BATTLE!!!!!: srt-4 vs. evo

[evosarewaybette]

an srt-4 is a girl car with a turbo, and other than the fact that the evo out performs and out handles the srt4 by far, It kills it in looks too!

[RabidPony]

Wow.. do you feel special making a username just to make 1 post? I think that is what they make the subject line for ya sped. Not to mention as stated above that an srt-4 will outhandle an evo with a little over a grand in suspension mods and you still spend less.

[97talon]

Originally Posted by evosarewaybette

an srt-4 is a girl car with a turbo, and other than the fact that the evo out performs and out handles the srt4 by far, It kills it in looks too!

I like srt-4's and girls.

[Turbo AWD]

To say that an srt-4 will out handle an EVO is just silly. Let's forget for a second that the EVO is a Rally machine designed to attack corners. The EVO is equipped with an open differential system which allows the power to be shifted from side to side, providing maximum traction through-out the corners. Unlike the EVO the srt-4 is a FWD vehicle. It's a well known fact that FWD vehicle's suffer from major understeer and lack of traction, hence limiting their cornering abilities. The best suspension system in the world won't be able to compensate for such.

[quick4dr]

With drag radials and exhaust my srt went 13.1 @ 101 I pulled an sti on that run and the video is on tremek somewhere about two years ago car is still running strong and ran 12's on stock turbo and has trapped 116mph so far... 200+ 1/4 mile passes with alot of street racing motor doesnt skip a beat so I find these posts about srt's not lasting funny and I have a vid on here of me pulling a 300awhp evo also. Posts that are retarded should be backed up with facts instead of peoples opinions...

[97talon]

Yeah, what he said ^^^

[nattyice08]

ok here's all the facts you guys need....straight from the professionals at caranddriver. first off i would like to say that i haven't even looked at this video because i started reading the arguments and just laughed my way through. granted the srt-4 is a pretty bad ass car for what it is, it still can't keep up with an evo stock for stock.

SRT-4= 0-60 5.3sec 1/4 13.8(respectable) granted the car may be faster with a different driver
EVO VIII = 0-60 4.5 1/4 13.5
EVO MR = 0-60 4.3 1/4 13.3

Not bashing the srt-4, but all you guys that are boasting about the srt-4 are saying that "well do suspension or mod it a little and it will blow the doors off the evo", yeah if you mod it first. stock for stock the evo is better. however, it all depends on what your preference is.

just the facts, not trying to start anything :thumb:

[97talon]

Enough with the magazine racing already. If you want to talk about facts it's a fact that not many people on the streets are professionals. So if you are comparing two cars that are only a few tenths of a second off (I have seen a stock Srt-4 run a 13.6) on the streets it comes down to the driver not the car.

[Turbo AWD]

Here's another fact, the EVO will put down the same numbers rain or shine. While the srt-4 mixed with a little rain will go from mid 13's to 16's or more, depending on the wetness of the road.

[97talon]

Yeah, rain makes it a lot harder to get traction. If it's really raining I can spin the tires in third just by getting on it.

[92tsiauto]

Awd is almost impossible to beat on the street from a dead stop.Where the srt wins is the 2.4 vs 2.0 and the torque starts to work in the srts favor.
Now lets have fun if both were awd or fwd either or who has the advantage? Fact is both have unreal amounts of power just laying there waiting to be unlocked. The cars are worthy of the debates cause they are to close to call. Now if you go rally racing..well the evo is gonna win.Sorry just had to add that....
Never stopped dodge though...remember the shelby charger rally cars? Those shelby chargers were holy terrors on the scca circut too.Dodge knows how to make a fwd turbo car run without a doubt.I guess 20 plus years at it kinda helps. :thumb:

[92tsiauto]

Here is one:

http://mclellansautomotive.com/photos/B32133.jpg

[Turbo AWD]

Sorry to say, but the Dodge Charger (L-body) Front-wheel drive was a total pos. It only lasted 4 years in production from 1983-1987. It's successor was the Dodge Shadow and Plymouth Sundance.

The Dodge Charger Shelby was basically the same vehicle with an added turbo-charger, bumping the hp rating from 84hp to a whopping 146 hp. Shelby's successor was the Dodge Daytona.
The Daytona was produced from 1984 to 1993, and it had a twin model from 1984 to 1986 called the Chrysler Laser.

[Macadoisha]

I can't honestly believe someone is debating the stock for stock performance of these vehicles, granted the srt is a quick, cheap 4 cylinder with impressive performance. However, its drivetrain, suspension, and engine are in no way on par with the components in the Evolutions.
As far as saying that you've seen a stock srt-4 with a good driver run low 13's, you're lying.

The fastest documented stock (showroom unmodified) quarter mile time for a 2003 SRT-4 is 13.75 @ 101.68 mph, with a fastest trap-speed of 103.16 mph [2], while the fastest quarter mile times with documentation for more powerful 2004-2005 models include several 13.6's @ 105 mph. Those stock times included the use of the original, factory-equipped tires.

There are numerous accounts of STOCK evos running between 13.0 - 13.4 quarter miles, meaning its still faster in a straight line. We won't even go into corners.

Also arguing that the drivetrain weight makes the evo slower is ridiculouss, because all four wheels in the Evolution are still receiving more power than the srt-4 puts to the crank.

The only possible reason for choosing an SRT-4 over an Evo is price, bottom line. Because despite all you people arguing the potential for modification on the SRT's, the potential with an evo is greater yet. Don't believe me? Check out some of the wild shit AMS does with their Evos.

Seriously, I like the SRT-4's and all, they are quick and relatively inexpensive; however the evolution is almost a supercar in the sense that it was engineered with strictly performance in mind.

[03EVOVIII]

Comparing an Evo to an SRT-4 is stupid. They are two totally different cars built for 2 totally different reasons. Regardless of what people think the SRT-4 is a straight-line car. That's not a bad thing, it's just the way it is. The Evo on the other hand is not a drag car. Saying this does not mean that the Evo doesn't perform well at the strip or the SRT-4 doesn't perform well in the twisties. It's just that the two were engineered with different goals in mind. I have personally ran a 13.3 on my stock 2003 Evo. I don't know what times people are clicking off in SRT-4's so I will not argue that one way or the other. What I will say is the SRT-4 definitely has balls and is a fast car. I've driven them before and I am very impressed. Of course I like my car better, but that is purely my taste. For the price of an SRT-4 you can't beat the performance. And as for my opinion I feel that stock for stock the Evo will beat the SRT-4 in the 1320 more times than not with equal drivers because of it's ability to shine from a dig. Now when you start talking about roll racing then I think the margin between the two closes up pretty tight. But again I'm not speaking from direct experience, just opinion.