RE: 0-60 VTEC vs. SRT-4
Login  | |
|
RE: 0-60 VTEC vs. SRT-4 - 2/4/2005 9:48:53 PM
|
|
|
Kappa22
Posts: 3100
Joined: 12/4/2004
Status: offline
|
Mmmm.... ancient....
_____________________________
Your Forum Turbo Groupie...
Also your official Forum EF and GTR Brain-Trust
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 0-60 VTEC vs. SRT-4 - 2/4/2005 10:03:32 PM
|
|
|
blackeyes
Posts: 736
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Match the displacements up a little better (GSR motor), equalize them (by putting a turbo on the Civ) and mod it as close to the same as possible; SRT-4 won't stand a chance.
preach bratha preach...lol
_____________________________
vtec is a way of life
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 0-60 VTEC vs. SRT-4 - 2/4/2005 11:00:08 PM
|
|
|
sacicons
Posts: 7675
Joined: 6/26/2004
Status: offline
|
and the civic will still handle like a civic.
_____________________________
Yes, there's a "Replacement for Displacement". Its called Volumetric Efficiency.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Forty04
I choose the rear ending
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 0-60 VTEC vs. SRT-4 - 2/5/2005 12:10:14 AM
|
|
|
Roto
Posts: 5507
Joined: 11/15/2004
From: Centralia, PA
Status: offline
|
Dodge DID build a good turbo 4...back in the 80's...too bad they scraped it and used a mitsu 4 instead.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 0-60 VTEC vs. SRT-4 - 2/5/2005 2:10:31 AM
|
|
|
Kappa22
Posts: 3100
Joined: 12/4/2004
Status: offline
|
Are you talking about the Sundance 2.2T? I guess I could give you that... but that was in the 80s. Dodge was a completely different company (non of the delusions of grandeur that came with the Viper...)
_____________________________
Your Forum Turbo Groupie...
Also your official Forum EF and GTR Brain-Trust
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 0-60 VTEC vs. SRT-4 - 4/29/2005 4:20:46 PM
|
|
|
civic_minded
Posts: 8
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
auctally, no. the SRT-4 is NOT a neon. the body looks the same, but it isnt. why would dodge make the srt-4 and neon diffrent cars on the dodge site if they were the same? i cant stop stressing this fact.
Actually, it is a neon. Dodg took their most economical crappy car, and invested in under the hood primarily. This is how they kept the cost at $20K. Very easy when the rest of the car is a plain $12.5K car with an upgraded powerplant.
Honda should increase the displacement of the K20 to also 2.4, as well as super/turbo, but Honda doesn't believe in anything other than naturally aspirated engines. Also, supercharging/turbo will cut the life, reliability of the engine as well. Honda doesn't want to mess with it's pristine reputation.
|
|
|
|
|
Printable Version
