SRT Forums goodness...

[sp00ln]

But it is almost the best car since sliced bread. First, it was under $20k, now it's just about $20k. Still pretty cheap. It comes with an awesome LSD system and with just some simple mods you can get 300whp. Amazing if you ask me. And the neon shell doesn't bother me - I actually think it looks pretty aggressive. Besides? What's a WRX? It's just a legacy shell?? What about an EVO??? It's just a lancer shell. All originally slow, family, commuter cars, not ment for sport, but rather just cheap, family orianted with decent gas milage. I think that's the point of keeping it a neon. And yes, I do agree with you to the point where they could have done things better, but then you loose the great aspect of a $20k car that can hand $30k cars their asses. The SRT4 is a tuners dream - cheap, fast, reliable.

This is just my opinion on the car. And when I look at the car, I do not see a neon, I see an SRT4. And I know if neon's never existed, you'd think the SRT4 was hot. If you remember, the WRX also had a shell to break. As I've said before, my friend was one of the first people in the Reno area to own a WRX - and when he'd tell people what he drove, people said "Eh... you drive a subaru? That sux." Now they say, "Sweet! A WRX is my dream car!"

[Nick Koan]

Originally Posted by sp00ln

Besides? What's a WRX? It's just a legacy shell??

Actually, its "just an Impreza shell." The Legacy is a bit longer and wider.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by sp00ln

And I know if neon's never existed, you'd think the SRT4 was hot.

No, I'm pretty sure I still wouldn't want a FWD sports car.

[Kevin M]

Originally Posted by AtomicLabMonkey

No, I'm pretty sure I still wouldn't want a FWD sports car.

Indeed, right you are Ken.

[JC]

Originally Posted by sp00ln

The SRT4 is a tuners dream - cheap, fast, reliable.

Exactly it's a tuner's dream. It's got a big wing, body add ons, nice seats, puts down big dyno numbers, can do big burnouts to impress your friends in the high school parking lot, lay down good quarter mile times on slicks, and can smoke more expensive cars from a roll on the street. What's it's not is an enthusiast's dream. It's FWD, it's got narrow tires, FWD, shitty rims, FWD, poor build quality, FWD, small brakes, FWD, tall suspension, FWD, it's a cop magnet, oh and it's FWD.

JC

[sperry]

Originally Posted by sp00ln

But it is almost the best car since sliced bread. First, it was under $20k, now it's just about $20k. Still pretty cheap. It comes with an awesome LSD system and with just some simple mods you can get 300whp. Amazing if you ask me. And the neon shell doesn't bother me - I actually think it looks pretty aggressive. Besides? What's a WRX? It's just a legacy shell?? What about an EVO??? It's just a lancer shell. All originally slow, family, commuter cars, not ment for sport, but rather just cheap, family orianted with decent gas milage. I think that's the point of keeping it a neon. And yes, I do agree with you to the point where they could have done things better, but then you loose the great aspect of a $20k car that can hand $30k cars their asses. The SRT4 is a tuners dream - cheap, fast, reliable.

This is just my opinion on the car. And when I look at the car, I do not see a neon, I see an SRT4. And I know if neon's never existed, you'd think the SRT4 was hot. If you remember, the WRX also had a shell to break. As I've said before, my friend was one of the first people in the Reno area to own a WRX - and when he'd tell people what he drove, people said "Eh... you drive a subaru? That sux." Now they say, "Sweet! A WRX is my dream car!"

What I'm talking about is instead of tossing that powerhouse motor into a $20k neon, they could have tossed it in a $20k RWD sports coupe. Granted there'd be some R&D costs for a new chassis, or for converting the Neon chassis to RWD, everyone and their momma is crying for an affordable RWD car! Seriously, name one decent $20k RWD car. An affordable Dodge turbo hatch w/ RWD would have sold even better then the SRT-4... especially w/ the drift craze going on. That thing would turn up in all sorts of motorsports... instead of just at the drag strip and Club Rally.

So, no matter how awesome the SRT-4 is, there's a pretty long list of people that would never buy one simply because it's FWD... that's just one thing you can "tune" out of the car... the ugly looks, the crappy rim/tires, the sloppy suspension, etc, can all be fixed. The FF layout... not so much.

As far as other sports cars being based on econo-boxes... that's not really my point. Sure the WRX/STi, and EVO both have econo-brethren... The difference is that the performance models don't share the econo-drivertrain the way the Neon does. Hell, even the base model Subaru's have AWD... there is no econo-drivetrain!

And for the record... Subaru used to rally the Legacy. But they realized that to be competative, they needed a car designed from the start to be used as a rally car. That's where the Impreza came from. Subaru designed the Impreza shell to have all the features they wanted in their WRC car. Then they built one with "econo" running gear for homoligation purposes, and handed off the WRX to Prodrive and STi for the race car. So even though the Impreza is an "econo-car", it's an econo-car build into a race-car shell, not the other way around.

[sp00ln]

Ah! Impreza! I feel like a n00b!

So, if a FWD car can beat you guys in a strait line and around a track, you'll still look down on it because it's FWD?

[Nick Koan]

Originally Posted by sp00ln

So, if a FWD car can beat you guys in a strait line and around a track, you'll still look down on it because it's FWD?

Straight line? Fine, straight line isn't my cup of tea.

Around a track? Perhaps, but I'd bet that has more to do with driver and setup then the actual car (unless you've seen some stock versus stock track race that I haven't). We'll hopefully be able to see them race in Speed World GT/TC next year, when FI cars are allowed.

Rally? SRT-4 is dominating FWD, but still can't keep up with AWD cars. They are running Stage 2 and Stage 3 cars, they still can't beat Group N WRXs.

And yeah, I do think the SRT-4 is a decent car. I just think stuff Subaru offers is better as an all around package.

[JC]

Originally Posted by sp00ln

So, if a FWD car can beat you guys in a strait line and around a track, you'll still look down on it because it's FWD?

For me it's not that I'm looking down on FWD cars but it's not the driving experience that I want. You can certainly modify a FWD car to handle more RWD-like and be fast but to me you always trying to fight against it's inherent nature. I prefer to buy a car I enjoy and try to enhance it's character not try to overcome it.

[sperry]

Originally Posted by sp00ln

Ah! Impreza! I feel like a n00b!

So, if a FWD car can beat you guys in a strait line and around a track, you'll still look down on it because it's FWD?

FWD doesn't suck in all cases. I get my ass handed to me regularly at National level events by the CRX drivers. My point is specifically geared towards the SRT-4. FWD can well around corners as long as the car is light... and I mean *extremely* light... like a 2200 lb CRX. Then you can keep momentum up in the corners, and having low power isn't a big issue. (IMO, a CRX may be the ultimate street tire autoX car... us WRX owners only get away with it in Reno because the turbo counters the altitude mre effectively.)

However, the SRT-4's beefy motor will *never* be light. That neon will be over 3000 lbs in *any* trim. To get a heavy car like that to handle well in the twisites, you need to be able to throttle steer it, and that's very difficult in a FWD car. For example, have you ever seen a drift EG6? It's basically all hand-brake... IMO it's pretty stupid to "drift" a car by driving around with the handbrake on 90% of the time... you might as well just toss some cafeteria trays under the rear-wheels. Without drive wheels in the back, it's very hard to make a heavy car handle well in anything but a straight line... and even then, RWD has the advantage.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by sp00ln

So, if a FWD car can beat you guys in a strait line and around a track, you'll still look down on it because it's FWD?

Yes, because FWD is an inherent design flaw in a motorsports application.

Formula-1 cars are RWD for a reason...

[sperry]

Originally Posted by AtomicLabMonkey

Yes, because FWD is an inherent design flaw in a motorsports application.

Formula-1 cars are RWD for a reason...

Yeah, the rules won't allow them to be AWD.

[Nick Koan]

Originally Posted by sperry

Yeah, the rules won't allow them to be AWD.

Do you want a crankshaft spinning at 12k RPMs literally inches away from your nuts?

[sperry]

Originally Posted by nKoan

Do you want a crankshaft spinning at 12k RPMs literally inches away from your nuts?

a) it could be geared down and back up so it's not spinning so fast
b) it could be hydraulic, so the only thing transfering power near the driver would be fluid
c) it could be elctro-mechanical, or use an electric motor up front

Saftey isn't really the primary reason AWD isn't allowed... cost is.

[sp00ln]

Originally Posted by JC

I prefer to buy a car I enjoy and try to enhance it's character not try to overcome it.

Ah, you probably said it best.