Srt-4 Quality

[spacemonkey]

The only problem I've read about the SRT-4 is the noise, oil leaks, need wider tires and crappy turning radius. Its not a regular neon. Its a completely diffrent engine and tranny...remember that the engine and tranny was designed for FI.

This is really a useless arguement cuz do you think you would get a perfect car for $21K. Good power, looks, handeling and comfort. You win some and you loose some...but you cant have them all. Both cars (MSP and SRT-4) have strong points and weak points. Im not a straightline guy...I like conmfort style and handeling. So MSP was my choice. Some like fast and could care less of what the car looks like...

 

[jred321]

This is really a useless arguement cuz do you think you would get a perfect car for $21K.

yea, you have to spend around $28,987 MSRP for one (evo price)

 

[jflo]

The SRT takes the heritage that Chrysler had with turbo 4 cylinders, and came back with a vengence. Yes there are cars that are faster, nicer interiors (all subject to OPINION) but the fact remains. The SRT-4 is the best car for the money. The SRT-4 responds to mods VERY WELL. Beating cars that are 8-12k more in MSRP. If you look back at Dodge, they have always been on the forefront of offering more power. Even to the point of putting themselves almost out of business. Dodge has always been a best bang for the buck company. Since the hostile takeover from Daimler, Chryslers quality has been on a HUGE upswing. Yes there is a reputation that is hindering the name but it's time to let the negatives of the past to rest.

what heritage ? the one that mitsubishi built ? hmmm DSM ?

 

[jred321]

what heritage ? the one that mitsubishi built ? hmmm DSM ?

i think he's talking the one that shelby built, the omni and daytona turbos. he may also be factoring the mitsubishi line up too (chrysler conquest, plymouth laser, eagle talon, dodge stealth)

 

[Vooduguru]

I've driven my SRT in the snow, with minimal complaint. Granted I have some sloppy steelies on it and when the road gets slick I need to high tail it to 3rd gear quickly. And to Jred321 Mistu and Chrysler developed a lot of cars together. Shelby used the basics of the mitsu turbos to design the CSX, the GLH, GLHS, Daytona, etc. Oh and stroke makes torque, not turbos

 

[Ceej]

just do the poll.
do u guys/gals think that the SRT-4 is a low quality car(cheaply made), so that it whould keep the cost of the car down.

If you have not sat in or driven the SRT-4 you are a MORON for commenting and voteing in this inane thread!

 

[jred321]

I've driven my SRT in the snow, with minimal complaint. Granted I have some sloppy steelies on it and when the road gets slick I need to high tail it to 3rd gear quickly. And to Jred321 Mistu and Chrysler developed a lot of cars together. Shelby used the basics of the mitsu turbos to design the CSX, the GLH, GLHS, Daytona, etc. Oh and stroke makes torque, not turbos

from what i've heard of the mitsu-chrysler relationship, mitsu does the turbo/strong engine side of things (4g63, 3000gt engine, starion engine) and chrysler does the cheap side of things (420a motor, whatever v6 thing is in the avenger), but that's more opinion than anything that can be proven as chrysler i'm sure funded mitsu a lot for those engines they were developing, and this may be the view of a former mitsu owner.

turobs making torque is from maximum boost, and they do make torque. stroke makes low end torque, the turbo makes your high end torque, which equates into horespower. i don't have the book here with me now so i can't tell you what he was talking about exactly when he said it, but that's basically it

 

[Low J.]

Re: Re: Srt-4 Quality

If you have not sat in or driven the SRT-4 you are a MORON for commenting and voteing in this inane thread!

amen to that.......and ask any SRT-4 owner how easy it is to get a test drive......not very easy.......I know all these people voting aren't test driving all the new SRT's.......this is pointless.

 

[Swerny]

Another idiotic post about another non Mazda product.

Snowman weren't you having this same conversation with Low J in another thread?

You start out saying it's cheaply made, and you end up saying you are going to test drive one ?????
I guess you voted that it wasn't cheaply made then ?

I have been on this board for about a year. First there were people saying the Spec V was $hit, then it was the 1.8T GTI's and Jetta's, then the WRX, then the EVO, and now the SRT. I bet in a year we will be ragging on the Saturn Redline etc.

Can't we all just mutaully respect each other's cars.
I prefer the looks of the MSP to the SRT. I'm not a 1/4 mile guy, so the MSP is plenty fast for me thank you very much.
If I were a 1/4 mile guy, then I would be all over the SRT like a fat kid on a Smartie.

I couldn't afford the WRX or STI, the EVO isn't available in Canada (couldn't afford it anyways), and the SRT is now available here. I drove the Spec V and there were things i didn't like about it (trunk pass through, dash, stereo etc. )

If you are pissed that you bought your Mazda, and wish you had bought something else, live with it or sell your car and get the one you really want.

There is no need slamming another car just because you drive something else.

Somene said the SRT has a weak tranny...no that would be the Mazda's with the $hit shift forks etc.

Cheap thin plastic? What car for $20 K doesn't have plastic ?

Oh and as for the "it's a Neon" comment, grow up. We all drive Protege's, not BMW's.

The more companies that come out with Sport Compacts., the better it is for all of us, the consumer, in the long run because there are more products to chose from, and new one's coming down the pipeline each year.

We should all show a mutual respect to each other, not make ass hat comments like "it's cheap, and it's a Neon".

Done

 

[spacemonkey]

Whats wrong with the SRT-4? This is a matter of opinion so no point in arguing. Get facts straight before you talk smack about the SRT-4. The engine and tranny is not weak...its stronger then the speed. The interior is okay and the viper seats are super nice. Grow up...SRT-4 isnt just a neon. Thats like saying the EVO is just a Lancer. STi is just a WRX and MSP is just a Protege.

 

[Low J.]

here's what the EVO owners say.....you can see that most of them respect the SRT for what it is......an inexpensive car with good performance:

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59791

 

[EVILSRT]

Another idiotic post about another non Mazda product.

Snowman weren't you having this same conversation with Low J in another thread?

You start out saying it's cheaply made, and you end up saying you are going to test drive one ?????
I guess you voted that it wasn't cheaply made then ?

I have been on this board for about a year. First there were people saying the Spec V was $hit, then it was the 1.8T GTI's and Jetta's, then the WRX, then the EVO, and now the SRT. I bet in a year we will be ragging on the Saturn Redline etc.

Can't we all just mutaully respect each other's cars.
I prefer the looks of the MSP to the SRT. I'm not a 1/4 mile guy, so the MSP is plenty fast for me thank you very much.
If I were a 1/4 mile guy, then I would be all over the SRT like a fat kid on a Smartie.

I couldn't afford the WRX or STI, the EVO isn't available in Canada (couldn't afford it anyways), and the SRT is now available here. I drove the Spec V and there were things i didn't like about it (trunk pass through, dash, stereo etc. )

If you are pissed that you bought your Mazda, and wish you had bought something else, live with it or sell your car and get the one you really want.

There is no need slamming another car just because you drive something else.

Somene said the SRT has a weak tranny...no that would be the Mazda's with the $hit shift forks etc.

Cheap thin plastic? What car for $20 K doesn't have plastic ?

Oh and as for the "it's a Neon" comment, grow up. We all drive Protege's, not BMW's.

The more companies that come out with Sport Compacts., the better it is for all of us, the consumer, in the long run because there are more products to chose from, and new one's coming down the pipeline each year.

We should all show a mutual respect to each other, not make ass hat comments like "it's cheap, and it's a Neon".

Done

Best most mature response ever. Well said man, well said. I wiah more members were mature about other cars. Oh well.

 

[Swerny]

Best most mature response ever. Well said man, well said. I wiah more members were mature about other cars. Oh well.

Cheers buddy !

 

[Notorious]

I like the motor in srt-4 but in interior quality is exactly setting new standards in the industry. The cost cutting is quite obvious. Power up front crank in the back, cheap plastics, but hey you have to save money somewhere. I love the seats though.

 

[mp5jeff]

the 04's have a nice shifter...

 

[charles]

If you have not sat in or driven the SRT-4 you are a MORON for commenting and voting in this inane thread!

(mswerd) Also this is an old thread. (nuts)

 

[Vooduguru]

from what i've heard of the mitsu-chrysler relationship, mitsu does the turbo/strong engine side of things (4g63, 3000gt engine, starion engine) and chrysler does the cheap side of things (420a motor, whatever v6 thing is in the avenger), but that's more opinion than anything that can be proven as chrysler i'm sure funded mitsu a lot for those engines they were developing, and this may be the view of a former mitsu owner.

turobs making torque is from maximum boost, and they do make torque. stroke makes low end torque, the turbo makes your high end torque, which equates into horespower. i don't have the book here with me now so i can't tell you what he was talking about exactly when he said it, but that's basically it

With all due respect, you're sources of information are off. Mitsu-DCX relationship built certain cars that are Mitsu cores with Dodge skins. The avenger was one of these examples. Everything except the badging was Mitsubishi. Same with the current gen Eclipse/Stratus coupe. The 2.4 and 3.0V6 are Mitsu. The "Dodge" content in the Stratus coupe is badging and a couple of minor styling cues. Mitsu benifitted from Dodges involvement with Carroll Shelby in the mid-late 80's. Mitsu provided the turbo, Shelby provided the R&D. Chrysler provided the engines. I'm sure you can trace the performance that Mitsu designed in their engines to the Shelby influence.

 

[mazdaspeedpower]

OK, I think that there are a few parts of the car made cheaply, thats a given, as it's an entry level sport compact...however, overall, I think the car is very well made, especially for dodge, but then again, they only put the SRT name on decent cars. Dodge has made some nice turbo cars before, the Omni, the Shadow. I know I know, the cars where not good, but the turbos in them lasted forever, and produced some very un-dogly numbers for the time. Now, they have a good turbo setup, with dealer support, and and ever improving car. The neon started out as a s*** bucket car, now they are decent cars, and the SRT-4 is an awesome car.

 

[mp5jeff]

the only thing that i found "cheap" about the srt-4 is the interior pieces that were used, they did however look fine, but you can tell they weren't the top quality, but the viper seats are nice =)