SRT-4 Test Drive - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 23 of 23

This is a discussion on SRT-4 Test Drive within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; Originally posted by DeeezNuuuts83 The road-going versions of both the Neon and the WRX differ from their autoX/rally editions, but ...

  1. #16
    Registered User ebbtide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    195
    Originally posted by DeeezNuuuts83
    The road-going versions of both the Neon and the WRX differ from their autoX/rally editions, but the production WRX is far closer to its own counterpart than any production Neon is to its own counterpart. So I could really care less about the Neon's autoX history. Giving more credit to the Neon because of stuff like that would be like saying that the Celica is a wild beast since its funny-car version is bad-ass. Get it?

    Basically, the performance of autoX/rally/etc. cars doesn't mean anything when it comes to the cars that are sold in dealerships since they're so different in most cases.
    I don't mean to flame you, but WTF are you talking about? The neons winning autoX's were purchased at dealerships, that can't be said about the rally versions of the WRX. Most of the classes the Neons win require the car be as close to stock as possible. That is why the Neons were givin their own class. These ARE road cars sold at dealerships.
    2003 Dodge SRT-4 Black
    221 whp/ 241 wtrq *Stock*
    13.585 @ 102.88 *Stage 1*

    "Nothing gives you such a sense of the infinite as stupidity"

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    Registered User DeeezNuuuts83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    199
    Originally posted by ebbtide
    I don't mean to flame you, but WTF are you talking about? The neons winning autoX's were purchased at dealerships, that can't be said about the rally versions of the WRX. Most of the classes the Neons win require the car be as close to stock as possible. That is why the Neons were givin their own class. These ARE road cars sold at dealerships.
    If you say so... you probably know more about Neons than I do. Thanks for the clarification. I just didn't think those autoX Neons were stock, 'cause I've been in a few Neons and driven them and they don't handle as well as you'd expect an autoX-capable car to perform. Either way, that SRT-4 is an angry little ****er, despite its weird exterior, cheap interior, tall shifter, and stiff clutch (which was obviously made for drop-clutch launches).

  4. #18
    Registered User Rockatansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL - USA!
    Posts
    49
    Ayyy - so many comments with so little info... The ACR was hardly a "purpose-built" race car. The only substantial differences between the ACRs and any other similarly stripped Justaneons were the Koni's, and thicker front hubs. I've seen so many ACRs bought by non-racers just for their commuter car. So many did not know about this 'purpose' it was 'built' for. The key to the Justaneon was the super rigid unibody and the relatively punchy engine/trans combos. Yes, you read that right! Both the twin cam and SOHC version (both available in the ACR) were free-revving, relatively strong N/A motors with an extra dose of torque, something the N/A Jap motors rarely get. The 5 speed trans was very tough (check Len Ayala's 10 sec turbo ACR - he ran a stock 5 speed for at least 3 seasons!!! He only switched to a built auto for the faster shifts!) And no Neon ever came from the factory with an LSD. That didn't seem to stop the hook-up though. Torque steer was hardly a factor! (Equal-length half-shafts, I think...) Vette was right - the auto-x courses (especially of the late 90's) were just packed with Justaneons in all varieties: the ACRs of course, but the R/Ts and the *gasp* base models too. It wasn't due to any mindless brand-loyalty or crowd-following BS that you see on the street. The fact was that the car won races, plain and simple. You buy the car that wins. The Imprezas in the clubs that I saw race typically were lagging behind, despite what a lot of us thought they'd do. The Miata was popular also, and to a lesser degree so was the Integra, for many of the same reasons the Neon was; mainly that they were proven on the track. Of course they both cost considerably more than the Justaneon. I'm just as perplexed as the rest that the camber can't be adjusted on the new ones. With the autoX heritage the Justaneon has, it seems odd that suspension tweaks were not considered in the SRT4. I can't imagine it will be too long though before some after-market company comes up with a way around that (that doesn't involve coilovers... )

    All that being said, I still drive a Rexwagon (I'll be auto-xing it this year!) But one must give credit where credit is due.
    Driving the whiteline nightmare!

    2003 Aspen White WRX Wagon 5 speed

  5. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    370
    Rockatansky,

    I guess your comments were made to my remarks about "purpose built" and "well just a NEON".

    I stand on my first comments and think you might want to re-examine yours. Your post prompted me to rethink what I said but I could only find more information stating that the ACR was "purpose built".

    Here's one:

    "ACR - R/T
    1995 brought the introduction of the ACR, a purpose built neon designed for autocrossing and road courses, built for the budget weekend racer. These neon dominated SCCA Solo2 competitions and inspired the Neon Challenge. 1998 revived the classic R/T, complete with racing stripes and special badging."

    "Neon ACR. No frills, lots of thrills.
    What you give up in cushy comforts you make up in performance with Neon ACR (American Club Racer). For example, hand-crank windows make it lighter and therefore faster in races sanctioned by the Sports Car Club of America."

    Furthermore, it was appointed with other non-standard "well it's just a NEON" equipment than just Koni struts, stiffer springs and front and rear sways. It also got a quicker steering ratio and the ACR coupe got the 2.0L 150HP motor (no rev limiter either) and was only available in a maunal.

    Ok enough Neon arguments.
    2002 WRBP WRX

    Old setup = BPM GT turboback, PDE up-pipe, Unichip w/custom map, cooler plugs (NGK range 7), Walbro 255LPH FP, MBC (15 PSI), and custom built turbo utilizing the 13G housing (Internals: Hitachi compressor wheel, Mitsu 15G turbine lightly clipped).

    1/4, 12.88 105.10 - 1/8, 8.09 85.96

    New set up = Now w/UTEC and STI Injectors

    1/4, ? - 1/8, ?

  6. #20
    Registered User ebbtide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    195
    Note, the ACR motor is the same as the R/T motor. Either way, as was mentioned, credit where credit's due.
    2003 Dodge SRT-4 Black
    221 whp/ 241 wtrq *Stock*
    13.585 @ 102.88 *Stage 1*

    "Nothing gives you such a sense of the infinite as stupidity"

  7. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    188
    Ummm, the original Neon Sport coupe and the R/T has the same spring rates, roll bars and faster steering as the ACR. Only difference were the struts and thicker hubs on the ACR. 95 ACRs didn't have a speed limiter same with the 95 Sport coupe. After that, the ACR and the R/T were limited to 130 versus the 118 for other Neons.

    The 95-96 ACRs didn't have Konis, but Arvins with adjustable camber.

    The ACR, R/T and earlier Sport coupes are all in D-stock, while the rest of the Neons are in E-stock.

    -B

  8. #22
    Registered User Rockatansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL - USA!
    Posts
    49
    Originally posted by boosted 4
    Rockatansky,

    I guess your comments were made to my remarks about "purpose built" and "well just a NEON".

    Good point - I guess it depends on what you think "purpose built" means. I tend to consider it more factory custom than you, (think ACR Viper) but hey, no biggie. But my comments were meant to address the difference between the ACR and the rest of 'em. The R/T and the ACR had all the same purpo... excuse me, enhanced standard equipment except for the Koni's/hubs. The DOHC motor was available in other models. The ACR sedan got the SOHC. Power windows were not standard (exc. for R/T). The point is that the difference to all but the best auto-xers between the ACR and another "just a Neon" (your quote, not mine) was not that significant. Critical items were the same. In my auto-xing experience, R/Ts and twin cam Sport models did just as well. No real rethinking necessary.
    Driving the whiteline nightmare!

    2003 Aspen White WRX Wagon 5 speed

  9. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    370
    Okay no problem.
    2002 WRBP WRX

    Old setup = BPM GT turboback, PDE up-pipe, Unichip w/custom map, cooler plugs (NGK range 7), Walbro 255LPH FP, MBC (15 PSI), and custom built turbo utilizing the 13G housing (Internals: Hitachi compressor wheel, Mitsu 15G turbine lightly clipped).

    1/4, 12.88 105.10 - 1/8, 8.09 85.96

    New set up = Now w/UTEC and STI Injectors

    1/4, ? - 1/8, ?

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •