Hyper-X

That's not saying anything out of the ordinary. I mean having a 3.5L V6 and a turbocharged 2.4L is a no brainer regarding which engines should be producing more torque over the NA motor displacing 2 liters. So if I were to say a blown 426 Hemi with nitrous has more torque over the 3.5L Nissan and the 2.4L SRT4, would that be saying anything surprising?

You could have all the torque and still not perform. I've said this many times in many threads that it's the total balance of things that determine which car is better than the next. A diesel truck has more torque than most supercharged S2000's, but the S2000 can still come up on top.

Here's my point... since torque seems to be the issue here, considering the S2000's 2 liter engine is being compared to a 3.5L V6... the Z isn't significantly faster than the S to justify displacing a whole 1.5L and 2 more cylinders. The same could be said about the SRT4 having .4L of displacement advantage and boost isn't freakishly faster than the 2.0L VTEC. People seem to forget that the 2.0L VTEC F20C in the S2000 is doing all of its work from a "torqueless" engine, yet cars with displacement advantages ranging from .4L to 1.5L plus turbo can't smoke the S2000 with those crutches.

Suppose the S2000 was a 2.0L turbocharged car from the factory. If my car can't significantly smoke a NA 1.6L car, that'd really put me in my place.

bunjimobile

Well the 350Z and the SRT-4 are in the same performance category as the S2000 I think (0-60@5.5-5.8). Neither car can give the other a smack down(1/4 mile@14-14.2) but cars with higher torque are definitely easier to drive fast and allow more room for mistake than cars that have low torque. Thats was just my experience. Either ways we all agree here that the S2000 is an excellent car but we can't deny the fact that the 350Z and the SRT-4 are great cars as well.

1sweet00SS

FYI there is no boost loss if you WOT shift an SRT. Zero...none. Once in boost an SRT should always be in boost until the race is over.....

It's a driver's race

Hyper-X

Good post!

blessed

[QUOTE=1sweet00SS,Jul 23 2004, 05:03 PM]FYI there is no boost loss if you WOT shift an SRT.

1sweet00SS

[QUOTE=blessed,Jul 23 2004, 09:59 PM] I wonder how much it cost for a new SRT-4 tranny..??

blessed

You make it sound like the car is 7 years old and has been powershifted a million times...they came out in 03, remember that...

There a great bang for your buck no doubt, but we'll see how they hold up in a few years before I believe there "trannies are strong"...whatever, not flaming, just making a point.

1sweet00SS

I didn't make it sound like anything. You asked a question and "made it sound like" SRTs were having tranny problems. They are not.....plain and simple. Also, I'm well aware they came out in 03.....sheesh

BTW, another thing you misstated in your first post....... stock SRTs DO NOT rev to 6500 rpms. Red line is 6000 rpms and fuel cut off is set at 6200 rpms. Also, turbo lag is almost nonexistent. Unlike a WRX, a stock SRTs torque will peak at 2800 rpms!

No flaming intendied, but you are posting a lot of misinformation about the SRT, which maybe explains why you believe a S2000 should always win.

One more thing, because boost tapers off around 5500 - 5700 rpms, most everyone I know WOT shifts at 5500 rpms.... Therefore, there is no boost loss between shifts, and you shift before boost tapers off up top (counter points to two of the major issues why you say the S2000 should be faster).

Again, it's all about the driver. These two cars are a driver's race plain and simple and neither should always win..... they are just too close in straight line speed when stock. Now throw some turns in there, and an S2000 will spank a stock SRT.