Twins! (Part Nine)

[2o6]

Same Chrysler 2.4L Turbo. Similar platforms. Both make ~230HP.

Go!

[68_427]

Neon.

[2o6]

I voted for the PT GT, mostly because I've driven a 2nd Gen Neon, and it's not as fun as the 1st gen. Of course, the SRT-4 has some serious suspension upgrades, but I haven't driven one, so I can't say. The PT GT is also more practical.

[68_427]

I cant imagine the PT being as sharp as the Neon.

[the Teuton]

I really like my mom's PT, but if it's gonna have a turbo, it might as well be one of the quickest FWD cars ever made -- the tin shit-can with a turbo.

[2o6]

I cant imagine the PT being as sharp as the Neon.

I dunno, I'd take the practicality over the sharpness.

[68_427]

My neighbor has a PT turbo.  Dark metallic red.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

Neon! I never cared for the PTs "Chick Car" styling.

[thewizard16]

Neon because everything I read that mentioned it made it sound like it might actually be fun.

I dunno, I'd take the practicality over the sharpness.

Having had a lot of experience with an HHR lately, I think the "practicality" value of those mini-wagon retro cruisers is highly overrated. It doesn't hold much (if any) more in the back than a trunk does, and has significantly worse visibility to boot. It's not like it's big enough to move furniture or anything very substantial in either, so I'm not seeing a huge daily benefit in practicality.

[hotrodalex]

Neon because everything I read that mentioned it made it sound like it might actually be fun.
Having had a lot of experience with an HHR lately, I think the "practicality" value of those mini-wagon retro cruisers is highly overrated. It doesn't hold much (if any) more in the back than a trunk does, and has significantly worse visibility to boot. It's not like it's big enough to move furniture or anything very substantial in either, so I'm not seeing a huge daily benefit in practicality.

My Dad and I rented an HHR when we picked up the crate engine for the El Camino. It's about the perfect size for that.

[2o6]

Neon because everything I read that mentioned it made it sound like it might actually be fun.
Having had a lot of experience with an HHR lately, I think the "practicality" value of those mini-wagon retro cruisers is highly overrated. It doesn't hold much (if any) more in the back than a trunk does, and has significantly worse visibility to boot. It's not like it's big enough to move furniture or anything very substantial in either, so I'm not seeing a huge daily benefit in practicality.

The shape of the opening.

[the Teuton]

My Dad and I rented an HHR when we picked up the crate engine for the El Camino. It's about the perfect size for that.

[CJ]

I'd rather cut my testicles off and feed them to a llama than drive either of these.

[2o6]

And you are wholly stupid for that.


I'd take either of these Mopars over any personality-less Volvo. (aside from maybe a V70R)


I mean, seriously. It's a rolling box made for well-to-do families. That alone tells you that it was never meant to be a fun car.

[CJ]

My car is:

1) Built better
2) Drives better
3) More comfortable
4) Faster


Drive something T5 and you'll understand.

[2o6]

I mean seriously. People get on me for small hatchbacks, but you take it to a whole new level with the Volvos, man.

[Raza]

My car is:

1) Built better
2) Drives better
3) More comfortable
4) Faster


Drive something T5 and you'll understand.

I'm going to call bullshit on 2 and 4.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/02q4/dodge_neon_srt-4-road_test

Long story short:

"The Neon SRT-4 rips to 60 mph in 5.6 seconds, to 100 in 13.8, covers a quarter-mile in 14.2 seconds at 102 mph, and keeps on huffin' all the way to 153 mph."

"For all its wheelspin potential, though, the SRT-4 is a balanced package, capable of stopping and turning with the same kind of zeal it brings to going straight-ahead."

[omicron]

For some reason I want to say PT, which is bothersome because I don't really like the PT.

[CJ]

I'm going to call bullshit on 2 and 4.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/02q4/dodge_neon_srt-4-road_test

Long story short:

"The Neon SRT-4 rips to 60 mph in 5.6 seconds, to 100 in 13.8, covers a quarter-mile in 14.2 seconds at 102 mph, and keeps on huffin' all the way to 153 mph."

"For all its wheelspin potential, though, the SRT-4 is a balanced package, capable of stopping and turning with the same kind of zeal it brings to going straight-ahead."

Than the PT, yes.  I'm sure the Neon drives very well...but it's still a Neon.  It has two power windows.  Two.  I'll keep my heated leather seats and non-functioning sunroof, thank you.  I have no doubt the Neon is a very good car to drive.  I happen to like a little more substantial feel to my cars.

[the Teuton]

Nothing says trust like ripping the shit out of a tin shitcan. Screw substantiality; live with a Subaru then lecture me on that one.

[Raza]

Than the PT, yes.  I'm sure the Neon drives very well...but it's still a Neon.  It has two power windows.  Two.  I'll keep my heated leather seats and non-functioning sunroof, thank you.  I have no doubt the Neon is a very good car to drive.  I happen to like a little more substantial feel to my cars.

Like I said, just two and four.  I don't doubt that a Volvo is built better and is more comfortable.

[Onslaught]

I'll walk.

[BimmerM3]

Neon, hands down.

[sportyaccordy]

Rode in a Stage 3 SRT 4. Came away a little disappointed. Def didnt have the sense of occasion of a VTEC Honda.

That said I dont like the looks of the GT Cruiser. Neon (sans wing + bright yellow paint) it is.