Please...talk me out of a 07 'stang....

[Wh33lhop]

Its still an embarrassment on Dodge/Ford that a car with 20 year old technology made more power than a new technology engine WITH a turbo...

You're retarded.

[ohthejosh]

[QUKBMER]

Sure we all know hicks drive them but I got my eye on this purdy little one. About 40k miles. 5 speed, 4.0 V6 (easily more power and better economy then my little e30). Not to mention it's safer in an accident.

http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/nvn/cto/3383309935.html

I really want a reason to hold onto the e30...but stuf like this really gets my attention :(

So please, someone...ANYONE, just give me some good reasons why my e30 is worth putting work into...life could be so much easier with somethign newer like this

Yes..... but its not an e30 and its not a V8 stick in a non waffleswaffleswaffleswaffleswaffles color.

[s14pwd]

You're retarded.

Please elaborate? What I said is true.

S14: (235HP in EVO trim)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_S14

SRT: (230HP WITH FI)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_SRT-4

Mustang v6: (210HP, with 2 extra cylinders)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang

Next time you call someone a retard, make sure you don't make yourself look like one.

[ltz Viper]

You're retarded, you are comparing a low volume top the model lineup engine to a mass produced engine, dodge could have easily made it 300hp but it was engineered with 230 to be the right amount for the car. If you really dont think that dodge has the "tech" then please go look up the dodge spirit r/t.

[Wh33lhop]

Please elaborate? What I said is true.

S14: (235HP in EVO trim)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_S14

SRT: (230HP WITH FI)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_SRT-4

Mustang v6: (210HP, with 2 extra cylinders)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang

Next time you call someone a retard, make sure you don't make yourself look like one.

Check out your wikipedia page again. I especially like the part where it says:

Manufacturer's specification when the SRT-4 was released was 230 hp (170 kW). However, several independent tests have produced results indicating 230-238 hp and 250-262 lb-ft that means the SRT-4 produces more power than the manufacturer claims. The flywheel power is estimated to be around 265-270 hp(194-198 kW) and around 285-300 lb-ft (386-406 N·m)

This is in a car that costs $20k, brand new. ~230-240whp and 2900lbs means this car is as fast in a straight line as an Evo or STi (low 5 seconds to 60 in a stock FWD car is otherwise unheard of) yet it is over $10k less. This motor can also support 400whp+ on stock internals for relatively cheap.

As for the comparison to an E30 M3 Evo, do you know how much an Evo 3 S14 costs? You could almost get an entire brand new SRT4 for that. By your logic the 335i is also an embarrassment because the NSX made 300hp from an NA V6 in the 90s. Never mind that the NSX was a $100k supercar and the 335i is underrated...

So, next time if you just don't like a car, just say you don't like the car. You can't form a coherent argument for shit.

Retard.

[JasonC]

You're retarded, you are comparing a low volume top the model lineup engine to a mass produced engine, dodge could have easily made it 300hp but it was engineered with 230 to be the right amount for the car. If you really dont think that dodge has the "tech" then please go look up the dodge spirit r/t.

This is true. Cause the same time that S14 was out, Dodge had a 2.5 turbo they was testing that had 400hp and a top speed of 190+. But they had to tame it all down and do the 224hp 2.2L

[Kevinl]

I wouldn't touch any mustang built between 1994-2010 unless it has a cobra on it. especially a v6 one

i would rather have a 1984 318i automatic than a 07 mustang v6

The new 2011+ mustang V6's actually make more hose power than the older gt's

[mulletman]

Check out your wikipedia page again. I especially like the part where it says:

This is in a car that costs $20k, brand new. ~230-240whp and 2900lbs means this car is as fast in a straight line as an Evo or STi (low 5 seconds to 60 in a stock FWD car is otherwise unheard of) yet it is over $10k less.

I agree with your general assessment of the SRT-4 Neon, but the bolded part is just inaccurate. The Evo IX will do 0-60 in 4.7 and the 1/4 in 13.3 at about 104, bone stock. The Evo RS shaves the 0-60 down to 4.4. That's a hell of a difference from just a 'sub 6-second' SRT-4.

[Wschnitz]

Why are people still defending the Neon with low hp for a turbo car. Its ugly, FWD, and does not look cool. Wait for the 2013 Dodge dart SRT, that would be worth defending, if they give it at least 300hp.

Plus NA>turbo every day all day. in most cases.

[uofom3]

Ford, Mustang, V6, Gayer than aids, etc...

That's it; only Driven by NASCAR fanboys and lesbians. Just say no.

[Toadleg]

I dd this much hated neon srt4 lol. To each their own.

[Wh33lhop]

I agree with your general assessment of the SRT-4 Neon, but the bolded part is just inaccurate. The Evo IX will do 0-60 in 4.7 and the 1/4 in 13.3 at about 104, bone stock. The Evo RS shaves the 0-60 down to 4.4. That's a hell of a difference from just a 'sub 6-second' SRT-4.

Sure if you launch the piss out of an AWD car you can knock a second off the 0-60 times. For everyone who doesn't enjoy buying new clutches and transmissions the two cars will be on the same playing field.

[Bimmerman325i]

ITT: butthurt people who are just realizing that the E30 M3 is really just an old slow car when compared to cars of today.

[DisgustipatedAP1]

Sure if you launch the piss out of an AWD car you can knock a second off the 0-60 times. For everyone who doesn't enjoy buying new clutches and transmissions the two cars will be on the same playing field.

Learn to launch one then. You can do it without blowing stuff up and get a ridiculous launch if you know what you're doing. My 0-60 right now is about 3 seconds flat, maybe 3.2-3.3 at most.