1. Home
  2. Ford Mustang Forum
  3. Mach 1 vs SRT4

Mach 1 vs SRT4

I don't care what anyone says...I would drive a SRT-4. Actually, I would prefer to have what the SRT has in a regular Neon body. The cars are pretty damn quick.

We had numerous problems at the track last night. Fights, A.B.L.E. commission out nailing drinkers and contributors, tons of people endangering the pit area since it was Pro Street night, and Test & Tuners parking in the Pro Street area pissing those guys off.

I only got to watch the Mach 1 and the SRT race one time. I think I am going to go over to the SRT forum and talk them and see if the guy posts in there or not. They were both Blue. I understand for the SRT it is a hard to get color. The Mach was Azure of course...so it was a blue on blue grudge match.

35 years ago you wouldn't have seen a Mach 1 and a Econobox running at a track together...and you would definitely have not seen them posting almost similar times. I think it is great that competition comes from everywhere.

Mach 1 13.55 SRT-4 13.77

Can't wait to see what their other times were.

Don Manning

Reply to
2.3Sleeper
Loading thread data ...

So get an SRT-4 :). They are nice cars. I would NEVER take one over a Mach 1 though. I love Mach 1's too much. SRT-4's are fairly light cars... and of course the turbocharger helps just a tiny bit ;D. I love the looks of a Mach

1 so much more than SRT-4's looks... the SRT-4 is 653lbs lighter than the Mach 1... (comparing 2003 vs 2003).. Mach 1 puts out 305hp @ 5800RPM and 320 ftlb torque @ 4200RPM... while SRT-4 puts out 215hp @ 5400RPM and 245 ftlb torque @ 3200RPM.

I *do* think it's pretty impressive to see an "econobox" next to a big muscle car on the track though... and actually putting forth some impressive numbers. I think it's great that so many different cars are so capable to become fast & handle well. But... this doesn't separate me from my love for the Mustang.

-Mike

Reply to
<memset

How about a 351 Mach 1 up against a 340 Dart in 1969?

Rob

Reply to
trainfan1

Since when is a 340 an Econobox?

Don Manning

Reply to
2.3Sleeper

I think you Mistook what I was saying. Yes, I would drive one, but would rather have the engine/tranny combo in a regular neon body. However, I would never have one of those before I had a Mach 1.

Don Manning

They are nice cars. I would NEVER take one over a Mach 1

Reply to
2.3Sleeper

I know what you mean... I would much rather have the srt-4 engine/tranny in a regular neon body as well. I'm not big on the SRT-4 body style at all.

-Mike

Reply to
<memset

Neither am I. It does however, match up well with the EVO! LOL. An EVO was running last night at the track and I think he was running 14 flat most of the night. He might have dipped into the 13's when I wasn't watching.

Don Manning

Reply to
2.3Sleeper

That's surprising. The EVO has 271hp compared to the SRT-4's 215.

///Mike

1993 BMW 525i
formatting link
of all the old cars
Reply to
TurboMike

My brother-in-law is currently getting 13.30's out of his SRT4, 2.0 60' time & trapping at 106-107mph. He's running 14# with a larger turbo. His plan is to bump the pressure up a wee bit at a time. The Neon is such a POS though. Driving it down the 1/4 is like piloting a rocket-propelled trashcan. :P

Reply to
John C.

I think the "econobox" is the car - the Dart was the "compact" car of the day - it held the same position in the line as the neon does today. Most Darts were made for the masses with the slant six... a rather utilitarian automobile...

Rob

Reply to
trainfan1

"John C." wrote in news:t5Fwc.8557$ snipped-for-privacy@nwrdny02.gnilink.net:

That was the whole idea behind muscle cars and hot rods in the first place - make the econobox go fast. The SRT-4 is just a variation on a theme.

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

Reply to
Joe

As is the Evo and WRX/WRX STi.

Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD

Reply to
Patrick

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (Patrick) wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@posting.google.com:

There ya go. Now I'm waiting for Mazda to sell a factory turbo Miata and Ford to sell a factory turbo Focus.

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

Reply to
Joe

One down, one to go.

Mazda has one out there. I drove a turbo Miata in Boston a few weeks ago. They rate it at about 180 HP. Nice little car. Mazda makes some of the most user friendly interiors, period. Everything is where it should be, and the feel of the controls is superb. (love the shifter!)

-- John C. '03 Cobra Convt.

Reply to
John C.

"John C." wrote in news:HoQwc.9014$ snipped-for-privacy@nwrdny02.gnilink.net:

Neat. Is it factory, or a dealer item?

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

Reply to
Joe

I think it's factory as I saw an ad in a People Mag for one.

///Mike

1993 BMW 525i
formatting link
of all the old cars
Reply to
TurboMike

It may be American, but it's still a "ricer." "No replacement for displacement"

Reply to
Richard

Oh horsesh*t.

Sure there is...it's called boost. New Cobra is a perfect example. 390 hp from 281 ci.

///Mike

1993 BMW 525i
formatting link
of all the old cars
Reply to
TurboMike

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (TurboMike) wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@mb-m17.aol.com:

Well that's pretty cool. Anybody have any experiences with them? Numbers?

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

Reply to
Joe

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (TurboMike) wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@mb-m12.aol.com:

Mike, boost isn't a replacement for displacement because whatever tricks you can perform on a little engine you can do with a big engine. In the end, there's no replacement for displacement, and there's no substitute for cubic inches. ;)

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

Reply to
Joe

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.