|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 432
CEG\'er
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 432 |
thanks for the input, the only thing that is holding me back on buying a used car is the problem of people beating the crap outta the cars, even when i buy a used one with low miles, i dont know what theve done before i get it, and the dealers and car lots just dont fell right to me when im buying a used car, i like the performance of the srt-4 and the mustang is kinda slow, but with a supercharger on the mustang it would kill the srt, i would rather be pushin that pullin thats for sure i know of alot of problem with the srt's hooking up after alot of mods have been done. but with the money i save on the srt-4 i would be able to do alot of mods to it compared to the mustang i will be pretty bone stock for a little while. i have arranged meetings with both the stang and srt-4 on friday and will be purchasing some thing by next week. KEEP POSTING LET ME KNOW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,392 |
Originally posted by CeeBee94Z:
Well my friend in his 2000 Z28 was running 13.3 on street tires with 2.2xx 60 foot times. (Bone stock down to the paper air filter) Let me see if I can find a 12 second time slip for ya.
unless that car was an SS, i call total and complete BS on that claim.
02 Mustang GT... Tuned by Nelsons. Low 12's, anyone? 
.....______
___|______\_____
|/-\_________/-\_|
.\_/...............\_/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 362
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 362 |
Originally posted by MxRacer:
Originally posted by CeeBee94Z:
Well my friend in his 2000 Z28 was running 13.3 on street tires with 2.2xx 60 foot times. (Bone stock down to the paper air filter) Let me see if I can find a 12 second time slip for ya.
unless that car was an SS, i call total and complete BS on that claim.
You do know that the SS has 0 more horsepower than the Z28 right? You may want to brush up on your knowledge of F-bodies before calling BS on me. I love all of the ignorant people who actually think the SS camaro's are faster than the Z28. (Its all marketing, the Z28 is advertised at 310 and the SS is advertised at 325, but many dyno sheets have shown 0 differences, basically because the "ram air" really has no effect unless going VERY fast. Plus its an in efficient design)
If you want, I can get a copy of his time slip if you actually want me to prove it or if you feel like browsing the internet a bit check out ls1tech, there will be PLENTY of bone stock LS1's running 13.3's or better. And actually, if I remember correctly, I know someone on the cz28.com that was running 13.0 or 13.1 or something stock as well.
Also, GM plans on fixing all of the ignorance on differences between the SS and Z28 models by making the Z28 top dog when they re-release the car. All the SS is, is an appearance package. The ram air has NO affect in performance and that is the ONLY "performance" difference.
2001 Volvo S40-Perrin MBC@ 11psi, EST intake, 35% tint, still slow
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,840
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,840 |
When are you going to leave? It's like all I hear from you is Mustang is poo, LS/LT1 yaaay!!!  He asked about two cars. Neither of which wore bowties. Stick to the subject, thx. -SAV
Troll. 1997 VW Jetta MkIII GLS 5spd
All hail my appearance on CEG!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 362
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 362 |
Originally posted by SAV:
When are you going to leave?
It's like all I hear from you is Mustang is poo, LS/LT1 yaaay!!!
He asked about two cars. Neither of which wore bowties. Stick to the subject, thx.
-SAV
Eh, I gave my opinion already. Out of the two, I said SRT-4 and I gave my reasons why. I just threw the option out there since he was looking at mustangs anyway because obviously he wants a car with potential and a f body would save him money since they stopped them in 02.
Anyway, I don't even own the Z28 anymore. I got rid of both that and my CSVT and now drive a S40 so my car is slow.
2001 Volvo S40-Perrin MBC@ 11psi, EST intake, 35% tint, still slow
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882 |
Originally posted by Tourgasm:
Sometimes you can mess up a word so bad that spell check doens't know what the hell you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,193
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,193 |
Well, both cars come short of offering all the necessities, but the Mustang is closer. Overall, I think it's what is going to offer you the more rewarding 24/7/365 experience. I see the Mustang as more stylish and far better appointed. The SRT-4 (type Neon) is a tossable go-kart, but cruder. It also has a significant price advantage.
Brad "Diva": 2004 Mazda 6s 5-door, Volcanic Red
Rex: 1988 Mazda RX-7 Vert, Harbor Blue.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,116
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,116 |
since when is a 0-60 time of 5.4 seconds slow---the GT's time? I have driven an SRT and it was not a very good experince in my book. Didn't shift well, LOUD (and not in a good way), poor constuction--it just felt cheap all around, and I have a feeling that in a few years most of them will be having reliability issues. We have a good amount of vehicles up here in northern MN that are RWD and they are driven year round with out any trouble at all....my freind has only had RWD cars and he has yet to get stuck or go in a ditch. In my opinion, the SRT is just a fast, ugly piece of loosly fitted plastic.
95 SE MTX
svt exhaust
intake
deer killer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,651
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,651 |
ummm edwardo buy the mustang. I laugh when i see older kids/men driving srt-4 neons!! It remindes me of a highschool kids car. Maybe cause they have been around for soo long?? No matter what u do to it, its still a neon. Mustang is heritage!! I would seriously look into finding an 04 cobra superhcarged. I find some in the papers around 10-15k miles. for cheap around $26k. That is a bargain!! Can u say 12's all day long!!! The new mustang guy's come with traction control by the way 
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,423
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,423 |
The only criteria you listed for buying your next car was implied that you want to go fast in a straight line. Stock, an Neon SRT-4 will be quicker after first gear traction issues are gone and be cheaper to make a little quicker. It also costs $5k less than a base GT (assuming no employee discounts on either).
Mustang can be made quicker w/ a rear gear swap (cheap), or by forced induction(expensive). It's much easier (and fun) to control RWD power. You're in MI, so save $800-1000 for snow tires and wheels for either one.
That said, these two vehilces are so different in terms of driving feel, interior, ride, and looks. We can all list what WE like better ,but you won't have a clue until you drive them both.
I'd also not wanna buy the Neon SRT-4 w/ the Caliber SRT-4 coming soon for about the same price. I believe it will be far superiors a vehicle to live with every day.
|
|
|
|
|
