Club Scion tC

Guest Menu
Forum Utilities
More Other Car News and Discussion Threads
Viewing Thread

SRT-4 Comparison

  • 31 posts
  • Page 1 of 2
  • 1
  • 2
  • »
    • Sep 12, 2004 12:03:02 am
    oh man, i went to the auto store today and some guy had a srt4 with the mopar stage 1 kit...i asked him if i could hear it..SICK!!! SICK !! SICK!!...you should hear the bov on it..its insane...it was between the tc and the srt-4 for me...wow...we really need horsepower for the tc...that car was insane..
    • Sep 12, 2004 3:05:04 am
    Yeah SRT4s are nice in the power and sound department ... but you have to deal with [b]Interior by Rubbermaid??/b:32a9714f62] That and it would just get me into trouble ... and quickly.
    • Sep 12, 2004 3:10:10 am
    I think the 04-s come with Stage 1(just FYI)...The srt-4-s are sweet I just coulnt pull the trigger much less cock it casue the re-sale value is terrible
    • Sep 12, 2004 11:46:04 pm
    I drove in base neon over the summer which was brand new and it made my back hurt and clostrophobic, and all neons are the same once you get in one. Not a big fan but love the power they gave the srt-4.
    • Sep 15, 2004 7:07:05 pm
    both tc and srt-4 are 2.4L...the big difference is the neon comes with a turbo. the tc doesn-t. but the low compression of the tc makes it turbo -friendly- (try to turbo my celica gt-s with it-s 11:5:1 compression and BOOM!...lol).if i had to pick.i would go with the tc on this one. blowers are definately onthe horizon for this car...
    • Feb 06, 2005 9:59:20 am
    In a road and track magazine the Saturn Ion Redline kept up with the Srt-4 it was just 10ths of a second shy in amlost all catagories they paird them against each other the srt-4 cause they judged on interior and everything but it performed just the same even though its down on the horsepower compaired to the Srt-4But remember the Srt-4 is still a NEON and will not last especially throwing forced induction on it. Our cars will at least be reliable after after forced induction on the motor for a couple of years
    • Feb 11, 2005 8:27:18 am
    -i3ustown- wrote:
    In a road and track magazine the Saturn Ion Redline kept up with the Srt-4 it was just 10ths of a second shy in amlost all catagories they paird them against each other the srt-4 cause they judged on interior and everything but it performed just the same even though its down on the horsepower compaired to the Srt-4But remember the Srt-4 is still a NEON and will not last especially throwing forced induction on it. Our cars will at least be reliable after after forced induction on the motor for a couple of years
    i still don-t think it-s a really valid comparison to compare a car like the tC to the srt-4. although people may have different opinions, it-s just that there-s no doubt that the srt-4 is a car that made cuts in cost in many other nonperformance related parts, such as interior and stuff, to give it the incredilbly high bang for buck factor. the tC wasn-t made to be like that, since it was aimed for a well rounded car. i-d say the wrx and srt-4 would have a somewhat more fair comparison
    • Feb 15, 2005 2:41:58 am
    that is a fair comparison and as far as being reliable their motors are damn near bullet proof...my best friend has one...werd has it that theyre blocks hold about 500hp or so and heads about 3-4 its also a 2.4L and as it might not be as pretty...it sure is fast as a muthaF***a
    • Feb 21, 2005 3:19:51 pm
    Wow...crazy..are you nuts? Throwing forced induction on the SRT4? Are you kidding me? That engine was designed for a turbo. The internals have been proven to hold 550hp before needing upgraded units. The block casting it-self has been proven to 1000hp.....Still a Neon? I suppose...the TC will never come close in performance...interior and fit and finish is worlds ahead of the SRT though...
    • Feb 21, 2005 4:17:59 pm
    Where did you get your facts from? The 2.4 Neon engine is an outgrowth of the 2.0 DOHC which is an outgrowth of the 2.2 SOHC 2v engine itself designed from the 1.7L VW engine dating form the 70’s. For many years the 2.0 / 2.4 DOHC engines did not have turbo in America (there was a 2.4 turbo available in Latin America). The engine was not -designed- for anything but to be a cheap bread and butter engine. The 2.4 takes well for a turbo because of its cast iron block, dating back to its archaic roots. Daimler-Benz is dropping the engine as it is going with a Hyundai / Benz / Isuzu / Suzuki engine next year which will be all aluminum and I guess you could say was not “designed?for turbo application, even though I’m sure some will show up OEM with forced induction. I can think of NO engine that was designed for forced induction outside of diesel engines and airplane engines. If you are talking “tweaked?for forced induction, I’m sure the 2.4 is “tweaked? but even simple things like forged steel cranks are LACKING in the Dodge.http://www.hotrod.com/tec.../113_0309_srt/index1.html
    Quote:
    While the turbo 2.4 is the same basic configuration as the NA version, the casting has some slight revisions
    yea 500 HP, blah blah blah, the real question is how long can it last, and before you say um I hate Dodge, IÂ’ve owned two Shelby GLH-S turbo intercooled Dodge cars, HP from race engines is meaningless for demonstration of reliability on the street, and yes I realize that every Dodge SRT owner with a race engine, is like every XYZ owner, IÂ’m sure it is driven every day to work over a 300 mile commute and it never has a problem yada yade.I for one think take a Scion tC with factory supercharger, vs Dodge stock and the Scion reliability before critical drivetrain failure is going to be MORE then double that of a Dodge, overall reliability of electronics, fuel pump, brain etc would be quadruple that of a Dodge. That is the only reliability that is a concern for me and 99.99% of the people on this forum. Not that you know of or hear of some engine that takes 500 HP and is immortal. I for one give that ZERO credibility. I for one think that a bone stock Dodge at 230 HP will suffer problems though its whole life, and would only assume doubling the factory HP would greatly increase the problems. IÂ’m not saying the crank would fly out in a day. IÂ’m saying the car has pitiful reliability to start with and doubling the HP is not going to help matters. I like the SRT and considered buying one, but it is after all a hot rod Dodge and should be approached as such.
    • Feb 21, 2005 5:04:44 pm
    Oldman.....The 2.2L was NOT based off of the VW 1.7L that came in the early Omni/Horizon/TC3-s. The 2.2/2.5L turbo dodge engines are extremley reliable, and can infact take doubling the HP without this catastrophic failure you are speaking of. Before you get your panties in a bunch, I too, have owned multiple TD-s (An intercooled 91 Shadow ES, and 86 GLH-T) Please, cite examples for me of this terrible -brain- ( I believe you mean ECU ), wiring, etc.. failure. I got my 91 Shadow ES with 100,000 miles, then put a daily driven 35k additionally on it, intercooled, at 16psi, on pump gas, every day. Started every day. I sold it because I wanted a newer car.I have yet to hear an unreliable stock SRT4.....Have you EVER compared a 2.2/2.5L turbo dodge engine with the 2.0L DOHC? They are not that similar at all. You can, with lots of work, adapt the 2.0L DOHC head to the 8V block. Re drilling oil passages, etc IS infact required. 2.0L/2.4L engines are infact somewhat interchangable, and infact share a few common parts ( My 2.0L DOHC has an SRT4 Exhaust manifold/turbo on it)The crank will infact NOT fly out of a 2.0/2.4L due to it-s bedplate designed crank cradle.-before critical drivetrain failure is going to be MORE then double that of a Dodge, overall reliability of electronics, fuel pump, brain etc would be quadruple that of a Dodge.-^^^^ That, sir, is the most ignorant comment I have yet to hear on the internet to date. Do you HONESTLY think that the said Toyota parts really have a life of 4x that of the DCX parts? I find that terribly hard to believe. I also do not believe that the Toyota will last twice as long without breaking. That-s just absurd. My friend had a Matrix that shat out a transmission at 30k miles. I owned a 99 Honda Civic that ate a main bearing at 27k miles. I hope you have experience with a 2.0L/2.4L DCX engine, personal experience before you spout off ignorant comments like those above. In conclusion, I believe the blown TC with stock suspension and tires to be a mid6sec car 0-60, turning low 15-s at 92-93mph.....It would make a great daily driver.....
    • Feb 21, 2005 7:13:51 pm
    Quote:
    screaminDOHC The 2.2L was NOT based off of the VW 1.7L that came in the early Omni/Horizon/TC3-s. The 2.2/2.5L turbo dodge engines are extremley reliable , and can infact take doubling the HP without this catastrophic failure you are speaking of.
    The 2.2 was indeed base on and in fact a direct rip off of the 1.7L design, same everything from inline valves, to non-crossflow head, SOHC, etc, nothing more then a 1.7L upscaled on dimensions. Yeh the 1980 to 1994 dodge 2.2 were real reliable. IÂ’ll just let your statement stand, as most of us know they were curses. I owned not one but two GLH-S so I would think I know a little about what HP they could take. Max HP was never in debate, reliability was and there was no reliability on the Dodge, how many beater Dodges do you see on the road considering MILLIONS were built? How many beater 80 and 90 Toyotas? Answer is I see a beater Toyota every day going down the road, beater Dodge I have to look for the smoke screen coming out of the tailpipe and that happens every so often?yep a beater Dodge.
    Quote:
    screaminDOHC Before you get your panties in a bunch, I too, have owned multiple TD-s (An intercooled 91 Shadow ES, and 86 GLH-T)
    Unlike you, I obviously know they were mechanical nightmares. Mine were fast but had terrible reliability and they were not that fast, a built 2.2 would put about 300 HP to the wheels. OK but not mother of the Earth shattering. Please donÂ’t bother finding me a pure street 2.2 that puts out 500 HP, IÂ’m sure it does and the owner drives it 300 miles a day and never even opens the hood?yada yada
    Quote:
    screaminDOHC Please, cite examples for me of this terrible -brain- ( I believe you mean ECU ), wiring, etc.. failure. I got my 91 Shadow ES with 100,000 miles, then put a daily driven 35k additionally on it, intercooled, at 16psi, on pump gas, every day. Started every day. I sold it because I wanted a newer car.
    IÂ’m sure it was immortal even more so after you put more HP out of it.
    Quote:
    screaminDOHC I have yet to hear an unreliable stock SRT4.....
    I hate to be the owner of one experiencing it directly
    Quote:
    screaminDOHC Have you EVER compared a 2.2/2.5L turbo dodge engine with the 2.0L DOHC? They are not that similar at all. You can, with lots of work, adapt the 2.0L DOHC head to the 8V block. Re drilling oil passages, etc IS infact required.
    I got you not that similar except the head bolts right on?
    Quote:
    screaminDOHC The crank will infact NOT fly out of a 2.0/2.4L due to it-s bedplate designed crank cradle.
    IÂ’m sure that was part of the immortality the cast crank inherited from the previous Dodges
    Quote:
    screaminDOHC That, sir, is the most ignorant comment I have yet to hear on the internet to date. Do you HONESTLY think that the said Toyota parts really have a life of 4x that of the DCX parts? I find that terribly hard to believe. I also do not believe that the Toyota will last twice as long without breaking. That-s just absurd. My friend had a Matrix that shat out a transmission at 30k miles. I owned a 99 Honda Civic that ate a main bearing at 27k miles.
    I obviously did not mean the immortal Dodges that you and your friends own, I meant the other 3 or 4 million 80s and 90s dodges in the junk yard. I mean my bossÂ’s 2001 dodge van that blew its trans 4 times and the front receptionist that has an identical van on its 3rd trans. IÂ’m sorry to have confused you, I did not mean your own personal Dodge was not immortal, IÂ’m sure it is.
    Quote:
    screaminDOHC I hope you have experience with a 2.0L/2.4L DCX engine, personal experience before you spout off ignorant comments like those above.
    You really must hate me via the internet to wish me personal experience with a Dodge product. Lets have a look at your claim: Lets see Toyota number one 18 times and Chrysler ZERO http://www.autooninfo.net/RelPerDodgeCharts.htm
    Quote:
    screaminDOHC In conclusion, I believe the blown TC with stock suspension and tires to be a mid6sec car 0-60, turning low 15-s at 92-93mph.....It would make a great daily driver.....
    In conclusion the 2.4 was not built for forced induction despite your claims, and Dodge has a pitiful reliability rating despite your own immortal Dodge.In conclusion low 6 second 0-60 and high 14Â’s at 95 MPH with a good driver and some reasonable tires.
    • Feb 21, 2005 10:30:19 pm
    Oldman..you see Toyotas from the 1980-s driving around?Seriously. Even back in the mid 80-s, Toyotas were NOT known for reliability, aside perhaps from their line of pick-up trucks.Where, on those graphs, did you see the word -TOYOTA-?I seem to not see Toyota listed at all, rather the word -HONDA- being number one. It appears that we have differing opinoins regarding chrysler reliability. I not once claimed that it was the most reliable car. If I did, please do quote me. I simply stated that they were not as unreliable as you-d care to think. The 2.2 liter was NOT derrived from the VW 1.7LSee Allpar : http://www.allpar.com/mopar/22.html-The 2.2 was introduced in 1981 as an all-new design, the first metric Chrysler engine. --The 2.2 is one of the most reliable four-cylinder engines ever made, and in all its forms, from under 84 hp to 224 hp, was a long-lasting sturdy piece of equipment-There is indeed a difference between Turbo, and non turbo blocks. :-The early 1981-83 blocks weigh about 87 lb; the turbo block weighs about 90 lb-Not reliable? -2.2 liter engines are all noninterference designs, so they generally are not damaged when the timing belt breaks.- That seems like a pretty good idea...I bet you hate bent valves when your timing belt breaks.The 1.7L VW (rabbit engine) and 2.2L are NOT at all the same. If you are familiar with the 2.2L, it looks totally different. See 1.7L photo below^^^1.7L VW in a Horizon[img]As an FYI, incase you-d like to brush up on early 2.2L stuff http://www.allpar.com/history/fwd-performance.htmlAnd you don-t need to -build- a 2.2/2.5L to get 300hp. You don-t even need to crack the valve cover to get 300hp out of them. +40% injectors, a nice intercooler, fuel pump, ported exhaust manifold, slightly larger turbo, nice exhaust, computer, boost controller, etc will get you up to 300hp quite easily. And yes, it will infact still be reliable. It-s a known fact that the reliability of those engines, is influenced quite a bit by how the owner maintains the vehicle....
    • Feb 22, 2005 12:21:39 am
    damn that engine is really dirty... lol.. needs to be cleaned... i know that damn thing is old and can-t really help but be dirty, but i am just trying to releive some of the hostility that is in this thread... lol... for right now just call me dr. phil... lol.
    • Feb 22, 2005 1:42:42 am
    Take the argument to PMs, On Topic Please
    • Feb 22, 2005 1:55:42 pm
    I don-t think the SRT-4 and TC are comparable as purchased from the dealership if that is the criteria you want to use.First, pricing:SRT-4 base MSRP = 21,195.00 inc dest charge (per dodge.com)TC base MSRP = 16,515.00 inc dest charge (per scion.com)Nearly 5K more for the SRT-4. Yes, of course you can probably talk the dodge dealer down on their price whereas you can-t with Scion. I sincerely doubt you can talk them down 5K worth or even close to that. Maybe 20K out the door with no options (not that many available anyhow).Still quite a bit more than the TC. I got mine for 17,053.00 (before taxes).Second, factory/dealer performance:Even with all the TRD mods that are available or in the pipeline, the TC will probably put out no more than 200-210hp at the crank (based on the info available so far regarding the TRD supercharger). Pretty big advantage to the SRT-4 in this regard. The TRD mods will also eat up all your initial price savings and probably then some (assuming you do the suspension mods as well as the engine/exhaust mods).I do not mention aftermarket turbos and such for the TC as these are not factory/dealer mods. I am trying to compare apples to apples here so don-t start with the -what about nitrous?, what about the scionspeed turbo kit?, etc, etc,-.That said, I chose the TC for all the things I like about it and did not even consider the SRT-4 due to past experiences with dodge cars specifically/domestic cars generally.And no, I am not saying that every car that the U.S. has put out is a lemon. Just every one I have owned....
    • Feb 22, 2005 3:52:12 pm
    The plain and simple fact is the SRT-s engine was NOT built for forced induction... despite the claim otherwise? End of story.The fact is the Neon has one of the worst resale of any car sold in the USofA:http://moneycentral.msn.c...t/Saveonacar/P71881.aspWe all got a tC and I-m sure a primary reason was Toyota reliability and dealer network. Raw HP is meaningless if you have to show up to work on time. I don-t know about dealers at other places but $200 off the MSRP for the SRT was the BEST I could get and poor finance while I could get 4.25% from Toyota.Insurance for the SRT was $900 a year for me vs $550 for my tC and my tC has a breakdown coverage 7year /100,000 miles that does NOT apply to the SRT, call your local insurance agent, breakdown coverage is cheap on the tC, the SRT was something like $200 a year over 7 years, so to compare apples to apples that is $1100 for the SRT vs $550 for the tC. If I keep the car 5 years that savings on just insurance almost PAYS for the tCÂ’s supercharger. So if this is a HP comparison um the SRT-4 is a better buy, but if this is a car comparison then the tC wins hands down. If it is a combination comparison, the a supercharge tC might be slower than a SRT-4 but it will still be a Toyota backed by Toyota dealership IMO, which is obviously biased I-d take a supercharged tC which would still be cheaper then the SRT-4 and is much cheaper to insure, and IMO this time unbiased the tC should be significantly more dependable.In a nut shell the SRT-4 wins in the raw power, but the supercharge tC closes that gap considerably with NO drawbacks.
    • Feb 22, 2005 7:26:43 pm
    -oldman- wrote:
    The plain and simple fact is the SRT-s engine was NOT built for forced induction... despite the claim otherwise? End of story.The fact is the Neon has one of the worst resale of any car sold in the USofA:
    WHAT!!!You know nothing about the srt4 and don-t start talking like you do.The motor is built for boost unlike the TC.There-s guys running 550whp on stock internals.The motor is built from the ground up.info Engine blockEngine code: A855Block construction: Cast iron, closed deck, split crankcaseBore x stroke: 87.5mm x 101.0mmDisplacement: 2,429ccCompression ratio: 8.1:1Bore spacing: 96mmDeck height: 238.14mmPistons: Cast by Mahle, eutectic aluminum alloyConnecting rod design: Forged, cracked caps, threaded-in 9mm rod boltsConnecting rod length: 151mmRod/stroke ratio: 1.50:1Crank design: Cast high-hardness steelMain bearing diameter: 60mmRod bearing diameter: 50mmCylinder HeadHead construction: Cast aluminumCombustion chamber design: 48-degree pent-roof with partial cloverleaf between intake valvesValvetrain: Hydraulically adjusted rocker arm with roller cam followersIntake valve size: 34.80mm (Silchrome-1)Exhaust valve size: 28.45mm (Inconel)Intake valve angle: 24.46 degreesExhaust valve angle: 23.5 degreesHow many TC can run 500whp on stock internals? NONE!I-m not bashing the TC cause i have one and i love it but you can not compare the srt4 and tc. They are no where near the same car and class.read this and learn. everything you want to know about the srt4http://www.srtforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98857as for resale value.. your right there. Its bad The only good thing is that its a limited production car. only 3 years made. Some colors are even hard to get. 1 year of yellow, 1 year of blue, 1/2 year of white and 2 1/2 of silver. So that will make the value go up a bit.o yea don-t forget the aftermarket from mopar and all the other companys out there. One thing toyota lacks. I know i used to own a 01 celica and 03 matrix and now a TC.Mopar makes stage kits. 1,2 and 3.1 is a pcm and injectors,240whp s2, pcm, a bunch of sensors, wga, injectors and opt. turbo toys.265whps3, turbo upgrade, fuel rail, fuel pump, wga.... 330whpI-m not here to argue. I love the TC. it-s a great car but i need to stick up for the srt4 since i own one. Its even worse when people talk shit about the car and don-t know anything about it.
    • Feb 22, 2005 9:48:28 pm
    -While the turbo 2.4 is the same basic configuration as the NA version , the casting has some slight revisions that we will outline-http://www.hotrod.com/tec...3_0309_srt/index1.htmlThe engine was built on an archaic base to perform for as cheap transportation for a unreliable car. There are some tweaks as listed done to the engine. As stated the engine dates back decades and has its roots based on nothing more then enlarged VW design. It was not built for forced induction,. Period end of story.When was the first DOHC 2.0? um from like the mid 90s. When could you buy a turbo DOHC 2.0 or 2.4 engine from Dodge? A few years ago. So could this engine be “design?or “built?for forced induction? Only if time travel is possible.Once again as typical of SRT-4 owners spout off lame peak race numbers come out to prove reliability of a KNOW problematic car. Does doubling the HP somehow improve reliability? NO. Was the engine “built for boost? nope it is built to be CHEAP hence the archaic block and the cast crank and the pitiful reliability of the package leading to one of the worst resale values out there only one kia and one Hyundai base models fared worst. That is PITIFUL.Sure one and only one advantage of an iron block is that it can survive under higher boost. How many Scion TC will see more then 300 BHP and care? Say .001%. I’m sure at that point sleeves and a deck guard will be made and at the point the block can perform upto say 600 BHP which .0001% of Scion tC owners will ever need or care about. What are the disadvantages of an iron block: front end weight, detracting from vehicle performance for ride, to road holding, to stability, to braking. Oh the things that matter to 100% of tC owners 100% of the time. Given a choice cast iron block that can support above 300 BHP or aluminum block that has significant advantages for a car, I would hazard to guess if such a choice was a no cost option from Toyota, 99.9999% of tC owners would opt for the aluminum block. Obviosyly Dodge feels the same way as the motor is scrapped after this year, Dodge is going to an aluminum block. Design.Crankshaft, most Toyota, Honda, BMW, Acura, insert an dependable car here have a STEEL crank. Why? Steel is stonger but oh wait you say to me cast crank Neon is strong because Mopar magazine just had a guy dyno 500 WHP and it did not break. OK,, Ever know anybody that broke a crank? I thought not. So why does say Toyota put a steel crank into just about every engine? Answer: the engine last longer as a steel crank allows the use of significantly harder and longer lasting bearings. So why did Dodge use a cast crank on an obviously high bearing load engine such as the one in the SRT-4 that was “built?for forced induction? Answer: Steel was too expensive and Dodge does NOT care about longevity of the engine. Will the stock cast crank break? Probably not, will it last as long as a tC crank? Definitely not! How about if I double the stock Neon HP? Um you do the math.Did I mention that aluminum blocks also feature Nikasil type cylinder liners, these liners are near perfect in shape and near diamond hard too. Meaning after 200K miles, a simple hone job and the engine block is done good for 200K more miles, the steel crank will only need to be micro polished, while the cast crank will be hash. Also with Nikasil the ring can be hard chrome too which has less friction and can still hold compression over 200K. Wow one more thing every Scion tC has a near indestructible cylinder under normal use. We all know what the Neon has um plain old cast iron, plain old cast rings, nothing different then the last smoking 2.2 Omni that grandma drivers and has been smoking since 50K miles. The mere fact Neon owners have to spout off about 500 HP Neons which make up a small fraction of all Neons out there, demonstrates that the Neon, even though it is a much more expensive car, can’t compete in any other category. I’ve already said in raw HP it is obvious you should buy a Neon and many people have.OK lets sum it up: modern aluminum block benifts 100% of the owners 100% of the time, the archaic cheap iron block would benefit .001% of the owners of a TC. A forged steel crank benefits any engine needing to last 200K or more miles, obviously Dodge does not think their cars much less their engines go that long. The tC has a Nikasil type bore which once again 100% of the tC owners used 100% of the time good for 400K miles, while the Neon has cast iron the exact same iron used in garbage truck engines, Yugo, 1980 Dodge Ominis, Ford Pintos, grand dad’s Chevy wagon, tug boats, lawn mowers etc, unfortunately offering the same reliability too. The question is not how many tC run 500+ BHP on stock internals, it is how many Dodges hit 200K miles? And even if the do how many repairs do they need along the way. Lets see the average Neon sells for 23% of its purchase price after 5 years, while the average Toyota is double that meaning simply if 5 years chances are that I sell my tC and buy two stock SRT-4 IF they are still working.Lets talk turkey, when the tC supercharger comes out it will be backed by Toyota and back by extended warranty too mine goes 7 years 100,000 miles. Out of the Mopar stage kits, how many retain the factory power train warranty, and how many work with extended warranty?http://www.mopar.com/stre..._srt4_stage3.htmWarranty? Evidently this is a BAD word with Mopar parts:“NO PARTS WARRANTYMopar Performance parts are sold -as is- unless otherwise noted. This means that parts sold by Mopar Performance carry no warranty whatsoever. Implied warranties, such as warranties of merchantability, are excluded. (An implied warranty of merchantability means that the part is reasonably fit for the general purpose for which is was sold). The entire risk as to quality and performance of such parts is with the buyer. Should such parts prove defective following their purchase, the buyer and not the manufacturer, distributor or retailer, assumes the entire cost of all necessary servicing or repair. Dodge, Chrysler and Jeep?vehicle and parts warranties are voided if the vehicle or parts are used for competition. The addition of performance parts does not by itself void a vehicle-s warranty. However, added performance parts (parts not originally supplied on the vehicle from the factory) are not covered by the vehicle-s warranty, and any failure that they may cause is also not covered by the vehicle-s?rStage II “NOTE: The Stage 2 Turbo Upgrade Kits have not been emission certified or submitted to CARB for emissions exemption. Therefore, vehicles with Stage 2 Turbo Upgrade kits are intended for closed-course driving only.?rGee can’t even legally drive it on the street. Ouch?Oh and they are rated in BHP and frankly I don’t care if guys get more, basically there is warranty on the part I quote in case Neon owners can’t read the fine print “Should such parts prove defective following their purchase, the buyer and not the manufacturer, distributor or retailer, assumes the entire cost of all necessary servicing or repair. Dodge, Chrysler and Jeep?vehicle and parts warranties are voided if the vehicle or parts are used for competition?Basically you can ONLY legally use the part for “closed-couse driving?AND if it bust anything on your Neon or if anything bust on your Neon period it is not covered as it can only be used for competition which is directly stated as voiding your warranty. TRD supercharge, full factory warranty and extended warranty too, legal all 50 states. Toyota will give us complete satisfaction.I call that a slam dunk So Dodge you get 230 BHP from the factory we know it is more like 255 BHP, the next step is stage II, not street legal, voids the warranty by direct wording if used. Give the dealer so much wiggle room.TRD say 200 BHP stage one, with more stages to come say 230 BHP. 50 state legal, back by factory and extended warranty 100%. I think I can live with 50 less HP thanks...
    • Feb 22, 2005 10:08:08 pm
    I don-t feel like reading all of that.I glanced fast... I-m sure tc owners don-t care that there cars can hold 550whp. all they do is add a intake and exhaust and are happy with there 160whp. It-s not ment for racing and going fast. The tc isn-t even mine.it-s my girlfriends car, It-s really a girls car.Thats ok though it-s still a great car.
  • 31 posts
  • Page 1 of 2
  • 1
  • 2
  • »
Jump to Forum:
Related Threads
Threads
Replies
Views
Last Post
©2010 Club Scion tC - Social Network for Scion enthusiasts.