Quote:
Originally posted by srv1
you got to be kidding me? i will take the WRX over the PeeOn anyday!! you have all wheel drive and its turbo works really well. i have seen them pesonally hit mid 13's. Chrysler sucks. it might be nice to look at or cute little cars, but that fact is they ARE the most repaired vehciles out there. JUNK JUNK JUNK! i have done 2.4 head gaskets and swapped motors out of them and not because of lack of maintenence either. Now they want to put a turbo on it.:rollyeyes: i have seen those motors being really fast, but longevity takes a schit down the tubes. only thing chrysler made that was good was the hemi. you take the 2.4 and put 100k of "turbo" miles on it and you will see who last longer, the WRX or the PeeOn. WRX will. i would spend 5k more for the WRX.
|
Ok smart guy, i wont defend the "peeon" but are you saying all mopar are junk? you mean performance, or reliability?
heh, the hemi wouldnt be exactly reliable with its high compression race intentions, what about the 383-440 bigblocks that could tear into a hemi just as well,(when built) and heard many stories about the ole 318 lasting over 200k miles.
so saying thats the only thing chrysler did good, is dumb, since you obviously dont know enough info to be knocking all mopar engines. The 2.4 probaly is crap, and i wouldnt own a 2.? liter anything, anyone makes.
__________________
X-Texas highway patrol ssp 1990 coupe - exploder Gt-40 iron heads, Explorer intake, 19 lber's. E-cam. crane 1.7 rollers. 190fp. 75mm maf. 65mm tb, tubular subframe connectors, mac cai, Asp crank pulley, T-5, king cobra clutch, flowtech 1-5/8 unequals, mac X-pipe Frpp driveshaft, lakewood Lca's.
race weight 3,160
12.69 @ 107.35, 1.71 60' 26x8.5 drag's 3.90 gear
13.20 @ 106.91 - 235/60/15 firestones 2.3 60' 3.27 gear
|