I certainly would not have any place to beat down on it for performance, or would anyone else be able to, I mean no one here has driven it, But I can say this, its FUGLY, CHEAP INTERIOR, and Dodge looked to cut every corner when making it, I mean BRAKE LOCK DIFF? hahahahahaha!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
new srt-4
- Thread starter ccann26
- Start date
yup, i bet, go break down on the ******* rail road tracks you shmuck, i have the mazdaspeed, ur civic wont even be worth a mint flavored turd so shut the **** up
Whats funny about this is MSP do hold their value, just like any mazdaspeed.. More value than a honda, nissan and toyota. i watched a guy get 17K for a 2003.5 MSP with 55,000 miles on it... i was signing my papers when he was trading it in for a MS3. Unbelievable.
Well for one, how come true ACTUAL race cars have LOW torque and HIGH horsepower numbers? This confuses me..
This is the problem with multi-valve engines that are v6 or v8... Their horsepower will always be higher than the torque. go back to a 2 valve design and the torque explodes. Multivalve engines have a more linear powercurve.. This is excellent for coming out of corners while steering the car with throttle.
And secondly, when did I come in and say how great my SI was? I came in and said it was lame how you guys don't give any other car a chance (and I included my SI WITH the cobalt SS, ion redline AND SRT-4, no where did I say anything about my SI specifically until it was brought up).. I realize a mazda forum is going to be just like my honda forum and will be biased towards their own car.. but c'mon, I can't even come in here and say one thing about ANYTHING before all I hear is how much Honda sucks, how much better the mazda is, etc etc. And the ironic thing is how I'm always the one to be blamed for it/yelled at when you guys are the ones who bring it up, every single time. I don't care if you think the SI doesn't compare with the MS3, but at least give other cars a chance to be RELEASED (srt-4..) before you make judgements.
I think the new SRt-4 is butt ugly but i never capped on its power. I think people need to be aware of these things when they hit the road..
Seriously, this is the most mature and thought-out response I've seen yet. I came on here and said NOTHING about honda's specifically, and yet all I got in response was how much my honda sucks. Says a lot for the mazda community, yeah? I even came in and admitted that I like the MS3 more than my SI, yet people still feel the need to bash the honda. The pathetic part is that Honda is the leader of the sports compact, and the mazda/chevy/vw cars are trying to compete with honda. It's not the other way around - you can say it's all about availability all you want, but there's a reason why I've seen ONE mazdaspeed3 in my lifetime in person being driven around.. and the rest were sitting on the lot, while I see SI's nearly every day.
You started out good than began to brag about your hondas. If you throw s*** in the wind, its bound to fly back in your face.
And I'll stand behind my comment about how torque isn't necessary. My SI has less than half the torque as the mazdaspeed3 does.. is naturally aspirated AND is a 2.0 vs a 2.3, and yet the MS3 still only beats it 0-60 in approx. half a second or so. Yes.. that's quite the difference, but the way you all praise torque.. it's really not. You have 280, and we have ~140.. yet your acceleration still isn't that dramatically different. Why do you think that is? Surely having TWICE the torque, 60 more horsepower, etc etc would net a substantial acceleration difference.. but it doesn't. And to add on to my point even more, 0-60 on the SI is FAR worse of a comparison test fot the SI because all of its power is made up top, so from a standstill we suck. It's on the roll where the SI will shine a bit more.
Umm are we driving go-carts around here now? If you dont think you need torque, its time you go back to school and enroll.. you missed to many science classes. Torque moves you.. horsepower keeps you moving.. you need them both for performance... If you just want to use torque, its obviously for towing.. thats why diesels are such animals. If you want hp with no performance, you buy an SI.. whoops, did i say that outloud? lol. sorry. but you get my point by now. Ive squashed many SIs from a roll, so i dont know where you are thinking your hondas are going to stay with a monster torque producing turbo car. Please put the crack pipe down.
Again, I'm not trying to make this a honda vs. mazda thread, but you all keep bringing it up. Instead of replying to this thread about why hondas suck some more.. why don't you actually post something about the SRT-4?
Well all agree Honda's suck... and im hoping for more srt talk.
Why is this s*** in the MS3 welcome secton?
Welcome MS3 owners... check out the SRT4!
I vtec do you?
Member
Whats funny about this is MSP do hold their value, just like any mazdaspeed.. More value than a honda, nissan and toyota. i watched a guy get 17K for a 2003.5 MSP with 55,000 miles on it... i was signing my papers when he was trading it in for a MS3. Unbelievable.
Sorry.. but no. I actually almost bought a mazdaspeed protege when I saw one on the lot once. I had no knowledge of them at the time, but I had just turned 16 and it looked hot, drove well, etc etc and I decided to persue it. I *beleive* the car was 12k and it has low miles on it. This was nearly two years ago as well. Name is everything in the car biz, that's why honda's retain so much value and mazda's don't, even if their quality if equal.
Umm are we driving go-carts around here now? If you dont think you need torque, its time you go back to school and enroll.. you missed to many science classes. Torque moves you.. horsepower keeps you moving.. you need them both for performance... If you just want to use torque, its obviously for towing.. thats why diesels are such animals. If you want hp with no performance, you buy an SI.. whoops, did i say that outloud? lol. sorry. but you get my point by now. Ive squashed many SIs from a roll, so i dont know where you are thinking your hondas are going to stay with a monster torque producing turbo car. Please put the crack pipe down.
.
Ok, you keep using text-book answers for your replies. I used a real-world example - an SI running LOW 14s (14.295 I think) BONE STOCK. If torque IS so important like you all say, then how come a car with less horsepower and half the torque is running just a touch behind the all-mighty MS3? Just answer that question.. and quit giving me torque and work formulas.
I've said it before and I've noticed it on here as well - the MS3 is worse in actuality than it is on paper. There's a reason why the SI runs competitive times against it with a substantial lack of power in comparison. How can you tell me the SI is garbage when it runs that quickly with that much less power? That's beautiful engineering to accomplish that.. but you're too much of a narrow-minded Mazda fanboi to admit that. I've admitted the MS3 is a great lil car.. but you'll always be hell-bent on hating Hondas.
Yeah. Ummm - want any respect? Don't tell people their anecdotes aren't accurate. You don't know his market, you don't know the circumstances. Want to disagree with his point? Find something that isn't based on your opinion, especially since you know that its value is rapidly declining (your opinion that is).Sorry.. but no. I actually almost bought a mazdaspeed protege when I saw one on the lot once. I had no knowledge of them at the time, but I had just turned 16 and it looked hot, drove well, etc etc and I decided to persue it. I *beleive* the car was 12k and it has low miles on it. This was nearly two years ago as well. Name is everything in the car biz, that's why honda's retain so much value and mazda's don't, even if their quality if equal.
Haven't read everything have ya? If you had, you would have known the answer to this already. But here goes:Ok, you keep using text-book answers for your replies. I used a real-world example - an SI running LOW 14s (14.295 I think) BONE STOCK. If torque IS so important like you all say, then how come a car with less horsepower and half the torque is running just a touch behind the all-mighty MS3? Just answer that question.. and quit giving me torque and work formulas.
1. Drag radials will make a big difference
2. 250 lbs.
3. A 1/4 mile race requires us to go into 4th gear. I'm guessing the Si only needs 3 - you can correct me if I'm wrong.
4. Now this is the big one. Torque Management system. This massive 280 ft-lbs that keeps getting brought up doesn't kick in until 3rd gear. The race is half over by the time we're in 3rd gear.
So there ya have it. 4 pretty good reasons why the Si can almost keep up.
Wow... just. Wow. It's a great engine, but its greatest feat is in its ability to be a dual personality engine. What most Honda owners forget is that beautiful engineering doesn't mean winning races (look at their success in F1). The 1st Gen S2000 engine is amazing in its ability to rev to 9000 and make 240 hp. I mean - that really is something. But there's cheaper, faster cars out there that can do the same job (get from point A to B). Why pay/develop technology for the sake of it? It's a tough hurdle to get over for some people.There's a reason why the SI runs competitive times against it with a substantial lack of power in comparison. How can you tell me the SI is garbage when it runs that quickly with that much less power? That's beautiful engineering to accomplish that..
Honestly, you're not helping Honda's case here. You really are coming off as a troll even if you're not trying to be.
so ... about this whole SRT4 thing I've heard about.....
can't we stay on topic, just once??
I guess not...
They (dodge) should have put that motor in a 4-door sedan like they did with the Neon. They would more than likely make a killin'...who wants to buy a soapbox, even if it does have alot of power? Lower center of gravity, better handling, better looking...oh well, I wouldn't buy it anyway but just wish it was easier on the eyes.
either way dodge will sell alot of these and we re gona have stiff competition in straight lines....MY preference is definitely not for a car with those looks. i like the front , it looks aggressive but the rear is really ugly....for each car there is a buyer because of taste and preference....alot of people dont like the ms3 ( dont know why, the car is just soo sexy ) but we still bought it because we like it. i am just anticipating to see one on the street and maybe do a few runs
- dont even know why this thread has gotten this long without being locked....soooo off topic at times
- dont even know why this thread has gotten this long without being locked....soooo off topic at times
- dont even know why this thread has gotten this long without being locked....soooo off topic at times
lol...true!!
They (dodge) should have put that motor in a 4-door sedan like they did with the Neon. They would more than likely make a killin'...who wants to buy a soapbox, even if it does have alot of power? Lower center of gravity, better handling, better looking...oh well, I wouldn't buy it anyway but just wish it was easier on the eyes.
You and 1000's of others have said the same thing...alot of people want the driveline/engine put into the new avenger with AWD but as far as I know it's just a thought.
New Posts and Comments
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 334
- Replies
- 10
- Views
- 297
