and all you have to go on is specualation and one, count it, one review. Priceless. Simply priceless.

 

first i didnt say that statement, i was quoting from a website. second have you confirmed what we are getting here? is it official? so you dont know whether that is true or not.

AGAIN... just because it shares parts with a car does NOT make it the same car. case in point the new LANCER/NEON. because it shares a zero degree camber it is the same? you are reaching here. they are using it to save money. it cant even use the same suspension because of the knuckles and the k-member on the car. doesnt have the same engine. doesnt have the same transmission.

yes they could and have designed a new car for under 20k. how? by using some of the same parts on the neon!!! nothing on the srt-4 is beefed up from the neon. they are ALL NEW, they worked from the ground up. they are trying to make a name for themselves in the sport compact world. they wanted an under 20k car that does 0-60 in under 6 seconds. some places you will have to save money, how do they do that? grab parts from the neon.

notice you said you assume it was the srt-4. maybe they realized they couldnt get a neon to do that so they designed the srt-4? how come no one at dodge calls this a neon? neon is in a different catagory on the website. i called them, it is not a neon. i went online and asked them, its not a neon. i wrote them, and when they reply i will post it here.

 

one review is more than you have to go on. no, i cant get enough of this car. it is an awesome car for under 20k. it isnt any speculation. what exactly is the speculation? everything i said has been confirmed by that "one review" and people that actually work for dodge. and all you guys have is , "well it is a neon cause i saw someone call it that, and it looks like one".