My whole thing was to get a car that i didn't mind daily driving for a while and then later on building it to be a street/track car. The SRT-4 is yes a neon but ive seen some that after a couple of things done to it like lowering it, eyebrows, etc don't look bad. Yea the interior is a POS but what would I care if im going to make it a side car anyway.

I love the A4 because it's an Audi and the interior is nice plus it's all-wheel drive. I also have a mustang that im working on so I already have the raw straight forward power that's why I wanted a quick/turner car and these are the only two that are in my budget to finance and that I would want to eventually tear down and rebuild. I also plan on engine rebuild in either of these cars not just turbo upgrade so that should make a difference also.

Plus I was talking about getting the 2.0 quatro vs the 1.8.

 

Please know that I'm not doubting your expertise, but rather am curious to learn something here. How do you know that the Miata only had 130 horsepower? I imagine people mod them to get more power just like any other car, and that one's interior was clearly not stock; why should the engine be stock or anything close to it?

 

Manufactured by chrysler yes, but it was in part mitsubishi's help in design. There has been great bebate if its indeed better than the 4G63 engine. Both of them have crank walk problems if i remember right. I still think the 4G63 has more potential when in fully built form.

 

You obviously know nothing about the Neon having read your responses in this thread. Someone correctly stated before the motor is from the mexican stratus and the turbo pt cruisers(minus the intake manifold) and the transmission is from a diesel van. The only Mitsubishi product it used was the TD04 turbo, and yes the 4g63 is a far superior engine being that it has been out for a much longer time. Oh and 7-bolt 4g63's suffer from crank walk, and I have yet to hear of mass neons suffering from it.

 

I worked at Chrysler during the developement of the engine(and until last year). I was at Highland Park when they put the first motors on the dyno, watched them do it. I know the head of engine developement and head developement plus about 1/2 of the SRT staff, trust me, its a Chrysler motor developed by Chrysler. A few people from SRT instruct at our events. The motor is pretty stout, cylinder head limited to about 375hp but with some head work you can see way more and they seem to last at those power levels, other things give up first.

As far as the Miata, the youtube link says that its an IT Miata. I'm not sure of the specifics of the class(ITA, ITB, etc) but I do know no forced induction so the most he would make if he had a screaming multi butterfly super wazo intake system is 170hp naturally aspirated.

Most likely the class is restricted which I'd take a stab at being around 130hp. Plus on the straights you can watch the tach move, its crawling, its near stock horsepower.

The driver was great, the car was setup great and he was cooking for sure but on a nearly stock motor I'd bet with probably a couple hundred pounds removed.

Plus, 400hp in the B5 at stock weight he'd need around 200hp in a SPEC Miata to keep up in the straights so he had significantly less than 200hp and most likely stock gearing.

[edit] After trying to find out some more info on what race class they meant by IT Miata I found there is a ITB kit which I referred to above as the super wazoo intake, ITB's are Independent Throttle bodies. I made a guess of around 170max HP but from reading some max effort cars have gotten to 200rwhp in a ITB setup at a fantastic cost. At 200whp he most likely would have overtaken the A4 on the straights, the HP difference was huge leading me to go with stock power levels.

Oh and I used to own and track a 340hp T03/04 Miata.

 

Yes thats why i suffered from crankwalk when i owned it........I went thru two crankshafts and a snapped balancer shaft. So you joined an audi forum just to spit out your knowledge of the neon? Man you neon guys are touchy.

 

That doesn't stop the fact it was a CHRYSLER designed engine.

The Mitsu 2.4 was used in the Mitsu derived cars like the 2 door versions of the Avenger got the Mitsu 2.4, the 4 door(Chrysler) got the Chrysler 2.4.

Previous to that the 2.5l V6 was used in the cloud series of cars, and the 3.0 was used in the prevoius gen before they went to the 2.4/2.7/3.5 series of which the 2.4 is the new world engine.

The entire 2.0/2.4, along with the original 2.7 and 3.5 iron block V6 were all part of Chryslers replacement engine program so they could get away from using other makers engines. They all debuted around the same time frame. The 2.0 in the Neon, the 2.7(2nd gen)/3.5(first gen) in the first LH series of cars. The 3.5 then being updated to aluminum during its time in the Prowler.

Your getting the fact mixed up that Chrysler had 2 2.4l(mitsu and Chrysler) 4 cylinders, 3 actually if you include the new world motor but the one put in the SRT-4 and original Neon were in fact, Chrysler motors.

 

Well i have to give it to chrysler then for making that engine, thats the best thing thats come out of their factory in the 4 cylinder division. Its just a shame that the SRT-4 itself is just poor build quality, i guess thats the only way they could have warrented the low price tag. I mean front power windows and rear crank windows? Come on dodge, just give me the motors. Little things like that just get under my skin i guess.

 

I joined an Audi forum because hold your breath now...I own an Audi as well as a neon. Also just because you suffered from broken crankshafts doesn't mean that all of them are prone to do it. Why do people honestly care about back power windows? I can honestly say I never sit in the back seat of my own car and no one who's ever been in the back seat has complained about it. My audi is also in need of repair far more than the neon and both are quite modified.

 

Actually on other cars in its class, at its point of introduction power front/roll rear was commonplace.