2004 Srt4
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Rep Power: 0 
2004 Srt4
I bought a mint condition 2004 SRT4 for under $10,000 here.
advertising removed. If you bought the SRT4 for under $10,000 you still paid 3 times more than you should have.
advertising removed. If you bought the SRT4 for under $10,000 you still paid 3 times more than you should have.
Last edited by S2000man01; Jun 6, 2005 at 01:09 PM.
Last time I had this much fun some furniture got broken!
Hey! Look At Me!! I'm a Supporting Member!!
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,839
Likes: 2
From: PA
Rep Power: 360 
well, i hope you like it.
me, along with many others, would rather not be seen dead in one but hey its your car. to each his own. so hopefully no one gets carried away and makes fun of you. just not my style
me, along with many others, would rather not be seen dead in one but hey its your car. to each his own. so hopefully no one gets carried away and makes fun of you. just not my style
Originally Posted by almu
I bought a mint condition 2004 SRT4 for under $10,000 here.
Psst....don't tell your friends. This is a highly protected source.
Psst....don't tell your friends. This is a highly protected source.
Last edited by Havok2k1; Jun 6, 2005 at 01:41 PM.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 400 haha this guy is a spammer who just came in to advertise the website.
ironically enough, he came in advertising he bought a 2004 SRT4 for $10,000. when the irony is the car probably isn't even worth that.
ironically enough, he came in advertising he bought a 2004 SRT4 for $10,000. when the irony is the car probably isn't even worth that.
I went to prison a boy and came out a man with a sore ass!
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 1
From: Gallup/ABQ, New Mexico
Rep Power: 293
Originally Posted by Vantage
SRT-4's are the **** man, good pick. People on this forum seem to hate on them, i dont know why. I think they are mad that their car cant run 13's in stock trim.
Why would s2kman be mad? His car runs 13.7 in stock form, has better resale, RWD, and the build quality is much better.
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Rep Power: 297
Originally Posted by Vantage
SRT-4's are the **** man, good pick. People on this forum seem to hate on them, i dont know why. I think they are mad that their car cant run 13's in stock trim.
for SRT-4 lovers, go to SRT-4 forum
i believe their is only one purpose of the srt-4... straight line performance (exclude the acr version). but smart people want more than just that or have options such as: reliability, price, looks, quality, resell values?, aftermarket support, etc.
i simply choose reliability as top priority because i cannot afford to dish out over 15k on a new car and leave myself stranded on the highway calling AAA. whether its a neon, kia, chevy, nissan, its something i would never sacrafice even if it runs 10's from the lot.
the neon srt-4 is a good 'cheap' car, its the owners that give them bad rep. imo, thats one reason why people bag on it
i simply choose reliability as top priority because i cannot afford to dish out over 15k on a new car and leave myself stranded on the highway calling AAA. whether its a neon, kia, chevy, nissan, its something i would never sacrafice even if it runs 10's from the lot.
the neon srt-4 is a good 'cheap' car, its the owners that give them bad rep. imo, thats one reason why people bag on it
Registered!!
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver B.C. Canada
Rep Power: 0 
Why would s2kman be mad? His car runs 13.7 in stock form, has better resale, RWD, and the build quality is much better
I agree with better quality and a nicer car, but its also alot more $$$. if i was buying a SRT-4, i dont think id be looking at the S2000, they are 2 different cars built for differnt things.
just that none of us think it is a good car
Thats like saying a USDM CRX DX is the same as a JDM SiR, they might have the same body but other than that they are completely different.
Drive an SRT-4, then make ur decission, i would be $$ if u drove them u would like to buy 1.
Registered!!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
From: West TX
Rep Power: 0 $10,000 so what!
2001 Honda civic EX 50,000 miles, aem cold air intake, hayame exhaust, HP headers, 3 inch drop for $5,500. Thats $5,000 under Blue Book value. No body mods and no interior mods it's just what i was looking for.I know 7thgen civics arent the fastes but they are the sickest when fixed up.
I went to prison a boy and came out a man with a sore ass!
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 1
From: Gallup/ABQ, New Mexico
Rep Power: 293
Originally Posted by Vantage
Id like to see a video of an s2000 running 13.7's with a regular driver.
I agree with better quality and a nicer car, but its also alot more $$$. if i was buying a SRT-4, i dont think id be looking at the S2000, they are 2 different cars built for differnt things.
it might be a neon, but it is a lot more reliable and responsive, and a way better package than a neon.
Thats like saying a USDM CRX DX is the same as a JDM SiR, they might have the same body but other than that they are completely different.
Drive an SRT-4, then make ur decission, i would be $$ if u drove them u would like to buy 1.
I agree with better quality and a nicer car, but its also alot more $$$. if i was buying a SRT-4, i dont think id be looking at the S2000, they are 2 different cars built for differnt things.
it might be a neon, but it is a lot more reliable and responsive, and a way better package than a neon.
Thats like saying a USDM CRX DX is the same as a JDM SiR, they might have the same body but other than that they are completely different.
Drive an SRT-4, then make ur decission, i would be $$ if u drove them u would like to buy 1.
Your the one calling s2kman mad that the srt-4 runs faster then his s2k. let me quote you:
People on this forum seem to hate on them, i dont know why. I think they are mad that their car cant run 13's in stock trim.
Here are resale values for srt-4s
2005 $16,547 - $16,547 $17,785 - $17,785 $19,847 - $19,847
2004 $14,473 - $14,473 $15,515 - $15,515 $17,252 - $17,252
2003 $5,297 - $7,244 $6,006 - $8,142 $7,187 - $9,638
2003 $11,246 - $11,246 $12,621 - $12,621 $14,913 - $14,913
Registered!!
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,555
Likes: 0
From: familycar's Moms Room
Rep Power: 299
Originally Posted by Vantage
SRT-4's are the **** man, good pick. People on this forum seem to hate on them, i dont know why. I think they are mad that their car cant run 13's in stock trim.
I went to prison a boy and came out a man with a sore ass!
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 1
From: Gallup/ABQ, New Mexico
Rep Power: 293 It's awesome in a straight line, but other then the ACR version, it sucks in the handling and reliabilty department.
Check out Edmunds.com, good info. http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/dodg...enav..4.Dodge*
Check out Edmunds.com, good info. http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/dodg...enav..4.Dodge*
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 400
Originally Posted by Vantage
SRT-4's are the **** man, good pick. .
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 400
Originally Posted by jttegx
i believe their is only one purpose of the srt-4... straight line performance (exclude the acr version). but smart people want more than just that or have options such as: reliability, price, looks, quality, resell values?, aftermarket support, etc.
i simply choose reliability as top priority because i cannot afford to dish out over 15k on a new car and leave myself stranded on the highway calling AAA. whether its a neon, kia, chevy, nissan, its something i would never sacrafice even if it runs 10's from the lot.
the neon srt-4 is a good 'cheap' car, its the owners that give them bad rep. imo, thats one reason why people bag on it
i simply choose reliability as top priority because i cannot afford to dish out over 15k on a new car and leave myself stranded on the highway calling AAA. whether its a neon, kia, chevy, nissan, its something i would never sacrafice even if it runs 10's from the lot.
the neon srt-4 is a good 'cheap' car, its the owners that give them bad rep. imo, thats one reason why people bag on it
Registered!!
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 653
Likes: 0
From: So Cal
Rep Power: 0 
Originally Posted by QBoi
Why would s2kman be mad? His car runs 13.7 in stock form, has better resale, RWD, and the build quality is much better.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 400
Originally Posted by Vantage
Id like to see a video of an s2000 running 13.7's with a regular driver.
and a few have run 13.6's.
stock.
Registered!!
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver B.C. Canada
Rep Power: 0 I know S2000's can run 13's... but i dont believe they have in stock trim. thats y id like to see a video of a bone stock S2000 running 13's.
I just looked it up, with a professional driver here's stock #'s for an S2000.... not the 13's u guys said they run..
2003 Honda S2000 6.3 14.90
2004 Honda S2000 5.4 14.10
Look for urself.
http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm
14.1 is a killer time for any stock car, but comparing a $30,000+ car to a $15,000 car and the 15,000 car is faster, doesnt make the S2000 look 2 good IMO.
I dont want to sound like an S2000 hater, it's a super nice car, but u gotta respect a 4 door pulling 13's.
#'s for SRT-4
2003 Dodge SRT-4 5.6 14.10
Then they got an extra 30 hp in 2004/2005, so there's ur 13.7's...
I just looked it up, with a professional driver here's stock #'s for an S2000.... not the 13's u guys said they run..
2003 Honda S2000 6.3 14.90
2004 Honda S2000 5.4 14.10
Look for urself.
http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm
14.1 is a killer time for any stock car, but comparing a $30,000+ car to a $15,000 car and the 15,000 car is faster, doesnt make the S2000 look 2 good IMO.
I dont want to sound like an S2000 hater, it's a super nice car, but u gotta respect a 4 door pulling 13's.
#'s for SRT-4
2003 Dodge SRT-4 5.6 14.10
Then they got an extra 30 hp in 2004/2005, so there's ur 13.7's...
Last edited by Vantage; Jun 7, 2005 at 09:03 AM.
mm well i repsect a sti or a evo that pulling. not a dodge POS.
id rather have a s2000 then a srt-4 any day.
i think that most of the poeple that i have seen driving srt-4's think there hot ****. yeah its turbo'd, yeah it cant be fast, but its a dodge and dodge sucks unless you buying a suv or a pickup.
ill take my slow *** honda any day before i think of getting one of those. but hopefully by september ill be driving a EVO. everything is looking good so far.
id rather have a s2000 then a srt-4 any day.
i think that most of the poeple that i have seen driving srt-4's think there hot ****. yeah its turbo'd, yeah it cant be fast, but its a dodge and dodge sucks unless you buying a suv or a pickup.
ill take my slow *** honda any day before i think of getting one of those. but hopefully by september ill be driving a EVO. everything is looking good so far.
Registered!!
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,555
Likes: 0
From: familycar's Moms Room
Rep Power: 299
Originally Posted by exturbo6
mm well i repsect a sti or a evo that pulling. not a dodge POS.
id rather have a s2000 then a srt-4 any day.
i think that most of the poeple that i have seen driving srt-4's think there hot ****. yeah its turbo'd, yeah it cant be fast, but its a dodge and dodge sucks unless you buying a suv or a pickup.
ill take my slow *** honda any day before i think of getting one of those. but hopefully by september ill be driving a EVO. everything is looking good so far.
id rather have a s2000 then a srt-4 any day.
i think that most of the poeple that i have seen driving srt-4's think there hot ****. yeah its turbo'd, yeah it cant be fast, but its a dodge and dodge sucks unless you buying a suv or a pickup.
ill take my slow *** honda any day before i think of getting one of those. but hopefully by september ill be driving a EVO. everything is looking good so far.
I think you fools need to do some research on Dodge. Their quality IS NOT what it was 5 or 10 years ago. Take a look at the Charger R/T daytona, it has a multiple displacement V8, THE CROSSFIRE, SRT8 300c, SRT10, the list goes on!!
I could buy a brand new ****ing civic spend 10000 on it and smoke an srt 4. Ok so the Srt 4 has a good price but believe me in those two cars cruisin down the blvd S2000man is always gonna get puss y first then in some 4 door neon with a huge wing.
I went to prison a boy and came out a man with a sore ass!
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 1
From: Gallup/ABQ, New Mexico
Rep Power: 293
Originally Posted by DIZZLE
I just love how you guys compare a s2000 to a SRT4, 33k vs. 22k
I think you fools need to do some research on Dodge. Their quality IS NOT what it was 5 or 10 years ago. Take a look at the Charger R/T daytona, it has a multiple displacement V8, THE CROSSFIRE, SRT8 300c, SRT10, the list goes on!!
I think you fools need to do some research on Dodge. Their quality IS NOT what it was 5 or 10 years ago. Take a look at the Charger R/T daytona, it has a multiple displacement V8, THE CROSSFIRE, SRT8 300c, SRT10, the list goes on!!
Let me say this again. The only reason I brought up the s2k was because Vantage said s2kman was mad that the srt4 was faster then the s2k.
Wanna see something cool? Since you believe I am comparing the s2k and srt4, look at this...
True Cost to Own an SRT-4 in 5 years is $39,253
True Cost to Own a 350Z in 5 years is $39,905
True Cost to Own an S2000 in 5 years is $41,696
Price is rather close now right?
I have no idea why you brought the higher models into this. Bring in what more people buy.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 400
Originally Posted by Vantage
I know S2000's can run 13's... but i dont believe they have in stock trim. thats y id like to see a video of a bone stock S2000 running 13's.
I just looked it up, with a professional driver here's stock #'s for an S2000.... not the 13's u guys said they run..
2003 Honda S2000 6.3 14.90
2004 Honda S2000 5.4 14.10
Look for urself.
http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm
14.1 is a killer time for any stock car, but comparing a $30,000+ car to a $15,000 car and the 15,000 car is faster, doesnt make the S2000 look 2 good IMO.
I dont want to sound like an S2000 hater, it's a super nice car, but u gotta respect a 4 door pulling 13's.
#'s for SRT-4
2003 Dodge SRT-4 5.6 14.10
Then they got an extra 30 hp in 2004/2005, so there's ur 13.7's...
I just looked it up, with a professional driver here's stock #'s for an S2000.... not the 13's u guys said they run..
2003 Honda S2000 6.3 14.90
2004 Honda S2000 5.4 14.10
Look for urself.
http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm
14.1 is a killer time for any stock car, but comparing a $30,000+ car to a $15,000 car and the 15,000 car is faster, doesnt make the S2000 look 2 good IMO.
I dont want to sound like an S2000 hater, it's a super nice car, but u gotta respect a 4 door pulling 13's.
#'s for SRT-4
2003 Dodge SRT-4 5.6 14.10
Then they got an extra 30 hp in 2004/2005, so there's ur 13.7's...
professional driver or not, it takes someone time to learn the car and how to drive it to obtain the best times. not some magazine that has the car for a week or one day at the track, regardless of the driver.
14.9 is a HORRIBLE time for an S2000. in fact, the slowest I EVER ran stock was a 14.3 and that was WITH a missed shift.
I'm not going to continue to compare the SRT4 and S2000 as that is beating a dead horse and we've done it far too much.
But as an FYI here's a set of timeslips I have readily available from when I was stock. Notice I run 14.0 with crappy 2.24 60' times. This was when my tires were bald and on a fairly warm day. If my 60' had been my normal 2.0 to 2.1 I'd be hitting 13.7-13.8 all night.
Whether you want to admit it or not, a better than average driver will hit 13's all day in an S2000 stock. An average driver will get 14.0-14.1.
Registered!!
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,555
Likes: 0
From: familycar's Moms Room
Rep Power: 299
Originally Posted by QBoi
Let me say this again. The only reason I brought up the s2k was because Vantage said s2kman was mad that the srt4 was faster then the s2k.
Wanna see something cool? Since you believe I am comparing the s2k and srt4, look at this...
True Cost to Own an SRT-4 in 5 years is $39,253
True Cost to Own a 350Z in 5 years is $39,905
True Cost to Own an S2000 in 5 years is $41,696
Price is rather close now right?
I have no idea why you brought the higher models into this. Bring in what more people buy.
Wanna see something cool? Since you believe I am comparing the s2k and srt4, look at this...
True Cost to Own an SRT-4 in 5 years is $39,253
True Cost to Own a 350Z in 5 years is $39,905
True Cost to Own an S2000 in 5 years is $41,696
Price is rather close now right?
I have no idea why you brought the higher models into this. Bring in what more people buy.
honestly, who gives a **** about "True cost to own" besides you?
I dont know what moron came up with that crap. the thing that determines "true cost to own" would be your interest rate.
Registered!!
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,555
Likes: 0
From: familycar's Moms Room
Rep Power: 299
Originally Posted by QBoi
It's awesome in a straight line, but other then the ACR version, it sucks in the handling and reliabilty department.
Check out Edmunds.com, good info. http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/dodg...enav..4.Dodge*
Check out Edmunds.com, good info. http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/dodg...enav..4.Dodge*
Last edited by DIZZLE; Jun 7, 2005 at 04:19 PM.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,031
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US
Rep Power: 400
Originally Posted by DIZZLE
honestly, who gives a **** about "True cost to own" besides you?
I dont know what moron came up with that crap. the thing that determines "true cost to own" would be your interest rate.
I dont know what moron came up with that crap. the thing that determines "true cost to own" would be your interest rate.
to say "who gives a **** about true cost to own" is a very poor statement. while many people don't actually do the research, you'd be amazed at how much a difference it makes. sometimes a crappy $14,000 car will cost you MORE to own over 5 years than a well built $20,000 car. it's a VERY relevant statement. unfortunately most people don't look at those numbers for reasons beyond me.
