Dodge Neon SRT-4...

  • Thread starter Thread starter tehFAO
  • 71 comments
  • 3,750 views
Jim Prower
You seem like a knowledgeable person, and if you know of a well-cared for, kindly regarded SRT-4, go for it.
Click to expand...

Quite right...

Check for lady-owned cars. That's how I got my Celica, and for the most part, its been meticulously maintained in the 10 years shes had it. Small issues aside, its in mint condition, and although I paid a bit more than usual for it, it was still a good deal.
 
Joey D
It's still just a Neon with a turbo on it. The car was designed to have performance on the cheap, that's never a good combination.
Click to expand...
it's not just a neon with a turbo. i have a moderately fixed up standard 2005 sxt and i can asure srt4's are way different. i mean the engine's are different from the getgo, the sxt's 2.0 sohc making around 143 whp, then there's the standard se with a 1.8 sohc witch makes 120ish,then the RT with the less bored non turbo 2.4l dohc from the srt witch makes's 170ish to the wheels. then there's the srt4 mopar built reworked bored 2.4l dohc turbo(4G63) charged 4 banger. also not to mention sport tuned suspension, front and rear disk brakes, and re worked struts from a dogde stratus RT. but yea. as for reliability i would'nt say as much both my friends have had problem's with there's.. but they were both use'd any way.
 
Which does make me think...

I imagine that a GT-Cruiser (PT Cruiser Turbo, same engine as the SRT-4) would likely hold up a bit better (less abuse) and likely be cheaper to buy at outset as well. Probably be cheaper to insure too. Seems like minor modifications on a car like that would make it a capable all-rounder...
 
Duke
Abusing the living crap out of something will kill or injure it no matter how well it is engineered. By your logic, F1 cars should never break since they are so well engineered.
Click to expand...

Who the hell said F1 cars were well-engineered? I actually think the Neon SRT-4 is probably better-engineered than an F1 car, based on the fact that it has to go over every road surface in every temperature with every different driving style and do that while playing a CD, or receiving radio reception, and lighting up brake lights, and being quiet enough to hold a conversation, etc etc etc. The average road car is much more well-engineered than a one-purpose race car.

And yes I believe that the best of the best performance cars should NOT break. If I were to buy a 997 Turbo new today I'd kick the **** out of it. You're telling me the next owner should stay away cause I took it to every track day I could find? Man... the next owner's a wimp. The car was built for performance, so if I own it, it's gonna perform, bar none. If the car can't take it, it's the car's fault - if the next owner can't take it, then he should consider a midsize sedan. And thus "lowly" SRT-4s should break very little, if they were doing what they were DESIGNED to do. If their design was too weak to handle it, then that's a whole different story.
 
TorqueHappenS08
it's not just a neon with a turbo.
i have a moderately fixed up standard 2005 sxt and i can asure srt4's are way different.
Click to expand...
This much is true.
i mean the engine's are different from the getgo, the sxt's 2.0 sohc making around 143 whp, then there's the standard se with a 1.8 sohc witch makes 120ish,then the RT with the less bored non turbo 2.4l dohc from the srt witch makes's 170ish to the wheels.
Click to expand...
This is all entirely incorrect.

All US-spec 2-gen Neons have a 2.0l SOHC engine except the SRT. It comes in 2 forms: regular and Magnum. The regular version in your SXT makes about 132 hp stock, same as a base SE. IT IS PRECISELY THE SAME ENGINE AS YOUR SXT. In Magnum trim, which is found in 2-gen ACRs and R/Ts, the 2.0 SOHC makes about 150hp.

No Neon except the SRT ever came with a 2.4l engine. And all SRTs are the turbo 2.4 DOHC also found in the GT Cruiser. By the way, the 2.0 SOHC, the 2.0 DOHC from the 1st-gen, and the 2.4 DOHC are all 100% Chrysler designs, except for the Mitsu turbocharger itself.
 
M5Power
And thus "lowly" SRT-4s should break very little, if they were doing what they were DESIGNED to do. If their design was too weak to handle it, then that's a whole different story.
Click to expand...

No one is really attempting to destroy your point of view, because it is technically correct. But you've also gotta take into consideration the kind of driver that is going to be abusing an SRT-4 versus that of a Porsche 911... Chances are that an SRT-4 is going to some kind of novice, who thinks he knows better, and likely hasn't had driving lessons. You can imagine what kind of damage can be done if they don't know any better.

Certainly, yes, the boys in the SRT division designed the car to take a lot of abuse. But just like any other car, there is a certain level at which it is too much, and it all goes to hell... And that goes for ANY car. If anything, you should know more than anyone else here while working at a Ferrari dealer. If they are in fact the pinnacle of performance cars, why are the F1 gearboxes so fussy when they're used properly?

That's right, they're Italian... All things are forgiven...
 
YSSMAN
I imagine that a GT-Cruiser (PT Cruiser Turbo, same engine as the SRT-4) would likely hold up a bit better (less abuse) and likely be cheaper to buy at outset as well. Probably be cheaper to insure too. Seems like minor modifications on a car like that would make it a capable all-rounder...
Click to expand...
PT Turbos are a lot heavier than SRT-4s (to the tune of a quarter ton), have a much higher center of gravity and only came with 4 speed automatics. One could probably fix most of these things, but it might end up not saving much money in the long run to do so (pretty good idea regardless, and probably the route I would take).
 
Yes the GT was manual or auto, but there was an 180hp detuned version of the turbo 2.4 that only came with an auto and was available in the Touring and Limited models. ;)
 
buickgnx88
Yes the GT was manual or auto, but there was an 180hp detuned version of the turbo 2.4 that only came with an auto and was available in the Touring and Limited models. ;)
Click to expand...

YSSMAN suggested the GT, not the PT Turbo. I don't know why anyone would consider the latter.
 
Yes, but you replied to Toranado who was just talking about a PT Turbo with an auto, so it's quite plausable he was thinking of what I mentioned.
 
TorqueHappenS08
it's not just a neon with a turbo. i have a moderately fixed up standard 2005 sxt and i can asure srt4's are way different. i mean the engine's are different from the getgo, the sxt's 2.0 sohc making around 143 whp, then there's the standard se with a 1.8 sohc witch makes 120ish,then the RT with the less bored non turbo 2.4l dohc from the srt witch makes's 170ish to the wheels. then there's the srt4 mopar built reworked bored 2.4l dohc turbo(4G63) charged 4 banger. also not to mention sport tuned suspension, front and rear disk brakes, and re worked struts from a dogde stratus RT. but yea. as for reliability i would'nt say as much both my friends have had problem's with there's.. but they were both use'd any way.
Click to expand...

Please make an attempt to use capital letters and spell things to the best of your ability. We all make mistakes but please at least try.

And yes it is just a Neon with a turbo in it. I've driven several SRT-4's and agree they are fast and aren't bad sport compacts but it's still a Neon no matter how you look at it. Just like a Cobalt SS has a bunch of non-standard Cobalt parts on it, but in the end it's still just a Cobalt with a turbo.
 
WideBody_CobaltSS_exfrdrvr34.jpg
 
M5Power
The most annoying thing on Earth is when people say performance cars may have been abused in the past so stay away from them. Well durrrr... but if they're performance cars shouldn't they hold up??? If not it's not the fault of the prior owner but of bad engineering!
Click to expand...
There's hard use, abuse, and then there's "stupid-owner-crashed-it-2x-3x-4x...".

Nobody engineers a car to deal with the last scenario. And if a car generally has a less-experienced drivers behind the wheel, then it likely to have been crashed, smashed, curbed, and dinged in ways the manufacturer hadn't intended.

Do what Duke said, and look for a car owned by someone over 28-30. That's good advice for just about any make and model, though.
 
The Cobalt SS was another thing I was looking at though... but I couldn't really find anything on it. Does anyone know if it's about as fast as the Neon SRT-4? I know that it's been turbocharged, supercharged, and N/A... which one was the quickest?
 
The good SS was supercharged. The turbocharged, far faster model hasn't come out yet, and the NA Cobalt was "meh." Compared to the SRT-4, it was marginally slower in a straight line but handled marginally better due to better chassis control. Overall it would come down to the driver between the two cars, most likely,as the better handling Cobalt suffered from a more detached driving experience than the SRT-4, which was more raw.
 
Quite right, the SS was a bit more "grown up" than the SRT-4. Its kinda like comparing a Corvette and a Viper (in a strange way...), so its going to depend on what you want out of it. I'm personally impartial to the Cobalt SS in this comparison, however, you can get the same exact car for less with the Saturn Ion Red Line. Only problem is that it starts its life as a Saturn Ion...

...Or you can go just a little bit slower and get an Acura RSX Type-S...
 
Jim Prower
'cept the RSX is just as bad as far as former clientelle as the SRT-4 is.
Click to expand...

4 as's in one sentence. Wow.

The RSX didn't seem as well recieved as the Integra, so maybe it fared a lil better?
 
Wow. Didn't mean to do that.

RE: RSX - True, but it's still one of those cars sought after by young men. It was a bit pricier when it came out, but it may still be a problem: avoid the modified ones, definitely.
 
What draws you to the Neon?

Is it the Turbo?

The 4-doors?

The image you display when you drive a Turbo Neon?

Simple Questions really, depending on how you answer them, we here might be able to help you with your car selection.
 
Jim Prower
Wow. Didn't mean to do that.

RE: RSX - True, but it's still one of those cars sought after by young men. It was a bit pricier when it came out, but it may still be a problem: avoid the modified ones, definitely.
Click to expand...

0301lre_17zoom2002_Acura_RSX_Type-S.jpg

Bad!

Stock RSX's look nice. But they coulda kept the Teg name:indiff:
 
mustangGT90210
Jim Prower
'cept the RSX is just as bad as far as former clientelle as the SRT-4 is.
Click to expand...

4 as's in one sentence. Wow.

The RSX didn't seem as well recieved as the Integra, so maybe it fared a lil better?
Click to expand...

:lol:

RSX... tight-gated 6-speed... nice, mis-shifted, crunchy, grindy, cogs... RSX trannies blowing up make great youtube videos...
 
Well, even then, it makes me think about the "cheaper" alternative as well... The EP Honda Civic Si. No, its not as fast as the SRT-4, but it'll carry all of your crap. That, and its built a helluva lot better as well.

The thing is, that market is overflowing with good choices, its just a matter of finding the right car at the right price.
 

Latest Posts

Back