Neon SRT-4 vs. Evo VIII

[UNGN]

I'm looking through the results of the SORC 1 Mile Shootout and I see that a Neon SRT-4 with the $500 Stage 1 package ran 137.4 mph in the standing start mile, while a $10K more Evo VIII only ran a best of 132.6 mph. This makes me think the Neon puts out more than 215 Hp.

For comparison purposes a '93 Mustang Cobra ran 132 mph and a stock C5 runs about 145 mph and stock LT1 C4's run about 141 mph. Stock 405 HP Z06 and 450 HP Vipers both run about 159 mph.

'86 Pontiac 2+2's with 502 Crate motors run about 155 mph

 

[b4black]

What's the $500 Stage 1 package?

The Neon is tempting to buy.

 

[Gary Wells]

I hate to ask dumb questions, but was the Subaru WRX & the WRX STI in there, and how did they do?

 

[1ARUNEM]

The 215hp is the base number on a stock car. The stage one package consists of injector and ecu upgrades and costs $399.. It brings the SRT to 240hp and 260ftlb torque.

 

[UNGN]

Originally posted by Wells
I hate to ask dumb questions, but was the Subaru WRX & the WRX STI in there, and how did they do?

There was a WRX with a few mods, but he only ran the 1/2 mile (no racing harness). I'll have to check the numbers, but I think it only ran 114 mph, but don't quote me. I'm going to compile a rough list of cars and their mods and post a table like I did for the 2002 shootout.

They had 94 cars run. From 2003 Vipers and Jag XKE roadsters to Minicooper S's and Volkswagens to a 540 '71 Cyclone Spoiler Stock Car replica and a AAR 'Cuda replica with a 474 stroker motor (Both were bad ass).

 

[J Banning]

I REALLY like the SRT. If I didn't already have the Buick, trailer, and truck, I'd seriously think about getting one for a daily driver. Saw a 100% stock SRT (minus the airbox lid) run 13.88 @ 102mph a few weeks back. The driver was some young kid who never had run a car at the track before!!

Check out some of the fastest times over at srtforums.com:
http://srtforums.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=28


-Banning.

 

[FLYNRYAN87]

I bought a brand new black srt last week for a daily driver. very fun cars to drive.

 

[Rogue Leader]

I like some of those imports (especially the EVO and WRX), but I find it funny that Car And Driver had tuner versions of a lot of cars in this months comparo (lso some hondas etc) and at the end of the article theres a pic of a 2004 Z06 and it says "while these cars are fun, this bone stock 2004 Z06 was cheaper than many and cleaned all their clocks"

 

[FlyinGN]

yea that was a funny article. All these inport tuners and a LOT of $$ to go as slow and only a bit faster then stockers. Sad..

 

[Captain Mark]

For $20 grand the Neon is the most bang for the buck going right now. I would love to have one.

 

[Joe 1320]

I was next to an SRT-4 in traffic the other day. Noisy little sucker. Sounds like it might have a drone like a single shot with no muffler.

 

[1ARUNEM]

You are correct sir, no mufflers..

 

[UNGN]

In the Open Road Race portion of the SORC, the Neon Faired better than I thought it would. It entered the 120 mph class which I knew was a mistake.

I figured it would average around 112 mph and it managed 114 mph. There are lots of cars that can't average 114 mph on that road for 29 miles. Heading back south it only managed 112 mph into the wind, but then the southbound course is much tougher to maintain a high average speed.

It apears for 2004, the stage I package is to be included stock, with the new HP rating at 230 HP.

 

[T-limited]

I have a friend with an SRT-4. Great, great car. He has intake, exhaust, and the nitrous express intercooler (great size front mount) sprayer which sprays both nitrous and co2. It moves. He has already put a deposit down on a stage 2 which is a turbo, bigger intake manifold, reprogramed ecm, and larger injectors and I think it is around 2k or less! When installed by the dealership (small deductable) it will be covered under warranty!! They (dodge) predict around 270 hp and if that is underrated like the stock 215 which it really is it may be closer to 300hp! Most dealerships are not taking deposits but becasue he lives in a small town and has been in contact with the salesmen for the past two years there taking care of him. For the 10k you save over the lancer you can make a brutal street car.

 

[Joe 1320]

I'm going to have to hunt one down for a test drive. Everyone is buzzing about how quick they are, but I suspect the car is not going to be a well balanced car. The last high HP front driver I had ended up being totally unacceptable in the rain. In the dry, when the boost came up, you had better have a very firm grip on the wheel and countersteer to the left.... if you didn't the car would make a ricochet right hand turn into a parking lot whether you wanted to or not. Unless some magic trick has been introduced, I suspect this car won't be any different. Even as much of a bang for the buck that it appears to be, the other AWD pocket rockets are going to be a whole lot safer. When the wheels that steer are also spinning from torque, serious handling issues are the result.

 

[Captain Mark]

I agree with your handling comments. But, that may be why this car is about $8000 cheaper than the Wrx's...etc. That AWD stuff is expensive.

 

[John Larkin]

totally unacceptable in the rain

Led Zepplin predicted this in 1979 with their song, "Fool in the Rain".

 

[NICKG]

I have a lancer evo. I drove a neon srt and....

I would still spend the $10k and did on the evo. thing is that the neon is pretty quick, but not as quick stock as the evo. You have to bet that front wheel drive and big power is wicked to control in rain or snow(I have had several big hp turbo front wheel drive vw's(calloway turbos) My lancer rips 0-60 same in wet as it does in dry, better than that is that it stops almost the same, the neon has no brakes compared to the evo. comparing the two, the evo is a better car for the awd, bigger hp and real race style brakes and recaros(it is seriuosly like a rally car). the neon is fast, but ..........you cannot compare this to an evo or a wrx, it is just not a fair comparison. better comparing the neon to a matrix/vibe , 1.8t gti vw, civic si, z24, or the celica. That is what the neon is competeing against. guys who buy these are not gonna lump out the extra $10k for the evo(mostly cause they can't) I would strongly recommend that you go test drive either of these cars and then you will agree with me that they are not even close to compare as the neon srt is based on the standard neon and the lancer evo shares the name with the std lancer, and not much more(evo panels are aluminum save the roof and 1/4s)

 

[jastrckl]

the SRT-4 uses equal length axles. It doesn't torque steer nearly as badly as the typical fwd car because of this. I found a DSM site with some examples of equal length advantages: here

next year, the SRT-4 is getting an LSD. Only way it will hook better is making it a rwd car, basically. Still, for 20k, you can't beat it with a stick. I wish GM would wake up and make 1. a little rice rocket to line their pockets 2. a successor to the f-body that doesn't suck with the proceeds from the rice rocket.

 

[FlyinGN]

Re: I have a lancer evo. I drove a neon srt and....

ummm. Im not 100% sure if im correct but ALL the magazine tests RAVE about the SRT's brakes. I believe that C&D says that it stops as good as any of the German cars
In fact. Here are the facts.
70-0 srt- 165'
70-0 evo-157'

Hardly any difference. This is what C&D tested on both btw

Originally posted by NICKG
I would still spend the $10k and did on the evo. thing is that the neon is pretty quick, but not as quick stock as the evo. You have to bet that front wheel drive and big power is wicked to control in rain or snow(I have had several big hp turbo front wheel drive vw's(calloway turbos) My lancer rips 0-60 same in wet as it does in dry, better than that is that it stops almost the same, the neon has no brakes compared to the evo. comparing the two, the evo is a better car for the awd, bigger hp and real race style brakes and recaros(it is seriuosly like a rally car). the neon is fast, but ..........you cannot compare this to an evo or a wrx, it is just not a fair comparison. better comparing the neon to a matrix/vibe , 1.8t gti vw, civic si, z24, or the celica. That is what the neon is competeing against. guys who buy these are not gonna lump out the extra $10k for the evo(mostly cause they can't) I would strongly recommend that you go test drive either of these cars and then you will agree with me that they are not even close to compare as the neon srt is based on the standard neon and the lancer evo shares the name with the std lancer, and not much more(evo panels are aluminum save the roof and 1/4s)