NEW DODGE SRT-4 NEON VS. WRX
Registered!!
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, US
Rep Power: 0 
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: Neonmike
Consumer reports said that the dodge shadow was dangerous because the car lost control when the wheel was jerked violently at highway speeds.
Consumer reports said that when you press the gas pedal on the Z28, it would accelerate wildly. Most troubling.
Consumer reports said that the fiero GT was the "fastest car they had ever tested"
MY neon was never in consumer reports. I'm still waiting for all the reliability issues the ricer folk have predicted for me.[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: Neonmike
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: CivicRyder
Hmmmmmmm... Let's think about this. Let's consult Consumer Reports to see which car had major reliability issues? Could it be the Neon? I think that is enough supporting evidence to override any advocacy you have for the Neon. Now humble yourself!!!
[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: CivicRyder
Hmmmmmmm... Let's think about this. Let's consult Consumer Reports to see which car had major reliability issues? Could it be the Neon? I think that is enough supporting evidence to override any advocacy you have for the Neon. Now humble yourself!!!
[hr]
Consumer reports said that when you press the gas pedal on the Z28, it would accelerate wildly. Most troubling.
Consumer reports said that the fiero GT was the "fastest car they had ever tested"
MY neon was never in consumer reports. I'm still waiting for all the reliability issues the ricer folk have predicted for me.[hr]
Registered!!
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, US
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: bustervic
Mbow...gone
CivicRyder...gone
Like I said the facts shut some people up when they aren't big enough to admit when they are wrong.[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: bustervic
Mbow...gone
CivicRyder...gone
Like I said the facts shut some people up when they aren't big enough to admit when they are wrong.[hr]
Registered!!
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, US
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: bustervic
Consumer reports takes a 5 yr average for their ratings. The 1st gen car accounts for 4 yrs of the ratings and we know that it had some quality issues. Only 1 yr of the 1st gen reporting brought the car up a couple of notches, just wait until there are 3 yrs reporting. JD power initail quality survey reported the Neon just a hair under even the Civic and ahead of Sentra, Protege's, etc. Latest Car and Driver slammed the Civic for having shoddy paint and quality. Look at the rating for the Pt cruiser which also gets commended for its quality and reliability. Besides, who are you guys to judge, your not driving Bentley's for christ sakes, Civics!!
The 2.4 Turbo motor has been in production for 3 yrs in Euro and Mexican Stratus vehicles so there is plenty of development there to further help reliability. They use an iron block and forged oil cooled pistons and an 8.1 compression, that equals bombproof and reliability even when the boost is upped. Do you know why the WRX isn't the fave motor to mod overseas.....aluminum block has some limits for what in can hold for the boost.
The SRT already brakes quicker, has better slalom and skidpad numbers, so why wouldn't it outhandle the WRX?
Maybe you don't like the looks, whatever, that is subjective. The facts state that this car will be super fast and reliable. Domestic or not.
Now you humble yourself......[IMG]i/expressions/laugh2.gif[/IMG]
[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/IMG][hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: bustervic
Consumer reports takes a 5 yr average for their ratings. The 1st gen car accounts for 4 yrs of the ratings and we know that it had some quality issues. Only 1 yr of the 1st gen reporting brought the car up a couple of notches, just wait until there are 3 yrs reporting. JD power initail quality survey reported the Neon just a hair under even the Civic and ahead of Sentra, Protege's, etc. Latest Car and Driver slammed the Civic for having shoddy paint and quality. Look at the rating for the Pt cruiser which also gets commended for its quality and reliability. Besides, who are you guys to judge, your not driving Bentley's for christ sakes, Civics!!
The 2.4 Turbo motor has been in production for 3 yrs in Euro and Mexican Stratus vehicles so there is plenty of development there to further help reliability. They use an iron block and forged oil cooled pistons and an 8.1 compression, that equals bombproof and reliability even when the boost is upped. Do you know why the WRX isn't the fave motor to mod overseas.....aluminum block has some limits for what in can hold for the boost.
The SRT already brakes quicker, has better slalom and skidpad numbers, so why wouldn't it outhandle the WRX?
Maybe you don't like the looks, whatever, that is subjective. The facts state that this car will be super fast and reliable. Domestic or not.
Now you humble yourself......[IMG]i/expressions/laugh2.gif[/IMG]
[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/IMG][hr]
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Pitcarin, PA, USA
Rep Power: 0 Please, if you're going to make an arguement about neons having major failures, you could at least give specific examples. I'd like to see what you consider a major failure.
Of the things on my neon that have failed on their own, I've had a bad TPS, a headgasket leak before I even purchased the car, and a bad spring in my turn signal switch. I don't even know that the headgasket failed, other than it was replaced (to update to multilayer?) along with the timing belt after the car was traded in.
Now, i'l admit that the 1995-97 models sucked by today's standards, but when they re-did the car in 1998 they did a pretty good job. Same with the body restyle in 2000.
None of this relates to the SRT-4 anyhow. It's a new car and shares *nothing* with the 1995 models.
Of the things on my neon that have failed on their own, I've had a bad TPS, a headgasket leak before I even purchased the car, and a bad spring in my turn signal switch. I don't even know that the headgasket failed, other than it was replaced (to update to multilayer?) along with the timing belt after the car was traded in.
Now, i'l admit that the 1995-97 models sucked by today's standards, but when they re-did the car in 1998 they did a pretty good job. Same with the body restyle in 2000.
None of this relates to the SRT-4 anyhow. It's a new car and shares *nothing* with the 1995 models.
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
From: Tampa, FL
Rep Power: 0 i would choose the wrx mainly because it is awd and i have never experienced that type of handling before.
"The SRT already brakes quicker, has better slalom and skidpad numbers, so why wouldn't it outhandle the WRX?"
to whoever said this, can u provide the article where the srt outhandles the wrx, because i would figure the wrx would have better braking, slalom, and skidpad numbers....?
"The SRT already brakes quicker, has better slalom and skidpad numbers, so why wouldn't it outhandle the WRX?"
to whoever said this, can u provide the article where the srt outhandles the wrx, because i would figure the wrx would have better braking, slalom, and skidpad numbers....?
Registered!!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
From: Pontiac Michigan
Rep Power: 0 Neons suck?
"The R/T package is essentially unchanged for the 1999 model year, but as mentioned in the accompanying story, the 2000 Neon loses the 150-hp engine option. Too bad. At present, our R/T has a bit less than 20,000 miles on the clock and has served admirably. We've averaged 28 mpg, maintenance has been routine, and aside from a loose front anti-roll bar, the car has been trouble-free. Had we had to buy the Konis, the 14-inch Borbet wheels, and the Kumho racing tires, we would have paid a total price of far less than the current $2000 rebate on the car.
"This is the best car deal going," noted one staffer in the R/T's logbook. "I'm a little embarrassed to admit it, but I want a Neon."
from Car and Driver's review of a 99 Neon R/T
"The R/T package is essentially unchanged for the 1999 model year, but as mentioned in the accompanying story, the 2000 Neon loses the 150-hp engine option. Too bad. At present, our R/T has a bit less than 20,000 miles on the clock and has served admirably. We've averaged 28 mpg, maintenance has been routine, and aside from a loose front anti-roll bar, the car has been trouble-free. Had we had to buy the Konis, the 14-inch Borbet wheels, and the Kumho racing tires, we would have paid a total price of far less than the current $2000 rebate on the car.
"This is the best car deal going," noted one staffer in the R/T's logbook. "I'm a little embarrassed to admit it, but I want a Neon."
from Car and Driver's review of a 99 Neon R/T
Registered!!
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,862
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte, North Carolina, US
Rep Power: 0 Hope no one from Consumer Reports see this info as I do not have permission to present it here. I have a subscription and this info is available online to subscribers.
Doesn't look SOOOO bad until you look at the Civic's records for the past 7 yrs. Oh, and this should shut up some others about the civic as well. They know who they are.
Attachments:
[IMG]/forums/themes/orbitz/paperclip.gif[/IMG] ACF290.JPG (40 Kb)
[IMG]/forums/themes/orbitz/paperclip.gif[/IMG] ACF298.JPG (45 Kb)
[IMG]/forums/themes/orbitz/paperclip.gif[/IMG] MVC-009S.JPG (27 Kb)
Doesn't look SOOOO bad until you look at the Civic's records for the past 7 yrs. Oh, and this should shut up some others about the civic as well. They know who they are.
Attachments:
[IMG]/forums/themes/orbitz/paperclip.gif[/IMG] ACF290.JPG (40 Kb)
[IMG]/forums/themes/orbitz/paperclip.gif[/IMG] ACF298.JPG (45 Kb)
[IMG]/forums/themes/orbitz/paperclip.gif[/IMG] MVC-009S.JPG (27 Kb)
Registered!!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
From: Pontiac Michigan
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr][i]Originally posted by: Jon
to whoever said this, can u provide the article where the srt outhandles the wrx, because i would figure the wrx would have better braking, slalom, and skidpad numbers....?[hr]
[hr][i]Originally posted by: Jon
to whoever said this, can u provide the article where the srt outhandles the wrx, because i would figure the wrx would have better braking, slalom, and skidpad numbers....?[hr]
This is great : "So what's it like to drive? Bitchin', thank you. Tramp on the go pedal, and the boost gauge snaps to attention — right now. Power comes on with a profound rush, and Frankeneon hurls itself down the street with a will."
Braking : "We'd say PVO nailed its somewhat divergent dynamic targets and also nailed the braking performance. The SRT-4 delivers sports-car stopping distances — 165 feet from 70 mph — and keeps delivering, stop after stop, without fade, without drama."
Acceleration: "One look reveals the probable character of the beast, so let's just cut right to the quick. The Neon SRT-4 rips to 60 mph in 5.6 seconds, to 100 in 13.8, covers a quarter-mile in 14.2 seconds at 102 mph, and keeps on huffin' all the way to 153 mph."
Couterpoint: "Having vivid memories of the 1985 Dodge Omni GLH Turbo — harsh ride, spine-slamming power curve, and self-centering steering that went AWOL when you applied power in a curve — I had limited expectations for the new SRT-4. Sure enough, the SRT's ride is brittle, and when the boost comes up, the power explodes. But the new version retains some steering feel under power, even if cornering grip does evaporate when you apply all 215 horses. I never expected such excellent front seats. For the money, the old GLH Turbo was the fastest thing you could buy. So was the Road Runner back in the '60s. The SRT-4 continues that admirable tradition.
— Csaba Csere"
The Verdict:
"Highs: Sports-car hustle, sports-car reflexes, sports-car brakes, racing-style seats.
Lows: Reluctant shifting, rearview-inhibiting wing, racing-style seats.
The Verdict: Xtreme for everyday driving, but unbeatable for the bucks."
Doesnt sound so bad to me...
Registered!!
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, US
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: Mbow
Hope no one from Consumer Reports see this info as I do not have permission to present it here. I have a subscription and this info is available online to subscribers.
Doesn't look SOOOO bad until you look at the Civic's records for the past 7 yrs. Oh, and this should shut up some others about the civic as well. They know who they are.
[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: Mbow
Hope no one from Consumer Reports see this info as I do not have permission to present it here. I have a subscription and this info is available online to subscribers.
Doesn't look SOOOO bad until you look at the Civic's records for the past 7 yrs. Oh, and this should shut up some others about the civic as well. They know who they are.
Registered!!
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,155
Likes: 0
From: Victoria. BC
Rep Power: 0 but this is still from consumer reports. Weren't they already discredited in this thread?
Quote
[hr]
Consumer reports said that the dodge shadow was dangerous because the car lost control when the wheel was jerked violently at highway speeds.
Consumer reports said that when you press the gas pedal on the Z28, it would accelerate wildly. Most troubling.
Consumer reports said that the fiero GT was the "fastest car they had ever tested"
MY neon was never in consumer reports. I'm still waiting for all the reliability issues the ricer folk have predicted for me.
[hr]
[hr]
Consumer reports said that the dodge shadow was dangerous because the car lost control when the wheel was jerked violently at highway speeds.
Consumer reports said that when you press the gas pedal on the Z28, it would accelerate wildly. Most troubling.
Consumer reports said that the fiero GT was the "fastest car they had ever tested"
MY neon was never in consumer reports. I'm still waiting for all the reliability issues the ricer folk have predicted for me.
[hr]
Registered!!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
From: Pontiac Michigan
Rep Power: 0 Personally, I don't give a flying f**k what most of you ignorant rycerf*gs think (what with your 17 second monsters backed up by mighty 4 speed autos)
I haven't had one f**kING problem with my Neon(s) every besides routine oil changes and the like....
Go ahead and stay the jaded f**ks that you are..
I haven't had one f**kING problem with my Neon(s) every besides routine oil changes and the like....
Go ahead and stay the jaded f**ks that you are..
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
From: Tampa, FL
Rep Power: 0 holy crap, the srt-4 is better than the scooby in every respect, 0-60mph, 0-100mph, 1/4, braking distance from 70-0mph
you would figure it'd be the reverse since the wrx has awd. pretty impressive considering the srt is fwd
you would figure it'd be the reverse since the wrx has awd. pretty impressive considering the srt is fwd
Registered!!
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,862
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte, North Carolina, US
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: NitehawkVTEC
but this is still from consumer reports. Weren't they already discredited in this thread?
[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: NitehawkVTEC
but this is still from consumer reports. Weren't they already discredited in this thread?
Quote
[hr]
Consumer reports said that the dodge shadow was dangerous because the car lost control when the wheel was jerked violently at highway speeds.
Consumer reports said that when you press the gas pedal on the Z28, it would accelerate wildly. Most troubling.
Consumer reports said that the fiero GT was the "fastest car they had ever tested"
MY neon was never in consumer reports. I'm still waiting for all the reliability issues the ricer folk have predicted for me.
[hr]
[hr]
Consumer reports said that the dodge shadow was dangerous because the car lost control when the wheel was jerked violently at highway speeds.
Consumer reports said that when you press the gas pedal on the Z28, it would accelerate wildly. Most troubling.
Consumer reports said that the fiero GT was the "fastest car they had ever tested"
MY neon was never in consumer reports. I'm still waiting for all the reliability issues the ricer folk have predicted for me.
[hr]
Like I said earlier ( not directed at you Nitehawk), some people you just disagree with and move on. It's like catching a thief in the act and on video tape but the thief still insist he is innocent.
Registered!!
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,862
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte, North Carolina, US
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: screaminDOHC
Personally, I don't give a flying f**k what most of you ignorant rycerf*gs think (what with your 17 second monsters backed up by mighty 4 speed autos)
I haven't had one f**kING problem with my Neon(s) every besides routine oil changes and the like....
Go ahead and stay the jaded f**ks that you are..
[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: screaminDOHC
Personally, I don't give a flying f**k what most of you ignorant rycerf*gs think (what with your 17 second monsters backed up by mighty 4 speed autos)
I haven't had one f**kING problem with my Neon(s) every besides routine oil changes and the like....
Go ahead and stay the jaded f**ks that you are..
[hr]
No one ever said anything about performance on the civic, only reliability.
Registered!!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
From: Pontiac Michigan
Rep Power: 0 hahaha...sweet...it's so fun ruffling a few feathers...
really though..i'll stick up for Neon's reliability, and frankly, I don't give a hoot what Consumer Reports or anyone else says. I've driven my neon hard for 40k miles (plus the 30k it had on it when I bought it) and it's doing just fine. 30k of that has been with solid/stiff motormounts, and they haven't created any squeaks or rattles...
It's a cheap car, and it performs well, which is exactly what i've been saying it is. A reliability rating still doesn't really mean a whole lot to me, as I have a Neon that can disprove that.
To each his own. I have known chryslers that have broken all the time, and I have owned a Civic that ate a rod bearing at 27,000 miles.....
I will still stick up for Honda reliability, ALTHOUGH I have had better luck with my beater Neon....
:-)
really though..i'll stick up for Neon's reliability, and frankly, I don't give a hoot what Consumer Reports or anyone else says. I've driven my neon hard for 40k miles (plus the 30k it had on it when I bought it) and it's doing just fine. 30k of that has been with solid/stiff motormounts, and they haven't created any squeaks or rattles...
It's a cheap car, and it performs well, which is exactly what i've been saying it is. A reliability rating still doesn't really mean a whole lot to me, as I have a Neon that can disprove that.
To each his own. I have known chryslers that have broken all the time, and I have owned a Civic that ate a rod bearing at 27,000 miles.....
I will still stick up for Honda reliability, ALTHOUGH I have had better luck with my beater Neon....
:-)
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Pitcarin, PA, USA
Rep Power: 0 American cars = bad.
Chrysler = worst American cars.
That's Lesson #1, and it alone will save you hours of reading their blather by cutting right to the answer they will give, regardless of how badly it contradicts reality.
This is the magazine that rated the first gen Mitsubishi Eclipse near the top for performance and reliability, and rated the Eagle Talon at the bottom for both categories. Remeber, these are 'badge-engineered' cars that share 95% of their mechanicals. That's like saying Dodge Neons suck but Plymouths rule (but really meaning it).
Lesson #2:
Car = large expensive refrigerator.
Consumer Retards couldn't care less about how a car handles and performs. To them, the ideal car will start and run as long as possible without maintenance. They don't give a crap about how slowly it accelerates or how numbly it handles, as long as it is impossible to spin.
This is the magazine that recomended, literally and in print, that their readers should never buy the more powerful engine options or upgraded handling packages, because they are a waste of money.
Truthfully, having CR totally pan a car increases my interest in buying one. If they like a car, I'll test drive it just to confirm how much I hate it. Their only real automotive interests are stone-axe reliability and good resale value. None of their readers can imagine driving the same car more than 60,000 miles anyway, since CR has scared them into thinking a car is worn out and becomes an instant money pit at 4 years old.
Well, except Toyotas which are indestructible and immune to the aging process.
Chrysler = worst American cars.
That's Lesson #1, and it alone will save you hours of reading their blather by cutting right to the answer they will give, regardless of how badly it contradicts reality.
This is the magazine that rated the first gen Mitsubishi Eclipse near the top for performance and reliability, and rated the Eagle Talon at the bottom for both categories. Remeber, these are 'badge-engineered' cars that share 95% of their mechanicals. That's like saying Dodge Neons suck but Plymouths rule (but really meaning it).
Lesson #2:
Car = large expensive refrigerator.
Consumer Retards couldn't care less about how a car handles and performs. To them, the ideal car will start and run as long as possible without maintenance. They don't give a crap about how slowly it accelerates or how numbly it handles, as long as it is impossible to spin.
This is the magazine that recomended, literally and in print, that their readers should never buy the more powerful engine options or upgraded handling packages, because they are a waste of money.
Truthfully, having CR totally pan a car increases my interest in buying one. If they like a car, I'll test drive it just to confirm how much I hate it. Their only real automotive interests are stone-axe reliability and good resale value. None of their readers can imagine driving the same car more than 60,000 miles anyway, since CR has scared them into thinking a car is worn out and becomes an instant money pit at 4 years old.
Well, except Toyotas which are indestructible and immune to the aging process.
Registered!!
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,592
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, California, USA, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Sol System, Spiral arm of the Milkey Way
Rep Power: 0 "This is the magazine that recomended, literally and in print, that their readers should never buy the more powerful engine options or upgraded handling packages, because they are a waste of money."
This is SO true.
BTW i find it funny that they quoted the 03 Si as "driving like any other civic, but with more pep from the engine. nothing special here" [IMG]i/expressions/laugh2.gif[/IMG]
This is SO true.
BTW i find it funny that they quoted the 03 Si as "driving like any other civic, but with more pep from the engine. nothing special here" [IMG]i/expressions/laugh2.gif[/IMG]
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
From: Tampa, FL
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: Jon
holy crap, the srt-4 is better than the scooby in every respect, 0-60mph, 0-100mph, 1/4, braking distance from 70-0mph
you would figure it'd be the reverse since the wrx has awd. pretty impressive considering the srt is fwd[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: Jon
holy crap, the srt-4 is better than the scooby in every respect, 0-60mph, 0-100mph, 1/4, braking distance from 70-0mph
you would figure it'd be the reverse since the wrx has awd. pretty impressive considering the srt is fwd[hr]
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Pitcarin, PA, USA
Rep Power: 0 I don't see why the lighter neon would do any differently (notice the wording) than the heavier WRX in a test that involves the transitional grip of the tires/suspension. AWD really shouldn't come into play, as you're not accelerating or braking through the slalom.
AWD = nothing to do with slaloms.
AWD = nothing to do with slaloms.
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
From: Tampa, FL
Rep Power: 0 isn't slalom turning through a whole shitload of curves?
if so, the wrx's awd would come into play as the car would be accelerating through the curves more power would be given to the rear wheels in order to eliminate the loss of traction due to increased weight transfer in the front....
if so, the wrx's awd would come into play as the car would be accelerating through the curves more power would be given to the rear wheels in order to eliminate the loss of traction due to increased weight transfer in the front....
Registered!!
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,862
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte, North Carolina, US
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: Neonmike
American cars = bad.
Chrysler = worst American cars.
That's Lesson #1, and it alone will save you hours of reading their blather by cutting right to the answer they will give, regardless of how badly it contradicts reality.
This is the magazine that rated the first gen Mitsubishi Eclipse near the top for performance and reliability, and rated the Eagle Talon at the bottom for both categories. Remeber, these are 'badge-engineered' cars that share 95% of their mechanicals. That's like saying Dodge Neons suck but Plymouths rule (but really meaning it).
Lesson #2:
Car = large expensive refrigerator.
Consumer Retards couldn't care less about how a car handles and performs. To them, the ideal car will start and run as long as possible without maintenance. They don't give a crap about how slowly it accelerates or how numbly it handles, as long as it is impossible to spin.
This is the magazine that recomended, literally and in print, that their readers should never buy the more powerful engine options or upgraded handling packages, because they are a waste of money.
Truthfully, having CR totally pan a car increases my interest in buying one. If they like a car, I'll test drive it just to confirm how much I hate it. Their only real automotive interests are stone-axe reliability and good resale value. None of their readers can imagine driving the same car more than 60,000 miles anyway, since CR has scared them into thinking a car is worn out and becomes an instant money pit at 4 years old.
Well, except Toyotas which are indestructible and immune to the aging process.[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: Neonmike
American cars = bad.
Chrysler = worst American cars.
That's Lesson #1, and it alone will save you hours of reading their blather by cutting right to the answer they will give, regardless of how badly it contradicts reality.
This is the magazine that rated the first gen Mitsubishi Eclipse near the top for performance and reliability, and rated the Eagle Talon at the bottom for both categories. Remeber, these are 'badge-engineered' cars that share 95% of their mechanicals. That's like saying Dodge Neons suck but Plymouths rule (but really meaning it).
Lesson #2:
Car = large expensive refrigerator.
Consumer Retards couldn't care less about how a car handles and performs. To them, the ideal car will start and run as long as possible without maintenance. They don't give a crap about how slowly it accelerates or how numbly it handles, as long as it is impossible to spin.
This is the magazine that recomended, literally and in print, that their readers should never buy the more powerful engine options or upgraded handling packages, because they are a waste of money.
Truthfully, having CR totally pan a car increases my interest in buying one. If they like a car, I'll test drive it just to confirm how much I hate it. Their only real automotive interests are stone-axe reliability and good resale value. None of their readers can imagine driving the same car more than 60,000 miles anyway, since CR has scared them into thinking a car is worn out and becomes an instant money pit at 4 years old.
Well, except Toyotas which are indestructible and immune to the aging process.[hr]
You are right about CR and what they do. They test the reliability and longevity of their samples. That is the whole point of CR. Before I will even consider buying a car it must meet my reliability criteria which is very high. Heck, do you think I would be driving a honda if that wasn't at the top of my list. I wouldn't mind having the neon but not as a primary car to drive everyday, or a mustang, golf gti which I really wanted, etc...
Registered!!
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,862
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte, North Carolina, US
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: HondaGuru
"This is the magazine that recomended, literally and in print, that their readers should never buy the more powerful engine options or upgraded handling packages, because they are a waste of money."
This is SO true.
BTW i find it funny that they quoted the 03 Si as "driving like any other civic, but with more pep from the engine. nothing special here" [IMG]i/expressions/laugh2.gif[/IMG][hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: HondaGuru
"This is the magazine that recomended, literally and in print, that their readers should never buy the more powerful engine options or upgraded handling packages, because they are a waste of money."
This is SO true.
BTW i find it funny that they quoted the 03 Si as "driving like any other civic, but with more pep from the engine. nothing special here" [IMG]i/expressions/laugh2.gif[/IMG][hr]
The '03 review says "The high-revving Si drives similarly despite its 160-hp engine." Pretty much what was said above but w/o the bluntness.
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Pitcarin, PA, USA
Rep Power: 0
Quote
[hr]Originally posted by: Jon
isn't slalom turning through a whole shitload of curves?
if so, the wrx's awd would come into play as the car would be accelerating through the curves more power would be given to the rear wheels in order to eliminate the loss of traction due to increased weight transfer in the front....[hr]
[hr]Originally posted by: Jon
isn't slalom turning through a whole shitload of curves?
if so, the wrx's awd would come into play as the car would be accelerating through the curves more power would be given to the rear wheels in order to eliminate the loss of traction due to increased weight transfer in the front....[hr]
Registered!!
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
From: Tampa, FL
Rep Power: 0 "With a slalom you have a course laid out with cones in a straight line, spaced out so many feet apart. The idea is to weave back and forth between the cones while travelling as quickly as possible. As i have said, in a slalom there is little front-rear weight transfer, as the car is trying to maintain it's speed rather than accelerate or decelerate. Cars that change directions side to side well/quickly do better in slaloms, and that's all the suspension at work, almost nothing to do with the drive wheels or brakes."
so then there is plenty o left-to-right weight transfer of the car and still would involve the awd system, giving more power to the tires that need traction in order to avoid any sliding of the car around the cones. car and driver didn't give any numbers for the slalom test but i would imagine the wrx would do better
so then there is plenty o left-to-right weight transfer of the car and still would involve the awd system, giving more power to the tires that need traction in order to avoid any sliding of the car around the cones. car and driver didn't give any numbers for the slalom test but i would imagine the wrx would do better
