Originally posted by The EX- Striped SVT:
HAULT! The build quality is better, can you say dash warpage, syncros, diffs, black paint chipping, moonroof motors, etc. IMO both cars are going to have "some" issues, so thats nill and void IMO Now lets talk about price! My car stickered for $23.5K and with factoring in inflation, what would that put the 2000 CSVT up to right now. Let me say this again, I liked my old car, alot, but IMO the SRT-4 IS in the same catagory and is a better perf, turbo or not. I don't like this "well, its got a turbo and the CSVT doesn't", it is what it is, period! Its like if my Aunt had nuts, she'd be my Uncle Comparing base models, sure, the Contour is a nicer ride, but when you look at the perf versions, most enthusists will look past some things to get to perf, especially when its available at the dealership, what a concept Lets look at it like this then, $24K for the CSVT back in 2000 and about $21K for the 2005 SRT-4, what could you have done with the extra $3K you saved on the SRT-4....

-mod that suspension to outperform the CSVT
-upgrade to a stage 1 package

I'm theres other things I'm missing because I'm not into that car, but you get the point, I hope Another thing is this, the base Mazdaspeed 6 is a little over $28K, or about $4K more than the CSVT and NOW we're talking bargain, substance and exclusivity!!!




Uhhh Yeah! I can say the build quality is better because the fit and finish is/was better when new. The design of the dash pad, glue, or whatever is a long-term durability issue, not a new car issue. I can't argue that it isn't flawed.
As far as your "Hault" (:D spelled Halt by the way), no YOU HALT! You tell me I can't say anything about the lack of a turbo or not lack of a turbo...yada yada yada.
Well aren't you doing the same thing by comparing a 3-5 year old contour with dash warp to a brand new SRT that has no dash warp? Well don't use a double standard.

It is the as-new delivered condition that you must compare.
It is certainly fine to illustrate that the CSVT made 200 HP with NO TURBO five fuggin years before the SRT-4 even came out! IT is certainly fine to point out that two engines that were relatively the same displacement put out similar power only that it took a turbo for the SRT4 to hit only 12% more power. You do the math. And yes, we know what happens when you turn up the boost, but you were talking stock to stock right?

As new condition, the CSVT DID have better fit and finish and build quality than the SRT4. It had a better designed layout for the interior as well. It handled better out of the box 5 years before than the SRT4 did. It is a bit bigger car and has better ride manners too. So SVT got better ride and handling out of their package than SRT did with their lighter/smaller car. Yes, I know that the dodges do well in racing with a race suspension but again, you were arguing stock to stock.


The SRT4's reliability hasn't been winning it any awards either.
It is the SRT4s bang for the buck pricing and performance that makes it a clear performance winner, everything else is debateable or fixable.

So in the end, don't bring up the individual flaws of a 10 year old drivetrain design and compare to a 4 year old drivetrain design that hasn't had the time to prove itself, and say that the latter is superior.

Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760 356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas! See My Mods '05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red '06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black