[QUOTE]Originally posted by AustinS2k2003
[B]


Someone tell me how the hell the SRT-4 is anywhere near comparable to the S2000....

Comparing a Convertible Roadster to a Souped up Econo Box is like comparing an Escalade to a Maxima...totally different ballgame.

 

These cars are not designed to compete with each other for people

 

I also wanted to say that one thing both cars have in common is they are both incredible buys. I don't know of many cars for under 50k that are as much fun to drive as either of these. The S2k in my opinion is as much or more fun that a boxster S which costs almost 20 grand more. Not knocking the Boxster S, its just much more expensive.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ForcedInduction
[B]

I stopped buying cars based on what other people think when I was 16.

 

This thread has gotten pointless. SRT-4 is faster straight line and the s2000 handles better. One is $20K and the other is $35K or whatever. WHO CARES!.

Apples and oranges.

-Shawn

 

Note: he had a stage 1 kit on his srt-4 and with only 1k miles, probably hasn't learned to properly drive the s2k (low RPM launches etc).

The S2K is statistically faster in the straights and the twisties.

 

Hardly not. Define straights? 1/4 mile performance, the s2000 is not faster.

 

If it's not a neon, what is it?

 

could we flash forward like 5 years when the srt is the most popular car in the local junkyard....... seriously very been to a junkyard.. what do you see, a crap load of neons......just thought i'd point that out...

 

It is possible they did a *LITTLE* R&D and fixed up some problems from the NEON platform. They do realize who the car is marketed towards and realize they DO have to give a warranty. It's entirely possible that everyone assumes its a NEON underneath so it will break down like one.

-Shawn