sry bout this, SRT-4 engine vs. MSP engine

Is it true the SRT-4 has crank rear windows? If so; that's a bit of a joke now, isn't it?

Gee Whiz! I like the ability to control all of my windows as I'm driving, especially during these nice Spring days.
 
AFaceInTheCrowd said:
uhh well, the seats of the neon are engineered from the viper seats. the protege is a whole lot more refined in my eyes. the neon has crank windows and an extreamly small back seat. the shift is a lot of work, even after being broken in. my protege's shift is nice and soft now, not too much work, its actually fun. the neon rims are hardly appealing to me and the front facia is, well, in my eyes, still kinda funny looking. the rear wing looks like a civic ricer wing and really blocks the view from the rear glass. the protege wing is smaller and blocks less. overall, the neon is less ergonomic to me and doesn't have as many creature comforts.




uhhhh actually the neon has the largest rear seat room in the sub-compact class. Number 2 tossing in forged pistons and raising boost on a mazda speed will absolutley void all warranties.... and seriously raise the cost of the car(yes you do need a front mount intercooler to boost that high and fuel management). That being said the neon is not HORRIBLE but it ihas a cheaper feeling. PLus the neon does a decent job of getting rid of torque steer while boosting a MS pro... well who knows :)
 
unwrittenLaw said:


The srt-4 is a good car, but I wouldn't go as far as to say the MSP doesn't touch it performance wise...


uh Mazda speed pro with sub 170 hp to the wheels vs srt-4 217 Hp and 247 TQ TO the wheels?!?!? The MS pro doesn't even come close performance wise... don't make stuff up it makes you look doofy :p
 
Sorry but..... welcome to your worst nightmare :D

Already the WRX'ers are making excuses....



DSCF0038.JPG





Sport Compact Car Magazine Car Of The Year Award: 2003 Dodge Neon SRT-4

By Scott Oldham
Photography: Les Bidrawn, Josh Jacquot

When Dodge unveiled the turbocharged SRT-4 at the Los Angeles Auto Show last year, the theme of the press conference was urban decay.

To a hip hop soundtrack, graffiti artists in baggy clothes tagged a brick wall, as the Daimler Chrysler brass told the assembled press that the SRT-4 has everything the kids want. They just stopped short of calling it fresh and fly. We left shaking our heads. We remember thinking Dodge still didn't get it. We even shook off the claim that the turbocharged 2003 Dodge Neon SRT-4 would be the quickest car you could buy in America for less than $20,000, accelerating from 0 to 60 mph in 5.9 seconds. No way, we thought.

Then some of the Dodge engineers began driving a red SRT-4 prototype with a huge, front-mount intercooler in SCCA ProRally events. Almost immediately they found success, winning their class, Group 5, several times. Then we began to hear the car's turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder was making some serious power on the company's dynos, and the SRT-4 was going to be the real deal. We got interested. Maybe we were wrong. Maybe Dodge does get it. Months of phone calls later and a yellow SRT-4 prototype was at our office for the car's first road test ever in any magazine anywhere in the world.

Turns out we were right about being wrong. Dead wrong. Dodge does get it, but the SRT-4 does not accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in 5.9 seconds. It does it in 5.8 seconds. That's right, 5.8 seconds. It also puts 223 hp and 250 lb-ft of torque to its front wheels, stops from 60 mph in 119 feet and snakes through a 700-foot slalom at a very fast 69 mph.

That means the SRT-4 runs head to head with the new Nissan 350Z and the Subaru WRX, while leaving the new Mini Cooper S and the Acura RSX Type-S in the dust.

Dodge did it right. From its engine to its chassis, the SRT-4 is ready to rule. And we really like the way it looks. That front mount intercooler, big hood scoop and 17-inch wheels and tires have transformed the once homely Neon into a machine with real attitude.

In our first full road test of the car in the December 2002 issue we said the new SRT-4 redefines the collective concept of fast, raw and American and proves without question that Dodge is playing hardball.

One month later, in the January 2003 issue we put the SRT-4 up against seven other cars in a comparison test to find the best car for under $20,000. The SRT-4 finished a decisive first, outgunning the Mini Cooper S, Nissan Sentra SE-R, Hyundai Tiburon, Honda Civic Si, Volkswagen GTI, Ford SVT Focus and MazdaSpeed Proteg. Bottom line. It blew us away.

Then there's the price. Dodge did what it said, and priced the SRT-4 at less than $20 grand. That means it really is the quickest car you can buy for the money, which makes it, without argument, the greatest performance car buy of the year.

And that is why we have chosen the 2003 Dodge Neon SRT-4 as the 2003 Sport Compact Car of the Year.



http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/features/0302scc_neon/ http://staff.tcu.edu/jaltschul/SRT-4vsWRX_vs_Talon.WMV
 
please dont post nonsense about a car that has nothing to do with the advancement of the pro's
neons are sh*t boxes end of story
structurally they cant compete with mazda
there is no comparison
turbocharging that shoe box doesnt help its image
am i jelous that we dont get 225 to the wheels?
not really cause we got style!!
 
Psssst.... Sport Compact Car Magazine Car Of The Year Award: 2003 Dodge Neon SRT-4




Mazda Pro ranked dead last.



Way To go MAN!!




DSCF0081.JPG
 
smolten said:
Psssst.... Sport Compact Car Magazine Car Of The Year Award: 2003 Dodge Neon SRT-4




Mazda Pro ranked dead last.



Way To go MAN!!




DSCF0081.JPG

what are you talking about, ranked dead last. it was SECOND in SCC's sport compact car roundup. unless we are talking about a different review. and it doesnt even ******* matter, because guess what, WE DONT CARE ABOUT THE SRT-4. if we really wanted to hear how ******* great the SRT-4 is we would go to dodge forums or something. i hate how every ******* 2 weeks a new SRT-4 thread starts and turns into a ******* retarded moronic flamefest. just shut the hell up already damnit

sorry but i cant help it!
 
smolten said:
Psssst.... Sport Compact Car Magazine Car Of The Year Award: 2003 Dodge Neon SRT-4




Mazda Pro ranked dead last.



Way To go MAN!!

Good!!!!! So go buy a Neon SRT-4, and leave this forum. Why are you here? Looks like causing trouble is about it!
 
Dexter said:


what are you talking about, ranked dead last. it was SECOND in SCC's sport compact car roundup. unless we are talking about a different review. and it doesnt even ******* matter, because guess what, WE DONT CARE ABOUT THE SRT-4. if we really wanted to hear how ******* great the SRT-4 is we would go to dodge forums or something. i hate how every ******* 2 weeks a new SRT-4 thread starts and turns into a ******* retarded moronic flamefest. just shut the hell up already damnit

sorry but i cant help it!

yeah uhh i've avoided posting in this thread recently because of all the flame. i didn't mean for this to be a flame-a-thon, it was supposed to be an engine discussion thread presenting my findings and comparing the turbo FS-ZE and the neons engine. i was hoping to get some info on forged pistons, boost and that mistu turbo thats in the neon. well now i know better not to compare the msp to anything anymore. sry to all the senior members and ppl that hate this kinda thing. :( :( :(
 
AFaceInTheCrowd said:


yeah uhh i've avoided posting in this thread recently because of all the flame. i didn't mean for this to be a flame-a-thon, it was supposed to be an engine discussion thread presenting my findings and comparing the turbo FS-ZE and the neons engine. i was hoping to get some info on forged pistons, boost and that mistu turbo thats in the neon. well now i know better not to compare the msp to anything anymore. sry to all the senior members and ppl that hate this kinda thing. :( :( :(



awwww that's ok... it's called HP envy :D




Soooooo you paid how much for 170hp?!?!?!


muahahhaha
 
smolten said:




awwww that's ok... it's called HP envy :D




Soooooo you paid how much for 170hp?!?!?!


muahahhaha

HP envy? wtf. you can go build up a mustang...or a fire bird..or a camaro.....or an RX7...a supra...and get mad HP for the same price as your new cute Neon. so kindly **** off. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
there isnt a problem talking about forged internals on any motor
alot of us are here to learn and to listen to other experinces
but, when you have this guy who puts the neon on a pedistal in a mazda forum your bound to get a negative reaction
especially when he registers as amember of the club
i guess im old fashion when i talk about loyalty
why would you come out and bash msp and the price they paid?
its just plain ignorant !!
 
Soooooo you paid how much for 170hp?!?!?!

And you paid how much for the PC that you use to try and communicate to the world in a vain attempt to justify your thoughts? Thoughts that apparntly are based on ill minded attempts to start useless flame wars. Thoughts that serve no purpose other than to prove how a extreme select few can cause true car people to cast stereotypes on other car owners. Your thoughts that were cast to that keyboard about 1 second to fast, before any true thought on the subject given could be planned. What you and others here have failed to realize is there will always be something faster.

However the goal in many sport compact cars is not always to be the fastest. Instead its to provide a new style, or ride comfort, design interior, options, or sensation behind the wheel. With that both cars provide a nice addition to the sport compact sence. To each his own.


Why can't some people see past their keyboards and actually apperciate sports cars for what they offer? Instead of this constant bitching back and forth about who is faster, which looks better and so on.

Enjoy your ride, which ever it is. For we are not you and you are not us. We all have different taste, just respects others as well.
 
perfworks said:
there isnt a problem talking about forged internals on any motor
alot of us are here to learn and to listen to other experinces
but, when you have this guy who puts the neon on a pedistal in a mazda forum your bound to get a negative reaction
especially when he registers as amember of the club
i guess im old fashion when i talk about loyalty
why would you come out and bash msp and the price they paid?
its just plain ignorant !!

who are you talking about? :wtf: i'm not putting the neon anywhere i'm just simply comparing the two engines. who gives a flying fck about the car. i wanted to discuss some forged pistons and rods and compare the engines' boost limits. i want to work on my mazda so it can be faster. by looking at the closest competition i can see how they are getting their hp numbers and try my best to reach those numbers using what means i can afford. if i really wanted the neon, i would have bought the neon, BUT i wanted a mazda, so i bought the mazda. OBVIOUSLY the neon ENGINE (not motor, motor is electric) is superior because of the forged internals and greater displacement. i would like to learn from the people who want to help me as well as looking at real world apps of forged internals (like the neon engine). this way i can decide on what to get, be it SRP or JE or any other company and know what to ask for.
 
REMillers said:


And you paid how much for the PC that you use to try and communicate to the world in a vain attempt to justify your thoughts? Thoughts that apparntly are based on ill minded attempts to start useless flame wars. Thoughts that serve no purpose other than to prove how a extreme select few can cause true car people to cast stereotypes on other car owners. Your thoughts that were cast to that keyboard about 1 second to fast, before any true thought on the subject given could be planned. What you and others here have failed to realize is there will always be something faster.

However the goal in many sport compact cars is not always to be the fastest. Instead its to provide a new style, or ride comfort, design interior, options, or sensation behind the wheel. With that both cars provide a nice addition to the sport compact sence. To each his own.


Why can't some people see past their keyboards and actually apperciate sports cars for what they offer? Instead of this constant bitching back and forth about who is faster, which looks better and so on.

Enjoy your ride, which ever it is. For we are not you and you are not us. We all have different taste, just respects others as well.

Well said, my friend. (thumb)
 
AFaceInTheCrowd said:


who are you talking about? :wtf: i'm not putting the neon anywhere i'm just simply comparing the two engines. who gives a flying fck about the car. i wanted to discuss some forged pistons and rods and compare the engines' boost limits. i want to work on my mazda so it can be faster. by looking at the closest competition i can see how they are getting their hp numbers and try my best to reach those numbers using what means i can afford. if i really wanted the neon, i would have bought the neon, BUT i wanted a mazda, so i bought the mazda. OBVIOUSLY the neon ENGINE (not motor, motor is electric) is superior because of the forged internals and greater displacement. i would like to learn from the people who want to help me as well as looking at real world apps of forged internals (like the neon engine). this way i can decide on what to get, be it SRP or JE or any other company and know what to ask for.

dude chill, hes not talkin about u :p
 
faceinthe crowd
i was supporting your idea
i was talking about the guy who was posting the mag article
i should have clarified myself sorry:)
 
smolten said:
Psssst.... Sport Compact Car Magazine Car Of The Year Award: 2003 Dodge Neon SRT-4




Mazda Pro ranked dead last.



Way To go MAN!!




DSCF0081.JPG

god you really piss me off because you cant even read. it doesnt list the order of the cars in that article. read the january one they referenced and you will see the civic Si is in dead last.

neon got your brain?
 
AFaceInTheCrowd said:
well i did some calculations after looking at the SRT-4 with a friend of mine who is looking for a car. we wanted to find out the power per L of each car. well the srt outputs 215 horse and the msp 170. srt with 2.4l and a reported 14lb of boost (goin off a prev. thread which i nvr read so this isn't accurate someone correct this). msp with 2.0l and 7lb of boost. if we were to divide the hp with the Literage of the engine, the srt would be 89.9 (bar over the 9) hp per liter, and the msp would get 85 hp per liter. thats 53.75 hp per cylinder on the srt and 42.5 hp per cylinder on the msp. these numbers are just rough and DO NOT take into account that both cars are boosted.
first of all I think this whole comparison is stupid and just to let you know mt lancers "hp per cylindar (dumbest measurement ever) is 67.75 accordin to you calculations :rolleyes: :p
 

New Threads and Articles

Back