Srt-4 calling me out

[xcelr8]

Ive raced one that ran 11.45 @128 on street tires and meth, no NOS. bottles are for babies! But unless they build the bottom end with a bigger turbo, I give them 10-20 pulls then BOOM! GL

[mxlplx71]

my turbo daytona ran 18-20 lbs all day for over a year on pump gas. i never had a problem with the car. but to run 11s he probly needs 25+lbs and race gas.

[00z28bubba]

get those m/t's nice and warm. with a stall i would guarantee a win with those tires and your previous times. even if he does actually run 11s a stalled auto with proper tires and your previous times is just too much to handle. solid traction set ups are just too much to overcome. especially in a fwd car with street tires. if he has the power he claims he wont be setting any personal bests in street tires in hotter weather.

[Zinergy]

my turbo daytona ran 18-20 lbs all day for over a year on pump gas. i never had a problem with the car. but to run 11s he probly needs 25+lbs and race gas.

Yeah but on what turbo? PSI means nothing if you dont know the turbo size. I have been running 17-18 peak psi on my DD for 50,000 miles now but on the stock turbo. My bottom end would have blown long ago if i tried to run 17-18psi on something big like a gt35r or gt40r. PSI means nothing its all about how much air the turbo can flow and that is different from turbo to turbo regardless if the PSI is the same.

[Doppleganger871]

400'ish HP is safe for the bottom end of the 2.4L, it's when you start hitting the 500HP mark that you need to start to mod it down there. The stock tiny turbo is good for about 300HP with some supporting hardware, and it makes that below 5500RPM. The stock axle shafts should be upgraded if yer up near that 400HP mark, and there are 750HP axle shafts available.

And I prefer racing from a dig, even against AWD's. ;]

[johnnybz28]

Yeah but on what turbo? PSI means nothing if you dont know the turbo size. I have been running 17-18 peak psi on my DD for 50,000 miles now but on the stock turbo. My bottom end would have blown long ago if i tried to run 17-18psi on something big like a gt35r or gt40r. PSI means nothing its all about how much air the turbo can flow and that is different from turbo to turbo regardless if the PSI is the same.

I had an SRT-4 before my Camaro. I was running 22lbs of boost on a .50 trim turbo on the stock block making 390-400whp for over 2 years with no problems and 0 knock. There are quite a few here in NYC doing the same thing.

[Zinergy]

I had an SRT-4 before my Camaro. I was running 22lbs of boost on a .50 trim turbo on the stock block making 390-400whp for over 2 years with no problems and 0 knock. There are quite a few here in NYC doing the same thing.

If you look back through the posts I said I have seen many stock long block SRT-4s making 400-450whp, with fuel system/turbo/supporting mods. And had 2 friends doing just that Post number 20 on the first page. .50 trim isnt that big, its a very common size for srt-4 upgrade but still small in the 6 and 8 cylinder world.

[Zinergy]

400'ish HP is safe for the bottom end of the 2.4L, it's when you start hitting the 500HP mark that you need to start to mod it down there. The stock tiny turbo is good for about 300HP with some supporting hardware, and it makes that below 5500RPM. The stock axle shafts should be upgraded if yer up near that 400HP mark, and there are 750HP axle shafts available.

And I prefer racing from a dig, even against AWD's. ;]

Then you must prefer losing, A AWD car with the same WHP and simular weight will rape you from a dig as will a RWD car setup to hook cutting 1.4 60 ft times.

I like SRT-4s and I liked working on them but I just dont undersand why someone would want to build a FWD 2.4 liter, your starting with a disadvantage that can only be overcome by putting a bigger engine in and making the car RWD. Yes you can put a bigger turob and make more power but you can do that with a V8 and make the same power on much much less psi and strain to the engine. Not to mention more displacement means you spool turbos faster and therefore can run a bigger turbo with less psi and make more power with less lag all because of the size of the engine. Why would someone want to start with these disadvantages?

What does a time slip of your runs look like in that car? Do you have any? And what are your mods?

[LS1rapist]

Then you must prefer losing, A AWD car with the same WHP and simular weight will rape you from a dig as will a RWD car setup to hook cutting 1.4 60 ft times.

I like SRT-4s and I liked working on them but I just dont undersand why someone would want to build a FWD 2.4 liter, your starting with a disadvantage that can only be overcome by putting a bigger engine in and making the car RWD. Yes you can put a bigger turob and make more power but you can do that with a V8 and make the same power on much much less psi and strain to the engine. Not to mention more displacement means you spool turbos faster and therefore can run a bigger turbo with less psi and make more power with less lag all because of the size of the engine. Why would someone want to start with these disadvantages?

find me an AWD car that weighs 2800lbs. alot of people dont buy a car to just race with. some people dont want to cram their wife and kids in a camaro. some people would like to get decent gas mileage. Some people want to be able to do that while still having the ability to hit the track every now and again. To each his own.

Realistically an SS makes around 300whp stock, SRT4s dyno 240-250whp from the factory, more with a $2 spring mod. Dont be naive about something you are afraid to understand.

[Doppleganger871]

It's the challenge I like. Driver mod makes a bigger difference with FWD. AWD is easy, as long as you don't lose yer clutch or other driveline component. RWD is somewhere in the middle. This SRT is a lot of "firsts" for me... First FWD, first 4-wheel indep suspension, first manual, first 4 cyl, first turbo, first car with struts, first odd-year vehicle, first "compact" car, first car I can't slide under without jacking it up.

Right out of the box, the thing is pretty quick. And it continues the tradition of turbo mopars from the 80's. Nothing like seeing a minivan spank a camaro.

[Zinergy]

find me an AWD car that weighs 2800lbs. alot of people dont buy a car to just race with. some people dont want to cram their wife and kids in a camaro. some people would like to get decent gas mileage. Some people want to be able to do that while still having the ability to hit the track every now and again. To each his own.

Realistically an SS makes around 300whp stock, SRT4s dyno 240-250whp from the factory, more with a $2 spring mod. Dont be naive about something you are afraid to understand.

2002-2005 wrx was 2800-2900lbs.

I got 28mpg freeway with my 2000 T/A. I get 28mpg freeway with my AWD legacy that seats 4 and can go through 10+ inches of snow. I also put down 250whp through an automatic AWD drivetrain with 200 in mods, gutted dp/up and a tune. I paid for new gaskets, the tuning and a USB to ECU cable so i could data log. Ran a 13.6 with a automatic so no 5-6k rpms launch in a 3350lbs car. So i undestand exactly what a good dd/ sometimes track car is. But were talking performance potential of the cars and a 2.4 will never have the potential of a gm ls series engine.

Whats that last line im afraid to understand? You still answered none of my questions as to why you would one as a performance car. You want to get good mpgs and have 4 doors get a camry or cobalt or 30 other cars and get 35-43mpg. Anytime you built a turbo 4 and make 400-600whp that means adding a much bigger fuel system to support the new bigger air flow and your MPG argument goes out the window. I made 427whp with my T/A with head work, cam and supporting mods, spent less than 4k for the parts did the install myself, minus the head work and still got mid 20s mpg freeway.

[Zinergy]

It's the challenge I like. Driver mod makes a bigger difference with FWD. AWD is easy, as long as you don't lose yer clutch or other driveline component. RWD is somewhere in the middle. This SRT is a lot of "firsts" for me... First FWD, first 4-wheel indep suspension, first manual, first 4 cyl, first turbo, first car with struts, first odd-year vehicle, first "compact" car, first car I can't slide under without jacking it up.

Right out of the box, the thing is pretty quick. And it continues the tradition of turbo mopars from the 80's. Nothing like seeing a minivan spank a camaro.

I suppose i understand the challenge part as i made a 245crank hp 87 supra into a 517whp car but in the end when i owned the supra nad T/A at the same time i found how much more reliable and fun the T/A was. And if i had put the money into the T/A instead of the supra I would have had a 700-800whp beast.

[Doppleganger871]

Plus I have a really thick skin, and can take all the bashing and still smile. I still have a 94 Bronco (302), and a 2002 WJ (4.7). The WJ is what I'll be taking to work the STPR rally race, and the Bronco is useful for getting thru 24+ inches of snow (lifted, with traction aides in the axles, gears, etc, etc...)

[Zinergy]

Plus I have a really thick skin, and can take all the bashing and still smile. I still have a 94 Bronco (302), and a 2002 WJ (4.7). The WJ is what I'll be taking to work the STPR rally race, and the Bronco is useful for getting thru 24+ inches of snow (lifted, with traction aides in the axles, gears, etc, etc...)

Which just makes me as the question if you have other cars for snow use and DD why oh why a srt-4 for the performance car lol. Im not trying to bash you at all, like i said i have worked on and driven many times 400whp srt-4s and they are fun but i would never own one for the reasons i listed. Im just asking questions as to why people want to build them so much.

[Doppleganger871]

The car is fun to drive. I've put 34,000 miles on it since Nov of 08, and I don't drive it in the winter. Fuel economy is a nice bargaining chip with the XYL, too.

I have too many hobbies for my budget, so they're all under-funded most of the time. Splitting my income between the SRT, WJ, Bronco, Ham Radio, Firearms, Computers, House, etc, etc, etc... Denny's size pie slices.

I suppose a 200K income would help, but then I'd just lose half of that in taxes anyway.

In 2003, when the SRT-4 debuted, there was nothing that could touch it for the price. I'd love to get a Shelby Charger GHLS, too. I like what Chrysler did with their turbocharged cars. They're fun, different, and have a distinct personality. The sound of this 2.4 in unique. Every SBC V8 I hear sounds the same. Good, but something I've heard before. Same with SBF's. The gurgling, popping, and muffler-less exhaust that came from the factory was unheard of from a production car. It sounded like it was unfinished, and not ready for street use. Beautiful. I love the violence that this oddly-shapped 2.4 can produce. It's not a short-stroke ricer, it's a torque monster. Akin to the venerable 4.0 (and variants) Jeep motor. Stroke and turbo that thing, and it's in-freakin-sane. And that's 60 year old technology.

Though a GNX is still my #1 all-time 'want'. Probably never happen.

I guess I really don't care what's "fastest", as there's always someone faster. I liked the thumbs up I got from a BMW driver that got on it, and quickly saw my tail lights. He understood. Every manufacturer has their "special" cars. Short production runs that have quite a following. There's a few from each of the big 3 that I'd want, I just happened to stumble upon this one. I'll have this thing for a LONG time, just like my 3rd (WJ) and 2nd (Bronco) vehicles. (First was an 84 regal 2dr, 3.8 2bbl (replaced with a 4.1 4bbl later on), black, got it from my grandfather.) I do so many mods to my vehicles, it's a lot of labor to do them to another one, so I'd rather just keep them around.

Well, this went on longer than expected.

[Lunatikgixxer]

throw a turbo in a v8 and ull never have to worry about the ricers beating u with boost.
oh wait, whats this
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlAuImA2HbY&feature=related[/ame]

[Doppleganger871]

Until you get to a turn, then yea.

[Zinergy]

Until you get to a turn, then yea.

Every hear of a corvette? They have v8s too and can turn. SRT-4s were never the best handling car, and FWD doesnt help the argument once again. Ever hear of understeer? FWD hurts performance in all field whether it be straight line or twisties.

[Doppleganger871]

Every hear of a corvette? They have v8s too and can turn. SRT-4s were never the best handling car, and FWD doesnt help the argument once again. Ever hear of understeer? FWD hurts performance in all field whether it be straight line or twisties.

That was a funny lookin' vette in that video.

[c5z28]

OP it will be interesting to see if your stock stall will handle e.t's. My car bogged only running autox tires and another local bogged as well. Although I am sure a certain troll will tell me otherwise what I experienced in my own car.