srt neon better than wrx

[gibbo80]

there has been alot of controversie over this on these forums and i would say the srt is better. I saw a srt hit 13.9 bone stock with the driver buying the car only 2 days earlier. He hit this every time and even hit 13.8. All the wrxs were in the high 14s and thats all i have ever seen. Arnt they supposed to be better than the srt? I have yet to see one in the 13s. I have seen a evo 8 hit 13.4 stock so imho that is better to. People will say the awd is better but i think it is worse because no one can launch because they dont want to break anything. if you have a awd turbo you should be hitting 2.0 60's or close. Not seen yet by a wrx. plus same traction is easily reached with slick in a 2wd car. If someone can please prove me wrong please do.

wrx trolls are welcome

[toki]

is it just me or do both the Evo 8 and STi have 3 cats that restrict them beyond belief?

[574-240sx]

lets see how long that neon motor lasts. Nick

[Cold_Zero]

is it just me or do both the Evo 8 and STi have 3 cats that restrict them beyond belief?

.

Chris may be able to speak to the EVO8, but the STi like the WRX has three cats in the exhaust system. One in the up-pipe (front pipe), one in the down-pipe and one where the downpipe and the mid-pipe meet. Most down-pipes for the WRX eliminate the two after the turbo.

Gibbo-I think weight may be an issue here. From what I understand the SRT-4 is lighter and produces 222whp. (Someone correct me if I am wrong). Since the WRX has AWD, the power loss through the drive train is much more predominant. But to answer your question the term "better" is a vague term. Better in what aspect?

[gibbo80]

im talking about speed, in every forum they say the srt is almost as fastits not my fault the engineers were dumb and restricted it and made it heavy

[MasterMan]

the neon still looks gay.. no matter what.. plus AWD is just plain sexy

[Jesda]

The Neon was built with one thing in mind: Ricer-whipping drag races.

The WRX is intended more for rally environments. See what happens to the SRT4 in the woods, plowing through mud and snow vs. the WRX.

-Jesda

[Bubba1]

I don't see any controversy, If you're talking just drag strip numbers, sure, an SRT4 is very competitive, maybe quicker. But there's more to a car than 1/4 mile times. Ask any 240sx owner. The Neon is cheaply built, butt ugly and unreliable, despite some very impressive performance numbers. WRX gives you similar numbers, is AWD, better looking and is reliable. Most informed buyers will buy a Sube long before a Neon even if the Neon is quicker. Just my $.02

[KoukiS14]

The SRT-4 is NOT, I repeat NOT better than a WRX.

Hey, a Camaro is faster than a WRX, is THAT better too?

Hell, a Camaro is faster than my 240sx. .. why didn't I buy one? 'cause my240sx IS BETTER

[Cold_Zero]

The SRT-4 is NOT, I repeat NOT better than a WRX.

Hey, a Camaro is faster than a WRX, is THAT better too?

Hell, a Camaro is faster than my 240sx. .. why didn't I buy one? 'cause my240sx IS BETTER

Amen

The Neon was built with one thing in mind: Ricer-whipping drag races.

The WRX is intended more for rally environments. See what happens to the SRT4 in the woods, plowing through mud and snow vs. the WRX.

-Jesda

Both the EVO/Lancer and the WRX/Impreza are rally cars by origin ported over for street use.

[Cold_Zero]

if you have a awd turbo you should be hitting 2.0 60's or close. Not seen yet by a wrx. plus same traction is easily reached with slick in a 2wd car. If someone can please prove me wrong please do.

The night you were there at IRP I ran four races. Here are my 60' times.

1. 2.1352. 2.2203. 2.2334. 2.076

The last race was against a T/A that had a LS1 on Nitrous. He had a 2.239 60' time.

bud

[Tino]

ok, see what car and driver has to say about the neon and the wrx... case closed.

[Cyberkreig]

because the most important measure of a rally car is its time in the 1/4

[nlzmo400r]

ok, see what car and driver has to say about the neon and the wrx... case closed.

what month issue is this, im intrigued to see what they said

[gibbo80]

im not trying to be sarcastic or mean or anything but can a stock wrx really go flying through the woods? mud and stuff like that. Do they have the rally suspension? i really dont know

[Cold_Zero]

I have taken mine off road and I have to say its a blast in the snow. There is a group here in Indy that take their WRX's down to Brown County and rally (non competative) on some of the dirt/gravel roads.

[BadMojo]

They're both high performance cars for a good price. Both cars have received good reviews in the automotive press, and both have their fans. This sounds like a good thing, right?

I've been reading a bit about both cars, and they're both very impressive. I just hope this thread doesn't degenerate in to something nasty, the way these things normally do.

I haven't really seen any evidence that the Neon's reliability or build quality is poor compared to the Subaru. From what I've read, the engine in the SRT-4 is a proven design, as is the Neon platform the car's based on. Does anyone have some data to back up these claims?

For what it's worth, I've seen people complain about the quality of the interiors on both cars. Personally, I think that's a fairly silly complaint. They are very fast cars that have a sticker price of < $25K...who cares if you don't Jaguar caliber interiors? Do you have time to admire burled walnut @ 140mph???

Man...I'd love to have the luxury of choosing between a WRX and an SRT-4. In fact, if I were shopping for a car today, those would be my two top choices.

It's definitely a good time to be a car enthusiast.

PS: The more I read about the SRT-4, the more impressed I become. I was already impressed by the WRX. Two excellent cars.

[Jesda]

Youre comparing apples to oranges. The two cars arent designed to do the same things.

[Repo Man]

wrx trolls are welcome

Why do you guys always insist on calling others names? I mean really, what the hell IS that?

There are some very good points made by other members in this thread regarding the two cars. The SRT-4 is much bang for the buck, however there are documented cases of transmission problems with very few miles on the odo. Quality DOES matter. That's why I have a Nissan and not a Camaro, because believe me, the thrust from an LS1 is incredible and it would hand an SRT-4 it's arse.

If the measure of a car is it's quarter mile time, well then I know of some Pintos, Chevettes and Opels that I guess we should all be driving because they lay down a WICKED quarter mile time.

The quality of the Subaru I believe will be evident over time. I look at the interior of my 240 that is four years older than my buddy's Probe. His is falling apart and mine looks like it's new. Again, quality DOES matter.

[jEzTeR]

I think that the SRT-4 is a good car and for the price tag its got a whole lot to offer.I would never invest my 20k in it because I dont believe even with proper oil changes and good care that it will last.The folks at Dodge have proven that they can build a great automobile that will last (Viper Ram w/ V10)but they are much more over 20K price of the SRT-4.The SRT-4 has been dynoed with more HP that Dodge says it has.So the power is there.I have seen one monkey whore a moded GTI VR6 and several other cars not worth mentioning.

Now for my take on the WRX..It is an awesome car and even though the price tag is much more I would feel more comfortable spending my hard earned cash on a car that has proved itself for performance and longevity.The AWD is a big advantage on anything other than dry pavement.The looks of the WRX is something that I love.Then there is the aftermarket that supports the WRX.So if your not satisfied with the stock power you can add more.

Just my $.02!:D

[[GoaTSLonG]]

i sat in a srt-4 at the dealership and the interior is pretty nice, im liking the autometer boost gauge in the dash, the seats are really really nice and hold you in very nicely for stock seats, the shifter is really short and precise no jiggling at all when in gear and the clutch felt really good. The quality seems pretty good for a MOPAR (I'm a chevy guy myself). Oh yea 1 more thing, what is so bad about a camaro? the 98-2002's are built better than my 240, it handles really good for its size and weight, it is alot faster than my SR in my 240, and the borg warner t-56 is possibly the best transmission ever built. You guys talk way too much ****.

[Altiman94]

I'm not really impressed by the WRX myself. I enjoy the looks of the car and appreciate the AWD drivetrain, but am not a fan of AWD cars really to begin with. You can launch much harder on a RWD car with slicks than most AWD cars, mostly cuz AWD car owners are afraid of breaking the Diff. I understand the neon is made for straight line runs, and hte WRX for Rallying, but the neon is faster in the 1/4, hands down. For 20k, if you want just a 1/4 mile racer, it would be a great purchase. If you wanted to rally your car, then the WRX or EVO would be a good choice. But I don't really understand buying a new car, when you can buy an older one and put a little money into it and have just as nice of a car. For 20k, you can get a pretty nice BMW 3-series, or used maxima, and that would be much more practice than a turbo sedan in terms of reliability and people holding capacity.

[Altiman94]

Any cars interior can be nice if it is well taken care of. That doesn't have much to do with teh quality of the care as it does how the car has been taken care of.

[OneFastStanza]

This is defintely an apples to oranges thread.

The SRT-4 is no doubt a very nice car as far as performance goes and is blistering quick in a straight line but that is it IMO. I would say for $20K you can't find too much wrong with this car.

However, the WRX is very quick and when properly launched is good for low 14s stock. I just raced against one recently in the LS Ultimate Street Car Challenge and he was running 8.5s (~mid 13s in the 1/4) in the 1/8 to my 9.6s (~high 14s in 1/4) in the Spec.

However drag racing is not the WRXs strong point. It is an AWD turbo car with rally racing on its mind. It handles great and is a great asset on the AutoX course. I would love to have one to AutoX all the time in.

I would buy a WRX all day long over a SRT-4 just cause the WRX is a better all around car for only a couple thousand dollars more than the Dodge now. Straight-line performance isn't everything or like someone else already stated you would be better off building up a Camaro or Mustang.

[Repo Man]

I'm not really impressed by the WRX myself. I enjoy the looks of the car and appreciate the AWD drivetrain, but am not a fan of AWD cars really to begin with. You can launch much harder on a RWD car with slicks than most AWD cars, mostly cuz AWD car owners are afraid of breaking the Diff.

And this conclusion comes from your extensive driving experience? :rolleyes Have you ever driven a WRX? What about a WRX in the snow? I know you guys get that in Iowa. If you haven't, it is indeed impressive.

And launch harder in RWD than AWD? Are you on crack? Didn't you see my buddy Brian launch his DSM at IRP the night we were there? You know, that first run of the year where he ripped off an 11 second run? What about launching Skyline GT-R's, Porsche 911 Turbos, Celica All-Tracs, etc? They all jump like something bit them in the arse.

And regarding interiors, quality materials make all the difference in the world when it comes to longevity. Ask any first-gen Q owner. :ylsuper

[Cold_Zero]

But I don't really understand buying a new car, when you can buy an older one and put a little money into it and have just as nice of a car. For 20k, you can get a pretty nice BMW 3-series, or used maxima, and that would be much more practice than a turbo sedan in terms of reliability and people holding capacity.

The reason people buy new cars like the SRT-4 and the WRX is because they get performance from the factory with a warranty. They dont inherit other people's messes and they can choose their own path for upgrades later down the road. The reason why I havent done a Stage3 Vishnu or Cobb kit is because I want to retain my warranty.

For 20k you can not get a 3 Series BMW. Don't they start at 27k? They have a 6cylinder engine that makes 184hp.

[Cold_Zero]

All the wrxs were in the high 14s and thats all i have ever seen. Arnt they supposed to be better than the srt? I have yet to see one in the 13s. If someone can please prove me wrong please do.

I would check out http://forums.nasioc.com/forum...id=79

Just because I didnt achieve 13's doesnt mean the rest of the community isnt.

[gibbo80]

Everybody has made good points. I am a evo 8 fan my self so dont think i really hate awd. I do agree with altiman saying that rwd is better for high launching, i dont remeber your friends dsm being there but i have seen 3 liquify there diff. here at our track. Sorry if i pissed people off but i got alot of response in a short period of time.

my $.02 : I dont think the srt will have many problems with breaking down since most dodge things i have seen seem to last along time.

A question: are the wrxs we buy here the same as the ones in japan amd are they imported or assembled here. I know that the sti's are different but i still dont know if they are assembled here or not. I know the evo is straight from japan cause it says it on the sticker but i odnt know about the wrx

[KoukiS14]

I have taken mine off road and I have to say its a blast in the snow. There is a group here in Indy that take their WRX's down to Brown County and rally (non competative) on some of the dirt/gravel roads.

Oh damn!!! That'd be awesome, and very scenic. . I LOVE driving around brown cty. . huge hills, curvey roads. . I can imagine taking them off road would be a blast. . I'll have to show up sometime!! haha

I'm in Lafayette

[KoukiS14]

OHH! but you have to promise me, DON'T STEAL STUFF OFF MY CAR LIKE THE LAST NICO MEET. I will never forgive that assclown.