You, boys, I see Michael Colangelo over on the "other place" asking about a good multi-purpose car to daily drive, play track days and to "Pro and Cons of Dodge Neon SRT-4 as a rally car?
I'm in the market for a car that will serve as a daily driver, rally cross car, and track car for a year or two and that has the potential to be turned into a competitive FWD rally car. SRT-4s seem to be pretty attractively priced "

Now you all know I talk about how important getting a car that doesn't have any built in flaws and how you have to leave room for growth as you pound on the car and how we vitally NEED to have the ability to progressively upgrade things easily, and how I point out that nearly every fwd car locks a guy into whatever came on the car in terms of gearbox, CV joints, drive axles, hubs and bearings and how that means that those critical parts are sorta "un-upgradeable", and how conversely ANY REAR WHEEL drive car we can fairly easily swap in an alternate rear axle when for example we find the OEM thing has seriously undersized half shafts, or alternate final drive ratios are 800 buck vs 140 for something easier.

OK we need to convince this poor guy that the Neon has serious built in dead-ends in the size of the diff, which explodes regularly, the axles etc, not to mention the complete unavailability of ever changing ratios eithe rin the gearbox or final drive----and how that alone means a car really will always be a tarted up street car, and not really "competitive".....

So could sobody go and gently suggest he look in here and discuss the easier options of something nice and which would cost him 1/20 of the 10,000 bucks he's talking about for some SRT thing?

Meybe James Phillips out in Nebraska who has rally-ex-ed his Neon thing but has decided to build a pretty fun spec 240 volvo could go and enumerate just why the 240 is such a good choice, and what he's seen as limitations on the Neon....

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

I'll copy/pasta him your post in a private message over there.

12xalt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'll copy/pasta him your post in a private message
> over there.

Screw PM, post it right on the thread and suggest since he's nearly the most local guy to the JVAB Ford Asylum, he should maybe meet up with the local gang when we're doing these beer drinking things----the whole purpose of which is to build connections and see things, actual parts, so that newbs don't think of crazy ideas like spending 10g on a car with built in failures which will sooner---not sooner or later, SOONER----cause difficult and frustrating problems.
(which ultimately detract from the fun)

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

too late, message sent already

and I don't know which thread and I'm not going searching, if you wanted that you should have asked for it specifically and posted a link

Gee, MaX Attack, Speical Stage, seems to be only one thread on "Pros and Cons of Dodge Neon as a rally car" and at the top of the section;http://www.specialstage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40207

I believe too much stuff gets talked about in PMs which seems the anti-thesis of athe purpose of a rally discussion forum....

But what the fawk do I know.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Hi JVL!

Thanks for your thoughts on this. I do appreciate it. The whole SRT-4 thing was more of me "thinking aloud" and gathering info on the car.

I almost bought cheap '97 Neon Sport over the weekend but someone beat me to it. I figured that'd be a good rallycross car and all-around beater for driving in and around Seattle.

I guess I'm more of a FWD kind of guy (I know, it's a character flaw) so I've been leaning towards FWD cars.

john vanlandingham Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gee, MaX Attack, Speical Stage, seems to be only
> one thread on "Pros and Cons of Dodge Neon as a
> rally car" and at the top of the section;
>
> I believe too much stuff gets talked about in PMs
> which seems the anti-thesis of athe purpose of a
> rally discussion forum....
>
> But what the fawk do I know.
>
>
> John Vanlandingham
> Sleezattle, WA, USA
>
> Vive le Prole-le-ralliat
>
> www.rallyrace.net/jvab
> CALL +1 206 431-9696
> Remember! Pacific Standard Time
> is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.



you ask for something, someone passes it along, and then you whine about getting what you asked for

you sound like a woman

Didn't an SRT-4 Outright WIN Idaho last year?

---

Welcome to the cult of JVL drink the koolaid or be banned.

MikeColangelo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi JVL!
>
> Thanks for your thoughts on this. I do appreciate
> it. The whole SRT-4 thing was more of me
> "thinking aloud" and gathering info on the car.

OK, but take heed of the reports of diff failures and drive axles breaking.
That's what I call a built in problem with no obvious solution that utimately leads to frustrating and usually costly attempts at curing.


>
> I almost bought cheap '97 Neon Sport over the
> weekend but someone beat me to it. I figured
> that'd be a good rallycross car and all-around
> beater for driving in and around Seattle.

Well I've driven the sporty version fora 5 day stretch and I thought what a gutless pile unless revved mercilessly.
I know I've been spoiled by 10+ years of turbo cars but still......


>
> I guess I'm more of a FWD kind of guy (I know,
> it's a character flaw) so I've been leaning
> towards FWD cars.

Note well I have only driven in rally one car: Saab 96 which is of course front wheel drive.
But I've helped dozens of guys get started in the sport and I see a huge contrast between effort and dollars spent and how much flat fun the boys have had in their cars and the dollar/fun ratio is dramatically higher for the rwd guys.
Now I rallied the Saab because my rent was paid running a niche business centered around the 96 since the customer base was very very loyal to the car since it is such a good base car.
The weight is for a stock car 1946 lbs, the Ford V4 motor has a big bore (90mm) and there's room for significantly larger valves----off the shelf Ford Ranger 2,9 V6 valves are drop in and they're 42mm in and 36 exhaust, and cost under 10 each, and are extremely high quality to live with no-lead, so a cheap easy upgrade that costs 1/3 of what stock valves cost so of course we drop them in everything.
the weight distribution with 2 people in the car is about 52/48, the slow rack is 2,7 turns, the stock up to 68 rack was 2,2 turns, the gearbox is strong, LSDs are off the shelf, shorter ratio final drive was never a problem to find 5.45, the brakes are excellent power and perfect gravel balance, the drive axkes and CVs wer as big as 99/900s weighing 800-1000 lbs more so never an issue ever with drive line stuff, and it was a demo car. All solid reasons to rally it.

But it was always annoying sorta to see how easy we could make RWD cars work BETTER..

So re you saying maybe you're a fwd type of guy, and remembering that I have built so many rwd cars which have worked so well---and been so easy to upgrade to stronger bits might I posit that maybe you've just not driven decent (for what we're talking about---fun daily driver-track day-rally-ex----and eventual rally car) REAR DRIVE cars.....

I mean there has to be some good reasons why a guy who has been loyal to Saab since 1980 is suggesting that people think hard about simple basic RWD stuff like oh say a 240 Volvo....... they are basically so "correct" out of the box and have such easy upgradability for things that cost hundreds (like $380 for a gearkit, not $3800) that I really believe that they ought to be looked at as the ideal all purpose beginner car, the default car in fact.

I keep thinking that for the long term viability, "we" need to get to the point that we look at them as the Ford Escort MkII of North America in that its size, weight, BALANCE, power and strength (and stuff like suspension travel) is so good that we all should be reflexively considering them as THE car to start in----and I betcha that a big % would find that the car does everything they were wishing for in the long term.

I had a fellow ring me last week to ask about suspension "for rallycross" like in Hillsborough who has a Focus and I talked to him for a while and made the point that the focus is LARGE (102.5" wheelbase), somewhat heavy, definitely underpowered and with only extremely expensive eventual upgrades and in the end suggested he keep the thing as daily driver and think about getting a dedicated beat on/play car that could be fun near stock but could be piecemeal built up and pointed out the easiness of the 240---or Xratty, same stuff and he concluded it made tons of sense.

So, even if you hadn't thought of RWD, let's wrestle with that idea, the Pros and Cons of that aside from your presumed preferences (as I said---ever driven a decent prepared, correct sized RWD car?).

just for info gathering...


Oh and Hey you really ought to come out to our beer swilling/food chomping meet and greet meetings, you're local enough since we make them on the South side of town. You're not even 5 miles from here....

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

12xalt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> john vanlandingham Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gee, MaX Attack, Speical Stage, seems to be
> only
> > one thread on "Pros and Cons of Dodge Neon as
> a
> > rally car" and at the top of the section;
> >
> > I believe too much stuff gets talked about in
> PMs
> > which seems the anti-thesis of athe purpose
> of a
> > rally discussion forum....
> >
> > But what the fawk do I know.
> >
> >
> > John Vanlandingham
> > Sleezattle, WA, USA
> >
> > Vive le Prole-le-ralliat
> >
> > www.rallyrace.net/jvab
> > CALL +1 206 431-9696
> > Remember! Pacific Standard Time
> > is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.
>
>
>
> you ask for something, someone passes it along,
> and then you whine about getting what you asked
> for
>
> you sound like a woman


Thank you, and whatever.

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Dazed_Driver Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Didn't an SRT-4 Outright WIN Idaho last year?

Yes and probably with just a tad more budget building it than the average beginner would be able to afford and there is a good chance that the driver would have done the same of better in a nicer, more balanced car regardless of drive configuration.


>
>
>
>
> Feisty Peacock?
>
>

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Thanks again. Yes, I need to tip a few beers with you guys. Hell, I can walk to Georgetown from where I work.

I know the 240 is a good car. I've road raced against them and was impressed at how well they seemed to handle. I'll have to check them out.

How about...

http://seattle.craigslist.org/see/cto/1678488447.html

cheap too...

---

SteveL
This is the point in the killing spree when you really should turn the gun on yourself

Well, since I got referenced into this thing in the first post, I should probably speak up.

I have several Neons: an aborted G2 build of a 1GN 98 coupe and my current SRT-4 rallycross car. I've decided to go with a Volvo 240 for several reasons:

1) It's a Volvo. This will be my 3rd. I plan to listen to NPR during transits, and am currently negotiating with Birkenstock to develop FIA driving shoes. I also have a full beard, and vote Democrat.

2) I like the simplicity of a live-axle RWD platform, since I tend to break things. I grew up driving them, and crashing them, and getting them stuck on muddy roads, and fixing them in my parents driveway, etc.

3) I think RWD is a more versatile platform for the variety of events I plan on entering (open-road race, hillclimbs, stage rally, autox, rallyx) without getting into the cost/complexity of AWD. I also think it's more fun to drive, especially the tail-shake when you put the power down on corner-exit.

3) I like John's philosophy of the 'spec 240' platform. I've followed the topic here at RA for several years, and I like the sustainability aspect of it. I don't want to change cars/platforms every few years. Modern automobile manufacturing methods do not lend themselves to easily changing things such as engine/final drive/transmission/etc., to suit different circumstances, or the evolution of the driver or his competition. G2->G5 is just an easy engine swap away. DOHC B230, turbo B21/23, small-block V8, there's plenty of room in the bay.

Will I ever get to the point where the durability and adaptability actually matter? Who knows, I suspect I'm just a dilletante. But it won't cost me any more $$ to do it than it would cost me to fix my messed up G2 build Neon, or build the SRT-4 into a rally car, and I think the things the 240 platform has going for it will keep me involved in the sport longer than my other choices would. Certainly longer than chasing a 'car of the year' philosophy will, after all, I'm wearing 13 year old Birkenstocks that are on their 6th set of soles. Clearly I don't like unnecesary change.

regards,

---

james phillips
Volvo 242 GT (being built...)
Scooby killing 04 Dodge Neon SRT Rallycross monster
Lincoln, NE

SteveL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How about...
>
>
>
> cheap too...
>
> SteveL
> “This is the point in the killing spree when you
> really should turn the gun on yourself…”

145 is rarer than hell in the "rally spares storafe depots" commonly referred to as "junk yards".
Thus there is an instant problem with sourcing wear items like hoods, door, fenders, grilles, things that tend to wear out when smacked into trees.

Second the steering is via a shitty, loose, worn out 25 years ago "steering box" which means the cars will wander all over the road, and be vague, causing a need for more "wear items" mentioned above.
Even were the steering as tight as new, the steering is so slow, the need for wear items becomes paramount.

The design of the LONG lower control arms makes just slapping a rack in a problem, an extremely short rack is needed to avoid drastic bump or droop steer.

Conclusion: 140 has "built in problems" which would demand money/time/energy to fix that simply choosing a 240 would solve instantly.

Thus: No ADVANTAGE.
(I strongly suggest posing the question at nearly every step "What ADVANTAGE would this____________________ give me?" which the posing the question immediately suggests it's reverse unstated question "What DIS-advantage would _______________ saddle me with?"

142: No advantages, only fundamental problems before you even start, which IF solved leave the problem of "wear items".

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.