3L Contour vs SRT-4? - CEG Archives

that would be funny iff a 3L got its a$$ handed to it by an SRT-4...i dont think it will happen that way though...

I haven't seen any 3Ls trapping 99mph and above.SRT-4s are trapping as high as 102mph. Thats what the turbo CSVTs are doing. Sorry, just don't see it happening.

-R-

I'd love to go find out. A friend of mine challenged me with HIS friends SRT-4.

I told him sure! Anytime.

I'd love to find out too. Realistically, I see only a really strong 3L not getting spanked. And I'm not being negative. I would love for someone to prove me wrong.

-R-

Depends on the driver.

I highly doubt a hybrid will win. When an SRT will run in the very high 13's-low 14's. 3L will run about mid 14's still. Just done't miss a shift.

remember, David Z ran a 13.7. Granted he had cams and what not..but none the less a N/A 3.0L. And most 'stock' hybrids do run mid 14s....but who wants a 'stock' hybrid?? :-)

Originally posted by todras:
Depends on the driver. I highly doubt a hybrid will win. When an SRT will run in the very high 13's-low 14's. 3L will run about mid 14's still. Just done't miss a shift.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
remember, David Z ran a 13.7.

13.7 since when?

Fastest I thought he had was like a 14.01 or a 13.9?

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
remember, David Z ran a 13.7.

Even IF he did he had 1 off cams among other things to get his motor making some serious power. A stright hybrid isn't going to make the same numbers as him.

Originally posted by beyondloadedSE:

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
remember, David Z ran a 13.7.

13.7 since when? Fastest I thought he had was like a 14.01 or a 13.9?

The 14.01 was in a Contour. The 13.7 was in a Cougar.

In a standing start quarter, the 3L tour doesn't stand much of a chance. The Contour has to be one of the worst launching front drive cars I have driven. The Neon would spank most 3L Contours quite handily.

I could have SWORN I saw him post a while back that he jacked up the fuel pressure once and another tweek or two and busted out a 13.7 *shrugs* I could be wrong though.

Todd, yeah I know thats why I said he had cams ;-) plus he said 'with mods'. Granted the SRt-4 has the complete upper hand. Add some boost and buh bye

Originally posted by beyondloadedSE:

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
remember, David Z ran a 13.7.

13.7 since when? Fastest I thought he had was like a 14.01 or a 13.9?

Originally posted by Kung Fu Joe:
I haven't seen any 3Ls trapping 99mph and above.SRT-4s are trapping as high as 102mph. Thats what the turbo CSVTs are doing. Sorry, just don't see it happening.

-R-

w3rd

Originally posted by Kung Fu Joe:
I haven't seen any 3Ls trapping 99mph and above.SRT-4s are trapping as high as 102mph. Thats what the turbo CSVTs are doing. Sorry, just don't see it happening.

I agree.

SRT-4's are in the high 13 to low 14 range at 100-102.

Most 3L's are in the low to mid 14 range at 95-99.

Now any turbo'd Duratec would be "faster" then an SRT-4. However the "quickness" of both cars would be close with the Duratec really stretching it's legs in 3rd and above.

A 3L turbo (or currently "the" 3L turbo) is significantly faster (trapping mid to high 100's!) and on average a bit quicker.

While I do agree with Demon, one thing that needs not be forgotten is that we're comparing stock to modified. These SRT-4 guys really have it going for them as any factory F/I car has a world of simple modifications that can yeild major improvements.

I'm a huge Duratec/CDW-27 fan, but there will come a time when our engines are no longer competetive in the hp wars that are errupting before us.

My take is that if you have a light, heavily modified 2.5/3.0 liter, know how to drive and run in with a "stock" SRT-4 then there is a chance(slim) you'll be able to put it to him/her. Modified to any of our N/A motors really isn't fair game IMO. Remember running mid-high 14's at 94-96 mph as some of us have done in the past will put you within a carlength of a stock SRT-4 with a decent driver. If you cruise SRTforums you'll see that quite a few are running mid-low 14's while quite a few are in the 13's if not better.

Good luck....don't worry about me...I've got a turbo!

You can probably run with a stock SRT-4 if you have a well built Hybrid.

Heh, years ago who woulda thought that one day us Contour owners would be sitting here saying "Gee, I wonder if my 3L hybrid can beat a Neon?"

How times change. The Neon went from a little economy car that said "hi" to a hi-po model that people actually fear at a racetrack. Gotta love the way things are headed though, power, power and more power!

Originally posted by svtman21:
Heh, years ago who woulda thought that one day us Contour owners would be sitting here saying "Gee, I wonder if my 3L hybrid can beat a Neon?"

lol

Unoffically it ran 13.7 on 555R drag radials, took out heavy subs and everything out of the trunk. That day carlsbad was having some problems with the timing equipment so yeah...

Thas why I don't post that number much since I can't really back it up.

Thanks David :-) I knew I seen that posted somewhere :-)

Most SRT-4s are very quick stock, I've seen them run 14.0 flat bone stock @ 101. A few mods and they're in the high 13's.

Now...a certain Silver SVT Turbo is pretty darn quick from 60-120....keep up with me in my slow automatic.

From a roll I loose one car length on a car that traps 100.xx

Originally posted by MystiqueSVT:
Most SRT-4s are very quick stock, I've seen them run 14.0 flat bone stock @ 101. A few mods and they're in the high 13's.

Now...a certain Silver SVT Turbo is pretty darn quick from 60-120....keep up with me in my slow automatic.

On 5psi to boot...

Now if I can run good at the track again...up for another visit Ryan?

I've got the car around 7psi right now..it puts you back once it hooks up!

I'll give you a call to set up the track "event".

Its just too bad that it takes a $23k car another $5k+ in mods to try to keep up to a 4cylinder SRT-4 Neon.

Originally posted by BBContourSVT:
Its just too bad that it takes a $23k car another $5k+ in mods to try to keep up to a 4cylinder SRT-4 Neon.

More like a $9000 car (or less) and +$5000 in mods.

Cars are turning into what computers are now. You buy it and there is soemthing faster more powerul the next day. Some of our cars are getting close to being 10 years old so yea its going to take some money to keep up with the new car on the block. Factory boost is just the bomb.

Sounds good to me! I need to buy some more mods so I can keep up with you...on the track. Of course.....we can just go from a dig this time....

I'm going on vacation next week...so maybe we can do it at the end of this month.

Just crusing the net and saw this, felt I had to contribute. Contour SVT vs SRT-4? In a few words, not a fair match up. Why? One chief reason: weight. You guys are frickin' heavy compared to the Neon. Power/Weight ratio plays a huge hand. Two: Turbo vs N/A. I'm sure your motors could put out some good power modded, but the were not designed as hi/po motors. The 2.4L in the SRT-4? Different story. Sport Compact Car did a complete write up of the motor's internals, a very good read which I recommend. Even you guys with turbo added are fighting Ford's engineering or rather, the fact that your motors are not designed for much more than fuel economy and reliability. Nor are your cars factory backed. SRT-4 has new parts from Mopar coming out on nearly a monthly basis, nevermind the aftermarket. The 2004's(which I have) are cutting anywhere from 14.0 to 13.8 STOCK. Nevermind those that have serious mods. So, while it's fun to bench race, let's keep some reality, ok?

IMHO the only two SVT's of any note are the Cobra and Lightning. Anything else is just bodykits and badging.

Not flaming, just pointing some things out.

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
Just crusing the net and saw this, felt I had to contribute. Contour SVT vs SRT-4? In a few words, not a fair match up. Why? One chief reason: weight. You guys are frickin' heavy compared to the Neon. Power/Weight ratio plays a huge hand. Two: Turbo vs N/A. I'm sure your motors could put out some good power modded, but the were not designed as hi/po motors. The 2.4L in the SRT-4? Different story. Sport Compact Car did a complete write up of the motor's internals, a very good read which I recommend. Even you guys with turbo added are fighting Ford's engineering or rather, the fact that your motors are not designed for much more than fuel economy and reliability. Nor are your cars factory backed. SRT-4 has new parts from Mopar coming out on nearly a monthly basis, nevermind the aftermarket. The 2004's(which I have) are cutting anywhere from 14.0 to 13.8 STOCK. Nevermind those that have serious mods. So, while it's fun to bench race, let's keep some reality, ok?

IMHO the only two SVT's of any note are the Cobra and Lightning. Anything else is just bodykits and badging.

Not flaming, just pointing some things out.

Too Cool!
It is still a Neon.............

IMO my friend, you just started a flaming here. That post was complete BS. Did you read the whole post? Do you know what a 3L is? Do you know we have powerful and reliable turbo kits available to us? Do you know that we know SRT4 are fast? Do you know you sound like you don't have a clue? Oh well, just keep spouting off whatever you have to say and wait for some of these guys to get done with their 3L turbo setups. Stock for stock you win hands down no doubt, but don't come on here talkin about stuff like you have know we are slow and Ford sucks and blah blah blah. Sorry guy, but that was not a very educated or polite statement.

Maybe you should read up a little bit before you come back too. If you want to talk cost also, you spanked down 20k+, we can slap down 10k for the car and dump that other 10k into putting a 2004 to shame. money:power ratio is even now.

And of course I have to say it....it's still a Neon, an ugly one at that. The word "Exclusive" and Neon srt4 don't hang together anymore too.

SRT-4s are pretty good for what they are, but there have been contours to prove plenty reliable and have more power than srt-4s. My car is lighter than a srt-4, so I'm sure some of these SVT guys could get close to my weight if they wanted. Also the SVT Contour is more than just badging and body work. You know about Lightnings and cobras because they're popular, but I guess we have to fill you in on the contour. The engine has 30hp more than normal duratec contours, upgraded suspension, and other nice things. The engine has some reliability problems but fixes have been found are easy to implement. Now I just wish I could build up my zetec and put everyone to shame, aftermarket is there but my wallet isn't.

Belive me guys the SRT-4 is on the top of my list of cars to seek and destroy when I am done, I gurantee this summer I will get one. I am thinking on 10-11 lbs. of boost I will be somewhere around 350-375 hp with over 300 ft.lbs of tourque at the wheels and I will be in the mid to low 13's. I paid $11.5K for my car I got the 3L for about $1400 and the turbo kit for about $5500, That is about $18,400 for the motor and turbo plus the car, That is not counting transmission parts, and suspension and all the other little stuff. The only thing I can say is I hope I run into one of these SRT-4 guys and show em They are not the fastest thing on the street.

what do you think of this license plate-> SRTWHAT

That would be a good one!

-Jeff-

Cobra and Lighting are deffo worthy of the SVT tag, but just cause the Contour doesnt sport a V8 or some sort of FI, the guys at SVT are fond of it.
Isnt there an article with an interview of someone from SVT whos favorite vehicle is the SVT Tour?

I reckon that superchargers aside, IMO I dont think any stang (ok,ok, maybe a Cobra)

or esp Lighting could stay with an SVT tour down a twisty, bumpy back road. See ya.

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
Just crusing the net and saw this, felt I had to contribute. Contour SVT vs SRT-4? In a few words, not a fair match up. Why? One chief reason: weight. You guys are frickin' heavy compared to the Neon. Power/Weight ratio plays a huge hand. Two: Turbo vs N/A. I'm sure your motors could put out some good power modded, but the were not designed as hi/po motors. The 2.4L in the SRT-4? Different story. Sport Compact Car did a complete write up of the motor's internals, a very good read which I recommend. Even you guys with turbo added are fighting Ford's engineering or rather, the fact that your motors are not designed for much more than fuel economy and reliability. Nor are your cars factory backed. SRT-4 has new parts from Mopar coming out on nearly a monthly basis, nevermind the aftermarket. The 2004's(which I have) are cutting anywhere from 14.0 to 13.8 STOCK. Nevermind those that have serious mods. So, while it's fun to bench race, let's keep some reality, ok?

IMHO the only two SVT's of any note are the Cobra and Lightning. Anything else is just bodykits and badging.

Not flaming, just pointing some things out.

I would take you seriously but when you say the SVT motor was not designed as a hi-po motor then you are smoking the crack pipe a little to much.
When you figure that the SVT 2.5L was good for 200 HP and the '03 SRT-4 was 2.4L turbo and only good for 228 or even 240 HP or whatever it is now then you really have no leg to stand on.
Did you know that the CSVT motor was the first factory produced engine to have Extrude Honed intake manifolds? I'm surprised that a base model engine uses this technology

Did you know that the 99 CSVT was the first EVER factory car to feature the BFG G-Force T/A KDW tires? It took them 6 months after the 99 models were rolling to release the tire to the public. Didn't I read that the SRT-4 has been coming with BFG's on it now? Hmm.

80HP/liter Naturally Aspirated was enough to put it as on of the "10 Best Engines" awards when it came out and ranked right up there with Acura for efficiency.
Where is the SRT4 motor going? With boost to make up the power.
Its hard to compare the cars accurately but comparing the engines is a different story. The 2.5L duratec is a far better motor, good enough that variants of it are used in Jaguars and the Noble sports car.

Our sorry little motors put out close to 350 horsepower on only 10 pounds of boost....that is only 0.1 Liters more than your engine, less boost and 100 more horespower!
How many pounds of boost is your srt4 motor running?

By the way, the interior quality and styling of the neon are still sup-par when compared with a Focus SVT or a Contour SVT and overall they are a much less refined car.

Enjoy your day, hope I meet you at the track sometime.

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
Just crusing the net and saw this, felt I had to contribute. Contour SVT vs SRT-4? In a few words, not a fair match up. Why? One chief reason: weight. You guys are frickin' heavy compared to the Neon. Power/Weight ratio plays a huge hand. Two: Turbo vs N/A. I'm sure your motors could put out some good power modded, but the were not designed as hi/po motors. The 2.4L in the SRT-4? Different story. Sport Compact Car did a complete write up of the motor's internals, a very good read which I recommend. Even you guys with turbo added are fighting Ford's engineering or rather, the fact that your motors are not designed for much more than fuel economy and reliability. Nor are your cars factory backed. SRT-4 has new parts from Mopar coming out on nearly a monthly basis, nevermind the aftermarket. The 2004's(which I have) are cutting anywhere from 14.0 to 13.8 STOCK. Nevermind those that have serious mods. So, while it's fun to bench race, let's keep some reality, ok?

IMHO the only two SVT's of any note are the Cobra and Lightning. Anything else is just bodykits and badging.

Not flaming, just pointing some things out.

I'll take that BS on the duratec with a grain of salt considering what was said is obvious ignorance and the information is coming from an SRT4 owner

The duratec has a interesting history, so rather than writing it off as an economy engine......actually look into if what you're saying is true. It is not. To continue to spout off incorrect info about the duratec is a statement in itself. Feel free to browse some more around CEG a bit more, as it is a wealth of information to show you the errors of your ways.

Our economic, non-hipo engines were originally designed by Porsche....those economic vehicle manufacturers..

Our intake manifolds also use the Cosworth casting process..Yet another economy manufacturer!

Seriously though, the SRT-4 is a great(term used lightly) "Bang for the Buck" performance car yet what it makes in overall power it lacks in other areas such as handling, looks etc.

I personally think that comparing an SVT Contour that was designed/released in the mid-late 90's to a Factory F/I car of milllenium technology is absurd.

Atleast we have power rear windows!

Originally posted by e1flakedsvt:
Atleast we have power rear windows!

HAHAHAHA

Ray

Exactly. A duratec designed for fuel economy? I about pissed my pants. Aside from the one of the highest hp/ltr figures for the time, this guy obviously hasn't seen the fuel economy! Let's say it isn't anything to write home about.

The fuel economy engine is the zetec. Those have made over 400 whp in the focus.

Dang guys, didn't mean get some panties wadded up! lol. Seriously, I know I sounded ignorant. I am. Being a Dodge guy, I know precisely nada about Fords. Secondly, I wasn't trying to put down your cars. I was just posting some opinions, be they accepted or not. Though I expect some irritaion with would come after all, this is y'all's house. And those things some of you posted about the duratec? Didn't know that. Designed by Porsche? Pretty cool. Guess I let some local contour guys bias my opinions on y'all. You know the type. To them, the SVT badge might as well say type R. And if some well tuned Contour wanted to go, I'd do it. Win or Lose, It'd be a cool race. What's the fastest time anyone's ever pulled in a Contour? Just curious 'cause I know of a few SRT's in the twelves.

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
Dang guys, didn't mean get some panties wadded up! lol. Seriously, I know I sounded ignorant. I am. Being a Dodge guy, I know precisely nada about Fords. Secondly, I wasn't trying to put down your cars. I was just posting some opinions, be they accepted or not. Though I expect some irritaion with would come after all, this is y'all's house. And those things some of you posted about the duratec? Didn't know that. Designed by Porsche? Pretty cool. Guess I let some local contour guys bias my opinions on y'all. You know the type. To them, the SVT badge might as well say type R. And if some well tuned Contour wanted to go, I'd do it. Win or Lose, It'd be a cool race. What's the fastest time anyone's ever pulled in a Contour? Just curious 'cause I know of a few SRT's in the twelves.

yup, its designed by porsche and ford then took the design and put it our cars. The fastest time iirc is a 13.8 which has been acheived both on a n/a 3.0L putting out 280 hp and on a few turbo svts, running as little as 5 psi. Our cars are not set up for drag racing. They are set up for twisties! I do see a contour breaking into the 12s into the near future though.

you also have to look at the fact that our cars werent meant to be at the strip. Our cars were made for cruising and pimpin the night away. When was the last time you saw a girl attracted to a neon? now the svt contour is a rare car and most people dont even know it exists, therefore making it an exotic car, therefore women are all over us. now what sounds better

Hey baby want to ride in my neon?

or

Hey baby want to ride in my svt?

yea thats what i thought!

Originally posted by lsneo:
you also have to look at the fact that our cars werent meant to be at the strip. Our cars were made for cruising and pimpin the night away. When was the last time you saw a girl attracted to a neon? now the svt contour is a rare car and most people dont even know it exists, therefore making it an exotic car, therefore women are all over us. now what sounds better

Hey baby want to ride in my neon?

or

Hey baby want to ride in my svt?

yea thats what i thought!

Well, a chick that's attracted to a SVT I wouldn't want in my SRT-4 anyway. No telling where THAT'S been.

Now that being the only so called advantage for a SVT in your eyes? Now that's kinda lame.

If I was interested in picking up chicks, I'd of bought a Lexus! I was more interested in performance, so I got the SRT.

Besides, I've had no trouble getting girls with the SRT. Believe me. It's amazing what a BOV does...

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
Besides, I've had no trouble getting girls with the SRT. Believe me. It's amazing what a BOV does...

Well, hell, if that's all it is.. I can fix that..

WOOT WOOT...

Ray

This is an intresting debate but, why? Both cars are cool. Both were built for pretty much the same market, just different times and technology. They are both 4 door, entry level price, performance sedans and even have a similar sticker.

I own and enjoy both my 1999 SVT Contour and my 2004 SRT4. Neither is necessarily overall better then the other. That's why I am keeping both! Cars are for fun, and to some a great hobby. Why does it always have to be a contest?

The SVT is sweet. Great power and rev range, responds well to mild mods, fairly cheap, very smooth, corners like a beast with suspension and tires etc...etc... The Duratec is a sweet engine. It has been proven to make great power NA, or under boost. The only weak links being it's not built for boost (pistons, CR) but can be easily and fairly cheap, and doesn't have the toughest tranny.

The SRT rocks!! Insane power, light weight, awesome torque, bulletproof tranny, Quaife, viper seats, awesome price etc..
The 2.4 L dodge turbo engine is bulletproof! Forged goodies, Split block main, crank scraper, piston oil squirters, coated components, etc... The SRT's are pushing insane power with little mods. If you haven't been in one, you need to!

My SRT for example made 230 FWHP/250 FWTQ STOCK and uncorrected. Very impressive numbers for any 4 cylinder! All with an AF/R of under 10:1!!!
My 2nd dyno with just an AFE filter and stage 1 PCM netted over 240 FWHP and 260 FWTQ. Still on stock boost with an AF/R of under 10:1! The peak gains were ok but 10-20 HP/TQ across the board.
I am heading back this weak hoping to make some nice gains with my new 3" O2 housing, 2 1/2" Upper Pressure Pipe and more boost via a TXS HPBC.

Lets face the facts..both cars are inexpensive sport compacts for us domestic lovers to put the beat down on rice boys! LoL

230 - 240 whp isn't alot for a 4 cyl, check out the nissan SR20DET or CA18DET, both capable of running upwards of 600 hp on a stock bottom end.

PS, Do you like to Crank your windows??

No hatin' here, just my $.02.

Quote:

Well, a chick that's attracted to a SVT I wouldn't want in my SRT-4 anyway. No telling where THAT'S been.

Now that being the only so called advantage for a SVT in your eyes? Now that's kinda lame.

If I was interested in picking up chicks, I'd of bought a Lexus! I was more interested in performance, so I got the SRT.

Besides, I've had no trouble getting girls with the SRT. Believe me. It's amazing what a BOV does...

its called a joke.....im a big srt-4 fan, shiz im a big dodge fan. Check out the gas gustler.....

you can even see the reflection of my headlights on the truck. Can you say 5.9 360cu inch V8 R/T power?

Originally posted by lsneo:
Can you say 5.9 360cu inch V8 R/T power?

can you say my 4.3 blazer walked away from one on the "track"

Originally posted by DJ_SpaRky:
230 - 240 whp isn't alot for a 4 cyl, check out the nissan SR20DET or CA18DET, both capable of running upwards of 600 hp on a stock bottom end.

No hatin' here, just my $.02.

That 230 is stock. The CA motor was below 200 hp, stock. I believe the only SR20DET motor to come close to 230 was the Pulsar. The Silvia, stock, is closer to 220. And speaking of capabilities isn't fair. Those motors have way more time on their side.

Originally posted by Russell-3L:

Originally posted by lsneo:
Can you say 5.9 360cu inch V8 R/T power?

can you say my 4.3 blazer walked away from one on the "track"

Ouch....

Originally posted by 1314:

Originally posted by DJ_SpaRky:
230 - 240 whp isn't alot for a 4 cyl, check out the nissan SR20DET or CA18DET, both capable of running upwards of 600 hp on a stock bottom end.

No hatin' here, just my $.02.

That 230 is stock. The CA motor was below 200 hp, stock. I believe the only SR20DET motor to come close to 230 was the Pulsar. The Silvia, stock, is closer to 220. And speaking of capabilities isn't fair. Those motors have way more time on their side.

Word, I don't call that stock, to me it more like OEM Tuned, the STI is 300, & it's a 4 Cyl, but it's also the largest of all of these motors & has the largest turbo & injectors.

Oh yeah, you do know that it is NOT a Dodge motor, right?
It's a 4G64 DSM Motor, the same block as in the Galant, and it is as old as the SR

...and as for your hp #s there all kinda high, S13 SR 205, S14 220, S15 SR 260, & CA 160.

One of my friends calls the SRT-4 "A Cheater Car", because it is pretty built & fairly cheap. I just would rather have a better looking car that with a few mods is just as fast & more comfortable, plus you'll know more about the car the you own.

Originally posted by lsneo:
now the svt contour is a rare car and most people dont even know it exists, therefore making it an exotic car, therefore women are all over us. now what sounds better

Hey baby want to ride in my neon?

or

Hey baby want to ride in my svt?

yea thats what i thought!

you are frickin ridiculous hahahah

seriously- the 'tour is no ferrari (granted it IS better than a neon..but still) "exotic car"?

!!!!!!!

I dunno about y'all...

...but I'd be damned happy to own either one over what I have now!

Every one read THIS! Click here now! haha

-Jeff-

Originally posted by Qwk98svt:
Every one read THIS! Click here now! haha

-Jeff-

haha

Originally posted by DJ_SpaRky:
230 - 240 whp isn't alot for a 4 cyl, check out the nissan SR20DET or CA18DET, both capable of running upwards of 600 hp on a stock bottom end.

PS, Do you like to Crank your windows??

No hatin' here, just my $.02.

SRT4 stock block handles 1000hp or more, they don't do anything to the block to use in the pro drag races. They said it saves them money and time so they really like it. I'll let ya'll know how I like the srt-4 after my friend gets his and I drive it.

Originally posted by DJ_SpaRky:

Originally posted by 1314:

Originally posted by DJ_SpaRky:
230 - 240 whp isn't alot for a 4 cyl, check out the nissan SR20DET or CA18DET, both capable of running upwards of 600 hp on a stock bottom end.

No hatin' here, just my $.02.

That 230 is stock. The CA motor was below 200 hp, stock. I believe the only SR20DET motor to come close to 230 was the Pulsar. The Silvia, stock, is closer to 220. And speaking of capabilities isn't fair. Those motors have way more time on their side.

Quote:

Word, I don't call that stock, to me it more like OEM Tuned,

You can call it what you want, but it's stock from the factory.

Quote:

One of my friends calls the SRT-4 "A Cheater Car", because it is pretty built & fairly cheap.

Well then your friend is a fool. With the capabilities of the 03 Cobra, does he think that's a "cheater car", also?

I'll take an SRT-4 any time
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
at Mid-Ohio Race Course.

Originally posted by DJ_SpaRky:

Oh yeah, you do know that it is NOT a Dodge motor, right?
It's a 4G64 DSM Motor, the same block as in the Galant, and it is as old as the SR

Actually the engine in the srt-4 is an A853 which was built buy dodge and has been used in the turbo stratus sold in mexico since 1994. The turbo is a mitsu however.

im sorry man, but i think there is no comparison...i might get beat on a straightline, but you take me on in the twiseites, i would love to see you take a hairpin at 70 in your neon, or even 60, let alon a good chicane.

I assume your talking to me? I dunno.... but anyways.....

go here and tell me who got 8th?

what car got 9th? Oh a lamborghini? huh.....

2003 one lap of america results

Keep an eye out for my buddy Dale Seeley in '04 SRT-4 this year. He placed 44th last year in a saturn SC1 with suspension upgrades and nitrous, winning his class.

dude, what i am saying is that my car has NO suspension mods. and onm steelies with goodyear spectras it will out handle quite a few of the same cars in its class, especially in the twisties.

[unrealted to topic] and what is this understeer eveyone keeps talking about? i can take a left turn at 40 and not have understeer, unless its raining.

Oh, a 3L swap is fair game to keep up, but a modded supsension isn't okay? My bad, I didn't know the rules. I love these contour board arguments.

snt talking to you anyway

lol i was talking to boostjunkie, i think is what the name was.

haha

we cool atl?

Word, Muh bads about the block thing, I guess because I couldn't find that info, and the galant is 2.4L, and I'm not saying that the SRT-4 is a bad car or anything, it's just not my style, to me it seems cheap(ly made).

As for the 03 SVT Cobra, that's another story, it's twice as much car, let alone the cost difference.

I'm just saying that a person that buys a $1000 240sx & swaps in a SR, then puts in another $5000, is going to be faster AND have a nicer (looking, riding, handling, RWD) car.

...and now back to the topic, in top MPH, the SVT, in Drags (1/4 & esp. 1/8) SRT, road course it depends on the track & the drive but prolly the SRT, cuz of quicker accelleration.

(sorry about the hijack, it was unintentional)

Depends on the road course, and too many other factors, people should not forget how successfully neons have been raced for many years, there is certainly a reason for this.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by DJ_SpaRky:
230 - 240 whp isn't alot for a 4 cyl, check out the nissan SR20DET or CA18DET, both capable of running upwards of 600 hp on a stock bottom end.

PS, Do you like to Crank your windows??

No hatin' here, just my $.02.

SRT4 stock block handles 1000hp or more, they don't do anything to the block to use in the pro drag races. They said it saves them money and time so they really like it. I'll let ya'll know how I like the srt-4 after my friend gets his and I drive it.

So does the GM ecotec motor, 2.2L in most configurations and the stock block handles 1000HP.

Plus it is a hell of a lot cheaper.

The dodge motor is nice but it is a boosted factory motor with too small of a turbo. I think with a fair sized turbo it would be chugging out much more power.
Comparing it to a HIGHLY efficient naturally aspirated motor is a stupid unfair comparison. Unless it is based upon power output per fuel input. This method shows the engine's efficiency and you can compare more effectively. Another way is with the weight of the power plant versus power out, or all 3 methods.
The differnce of 2.4 vs. 2.5L with 240(or around there) and 200 HP respectivly sounds totally in the SRT's favor until you look that there is less fuel used in the N/A motor and that the total engine package weight is probably about the same. The N/A motor is simpler too without the added reliability issues of a few more mechanical parts.

If you start quoting the modded engine numbers then remember that modded SVT 2.5L's are making 230-240 crank HP versus probably 280-300 (just averages) leaning in the SRT's favor.

If you factor cost to mod then it is definitely in the SRT's favor.

I can only say that we all fell victim to another troll and that this argument will end up going nowhere as the last 2 or 3 arguments have!!
Of course I still like to have my say and in the end it is he who is looking in the rearview mirror at the other guy that wins this particular contest.
I know I don't have an average contour, but as I said before if I'm rolling or in a race from 0 to 120 then probably 1 in 1000 SRT's is going to pass me by.... at least as long as I keep the boost raised!

you think you can beat a SRT4 around a track with a stock suspensioned contour?

and on another note

I test drove a srt4 two weeks ago. vs my contour it was faster, braked better but did not out handle it. And my svt still has the factory suspension at 97,xxx. So it needs to be replaced soon.
the neon had more backseat room, but the contour was more comfortable. The dials were easier to reach in the tour.

overall both cars are really nice for driving. Both have suspensions that when regular driving is required they act like their normal less impressive brothers. But with both cars, when you push them. They push back and scream GIVE ME MORE [censored].

on a sad note, I might be selling my svt to my dad for the a srt4.
The srt4 would just cream the [censored] out of the svt in stoplight racing. And that right now is what i'm looking for.

I'd just like to point out, I do not use my car to wow chicks so that point is moot.

That's what my penis is for.

They are both nice cars, yet the svt wasnt meant to be a pocket rocket like the srt.

Also, why compare hp and leave out torque?
The srt makes 245-250 ft-lbs at the wheels.
Duratec isnt near that much.

Those with money can put it into a 3L, which I would do also, yet for a brand new car for 20,999, with a lsd, equal length half shafts, and almost every other part upgraded, it cant be beat.
....until the next econo pocket rocket comes out and takes the spotlight

This is still going???

Oh wait.......

Tastes Great!!!

Less Filling!!

(had to be said, to perpetuate this inexorable post ghost)

man i love contours but the srt def has the biggest bang for the buck. my friend has a 03 w/ nothing done but a set of 18's w/ nittos a wastegate spring and a CAI. and he turned 13.3s in the 108 range. not sure what the boost was set at but he is a damn good driver too.

this last summer at the sport compact nationals in norwalk oh there was a factory rep w/ 4 srt's. 3 were running 14.0s at 101 consistently stock and one w/ straight exhaust and a smaller wheel tire combo running 13.5s at 104.

i would love to see more tours out there spanking those damn things. i mean they're nothing more than neons w/ a hairdryer right?!?

btw. i definately have a 4G64 in my 94 mitsubeater pickup
and its a SOHC motor at that. just to let u know where alot of them come from (the internals make for good stroker kits for the other dsm motors tho)

Originally posted by SErico96:

i would love to see more tours out there spanking those damn things. i mean they're nothing more than neons w/ a hairdryer right?!?

Neon chassis (which is a well made modern platform) with a hair dryer, bigger brakes than an SVT Focus, and more power than most Contours will ever see with more on tap rediculously cheap... wsh I could say the same for the SVT Focus

SRT owners - question for you:

I was at dodge buying the wife a Grand Caravan over the weekend (30k for a minivan

, actually only 24k with rebate and friends and family program but still...) and sat in the SRT-4 while they were doing paperwork. Are the ass-side-bolsters (name?) adjustable? I'm no lard ass, (6'1" at 205 lbs) but I swear my butt didn't even touch the bottom of the seat, I was totally sitting on the bolsters and it was damn uncomfortable. Besides that the interior was pretty nice - loved the center console bezel, nice gauges, okay shifter but not totally thrilled by it. Totally respectable car for 20k dollars. Heck, our recently traded in 96 Neon Sedan with 2.slow SOHC automatic retailed at 14k when new!

The SRT is growing on me. I finally heard one in person at the bank the other day, it was blue (new color?) and sounded VERY nice. Deep and throaty! Interior is much nicer than other neons I have sat in.

Also there was a recent SCC article on one, they deleted the wing, lowered and painted it Hemi Orange with CF hood and flat black accents with black wheels. Absolutely hot looking

uh oh, I sense a cult following for SRT's developing on ceg???

I saw a silver one this morning, the looks suck, but the engineering is a marvel. . .and for what you get on the '04s including an LSD, jesus, it's worth the money if you want an econo car than play with the big boys. . .

Originally posted by ScottK:
Are the ass-side-bolsters (name?) adjustable? I'm no lard ass, (6'1" at 205 lbs) but I swear my butt didn't even touch the bottom of the seat, I was totally sitting on the bolsters and it was damn uncomfortable.

I drove one, and you can buy a seat package that fits the more robust buyer better if you get the side air bags. Then you lose the support.

I was horribly disappointed in the interior of the car when I drove it. I pushed up on the roof liner and it folded. I have felt stiffer greeting cards. Then the cheap looking plastics got me down.

But MAN, does she have it where it counts.....

Yeah my friend's has side airbag, so thus no viper seats, but they're still pretty nice and comfortable. Interior is pretty good, I'd say the materials are atleast as good as a contour's but lacking some things we have (like lighted and covered vanity mirrors) though it does have 4 cup holders (that can actually hold cups). My friend got a nail in the sidewall of a tire today (sorta my fault since he was driving me around while my car was at the shop) and now he has to buy a $150 tire. .......

tell him he's luck it wasn't an 03, the tires are $200. Have you got to drive it yet Kermit?

Who complains about a hood liner?!?!?

Originally posted by ATL-SVT:
Who complains about a hood liner?!?!?

Ahem, hem....ROOF liner! And I do. For my $27K (Cdn) plus 15 per cent tax (GST and PST) on top of that, I should be assured that my interior is devoid of paper maché.

Originally posted by ATL-SVT:
tell him he's luck it wasn't an 03, the tires are $200. Have you got to drive it yet Kermit?

Maybe it will be $200, he hasn't gotten the new tire yet, I'm just hoping it'll be less than $200. I haven't driven it yet, I'm getting ancy.

If he has an 04 they are $140 per tire which is more stomach-able, needless to say I will not be replacing the pilot sports when my wear out!

lol Phil.... I hear ya, picture a contour interior, but you lose a bit of the ridgidity and throw that interior loss into engine bay gain!

Ok good. Hopefully there's some warranty from BFGoodrich on the tires as he just got 1000 miles on the car, but I'm guessing there won't be a warranty for road hazards...

Yeah the interior isn't anything great, but it looks pretty good, and the seats are good, and..... the engine is real good.

Yeah right. It's still slow.....
what's that SRT of yours trapping again?

Originally posted by warmonger:
Yeah right. It's still slow.....
what's that SRT of yours trapping again?

Oh no you didn't!!! It's trapping your mother, I mean 101 MPH, but that was before stage 1.

Are you using the MM inserts from www.turboneonstore.com ? Do they help a lot with the wheel hop? Do you have all three mounts filled or just that top one? My friend gets massive wheel hop,, though he's still learning to launch, his tire problem is also fixed, so I should get to drive it soon.

By the way did you hear that I've began some new changes?

Back to the drawing board...

Originally posted by warmonger:

By the way did you hear that I've began some new changes?

Back to the drawing board...

naw man, what are you doing now!?!?! Send me a pm if you don't want to spill the beans here.........

Originally posted by warmonger:

By the way did you hear that I've began some new changes?

Back to the drawing board...

Interesting

Originally posted by ATL-SVT:
I mean 101 MPH, but that was before stage 1.

That's a VERY slow trap for a turbo charged CONTOUR...

Didn't Tom trap around 108... Before...

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by ATL-SVT:
I mean 101 MPH, but that was before stage 1.

That's a VERY slow trap for a turbo charged CONTOUR...

Didn't Tom trap around 108... Before...

Well with about 100hp more, I sure would hope the contour would trap faster,, but only 7mph.

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by ATL-SVT:
I mean 101 MPH, but that was before stage 1.

That's a VERY slow trap for a turbo charged CONTOUR...

Didn't Tom trap around 108... Before...

hey, it's my favorite hater!

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Are you using the MM inserts from www.turboneonstore.com ? Do they help a lot with the wheel hop? Do you have all three mounts filled or just that top one? My friend gets massive wheel hop,, though he's still learning to launch, his tire problem is also fixed, so I should get to drive it soon.

I got a top mm insert, just because I wanted some measure of compromise between completely rigid and real loose being that it's my daily driver. Definately get at least one insert. If he's getting wheel hop, he's dropping the clutch too high. It should just chirp and be gone. The only way I've found to get a smooth launch is to feather the clutch. I've tried launching from low rpms and it just doesn't catch like it should (IMO) so I launch at around 33-3500 rpms and feather a bit until I'm rolling, then dump it. After he gets stage 1 you'll have to do that in second gear as well or you'll just spin thu it and part of 3rd.

Unless of course your talking on the street, then all bets are off. I don't really do any street launches or racing for that matter so I have no technique to get rolling without spinning, except to just go from idle.

Aight, thanks. I think I might just fill his top motor mount with 3M window weld, as it's something we can easily do. If it doesn't help out a lot, I guess he'll be looking at doing the other mounts. Yeah, he still has to practice a lot on how to launch it. And I drove it today, but I didn't get to drive it like it should be driven. It was my second time ever driving a stick (and first time lasted about 2 minutes) so I'm still sorta sucky at driving a stick. I can shift fine just gotta get the taking off part down. Hopefully I can find another car to practice on, then I'll be able to really drive the srt.

I trapped 104mph on 5psi in which netted me 230whp/214wtq. Those power numbers are similiar to that of an SRT-4 only with the hp/tq reversed.

That was a 13.8 run FYI.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by ATL-SVT:
I mean 101 MPH, but that was before stage 1.

That's a VERY slow trap for a turbo charged CONTOUR...

Didn't Tom trap around 108... Before...

Well with about 100hp more, I sure would hope the contour would trap faster,, but only 7mph.

Um yeah..

How come a fricking ZO6 Vette averages only 10 MPH more in the 1/4?

It's called the exponential force of wind resistance.

You make it sound like 7 MPH faster trap speed in the 1/4 is nothing. The stock Z06 runs between 107-114 in the 1/4 mile with 400+ crank horsepower and dyno on average 330 wHP.
There are plenty of cars running less between 200-300 HP that can trapp 100 mPH in the 1/4.

With the force of wind resistance being exponential it requires ALOT more power to go from say 100 MPH to 104 MPH and ALOT more than that to go up to 108 MPH.
The 1/4 mile ET is less HP dependent and more easily affected by the launch conditions. THe faster you get rolling and up to speed the better the ET while the trapp speed can still be low.
I saw RWD cars trapping only 99 MPH on 13.0 second ET's....

That's still not that big of a difference.

Ooo and isn't a stock srt4 capable of sub 14 sec runs? And doesn't it cost less than CSVT did when new? Darn neons.

a dude in a mazdaspeed protege ran a 14.00 @103 with less than a grand in mods

I'm sure it was less than 200 fwhp, he hooked up with a 2.0 60 ft.

Originally posted by BStoneMega:
a dude in a mazdaspeed protege ran a 14.00 @103 with less than a grand in mods I'm sure it was less than 200 fwhp, he hooked up with a 2.0 60 ft.

103mph, less the 200FWHP...

...I don't think so...

Not even if the car weighed under 2500lbs. (which it does not)

Not only that, but a 2.0 60' & a 103 trap with only a 14.0 is a sign of a VERY peaky engine or maybe just Very bad shifting {or gearing.}

If you hit 2.0 in a Contour and trapped at 103 you would be deep into the 13's no question at all.

There are some normally aspirated folks that would be Very low 14's with just a 2.0 60' time. (I.E. running mid 14's with a 2.3-2.4)

http://www.msprotege.com/vbb230/showthread.php?s=&threadid=43480

opps..sorry 97. 6 secs isn't that much of a difference

dang short term memory gets worse by the day.

13.8 run had a 2.30 60' time....If only I could pull a 2.0 60'!

Could you imagine the ET our cars could put down if we had some more damn chassis flex! Damn Euro engineering and these stiff chassis made for handling purposes!!

Originally posted by BStoneMega:
http://www.msprotege.com/vbb230/showthread.php?s=&threadid=43480

opps..sorry 97. 6 secs isn't that much of a difference
dang short term memory gets worse by the day.

There's a guy on the second page that ran a 14.1 at 103mph w/$700 in mods. That might be what you are thinking about.

Originally posted by wavrdr:
13.8 run had a 2.30 60' time....If only I could pull a 2.0 60'!

Could you imagine the ET our cars could put down if we had some more damn chassis flex! Damn Euro engineering and these stiff chassis made for handling purposes!!

Maybe I've been mislead on this one, but why do you want chassis flex? Isn't that parasitic loss of power to the pavement?? Hence subframe connectors? Am I wrong in thinking that weight transfer is bad on FWD launches????

I don't know about the chassis flex thing, but I've read that some weight transfer is desirable.
The FWD car is soooo weight biased to the front that transfer of weight to the rear will not necessarily hurt it and it can supposedly help with the launches.
Figure a rear wheel drive car is more like 50-55% front but on takeoff probably 60% or a little more in the rear and will increase traction. IIRC it has to do with the type of setup on the FWD car, i.e. macpherson struts and the like.

Originally posted by warmonger:
I don't know about the chassis flex thing, but I've read that some weight transfer is desirable.
The FWD car is soooo weight biased to the front that transfer of weight to the rear will not necessarily hurt it and it can supposedly help with the launches.
Figure a rear wheel drive car is more like 50-55% front but on takeoff probably 60% or a little more in the rear and will increase traction. IIRC it has to do with the type of setup on the FWD car, i.e. macpherson struts and the like.

that makes sense, but my main reason for thinking that you don't want weight transfer is that it takes weight off the front wheels which would seem to give less traction (I suppose the setup would always change things a little, but not the concept).... I might be missing part of the equation though. It would be the opposite in a rwd car where you'd want to have weight transfer to get the rear wheels smashed to the ground.

Flexing just seems to time consuming when .01's of a second matter.

Chassis flex may not have been the greatest of words used to descirbe my thoughts....

Our cars are so damn rigid, and upon launch most of the weight transfers to the rear...

The bottom line is that I wished our cars hooked better, plain and simple!

get coilovers and set up your rear really stiff..and set your front really lose....will solve most wieght transfer probs.....

Originally posted by TrumpDrewSVT:
get coilovers and set up your rear really stiff..and set your front really lose....will solve most wieght transfer probs.....

you hit the nail on the head with that one. It won't be solved, but that's how most pro-drag cars (FWD of course) are set up.

-deleted- double post.

Originally posted by TrumpDrewSVT:
get coilovers and set up your rear really stiff..and set your front really lose....will solve most wieght transfer probs.....

I don't think you quite understand how our cars power curve is changed even on a minimal 5psi. There is no stopping wheelspin...1st and 2nd gear are nothing but spin!

I do have a coilover setup, and although the car rides stiffer, and has less front to rear weight transfer, wheelspin is still a major issue.....although body roll is not!

The bottom line is that these cars were built/designed with Touring in mind, not 1/4 mile racing. I frankly would rather have a car that handles/brakes well, and doesn't hook so well rather than hooking well and not breaking/handling so well.

Originally posted by ATL-SVT:

Originally posted by TrumpDrewSVT:
get coilovers and set up your rear really stiff..and set your front really lose....will solve most wieght transfer probs.....

you hit the nail on the head with that one. It won't be solved, but that's how most pro-drag cars (FWD of course) are set up.

And they also have a wheelie bar that "extends the wheelbase" or something like that,,, in other words, the second they hit the gas that bar hits the ground and sorta stops the car from moving backwards too much and pushes the front back down.

Just get slicks. Our problem is a 4.06-1 final drive ratio without enough room to mount serious tires under the fenders.

The low range torque on these cars with a turbo, especially the 2.5L guys is very impressive when combined with that gearing. If the axles hold up you can get an awesome hole-shot with it.

The suspension mods will help with wheel-hop but not wheels spin.

Originally posted by TrumpDrewSVT:
get coilovers and set up your rear really stiff..and set your front really lose....will solve most wieght transfer probs.....

I like my cars like I like my women

Tim

Just to show you the potential the SRT4 has, in case of any doubters, check this out. History was made yesterday, 500whp and 526 torque.

http://srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35600&page=1&pp=15

There are pictures and videos to prove it in case anyone thinks it's BS. Not trying to start anything just sharing valuable information among car enthusiasts.

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
Just to show you the potential the SRT4 has, in case of any doubters, check this out. History was made yesterday, 500whp and 526 torque.

http://srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35600&page=1&pp=15

There are pictures and videos to prove it in case anyone thinks it's BS. Not trying to start anything just sharing valuable information among car enthusiasts.

Thanks Troll!

Nobody doubts what money for mods can do or that the SRT-4 has potential. You will likely see similar numbers from the turbo contour crowd very soon, just in case you are doubting it.
It is you SRT-4 owners that doubt the power and speed of turbo CSVT's.

Well said...

Originally posted by warmonger:

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
Just to show you the potential the SRT4 has, in case of any doubters, check this out. History was made yesterday, 500whp and 526 torque.

http://srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35600&page=1&pp=15

There are pictures and videos to prove it in case anyone thinks it's BS. Not trying to start anything just sharing valuable information among car enthusiasts.

Thanks Troll!

Nobody doubts what money for mods can do or that the SRT-4 has potential. You will likely see similar numbers from the turbo contour crowd very soon, just in case you are doubting it.
It is you SRT-4 owners that doubt the power and speed of turbo CSVT's.

DRUM ROLL. . . .NOOB WAS OWNED! SRT4 monger

I don't doubt the CSVT could put down some power but I was just stating this was the first srt to hit 500whp. Like I said wasn't starting anything simply sharing.

There is an all out drag srt4 putting out over 1000hp....

Why do I keep coming back to this completely useless thread??

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
There is an all out drag srt4 putting out over 1000hp....

And?

Originally posted by LoCoZ:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
There is an all out drag srt4 putting out over 1000hp....

And?

Hector,,, how bout thinking for a minute

I replied to boost junkie, he was making it sound like 500hp is the highest a srt4 has gotten to, while the drag car with the stock block and crank has over 1000hp,, we all knew that it could get 500hp.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
There is an all out drag srt4 putting out over 1000hp....

we dont care about an all out drag car. this discussion involves cars that can accually be driven daily on the street

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by LoCoZ:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
There is an all out drag srt4 putting out over 1000hp....

And?

Hector,,, how bout thinking for a minute
I replied to boost junkie, he was making it sound like 500hp is the highest a srt4 has gotten to, while the drag car with the stock block and crank has over 1000hp,, we all knew that it could get 500hp.

At first you were all into Contours....and now SRT is SOOOO much better....hypocrite.

Nobody is denying the strength of the engine block in the SRT-4. Stout turbo blocks are nothing new from Mopar.

However making 500/500 and actually being able to use 500/500 are two completely different things.

I'd like to see the dyno graphs to see what the powerband looks like below 5000rpm.
It is easy to make dyno queens make great numbers, but good luck with actual street drivability.
You are now well into the realm of a drag only or dyno only setup.

Originally posted by LoCoZ:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by LoCoZ:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
There is an all out drag srt4 putting out over 1000hp....

And?

Hector,,, how bout thinking for a minute
I replied to boost junkie, he was making it sound like 500hp is the highest a srt4 has gotten to, while the drag car with the stock block and crank has over 1000hp,, we all knew that it could get 500hp.

At first you were all into Contours....and now SRT is SOOOO much better....hypocrite.

Wtf are you talking about? I'm still into contours,, and where did I say SRTs are sooo much better?

You are letting your brain wonder way too much... My zetec is capable of over 500hp (not stock block or internals), same thing with a duratec,,, all I was saying is we already knew it was possible with the srt4 as well and boost junkie was making it seem like people doubted it. .... And stock for stock a srt4 is better than a contour (minus interior),,, you can't really deny (with facts anyways). You really think your car can keep up with a srt4?

Anyways, for people that want to have an intelligent conversation::: download the video off of the srt forums, the dyno plot isn't too shabby for 500hp outta a 4cyl, it looks to peak at 5k rpm or a little sooner.

Originally posted by warmonger:

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
Just to show you the potential the SRT4 has, in case of any doubters, check this out. History was made yesterday, 500whp and 526 torque.

http://srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35600&page=1&pp=15

There are pictures and videos to prove it in case anyone thinks it's BS. Not trying to start anything just sharing valuable information among car enthusiasts.

Thanks Troll!

Nobody doubts what money for mods can do or that the SRT-4 has potential. You will likely see similar numbers from the turbo contour crowd very soon, just in case you are doubting it.
It is you SRT-4 owners that doubt the power and speed of turbo CSVT's.

I had a SRT "doubter" on Sunday.....needless to say I showed him what 5-6psi was like...

It was an 04'(tires)...he had a gauge pod, and most definitley an aftermarket BOV as I could hear him upshifting.....behind me!

way to go wavrdr! You're one of 5 contours on the planet that is capable of taking an SRT with a bad driver! On the street no less......

Yes, Steve is a dyno queen. Just a guy with money to burn wanting to find out what the stock internals of an SRT are capable of. Nothing more, nothing less. Those of you who want to knit pick "why his car sucks" please continue to do so, as I'm finding it very humorous albeit predictable. After all, it wouldn't be CEG without such useless input....

So any of you "fast contours" gonna be in Lousianna during Mardi Gras or what???

I usually just kick back and observe, but I've noticed something. Being an SRT4 driver gives you a big head. ATL used to be a cool guy, but now he just thinks SRT4s are the shiznit and is all full of himself. WAVRDRVR has a decent car there and to say it was a bad driver in the SRT4 is just ridiculous. neons are neons and countours are contours. Get over it, this post is getting stupid. I'm sorry, it got stupid a while ago.

Yeah, but we can't let almost 140 posts of SRT-4 hate mail go away!

Besides, I like the car but I like my SVT much more....AND since this is a contour web site then liking contours, and dissin other cars is perfectly acceptable. Especially since I can talk sh}t and actually back most of it up.

Originally posted by JonnySVT:
I usually just kick back and observe, but I've noticed something. Being an SRT4 driver gives you a big head. ATL used to be a cool guy, but now he just thinks SRT4s are the shiznit and is all full of himself. WAVRDRVR has a decent car there and to say it was a bad driver in the SRT4 is just ridiculous. neons are neons and countours are contours. Get over it, this post is getting stupid. I'm sorry, it got stupid a while ago.

awww come on now JonnySVT! I'm still a cool, guy!! If we ever met we'd get along great I'm sure. Its just the net dude, and when you're a troll [censored] talkin is the name of the game. Don't get me wrong though, my SRT is far superior automobile...... lmao! j/k man

YOU ARE ALL TROLLS!!!!

I AM THE ONLY TRUE CONTOUR FOLLOWER!!!

I AM A CULT OF ONE!!

ME!

ATL-SVT is still a cool guy,, though yeah maybe he shouldn't have said the srt4 owner was a bad driver,,,, wavrdrvr has a turbo and is pushing more power than a near stock srt4, so the kill makes sense. But stock for stock.... i wish i had money.....

I can beat the 1000 HP drag car with my Contour, no problem. Just line up with me in front of my work address. Jupiter PD will shut him down for violation of the noise ordinance & I'll win by default! With an ATX no less!

Quote:

Originally posted by warmonger:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just to show you the potential the SRT4 has, in case of any doubters, check this out. History was made yesterday, 500whp and 526 torque.

http://srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35600&page=1&pp=15

There are pictures and videos to prove it in case anyone thinks it's BS. Not trying to start anything just sharing valuable information among car enthusiasts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks Troll!

Nobody doubts what money for mods can do or that the SRT-4 has potential. You will likely see similar numbers from the turbo contour crowd very soon, just in case you are doubting it.
It is you SRT-4 owners that doubt the power and speed of turbo CSVT's.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I had a SRT "doubter" on Sunday.....needless to say I showed him what 5-6psi was like...

It was an 04'(tires)...he had a gauge pod, and most definitley an aftermarket BOV as I could hear him upshifting.....behind me!

Haha, I recently was in a very similar situation, needless to say he had a very confused look on his face.

ATL, you're right..how silly of me to think that a 250+whp lowly Contour could even keep up with the almighty SRT-4!

I don't even own a turbo, or a Contour for that matter...I just squid on all the major forums on the net saying how I beat cars all the time....

Maybe I'll go pick up an SRT-4, then I'll get some serious respect for having the fastest car on the planet!

He was not a bad driver....he even complimented my car saying "They're pretty quick N/A, but that things move with a turbo!".

Beleive what you want...I know how quick my car is, and I don't need your approval to be happy with my life.

AMEN TO THE CONTOUR CULT DEMON!

Guys....wavrdr's car is slow....at around 5 psi he couldn't even pull my WS6 with my top down from 70-120.

Originally posted by wavrdr:

I just squid on all the major forums on the net saying how I beat cars all the time....

So what are you doing on the contour forums then?

I don't know...I heard these here Contours are pretty cars!

Originally posted by wavrdr:
I don't know...I heard these here Contours are pretty cars!

yeah just drop a billion dollars into one and you can keep up with stock neons.....

Quote:

yeah just drop a billion dollars into one and you can keep up with stock neons.....

So you can fit in with all of the 16 year old kids who don't know sht about their cars, and think a BOV is the best mod ever....

Right, I'll pass. I would rather buy a turchocharged SVT for a little over 10,000 and beat an ass ugly srt-4. Oh wait, thats what I did.

Quote:

So you can fit in with all of the 16 year old kids who don't know sht about their cars, and think a BOV is the best mod ever....

Right, I'll pass. I would rather buy a turchocharged SVT for a little over 10,000 and beat an ass ugly srt-4. Oh wait, thats what I did.

Word

Originally posted by {Kontofosho}:

Quote:

yeah just drop a billion dollars into one and you can keep up with stock neons.....

So you can fit in with all of the 16 year old kids who don't know sht about their cars, and think a BOV is the best mod ever....

Right, I'll pass. I would rather buy a turchocharged SVT for a little over 10,000 and beat an ass ugly srt-4. Oh wait, thats what I did.

haha that's cute.

Originally posted by {Kontofosho}:

Quote:

Originally posted by warmonger:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just to show you the potential the SRT4 has, in case of any doubters, check this out. History was made yesterday, 500whp and 526 torque.

http://srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35600&page=1&pp=15

There are pictures and videos to prove it in case anyone thinks it's BS. Not trying to start anything just sharing valuable information among car enthusiasts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks Troll!

Nobody doubts what money for mods can do or that the SRT-4 has potential. You will likely see similar numbers from the turbo contour crowd very soon, just in case you are doubting it.
It is you SRT-4 owners that doubt the power and speed of turbo CSVT's.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I had a SRT "doubter" on Sunday.....needless to say I showed him what 5-6psi was like...

It was an 04'(tires)...he had a gauge pod, and most definitley an aftermarket BOV as I could hear him upshifting.....behind me!

Haha, I recently was in a very similar situation, needless to say he had a very confused look on his face.

I had a similar experience recently, SRT4 guy couldn't shake me on a roll up to, well, let's just say neither one of us would still have driver's licences had there been any cops in the area. Best thing is my SVT is fricking stock with nearly 140k miles on it!

Not dissing the SRT4, I give Dodge credit with plopping a decent turbo motor into an affordable, well-developed chassis. I'd still pony up the extra couple of grand for a WRX though.

Scott

Originally posted by {Kontofosho}:

Quote:

yeah just drop a billion dollars into one and you can keep up with stock neons.....

So you can fit in with all of the 16 year old kids who don't know sht about their cars, and think a BOV is the best mod ever....

Right, I'll pass. I would rather buy a turchocharged SVT for a little over 10,000 and beat an ass ugly srt-4. Oh wait, thats what I did.

It is all about being different....every kid is getting a SRT4, and everybody KNOWS they are quick.....but if you roll up with a t/c Contour....that is a sleeper.

Originally posted by Pigeon:

Originally posted by {Kontofosho}:

Quote:

Originally posted by warmonger:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just to show you the potential the SRT4 has, in case of any doubters, check this out. History was made yesterday, 500whp and 526 torque.

http://srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35600&page=1&pp=15

There are pictures and videos to prove it in case anyone thinks it's BS. Not trying to start anything just sharing valuable information among car enthusiasts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks Troll!

Nobody doubts what money for mods can do or that the SRT-4 has potential. You will likely see similar numbers from the turbo contour crowd very soon, just in case you are doubting it.
It is you SRT-4 owners that doubt the power and speed of turbo CSVT's.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I had a SRT "doubter" on Sunday.....needless to say I showed him what 5-6psi was like...

It was an 04'(tires)...he had a gauge pod, and most definitley an aftermarket BOV as I could hear him upshifting.....behind me!

Haha, I recently was in a very similar situation, needless to say he had a very confused look on his face.

I had a similar experience recently, SRT4 guy couldn't shake me on a roll up to, well, let's just say neither one of us would still have driver's licences had there been any cops in the area. Best thing is my SVT is fricking stock with nearly 140k miles on it!

Not dissing the SRT4, I give Dodge credit with plopping a decent turbo motor into an affordable, well-developed chassis. I'd still pony up the extra couple of grand for a WRX though.

Scott

Something was wrong with the srt4 then, it should have pulled a good bit on you at first and then kept pulling a little more at higher speeds... We were riding in my friend's srt last nite,,, the car is very stable at ummm, speed, though it's a little noisy, probably from the sun roof.

If the SRT-4 could manage to get a better looking interior (perhaps with some leather seating surfaces and a decent looking shifter), I'd be on it like stink on sh*t. I honestly don't care how much power advantage an SRT-4 has over a CSVT. The CSVT is a fun to drive car with a very comfortable, plush interior:

I have respect for it, and I honestly think the exterior looks decent, but the interior turns me off completely; and considering that's what I'd be looking at 90% of the time, I think I'll pass

This:

Or this:

This:

Or this:

Now, the exterior on the other hand..

This:

Or this:

I guess I'm the only Contique owner on this board that actually *likes* the exterior appearance of an SRT-4

Tim

I prefer the srt4 interior over mine. Though mine isn't perfect,, I think the non-cloth covered viper seats look better in the srt4 (those are viper ones in that pic),, the interior is simplistic and not great quality, but my contour's interior isn't great either. Plus the srt4 has tweeters and the boost gauge.

i see a problem on both of the interiors. THE CUP HOLDERS!!!!!

The SRT4 cupholders are much more functional than the contour's.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
The SRT4 cupholders are much more functional than the contour's.

Then get a SRT.

Originally posted by LoCoZ:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
The SRT4 cupholders are much more functional than the contour's.

Then get a SRT.

So angry just because it has functional cup holders,,, you should get one of those ugly EVOs that you speak so highly of all the time.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by LoCoZ:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
The SRT4 cupholders are much more functional than the contour's.

Then get a SRT.

So angry just because it has functional cup holders,,, you should get one of those ugly EVOs that you speak so highly of all the time.

EVO is all about functionality......RACING!!!

I don't give a crap about cupholders.

I took mine out.

That's great,, and I reckon the srt4 isn't about any kind of functionality... PRICE AND RACING.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
That's great,, and I reckon the srt4 isn't about any kind of functionality... PRICE AND RACING.

I repeat that I honestly wish the interior quality was far better than it is. I feel so cheap when I drive in an SRT-4, like I'm walking through a dollar-store.

Tim

Originally posted by Tim:

I feel so cheap when I drive in an SRT-4, like I'm walking through a dollar-store.

Tim

HAHAHAHAHA

Originally posted by Tim:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
That's great,, and I reckon the srt4 isn't about any kind of functionality... PRICE AND RACING.

I repeat that I honestly wish the interior quality was far better than it is. I feel so cheap when I drive in an SRT-4, like I'm walking through a dollar-store.

Tim

I'm not disagreeing with you.

Originally posted by Tim:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
That's great,, and I reckon the srt4 isn't about any kind of functionality... PRICE AND RACING.

I repeat that I honestly wish the interior quality was far better than it is. I feel so cheap when I drive in an SRT-4, like I'm walking through a dollar-store.

Tim

So you're saying you feel dirty and cheap?

This might help,

sorry for the non-sequitur,

On a serious note, the interior of the Evo 8 is cheap, as is the Sti, your SRT4, and any other pocket rocket being developed. . .it's for the speed. . .the contour is a 4 Door sedan first, a pocket rocket for some of us second.

Originally posted by ssmumich00:
On a serious note, the interior of the Evo 8 is cheap, as is the Sti, your SRT4, and any other pocket rocket being developed. . .it's for the speed. . .the contour is a 4 Door sedan first, a pocket rocket for some of us second.

[Ed McMahan voice] You are correct sir! [/Ed McMahan voice] What's the argument here? All cars are different and all drivers are different. Buy the car that makes you happy. If you're not happy with your car, well hot damn you can sell it and get something else! B!tching about which car is better is just using a relative term to define something. Neither car is better than any other car. I'm not saying a 0.9L I3 Metro would keep up with a Skyline, but the Metro beats the Skyline in fuel efficiency. Something for everyone I reckon. And since almost half of this thread is street racing stories and hearsay about Joe Schmo's friend's uncle's brother who saw an SRT-4 one time on TV, why isn't this thread locked?

The content of this thread is about as old and rehashed as last week's leftovers

More like Thanksgiving's leftovers.

Come on guys...cupholder functionality?

Kermit you scare me if you're 17 and care if your cupholders work or not. I have 12 of them in my car and I don't use any of them.

In all, I'm at a loss as to why this thread is still going. What's on the list next? Who's lugnuts are prettier? Hey...maybe if we strip that turbo off the SRT-4 (the only thing that makes that car what it is), a lot of you trolls/Mopar-worshippers wouldn't have so much shlt talking to do.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
The SRT4 cupholders are much more functional than the contour's.

Everyone's cupholders are more functional than the contour's! That's not saying much. If we were rated on the effectiveness of our cupholders then our cars would never have been built.

Ya'll are crazy. I was replying to lsneo, yell at him if ya'll have a problem with cupholders.

I have never said the srt4 is some great car or that it's better than a contour, just that it's faster. I defend it where it deserves to be defended but no where else. It also performs much better stock for stock, price for price compared to a svt contour,,, though yeah it's interior quality isn't perfect but I don't consider my contour's to be great (with every bit of plastic broken in it). Ya'll seem to have a real problem that there is a cheap car out there that can decimate stock contours. You should be happy that companies like dodge (I'm sure others will soon folow) are building great performing cars that are also affordable, especially since you can buy these perfect

contours new anymore.

Good god people! You guys are going on and on about how horrible the SRT is. Well, Contours run 5 or 6 psi?

compared to 14 psi stock? The interior is obviously better. Handling is good if you know how to drive it. I guess the torque steer is a little too much for you all since it puts out about 235torque stock.

I never doubted the SVT Contour, but its complainers that are on this thread that give the SVTs a bad name. I honestly cannot believe the sh*t thats going on here. I raced an SVT Contour because he was dumb enough to challenge me. I was completely stock and it looked like he threw the car in reverse... it was so sad.

Get off your soap boxes and let this damn thread die.

its sad how you all bring up, "I'd rather pay 10,000 than something that's an ugly piece of sh*t" Well you know,

After losing to me:
"I wasn't even racing anyway, plus your car is so freaking ugly."
My response:
"Dude, don't you think your opinion is kind of biased considering all you saw was my ass?"

I think there should be a discussion about the pros and cons of the Contour vs the SRT instead of completely bashing one or the other. I'm game either way, the SRT4 is one hell of a fast car but I'm open to any conversation on Contours. I like to learn about cars so all of this is good knowledge. Just don't knock it 'til you've tried it.

Stock, srt4 definitely,,, mods into both srt4 definitely,,, though yeah a svt contour is good for mods as well if you got the money and time. I've ridden in a supercharged svt, and yes it put me back in the seat more than the srt4 does, but the srt4 I ride in is stock... Contours aren't horrible, nor are they perfect, srt4s aren't horrible nor are they perfect either,,, if I had I choice, I'd drive neither, I prefer RWD. Those this thread is funny and should continue forever.

Originally posted by BoostJunkie:
...

I think there should be a discussion about the pros and cons of the Contour vs the SRT instead of completely bashing one or the other. I'm game either way, the SRT4 is one hell of a fast car but I'm open to any conversation on Contours. I like to learn about cars so all of this is good knowledge. Just don't knock it 'til you've tried it.

We tried that, at least those of us who could carry on an unbiased conversation, about 50 pages back. Or was it in the last SRT-4 thread?
Anyway, we tried that until people from both sides of the fence with little reasoning power and less patience chimed in.

BTW, I rode in the modded SRT-4 that my buddy Steve has that pulled 300 wHP on the dyno and it was just like riding in my turbo CSVT when I had the boost about 6psi. That thing was crazy fast too, spun the wheels all the way 1st and 2nd, with 18's no less.
He has modded as far as the stock turbo can go and that put him about 310 wheels is his best estimate.
So, how does it feel? As I said it is no better/worse than my CSVT when it was at 300 wHP.
So for all of you 'modded for modded' people out there....there is as fair and unbiased opinion as I can get.
And by the way, the interior looks pretty good though I don't like the tall shifter, the fact that the front window are power but the rears are crank handle, and that it is a tad plasticky. The seats kick ass though!
An SVT with a new-like interior is a bit more refined and looks and feels of higher quality. It's kind of like looking at a CSVT and then going and looking at an Audi...the CSVT looks real good until you sit in the Audi and really feel/see the small things. Well the SRT-4 also feels the same way until you fit into the nice leather interior of the CSVT.

Tom

Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Nobody is denying the strength of the engine block in the SRT-4. Stout turbo blocks are nothing new from Mopar.

However making 500/500 and actually being able to use 500/500 are two completely different things.

I'd like to see the dyno graphs to see what the powerband looks like below 5000rpm.
It is easy to make dyno queens make great numbers, but good luck with actual street drivability.
You are now well into the realm of a drag only or dyno only setup.

Dayymmm!

Nice curve overall. I bet that isn't a stock turbo though, and what does "Actual Horsepower and Actual Torque" mean?
Is that one of those places that measure power at the wheels and then back-calculate the curve to estimate flywheel horsepower? Even if it is, that's still a lot of power.

No it's not stock turbo. It's the AGP manifold and the turbo they sell on 105 octane gas. And the price to get a srt4 to 500hp is less than what it takes to get a contour to 300hp. The car (new) also cost less. The srt4 (if you're comfortable with it and know how to drive) handles better than a csvt, thus why I consider it better performance wise than a contour,,, I don't think that should even be argueable,, but it seems some people can't believe something is faster than a contour (I'm not talking to people like warmonger that actually have fast contours and know what it takes to get there).

Just like I was expecting. Fairly peaky. Especially TQ but then again how not to be on a small displacement 4 banger with a huge turbo.

Either way the numbers are HUGE!!!

(200+ per liter

)

Actual means uncorrected to SAE. What he "actually" made that day under actual conditions. No corrections.

Peaky tq is a HUGE asset when your biggest issue is traction. Especially when the peak is at the tail end of the power band.

Originally posted by ATL-SVT:
Peaky tq is a HUGE asset when your biggest issue is traction. Especially when the peak is at the tail end of the power band.

I definitely do not agree with that because of varying launch rpm.
If you launch out of the power band the engine will bog badly and have to wait until much higher rpm levels before it builds boost. That kills drag times.
You can tell by the graph where it starts building boost and almost exactly where it reaches full boost. Both are far above low rpm launch levels.

Also without flat torque the shifting powerband is extremely narrow and it relegates the car to dyno only or drag only "queen" status.
Which is exactly what he was going for here. The biggest numbers he could get regardless of the power curve it generated.
For what he was going for he definitely hit on the head. It makes astounding power numbers from the 2.4L engine!!!

You are trying to defend moot points and it makes everyone's case against your mainly biased and unrational statements even stronger.

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by ATL-SVT:
Peaky tq is a HUGE asset when your biggest issue is traction. Especially when the peak is at the tail end of the power band.

I definitely do not agree with that because of varying launch rpm.
If you launch out of the power band the engine will bog badly and have to wait until much higher rpm levels before it builds boost. That kills drag times.
You can tell by the graph where it starts building boost and almost exactly where it reaches full boost. Both are far above low rpm launch levels.

Also without flat torque the shifting powerband is extremely narrow and it relegates the car to dyno only or drag only "queen" status.
Which is exactly what he was going for here. The biggest numbers he could get regardless of the power curve it generated.
For what he was going for he definitely hit on the head. It makes astounding power numbers from the 2.4L engine!!!

You are trying to defend moot points and it makes everyone's case against your mainly biased and unrational statements even stronger.

Aight dude, you are so out of your element on the srt 4 it isn't even funny....
There is NO TURBO LAG. Unlike the contour YOU DON"T HAVE TO BE AT 4 GRAND TO GET ANY PULL. You don't know what you're talking about. YOu think I don't tune srt-4's? You think I don't drag srt-4's??? I clutch drop a 1800 rpms or less (or I spin in the box and never get out of the dig. IF and only IF I plan to feather the clutch do I launch at anything higher and then I launch at 2600, from there you short shift first and second gear. For the record, here is what happens when contours race SRT-4's at the track: right click save as My car makes more wheel tq at 3k than your contour could ever make PEAK at the flywheel. You sound like a honda owner with no concept of tq on a fwd in real life....

... and it just keeps getting fuller and fuller ...

Those last few comments were especially nice. Demon stated some very valid points that would apply to ANY car and you just HAD to retort with the "my car makes more tq than yours" and "you sound like a honda owner with no concept of tq". Come on now ...

I have to wonder if there is some particular reason you feel the need to boldly assert your car's superiority over everyone else here? Got something to prove? Some sort of inadequacy to compensate for?

Atl you are a fool, you can clearly see that the car has huge lag issues, and to state that your car has "no lag" is a moot point, he has a different turbo which can completely change spooling characteristics.

Next you go on to rip on stock contours because they have no torque below 4k....although the car in question has no torque down low either.

Speak intelligently and we will respect you.

Originally posted by {Kontofosho}:
Atl you are a fool, you can clearly see that the car has huge lag issues, and to state that your car has "no lag" is a moot point, he has a different turbo which can completely change spooling characteristics.

Ding, ding, ding...

We have a winner...

Exactly my entire point about the dyno graph in question. (NOT ABOUT THE SRT-4 IN STOCK FORM!

)

Then ATL only confirmed my other valid point about him.

---ATL---

Oh BTW - the SF kit with the T28 makes full boost below 3000rpm.

Tom's 3L with a T3/4 60-1 trim and large (.83/.86?) A/R turbine wheel still makes full boost by about 3500-4000rpm (depending on set boost level)
Also that's using the 2" primary prototype headers which slightly prolong spool time.

The funny thing is...
It was YOU that said having less bottom end torque to get the car launched better was a good idea. Funny how that is exactly how Tom's engine makes power.

Though he still has terrible traction problems anyway. (something about a FLAT TQ curve though

)

Again you put your head even further up your ass then was ever thought possible.

Man this thread is a big hoot...

Yes you have a fast car right out of the box. No Question.
Still does not make you any less clueless and ignorant though...

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

Originally posted by {Kontofosho}:
Atl you are a fool, you can clearly see that the car has huge lag issues, and to state that your car has "no lag" is a moot point, he has a different turbo which can completely change spooling characteristics.

Ding, ding, ding...

We have a winner...

Exactly my entire point about the dyno graph in question. (NOT ABOUT THE SRT-4 IN STOCK FORM! )

Then ATL only confirmed my other valid point about him.

---ATL---

Oh BTW - the SF kit with the T28 makes full boost below 3000rpm.

Tom's 3L with a T3/4 60-1 trim and large (.83/.86?) A/R turbine wheel still makes full boost by about 3500-4000rpm (depending on set boost level)
Also that's using the 2" primary prototype headers which slightly prolong spool time.

The funny thing is...
It was YOU that said having less bottom end torque to get the car launched better was a good idea. Funny how that is exactly how Tom's engine makes power. Though he still has terrible traction problems anyway. (something about a FLAT TQ curve though )

Again you put your head even further up your ass then was ever thought possible.

Man this thread is a big hoot...

Yes you have a fast car right out of the box. No Question.
Still does not make you any less clueless and ignorant though...

Tim

ATL, I have to point out that Demon wasn't referring to the stock SRT-4 or even yours, but he was strictly talking about the 500HP SRT-4. With that large of a turbo peaking that much later then it would have lag, a proportionate amount compared to the power it starts with at low rpm.

The stock SRT-4 has no noticeable lag to me from riding in it.
Of course we are again comparing it to a no-turbo tour also.

Compared to mine the stock SRT-4 was weak, but the nicely modded SRT-4 that Steve drove me around in was very equal to what I was driving.

It rained tonite and I met up with my srt owning friend in a big empty parking lot.... First time he was able to get spin without wheel hop.... good thing it has that 7 year warranty.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
It rained tonite and I met up with my srt owning friend in a big empty parking lot.... First time he was able to get spin without wheel hop.... good thing it has that 7 year warranty.

was your car able to spin the tires?

I don't push my car very hard (car has to last me hopefully another 4 years atleast and I don't trust the cd4e and my 100k mile axles that much),, though you know of course when I was waiting for him I did have a little fun and did lose traction a few times when I was just playing around, but I never actually tried to spin them. Though if you wanna know can my car spin the tires... yeah, I've done it at the drag strip,,, I imagine I could even do a decent burnout if I got better rear brakes and put my old wheels on.... but don't care to hurt my car anymore than I have.

Originally posted by Russell-3L:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
It rained tonite and I met up with my srt owning friend in a big empty parking lot.... First time he was able to get spin without wheel hop.... good thing it has that 7 year warranty.

was your car able to spin the tires?

Yep.....all the way up to 6750 redline!

I love rain...makes my car feel powerful!

On a side note:

Steve's SRT-4 already grenaded the flywheel/clutch assembly and damaged the crank about a month and a half ago.
They replaced the cracked transmission housing and the damaged crankshaft under warranty.

Well yesterday he told me that he has been having more problems and now they are going to give him another engine. He suddenly developed a new vibration AND he claims it is starting to run lean.

So, reliability issue number two for having 300 wHP in an SRT-4....in the same car. He is a hard driver though! I wonder how long Dodge will take that stuff before they say screw-off. That is going to cost them some serious money if everybody starts jacking up the boost like he did. He's running like 18-20#'s. So to get his 300wHP he has stressed his stock engine to the max.

I on the other hand I barely use my turbo's capability with 6#'s and make that much power. He's owned his car about as long as I had mine turbo'd, since about this summer. He is going on motor number two in that time frame, mine was still running fine, smooth and reliable as ever until I decided to try some new upgrades.

Opinions anyone?

With 230whp on the SRT4s it's still considerably faster than many of the cars out on the road.

Of course, with an aftermarket like the one the SRT4 is building...I'd be hard pressed to not mod a SRT4 if I owned one.

My opinion: If you're going to drive it like an A-hole, bump the boost up to quesionably safe levels...then it's not going to last no matter what the car.

What has he done as far as fuel management,etc.? I've read that going even just a little higher than the stock 15 psi can require a lotta stuff, injectors, fuel pump, computer control,etc...

Good point. Driver makes up a big part of it. You beat on something long enough even slightly, and something has to give.

How about looking at more 300fwhp SRT4's built fairly in the same mannor and let's see if they also give out.

Either way.....I'll still be driving my CSVT

Originally posted by LoCoZ:

Originally posted by Russell-3L:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
It rained tonite and I met up with my srt owning friend in a big empty parking lot.... First time he was able to get spin without wheel hop.... good thing it has that 7 year warranty.

was your car able to spin the tires?

Yep.....all the way up to 6750 redline! I love rain...makes my car feel powerful!

Ooo, I forgot to mention hector is co-owner of my car.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
I don't trust the cd4e and my 100k mile axles that much

you dont trust your axles with a zetec???

i got 90K on my stock axles and the 3L didnt break them.......yet

Originally posted by LoCoZ:

Yep.....all the way up to 6750 redline! I love rain...makes my car feel powerful!

with or without the ebrake on?

Originally posted by warmonger:
So, reliability issue number two for having 300 wHP in an SRT-4....in the same car. He is a hard driver though!

I'd more go along the lines of thinking it ran lean and then developed engine problems myself.
Though 300 wheels from 4-cylinders is a lot of stress for stock components even considering Mopar planned for the stock engine to make over 300HP with the 3 upgrade stages.
However what is in the Stage 3 package remains to be seen???

SRT-4 owners DO NOT bring up the fact that the block and heads are used in some of the drag engines because we all know that's not with the stock gaskets (head mainly), head bolts, bearings, et cetera.

The block and heads are never going to be the first failure point anyway.

Stock crank is also used.

Originally posted by Russell-3L:

Originally posted by LoCoZ:

Yep.....all the way up to 6750 redline! I love rain...makes my car feel powerful!

with or without the ebrake on?

without.