SRT v. WRX

[rydwhite]

I was driving to work this morning and saw a yellow SRT and a blue WRX kicking it heading south on I-65. Looked like the SRT was pulling away a bit, but they went by so fast. Must have been going at least 100mph I would say.

[[Zero-S]]

o...k...They've both been established as fast (well the SRT-4 is adequately fast...nothing to really gawk about and its still a neon)

[Altiman94]

srt-4 is very much faster than the wrx.

[Cold_Zero]

srt-4 is very much faster than the wrx.

Would like to see both numbers for these cars up over 100mph. Which is typically faster than each one's trap time in the 1/4. I wouldn't know what the WRX does up over 100mph. *grin*

[jdmfreak]

Really...I a couple of years it would be broken anyway. I think its fast for the money but still a waste imo.

[BadMojo]

.

o...k...They've both been established as fast (well the SRT-4 is adequately fast...nothing to really gawk about and its still a neon)

And a WRX is just an Impreza...yeah, we've heard that one a few times. The SRT-4 is *very* fast. It's not just fast for a $20,000 car, it's plain old fast. I haven't been in one over 100mph, but I know for a fact that it pulls like a mofo up to 80mph (the sales guy driving seemed to suddenly realize he was going 80mph in a brand new car, the only one they had on the lot, so he slowed down).

Sports Compact Car mag recently did an article on the best cars under $30,000. The SRT-4 had some impressive #'s:

0-60 in 5.8 seconds14 second 1/4 mile @ 100.5 mphSlalom (700') 69.9 mphSkidpad (200') .86g60-0 braking 117'

The WRX ran a 5.2 in the 0-60 but a 14.6 @ 91.8 mph in the 1/4 mile.

I'd imagine the SRT-4 had a lot of problems getting all of that power to the ground, while the AWD of the WRX helped out immensely. It looks a like the WRX ran out of steam a bit at the higher end.

Anyway, I'd give my left nut to own either of those two cars.

I'd love to take a ride in a WRX, and I actually have a friend who owns one. Unfortunately, he's doing his residency at a hospital not very close to here, so I haven't seen him in many, many months.

Edit: Although my left nut isn't actually for sale, I may still entertain offers.

[SmithSR]

People stick up for the SRT-4 only because they cannot afford better, or see past cheap(cheapest quality too) speed. BTW, this car will not help Dodge's public image. It's still a neon, and that means zero respect.

The car <might> be faster during instrumented testing, but it's still a neon, it's still FWD, it's still ugly, and it still gets laughed at.

If dodge had a clue, they would have put to market a compact RWD with similar power, for the same price. Too bad they stuffed more power into a useless chassis... good ol Dodge.

The car is fast, off the showroom floor. Anybody who calls himself an auto enthusiast should be aware of Dodge's problems and it's pathetic build quality. Let's give it a year or two, and we'll see just how bad it does....while Subaru continues with record sales...

[SWIFT_DRIFT]

Here's my scenario. Shop around for a used FD rx7. Where I live if you do good shopping you can find used 7's between 12-15k. Add another 2-3k for maintenace or possibly a motor rebuild depending on condition to bring the FD back to stock specs. Right there you have spent LESS then a new SRT OR WRX and you are already CONSIDERABLY faster then both the cars. Now spend some extra cash on the FD for say a boost controller, downpipe and exhaust and you now have a less then 5 sec 0-60. Low 13's quarter mile and a 180mph top speed. Oh and not to mention handling that will totally dominate the neon and wrx. Hmm, is it just me or are people dumb?Second situation. If you spend equal amounts of money for a new SRT or WRX compared to modifying a 240...you will still have a considerably faster car then the neon or sube.

[Bubba1]

Which of the two would win a drag race? probably a SRT-4.Which one would I rather own? No question - WRX.

The ability to win a simple drag race is but a small piece of the ownership exerience.

[[Zero-S]]

People stick up for the SRT-4 only because they cannot afford better, or see past cheap(cheapest quality too) speed. BTW, this car will not help Dodge's public image. It's still a neon, and that means zero respect.

The car <might> be faster during instrumented testing, but it's still a neon, it's still FWD, it's still ugly, and it still gets laughed at.

If dodge had a clue, they would have put to market a compact RWD with similar power, for the same price. Too bad they stuffed more power into a useless chassis... good ol Dodge.

The car is fast, off the showroom floor. Anybody who calls himself an auto enthusiast should be aware of Dodge's problems and it's pathetic build quality. Let's give it a year or two, and we'll see just how bad it does....while Subaru continues with record sales...

:Werd

[DSSA]

People stick up for the SRT-4 only because they cannot afford better, or see past cheap(cheapest quality too) speed. BTW, this car will not help Dodge's public image. It's still a neon, and that means zero respect.

This has to be one of the gayest, most short-sighted comments I've seen in a long time.

Quote »The car <might> be faster during instrumented testing, but it's still a neon, it's still FWD, it's still ugly, and it still gets laughed at.

If dodge had a clue, they would have put to market a compact RWD with similar power, for the same price. Too bad they stuffed more power into a useless chassis... good ol Dodge.[/quote]

It's still ugly, yes. It's also FWD...but the car is DAMN quick for a $19K car, and has potential. You might want to give yourself a quick history lesson and read up on how the Mopar turbo blocks have held up in the past. They're not mainstream, but some people have squeezed some serious power out of them well before the WRX was introduced to the U.S. public.

"more power in a useless chassis"...hmm. Seems to me that the Neon has done pretty well in a lot of SCCA events in the past.

Quote » The car is fast, off the showroom floor. Anybody who calls himself an auto enthusiast should be aware of Dodge's problems and it's pathetic build quality. Let's give it a year or two, and we'll see just how bad it does....while Subaru continues with record sales... [/quote]

Yes, Dodge does have some shoddy build quality (it's better than it was, but still not "top-notch" by any means). However, on the flip side "anyone who calls himself an auto enthusiast" (as you state) is going to give credit where credit is due, and not just slam a car because "Company X" makes it.

As far as "record sales", you need to remember that we're talking "record sales for Subaru" which isn't exactly on par with such sales histories as Honda and the Civic.

The Camry outsells the WRX as well, does that mean that the Camry is a better car?

Open your mind.....

[I H8 UR DSM]

Correction: Nissan Enthusiasts

[I H8 UR DSM]

i'd take a viper before i'd touch anything in the subaru line....<<dreams>>

[spec-v5150]

This has to be one of the gayest, most short-sighted comments I've seen in a long time.



It's still ugly, yes. It's also FWD...but the car is DAMN quick for a $19K car, and has potential. You might want to give yourself a quick history lesson and read up on how the Mopar turbo blocks have held up in the past. They're not mainstream, but some people have squeezed some serious power out of them well before the WRX was introduced to the U.S. public.

"more power in a useless chassis"...hmm. Seems to me that the Neon has done pretty well in a lot of SCCA events in the past.



Yes, Dodge does have some shoddy build quality (it's better than it was, but still not "top-notch" by any means). However, on the flip side "anyone who calls himself an auto enthusiast" (as you state) is going to give credit where credit is due, and not just slam a car because "Company X" makes it.

As far as "record sales", you need to remember that we're talking "record sales for Subaru" which isn't exactly on par with such sales histories as Honda and the Civic.

The Camry outsells the WRX as well, does that mean that the Camry is a better car?

Open your mind.....

WERD!!! I mean come one. The RX-7 is still a Mazda. A 240 is still a Nissan. We could on and on. I like the SRT-4. At least a company has stepped up and gave consumers turbo performance from the factory and at an affordable price. If I had to pick one, I would get teh WRX just because of AWD and I like the way they look over the Neon. Talk about cheap---there are a bunch of 240 driving people here. Some as old as 14 years. That isn't cheap. I would rather have a turbo from the factory....that means its covered under warranty. AND I can go get upgrades from Dodge. I think that is a heck of a deal. I would take one. It outperforms almost every car in its class, how can you NOT at least give credit where its due. I'll respect ANY car that beats me in a racew. Dodge , Ford, Honda, whatever. I doubt I would win in a race against an srt-4. Granted, I dont know what my swap puts down, but......I like to respect and study my competition instead of bashing it...

[spec-v5150]

WERD!!! I mean come one. The RX-7 is still a Mazda. A 240 is still a Nissan. We could go on and on. I like the SRT-4. At least a company has stepped up and gave consumers turbo performance from the factory and at an affordable price. If I had to pick one, I would get the WRX just because of AWD and I like the way they look over the Neon. Talk about cheap---there are a bunch of 240 driving people here. Some as old as 14 years. That isn't cheap??? :rolleyes I would rather have a turbo from the factory....that means its covered under warranty. AND I can go get upgrades from Dodge. I think that is a heck of a deal. I would take one. It outperforms almost every car in its class, how can you NOT at least give credit where its due. I'll respect ANY car that beats me in a racew. Dodge , Ford, Honda, whatever. I doubt I would win in a race against an srt-4. Granted, I dont know what my swap puts down, but......I like to respect and study my competition instead of bashing it...

[lvangundy]

The Impreza (WRX / 2.5RS) has some serious transmission problems. Ask any owner (or at least the NASIOC people) about popping gears and a broken 1st.

It's too bad it's only a 5 speed, it's not practical at high speeds. The STi is a different story.

[SmithSR]

DSSA, are you new here? Please take a moment and complete your profile, so that people know where you live.

No credit is due. Most any auto company can quickly contrive a turbo motor and slap it in an also-ran chassis. Quick, easy, and sure to make dodge a buck, off the hype from F&F generation looking for cheap thrills, cheap car, and a cheap life. This one's all yours, DSSA.

Dodge's neon srt-4 is about capturing the hype, not moving a top notch, high quality product.

Which would you rather have? Hype? or Quality?

I know about company-record sales, which Subaru continues to have. Um, duh. I'm glad you know about such record months, too.

"open your mind" Why not be aware of what dodge has packaged? If you're too blinded by the numbers, and can't see the play by Dodge to capture some of the sport compact hype, all the while putting off building and designing new, quality products, then you truly do belong with that Dodge.

I'm glad you know 'gay' when you see it! How noble of you. Mature, too. So, right off the bat you felt outgunned and thought you'd lob an insult my way? Smooth..

Camry isn't trying with all it's might to act like a contender in the performance segment. Neon is. Wanna compare longevity? driveability? ergonomics? sales demographic? All will be different, so quit using apples and oranges in your analogies. Bring some measure of restraint, edit your personal attacks, and quit thinking inside the box:

"It's still ugly, yes. It's also FWD...but the car is DAMN quick for a $19K car"

You're proving my point. Aim low, hit low. Spend your life chasing hype, and that's exactly what you'll end up with. God forbid, you want something better than a 19K parts-bin also ran. Some people are happy with such a life, I suppose.

You shouldn't stoop to personal attacks, and then go about proving my points for me. It doesn't show much depth or character...being two faced and political like that.

[FrEaK]

i'd take a viper before i'd touch anything in the subaru line....<<dreams>>

H8 stop touching yourself...

[PROJECTRB240SX]

DSSA:

DODGE NEONS ARE KNOWN AS PILES, THE RECALSS ARE ALREADY COMING OUT OF THE WOODWORK FOR THE SRT4. DODGE NEONS OUT PERFORMOTHER CARS ONCE THE OWNERS GO THROUGH AND CHANGE TONS PARTS TO HIGHER QUALITY MORE DURABLE ITEMS (IE BUSHINGS, CONTROL ARMS, ETC.)

AS FOR SALES CHARTS YOUR PITTING ECONOBOXES THAT APPEALS TO THE MASSES AGAINST SPORTCOMPACTS THAT APPEAL TO THE ENTHUSIAST. AND SMITHSR IS CORRECT SUBARU HAS HAD RECORD SALES EVEN 3 MONTHS AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE POOR MANS FWD PORSCHE.

MY .02 TAKE OR LEAVE IT I DON'T CARE, BUT DON'T SAY ANYHTING ABOUT DODGE CAUSE I KNOW DODGE FIRST HAND, WE HAVE HAD NOTHING BUT PROBLEMS WITH ALL OUR DODGES (FLEET).

[DSSA]

Smith,

You basically stated that if someone is an "enthusiast" they should be aware of drawbacks of the SRT-4? Every car has its drawbacks, especially a new model. However, those of us who are "enthusiasts" also realize the benefits of a car, regardless of make.

I rarely see sports car/coupe enthusiast worrying about ergonomics, demographics, etc. If this train of thought were to run as rampant as you like to make it out to be, there isn't too much out there to begin with.

Porsche seems to have built a damn fine sports coupe for the last 20+ years without worrying about "ergonomics and demographics". If you've ever driven a 930, the interior is about on par with the original beetle.

What a lot of people *DO* look at being "sports car enthusiasts" is one thing--*performance*, which the SRT-4 has plenty of with a $19K price tag.

This all coming from a guy who loves a company who puts a truck motor into "sports coupe".

The SRT-4 was created to fill a niche in the market. An affordable coupe with decent power. Did they do that? Yes, I think they did.Just because you dislike Dodge and prefer to bash a car that puts 227 h.p. down *to the wheels* for $19K, doesn't give you a real leg to stand on.

How about putting some facts instead of opinions in your "mature, logical" posts?

Have you even had any experience with the SRT-4? Or is a case of you just making assumptions on the car and voicing your biased opinion as gospel.

[DSSA]

DSSA:

DODGE NEONS ARE KNOWN AS PILES, THE RECALSS ARE ALREADY COMING OUT OF THE WOODWORK FOR THE SRT4. DODGE NEONS OUT PERFORMOTHER CARS ONCE THE OWNERS GO THROUGH AND CHANGE TONS PARTS TO HIGHER QUALITY MORE DURABLE ITEMS (IE BUSHINGS, CONTROL ARMS, ETC.)

AS FOR SALES CHARTS YOUR PITTING ECONOBOXES THAT APPEALS TO THE MASSES AGAINST SPORTCOMPACTS THAT APPEAL TO THE ENTHUSIAST. AND SMITHSR IS CORRECT SUBARU HAS HAD RECORD SALES EVEN 3 MONTHS AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE POOR MANS FWD PORSCHE.

MY .02 TAKE OR LEAVE IT I DON'T CARE, BUT DON'T SAY ANYHTING ABOUT DODGE CAUSE I KNOW DODGE FIRST HAND, WE HAVE HAD NOTHING BUT PROBLEMS WITH ALL OUR DODGES (FLEET).

I hope you're joking about these "recalls" being a drive-it-home point in your arguement.

The car is *NEW*. Of course there are going to be recalls on it.

I work at a Nissan/Honda/Mitsu/Toyota dealer, and I can assure you that all 4 usually have a slew of recalls on new models when they come out.

The worst part is, a lot of times the above companies try to avoid needed recalls like the plague, playing the "We don't know of this problem" game.

Replacing "Bushings, Control Arms, Etc?" I can send you a picture of about 30 control arms stocked at all times for some Mitsus as well.

My point is that every company has recalls, especially on the 1st model years introduced.

[PROJECTRB240SX]

I KNOW BUT HAVE YOU SEEN THE MILE LONG HISTORY OF RECALLS FOR NEONS? THEY ARE SUPPOSEDLY NEW AND IMPROVED EACH YEAR BUT IN THE END THEY JUST ADD A FEW MORE DEFECTIVE PARTS TO THE LIST. THE NEON IS JUST LIKE THE FOCUS EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT FORD ACTUALLY CLEANED THE FOCUS UP; CHRYSLER JUST LETS THE CRAP KEEP FLOWING OF THE FACTORY LINE. YES I GET WEEKLY RECALL SHEETS AND THE SRT4 HAS HAD QUITE A FEW THERE WERE A COUPLE MAJOR ONES BUT AT THE RATE ITS GOING THEY SHOULD JUST RECALL THE WHOLE CAR. I MENT AFTERMARKET BUSHINGS AND CAS, I KNOW ALL CARS GET THESE SORTS OF UPGRADES BUT THE NEON NEEDS IT JUST TO COMPETE WITH STOCK VEHICLES.

[Bubba1]

DSSA: There is more than one kind of enthusiast, my friend. With the SRT4. I think a "pure" enthusiast would applaud Chrysler's SRT-4. It'll embarrass many cars that cost considerably more. But an "educated" enthusiast will weigh the SRT4's above average performance and low initial purchase price against its considerably below average build quality, poor reliability, and ugly styling, and would more likely choose a WRX over a SRT4.

I'm sure the SRT4 will sell very well as the low price and performance are hard to ignore. But after owning 4 Chryslers, all of which had a LOT of quality/warranty issues, I much prefer the cars from the guys who put pickup truck motors into their sporty coupes. I think most folks will prefer a slightly slower 0-60 car that goes 200,000+ miles without problems (Nissan 240SX) than quicker car that self destructs at 60,000 miles (Neon).

And I agree most cars have recalls, particularly in the first year but some have so many recalls that it becomes an issue (Can you say "Ford Focus?")

[cosmo]

Has anyone noticed how weird the SRT-4 looks on the street?

There's one around here and in the back it looks raised up, like the front is lowered more than the back.

IE

_ -0 0

Is that for a reason?

[DSSA]

Quote » I'm sure the SRT4 will sell very well as the low price and performance are hard to ignore. But after owning 4 Chryslers, all of which had a LOT of quality/warranty issues, I much prefer the cars from the guys who put pickup truck motors into their sporty coupes. I think most folks will prefer a slightly slower 0-60 car that goes 200,000+ miles without problems (Nissan 240SX) than quicker car that self destructs at 60,000 miles (Neon). [/quote]Unfortunately, I've seen plenty of 240s wipe themselves out well before this mark. The '93 I picked up for $500 was subjected to a failed t-belt tensioner and jumped timing @ 140K. The '95 we picked up a year and 1/2 ago had a blown headgasket @ 129K.

Like anything else, there are some that last forever, and some that die early. Certainly some cars increase/decrease these chances, but I can't say that in my experience that the 240s are the most reliable cars on the planet. I definitely wouldn't describe them as "prone to breaking early". But I wouldn't consider them bulletproof either.

Then again...I own a lot of DSMs. The motors are quite capable even in stock form, but routine maintainance isn't really an option, it's a requirement.

Build quality is marginal on the DSMs as well (Chassis-wise, just like the Neon, they're Chrysler), but the tons of DSM owners (even realizing this) find the performance potential too hard to give up just because of this.

The 240 is a great chassis, just *painfully* weak in the power department. Thank god for SR20s/RB2xDET motors.

[SmithSR]

What a lot of people *DO* look at being "sports car enthusiasts" is one thing--*performance*, which the SRT-4 has plenty of with a $19K price tag.

How about putting some facts instead of opinions in your "mature, logical" posts?

In your next post, please give us fact-based benefit of FWD over AWD/RWD from a performance aspect. Tell us why Dodge built what you call a performance car with FWD. Feel free to include any and all press statements from Dodge proving this.

Lets hear your thoughts, backed by documentation, about wheelspin, torque steer, and wheel hop, with regards to this car you defend.

Please also present documentation that proves FWD offers better weight distribution, throttle-on turn in, and weight transfer upon launch.

If you can present fact-based documentation on all these issues, that prove the SRT-4 fits the description of performance, I'll post documentation to the contrary on all counts.

[DSSA]

In your next post, please give us fact-based benefit of FWD over AWD/RWD from a performance aspect. Tell us why Dodge built what you call a performance car with FWD. Feel free to include any and all press statements from Dodge proving this.

Lets hear your thoughts, backed by documentation, about wheelspin, torque steer, and wheel hop, with regards to this car you defend.

Please also present documentation that proves FWD offers better weight distribution, throttle-on turn in, and weight transfer upon launch.

If you can present fact-based documentation on all these issues, that prove the SRT-4 fits the description of performance, I'll post documentation to the contrary on all counts.

Sure, as soon as you post information where I said anything about FWD being superior to AWD/RWD.

Considering I own a slew of AWD cars and some RWDs, I don't think you'll find me saying anything like this.

Next genius attempt at a valid arguement, please...

Are you trying to amuse me here?:icesangel

[Bubba1]

DSSA We agree on quite a bit. Many cars with good reliability reputations wipe themselves out prematurely because of poor maintenance and/or abuse. But Chrysler really does have serious quality/reliability problems. And I'm not convinced they've addressed them.

Each of my Chryslers (3 LHS's and a 300M) had more problems in 3 years than all of the Japanese cars I've ever owned put together over 20+ years. That's bad.

And I agree with you about the 240sx being underpowered, but I hardly think any car you buy for $500 is going to be perfect. And when you buy a 7 year old car, you have no idea how it was maintained unless you bought it from the original owner who's willing to provide receipts. So I'm not sure it's fair to condemn the 240sx overall based on two old cars with unknown histories. I bought my 89 240sx new, had it for 14 years, put on 190,000 trouble free miles on it and she's still running today. I maintained all my new Chryslers as well as my 240sx and all the Chryslers had big problems.

I sincerely wish Chrysler would get their act together and build their cars better, because I think they're well designed, well engineered, nice driving cars. Just built like crap. It's a shame.

[DSSA]

DSSA We agree on quite a bit. Many cars with good reliability reputations wipe themselves out prematurely because of poor maintenance and/or abuse.

We people in the general Philadelphia area are just smarter than the rest. ;-)

Quote »I'd I agree with you about the 240sx being underpowered, but I hardly think any car you buy for $500 is going to be perfect. And when you buy a 7 year old car, you have no idea how it was maintained unless you bought it from the original owner who's willing to provide receipts. So I'm not sure it's fair to condemn the 240sx overall based on two old cars with unknown histories. [/quote]

I think I was a little confusing with my last post. The reason we bought these cars so cheaply was due to the repairs needed at the time of purchase.

The '93 was purchased with the intent of something to cradle and RB26DETT into to play with (would have ended up strictly a dyno-queen, and practically useless on the road), however, other circumstances have come up, and I need to get the car done quickly, so I settled for the SR20DET and ordered it yesterday--a little easier on the pocketbook at this point in time.

If you come by any other blown-motor/trans. 240s in the area you want to pass up yourself, let me know. I'd still like a chassis to drop an RB26 into, just at a later date.

[240marcuSX]

id take a sube, over a dodge. any day of the week. nuff said

WRX = amazing machineSRT-4 = fast motor, in a ****ty wrapper.