Worst rateing whatever its biased nonsense. People claim the car is too slow but yet its faster then entry level civics but yet the civic is ugylier and is still a god. There is a noticable difference in power off the line. It's bashed because it is a NEON and nothing more. People feel the need to feed into the anti american bullshit and its getting old. I must say the trani shifted a little more harsh then my aunts sunfire but that is also the lack of power issue haveing to kick the throttle to power up on the highway. Keep ing the gossip and half of ontario will be out of a job such as ford on the news today.

According to the institute of highway safety.. a 2000-2005 neon is ranked POOR in side impact And MARGINAL in front impact, the 1995-1999 is ranked poor in frontal impact.

The civic (2001-2005) is ranked GOOD in frontal impact

"Test details:

The Dodge and Plymouth Neon were redesigned for the 2000 model year. Side airbags were made optional beginning with 2001 models. The Plymouth Neon was dropped after the 2001 model year, and the high-performance Dodge SRT-4 model was added in the 2003 model year. Both the Dodge Neon and SRT-4 were dropped after the 2005 model year.

Injury measures:

Driver — Measures taken from the dummy indicate that serious skull fracture and/or brain injuries would be likely in a crash of this severity. Rib fractures and/or internal organ injuries plus a fracture of the pelvis also would be likely.

Rear passenger — Measures taken from the dummy indicate that serious skull fracture and/or brain injuries would be possible in a crash of this severity. A left femur fracture also would be likely.

Head protection:

Driver — The dummy's head was hit by the intruding barrier, producing high head injury measures.

Rear passenger — The dummy's head was hit by the intruding barrier, producing high head injury measures.
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/image.ashx?rh=284&id=1http://www.iihs.org/ratings/image.ashx?rh=284&id=2http://www.iihs.org/ratings/image.ashx?rh=284&id=3http://www.iihs.org/ratings/image.ashx?rh=284&id=4
Left to right:

* View of the vehicle and barrier just after the crash test. Larger photo
* View of the vehicle after the crash with doors removed, showing damage to the occupant compartment. Larger photo
* Action shot taken during the side impact crash test showing the driver dummy's head being hit by the intruding barrier. Larger photo
* Embedded glass fragments and paint marks indicate where the rear passenger's head was hit by the barrier. Larger photo

Additional features:

* Side airbags: front seat-mounted combination head and torso airbags (optional on 2001-05 models)
* Antilock brakes (optional)

Tested vehicle specifications:

* 2005 Dodge Neon SXT 4-door
* Class: Small car
* Weight: 2,654 lbs.
* Side airbags: none
* Wheelbase: 105 in.
* Length: 175 in.
* Width: 67 in.
* Engine: 2.0 L 4-cylinder
* EPA ratings: 25 mpg city | 32 mpg highway "

Neon TEST source IIHS Clicky...

Civic TEST source IIHS Clicky...

Must be a hell of a lot of gossip...

i'll sum up everything here and give you a fina answer...which is deserving of a definite final post to this thread.

if you like the car, get it. f*ck what a forum filled of keyboard racers who think that their car is gods gift to the automotive industry think. the majority of people here know balls all, but like to think they do, and are determined to try to make you believe that their tidbit of knowledge is wayyyy more then yours.

so...

buy (or if you have already, keep) the neon.

/thread

Having owned one for a while let me say this...

As far as interior and comfort is concerned, i say its very comfortable compared to alot of cars in the same class. My sister drove a cavalier for a while from the same year (2000) and that thing was fukin noisy with no power what so ever from the engine (auto tranny too). The civics (stock from 2000, refering to ex model) are just way too plain inside. So neon is more comfortable imo than those 2 comparrisons.

As far as powerplant... the base has a 2.0L SOHC and is rated at 132 hp and 130 tq, the good thing about it is it has torque in the lower gears, way more noticable than a civic or cavalier. As far as hp, its slow i wont lie but again comparing it to cars in the same class its not that bad. Back when i was stock i ran an integra RS with mods and we were dead even ( had him by half a car until 3rd), civics even slightly modded, the neon can beat no problem. I ran a couple of z24 cavaliers and lost by less than half a car each time.

My point is this. If you are buying the car as a daily driver or grocery getter, its a good choice above the competition. If you are bying the car as a project car that you intend to make fast, don't bother, there is aftermarket support but its just not worth it.

If you are looking for a daily driver with a sporty side for under 10gs then go for a 2001 or 2002 neon r/t, they have alot of goodies that make them worthwile.

blablabla

u obviouly dont know what ur talking about. Cavy is much faster then the neon....no power my ass. ANd dont even talk about lower power tourque, thats where ecotec serves neon its sorry ass.

:appl:

i dunt know what im talking about sry

ur telling me a base cavalier is fast than a base neon?
go find one and race it

lets have a forum race. neon is wood

I am willing to line it up, 2002 Neon R/T.

I have been door to door with a MkII VR6 swapped Golf. . .thought it was 16V the whole time too!

lmao. sure you have.

oh man u guys are soo ignorant, just because it has the gayest name ever doesnt mean its that bad of a car, like honestly guys these are all slow cars, dunt be mad cause urs is slowER

I agree when people learn to grow the **** up I will pay attention. Even with j-bodys I never knew much about them only knew a few people who had them. So the past weekend I decided to have a look in the yard! There where some 97-99ish cavaliers and sunfires most totalled. I checked the odomoter readings and most had around 290,000k! some engines were missing some looked dirty and stock. For a cheap car you can't complain people just can't face facts that if they are maintained they can last just as long as any import. The ignorance has got to stop.

BTW NOBODY CAN ARGUE THE FACT THAT DODGE MANAGED TO MAKE THE BEST SOUNDING STOCK 4CYL EVER SRT-4 ANYONE?

Yep ill seccond that, as far as every day cars the SRT-4 sounds insane no mufflers :smokin: some ppl accutally got tickets on their stock cars and they had to fight them in court.

I would say seccond in the common engine would be a nicely tuned VR6... simply badass (not 4 cyl i know)


As far as the main topic of this thread, all of us who have these entry level cars obviously have them because we cant afford something better. But at the same time we are bashing eachothers car over 5 hp or a name. No one said J-Bodies are crap (i was looking for one before I found the neon), no one said civics are , because all these cars have very high potential.

i'd have to say sti sounds absolutely the best... its got that lowly growl like locomotive or a truck. just love it

No, I think the SRT4 actually sounds like . Any turbo car without mufflers would sound like that, even better in most cases. I'm no Honda fanboy but the nicest sounding stock 4 cylinder I ever heard was the B18C5 (Type-R) we swapped into my friends CRX. That or my buddies GSX-R. :headbang: