Niter1dah

No kidding. Im surrounded by ricers Oh well. Something to bish about I guess. My friends dad and coworker were a hardcore street racers back in the day and told me lots of cool stories about things theyve done and mods they had in their cars. It was all about fords and chevy owners going at it (He had 750hp V8 with even bigger tq numbers :x). Id love to have an old muscle car like my dads road runner but for now i'll be happy with my 200hp 2L 4cyl that gets 31mpg

Nothing really ever changes...

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

I've often noticed that people who are unsure of their cars have to defend it and say it's the best just to prove to themselves that it was worth getting.

This post was not started to hate on neons, but merely to point out a problem with one. I've seen hundreds of posts here about problems with our civics. All of a sudden, a topic goes up about another car and we have people attacking us from another site. Grow up everyone.

CivicRacer5

One of my friends who lives in WV owns the fastest SOHC in the world, and it is a neon! I love my civic, but after seeing what him and Howell motorsports has done with neons i greatly appreciate them, including the srt-4! They have a show neon that runs 11's on street tires, the drag car which is the fastest SOHC, both those cars have been posted in MOPAR magazine, the drag cars title is Gizmo's great adventure, and the show cars is Candy Store because that car is his sisters. He also has an all motor neon that competed against AEM, GREDDY, and several other big companies in Las Vegas for the baddest street car. His daily driver which runs 12's. All those are neons and some of the baddest and fastest cars i have ever ridden in. They are now working on an SRT-4 and he expects it to be insane, and unbelievably fast. I drive a civic but i also have great respect for dodge because of what i have seen done to them. So the next time you say its just a neon, i gurantee i know where there are 3 neons, and an srt-4 that will spank about anycar you want to bring to the line.

S2000man01

iTrader: (1)

actually the fastest SOHC in the world is a civic. It runs 10's. It was in a story in sport compact car a little while back.

mk32382

S2kman...I was NOT trying to throw hp/liter in your face. Nor was I trying to rest on the laurels of that argument. Infact, just the opposite...I think that is a junk argument. I was commenting on how one of the civic owners used it as a key argument against the SRT-4 and then went on to flame him using inaccurate specs anyhow ("the SRT-4 is still a <100hp/liter car")

As for torque, whatever you say man. I didn't know that you could flat out deny the fact that torque as opposed to hp is going to be MORE important in a short-sprint race starting from a standstill such as the 1/4. Maybe the stang had a crappy driver. Maybe his tires spun on crappy rubber. Maybe it's because he has 500 lbs curbweight on you. Maybe since torque and HP are derived from eachother directly from RPMs, it makes a difference that you have a highly-strung N/A motor that can rev to 9k+. I have heard of plenty of GTs holding their own at the track. But I don't want to argue about track times. I'm not trying to say which car is better...I hate Mustangs, and would take an S2k any day. Look at it this way. If someone beefed up their internals in their D17, ran crazy boost, which would also raise their torque, and somehow managed to get near the 240hp that the S2k is advertised to put out, I still doubt it would be much of a race, and I think torque qould have a lot to do with that. Granted, the S2k is by far a superior car to the civic, and the drive wheels, suspension, the who package goes into getting that 13.6. That is why I believe you beat the stang consistently. So while I may have come up sounding like I think torque is everything, I in fact do not. If you thought that then I apologize. I was only trying to illustrate that kids these days look at HP a whole lot, without realizing what it means to a car's actual potential, whther racing or on the street.

As for the stuff about the s2k making more HP with less liters without a turbo, again great. Like I said, I don't care about HP/Liter...sorry if you thought so. Also "my" SRT-4? I don't own one. I have an EX coupe, as previously stated in this thread in a different post. Also this is why I referred to "our D17A2s". So again...if you think I am defending the SRT because I own one, no. I am just tired of civic owners not appreciating a good car. The SRT is a good car. Not an excellent one, but a good one. Yes, for <20k, you can get a stock civic and have it last 10 years. You can put a couple grand in, void your powertrain warranty, have a turboed vic that can keep up with an SRT. Will it last ten years? I don't think so. I don't think either the Vic or the SRT will...but it is safe to assume that if you do aftermarket FI, you aren't exactly driving gently. Also, would I care if it lasts ten years? Personally I like to think that in 4-5 years, I will be ready for a new ride, both financially and maturity-wise. Not that I won't want to go fast, but I will want to be gonig fast in more style than a vic or SRT. (Santa I want an STi for xmas!!! lol) Now the SRT, build quality will be a bit sub-par. For 20k, you are getting factory FI, which includes factory FI warranty. It will be a true wobbly-**** car, both inside and out, but I am not buying it for build quality. Like I said, they are sacrificing a lot of cosmetics for all out performance (as all out as you can be in a neon.) Comparing apples to oranges. That is what civic owners, more than SRT owners, seem to be doing. If they insist on comparing the two, then I will continue to argue the SRT as an all around more fun car, with a lot more potential than a civic. As a daily driver, I would take my civic ANY day. Just my .02.

smoger

umm.. first post in this thread:

lease:

navyedoc

iTrader: (1)

hey im that woman.. and i own a dodge ram right now.. i have owned dodge cars.. specifically a 2000 dodge neon.. it sucked.. it will always suck.. and for the money i spent on it... id rather own a civic. again this is my oppinion.. dodge cars suck a$$

smoger

all of a sudden you owned a neon, in your other post you said the dealer tried to cram it down your throat so you bought the civic instead.. lease:

HustleLikeMOFO

iTrader: (1)

If you can point out 1 thing from my post that was not correct please do so. I worked for a dealership last 2 summers and when people try to trade in a dodge, chevy, pontiac or even a cadillac it turns out that the cars are not worth anything, the SRT4 is by far no exception. You were obviously offened my my post because you fit the #2 description of an SRT owner.

Keep in mind that I never said anythign about the performance of the SRT, all I stated was that the car is a horrible investment because it will be worth less then half what you paid for it in 3 years, and thats not predicting the future... thats a typical dodge that was worth 15k new or 40k new.

Please list some examples from my post before you call me a dumb@ss.

navyedoc

iTrader: (1)

um i owned one with my boyfriend back in vegas.. we paid 15,000 or so for a used 2000.. it wasn't mine, but since i lived with him and drove it i concider it mine... i went to buy my own outright in august when the dealer tried to cram it down my throat.. so no i personally have never had my name on the title to a dodge car... but i have paid for one and drove one and i took a civic over the 03 neon

816Buddha

just to add my .02 into this mess . . . i honestly do not understand why people are even comapring the civic to the srt. first off, the two cars were manufactured for entirely different purposes and directed towards different audiences. the civic is advertised as an economy car to middle aged commuters and financially disadvataged students (to put it nicely). the srt is directed towards those who have a little more money and wanna enjoy a fun little car to zoom around in. this comaprison is awfully similar to one a while back comparing the nsx to the c5. comapring hp/liter and total hp and torque and all the other specs and figures means little because the cars were simply made for different reasons and different people . . . period. now granted, a civic can be made faster, but so can a srt, just give it time. how long was it before major performance parts came out for te 7th gen? a while. and let's not forget that when the 7th gen first came out, a lot of people were raggin on the way it looked too. my point is that everyone has different tastes, that's why they make so many cars in this world. and if the guy next to you decides he likes a dodge, then let him. people are so quick to rag on someone else, but those are the same ones who get so offended when someone stomps on their ride. if you're happy with your car then be happy and let everyone else be happy with theirs. i personally luv my civic. it's not hte fastest car in the world and that's fine by me because i'd probably be in jail if i had a faster car. it's not the nicest looking car out there either, but if it was it'd probably be stolen by now. but the fact is that i bought it cuz i liked it and i made it into something that i'm proud of, which is probably the same reason a lot of you bought your civics or srt's . . . because you liked it for whatever reason. ok, i'll get up off my horse now . . . just thought i'd add my .02 . . . =)

smoger

you seem to have hit exactly the point ive been trying to press throughout this thread.. the civic and srt are NOT competition for each other so its pointless to compare them! ..unfortunately some of the duller members of this forum seem intent on doing so. maybe now that one of their own said what i said they will listen

smoger

i believe that is the comment that drizze was referring to. no doubt the resale value of the car sucks.. we know that already. however there is nothing to indicate this car will be falling apart like you claim.

furthermore,.. last i checked, cars were meant for driving, not to make a profit on when you sell them. ..for car enthusiasts at least

816Buddha

haha . . . don't hold your breath for that one =)

S2000man01

iTrader: (1)

ah ok, thanks for clarifying. i get what you are saying now.

HustleLikeMOFO

iTrader: (1)

Very hard to make a profit on the car when you, the owner, is selling it. But this is one of the main reasons why I would never get the SRT. Like I said before, I had a fast car but it sucks when you wake up each day and pray to god that nothing will start acting up. Unfortunatly, the odds are that a Dodge, along with many more domestics, are built poorly. Owning an SRT is probably fun as hell because when I had fast car it was. The odds are that the SRT will have a crap load of problems and when you try to sell the car, you will feel dumb because it will not be worth much.

Comparing performace of an SRT with the Civic is a joke. All I was saying is that I would never get an SRT4 no matter how fast and cheap it is because it will most likely be a pain in the as$. Since I already had a similar car to the SRT (speed and quality wise), I think buying an SRT is the stupidest thing anyone can do if you're looking for a decent car that you wont have to think about.

**edit**

BTW, I do think each and everyday about my Civic. I think about what Mods I can do to it knowing that it is safe to invest into it because it will not break down every 3 months. When I had the Monte Z34, I was gonna get a body kit... can you imagine how much money I owuld of lost on it if I did.

drizze99

Hey man, don't get your panties all up in a bunch. NOT ONCE DID I BASH YOUR LITTLE CIVIC! Did you hear that? I didn't come here to bash your car. Look at my posts and try to comprehend what I have written. Every other member from our forum (with the exception of dymondboy) has been respectful and stated FACTS about our car to the misinformed.

You also need to quit swinging from Honda's *******. They have their problems just like EVERY car manufacturer out there. The is no such thing a "perfect car". Keep telling yourself that your Honda is invinceable, cause that is the Honda fan boi perception.

Check out this LINK and see how the Civic ranks against the Neon. I'm not a rocket scientist, but I do believe that the Civic is ranked HIGHER in Lemon Law complaints. Interesting when you see fact, isn't it?

HustleLikeMOFO

iTrader: (1)

^^false analogy: thats liek saying that most car accidents occur 5 miles away from your home. of course most car accidents occur 5 miles from your home because thats where most of the driving is done.

Well, if we compare how many people own and still drive Civics comepared to how many people own Neons.... then its a different story

K20A_Wanabe

iTrader: (3)

The only thing that don't break on there cars is the turbo looks like. lol And aren't the turbos in the SRT-4 made by Japs correct me if i'm wrong. Remember SRT-4 is still a POS and a girls cars. If you clutch went out in 3 days that sad. I run the ***** off my clutch and it never went out. Theres a reason why they don't put neons or SRT-4 in movies cause they wouldn't even make it to the end.

Wisper

iTrader: (1)

Neverending thread....

drizze99

First off, you had a bad experience with ONE domestic and now they all suck? You are stereotyping. Then you go off spouting and guarenteeing that the SRT-4 will just be another POS. That is why I said you need to read up on it before you call it a POS. The enginerring behind this car surpasses the Civic. ANY engine that can handle 20 psi of boost on STOCK internals is a serious contender, no matter who makes it. Oh, and where do you think your Civic is made (most of them sold in the US)?

You work at a dealership right? (or used to) I did as well. I was a car salesman for 3 1/2 years, so there is nothing you can tell that I don't already know. When you trade a domestic to a import dealer, you will get less for it than if you trade it at a domestic dealer AND vice versa. Do you you know how to read V.I.N. numbers? A "1" at the beginning of the VIN signifies that it was built in the US. "J" is for Japan. Go look at your Civic and tell me where it was built.

Khryz

You are so right. Everything you said is 100% correct. Kudos to you.

drizze99

You know, I can't wait until the NEW sport compact that Dodge builds is based off of the Lancer platform. What are your excuses going to be then? It will happen in the 2006 model year, so I'm giving you a head start on getting your excuses ready.

Khryz

As well as the Solstice, Razor, SRT-6 Crossfire ..

HustleLikeMOFO

iTrader: (1)

Drizzle

I personally did have a bad experience with 1 domestic, but if you read my thread I clearly stated that almost everyone I know who also owns a domestic tell me the same story... always some minor crap breaking... non stop. My car was assembled in the US but the parts are Japanesse. My Dad's 01 Accord was assembled in Japan.... where are you going with?

Trading in domestics to an import dealer? If you worked at a dealerhsip then you know that if you trade in a Neon to Dodge you will only get maybe like 300-500 dollars more versus if you trade the same Neon into a Honda dealership.

I dont know if you realize this but the greater the engineering is on the car, the greater the chances are that the car will not be reliabale. Simplicity always wins in the long run. You mentioning the "advanced" engineering in the SRT4 is just a more of a reason for it to fail.

My dad had a 96 Oldsmobile Aurora, that was a tight as$ car, V8, $hitload of computers, you name it. luxury car straight up. However when something broke the labor cost 3 times as much as the part that needed replacement. I think the Aurora was a very advanced car in the mid 90s, if you look at all the htings it came standard with it is easily up there with current Lexus and Acuras.

Same story with the Neon, the engine bay is PACKED, a lot of things are required to keep it the way it is and the odds are that works against it.

Dodge was never known for building reliable cars and there is a reason why the SRT is only 20k. You get what you pay for and the SRT gives the appearence of a car that is amazing for the price. We all know that if somethign seems to be a great deal, it usually isnt.

If you are telling yourself that Dodge finally built a car that is so far advanced and the usual Dodge engineering finally built a different car quality wise, then you are lying to yourself.

smoger

:zbsflag: lease:


fan boys -> Honda

RoBBUsaF

everyone stfu

smoger

yeah man, keep tellin yourself that. like someone mentioned before,..people make excuses to make themselves feel better about things.. so if you really want to believe the reliability of the srt is that much worse than the civic, be my guest.

gearbox

iTrader: (95)

I was referring to the poeple from the neon site having to come to a civic forum to defend their car. I already know my civic is sweet, so you don't see me coming to your site and telling you that.

drizze99

I'll explain to you where I'm going with this. The more reliable Honda's come from Japan, not the US. The US built Honda's have problems just like any other domestic made car. The work ethic of the Japanese is much different than the line worker in the US. I know this as fact.


So you are also saying that the German engineering in BMW's, Audi's, Porsche's, & Mercedes Benz is crap also? IMO, they have some of the best engineering in the world. The SRT-4 was designed and engineered by an elite group of DCX engineers called PVO. PVO is also the group that brought us the Viper. PVO is also the group that is bringing SRT-10 Ram and a few other specialty vehicles that will kick some serious ***. So YES, Dodge did build a better car withe the SRT-4 and I'm not lying to myself.