What was done to the ST? I agree that the power and weight are about the same. Its all in how you drive... i can beat riced out hondas with my stock 2.0 ZX3, because they dont know how to dirve.

Mouse

 

i think there just stock. i was just saying that cuz people are like omg its 150 hp and so fast and i was just seeing if im the only one that notice that there about the same speed ya know lol wondering if i was the only one that notice that

 

you should gut your car out. your power to weight ratio will be better

 

It might be in the driving, or your lucky. I haven't lined up with one yet, but i dont race much.

 

the STs are overrated - for that kind of money, I'd save an extra 3k and get into an SRT4 or a new Civic Si

 

i agree the ST is over rated i tested one and i didnt like how it felts. its louder and to much play in the sespension for me. i think the ST is great if your willing to spend a ton of money and drag it but im not all for that just a car that gets my to point a to b and still have fun with it. i had a 2.3 and theres alot you can do with it but its kinda costly. but in my car i got a sun roof and the audio up grade and still payed like 2k less lol

 

they wanted over 25g for a st in st.charles mo i told them they are crazy and kept my 02 zx3

 

LOL 25g. That's a rip off. I got my 05 ST out the door for 15900. 4k miles. And I'll tell you what. It had to be the driver, cuz I raced my brothers SVT and we are both great drivers. He barely beat me. I havent lost to a 2.0 yet....

 

my sister has an st i know there isnt much done to it yet but stock for stock my zx3 was faster off the line an slightly quicker to 100mph but as for race from rolls the st will very slowly pull ahead by about 1/4-1/2 a car.

 

you shouldnt use 93 octane on your car, its not gonna help you get more power, you might actually lose power cause your ecu is setup for 87 octane. untill you get a reflash and soem more mods i would stick with 87 for now...

 

i got my ST for 13,500 out the door.....it's all in the driving.....don't hate on the ST

 

LOL somehow this became a Lets Hate on the St post. LOL

 

LOL 25g. That's a rip off. I got my 05 ST out the door for 15900. 4k miles. And I'll tell you what. It had to be the driver, cuz I raced my brothers SVT and we are both great drivers. He barely beat me. I havent lost to a 2.0 yet....

the svt is a 2.0....[paranoid]

 

LOL and how old are you anyways? The power to weight ratio is better with the ST. Not much, but it is better. What are you talking about with the handling of the ST??? Put on a set of SVT springs, and the susspenion on the ST is identicle to the SVT for crying out loud. In a 2700 lb car you can feel 15 hp. And the ST has more torque. And you run 93 octane to get more power right??? WRONG!! in fact you could be loosing power by using 93 octane. Oh... it must be that massive rubber you have right? [rolleyes]

 

LOL and how old are you anyways? The power to weight ratio is better with the ST. Not much, but it is better. What are you talking about with the handling of the ST??? Put on a set of SVT springs, and the susspenion on the ST is identicle to the SVT for crying out loud. In a 2700 lb car you can feel 15 hp. And the ST has more torque. And you run 93 octane to get more power right??? WRONG!! in fact you could be loosing power by using 93 octane. Oh... it must be that massive rubber you have right? [rolleyes]

Wheels and tires would seem to be a subtraction in ET too.... I thought this post was kinda odd, but then I know a lot of people who line up with cars like M6's and swear they've won a race...... but the other car wasn't racing. I remember a race between my Monte Carlo with a 4.3/T-Metric against a riced up 200SX. The kid in the 200SX thought he was really racing me up to about 50mph when I actually double pumped the gas and left him like he was standing still.

Holla back when ya got a real weight to power ratio like 10/1, then we can go race V8's[]

 

i wasnt saying losing to an svt....i ment i havent lost to a non svt 2.0

 

STs come with better rubber out the door. My biggest problem with this car so far has been traction. My 60ft is spitiful, and I still run with my friend's ST (CAI). We are just about a dead even race, and I haven't been to the track with the new exhaust or tires that will be on shortly.

They are faster, but not that much. You get better suspension, top trim, and appearance packages to go along with it. I would love to have a 2.3L.

And yes, he is a good driver. I wish they had made an ZX3 ST, that would have got my vote.

 

theres not much differance in my low end with 93 but with my high end i dont crap out. i talked to a ford machanic whose my neightbor and he said it really donesnt matter. he said the ecu puts in the same amount of gas but 93 has a better ignition in the chamber. said i wont hurt anything he said the only way to hurt the car is use something less that 87 or use 93 for like ever then get cheap and switch back the 87. but dont take my advice cuz if hes wrong dont need anyone blaming me for it lol

 

LOL and how old are you anyways? The power to weight ratio is better with the ST. Not much, but it is better. What are you talking about with the handling of the ST??? Put on a set of SVT springs, and the susspenion on the ST is identicle to the SVT for crying out loud. In a 2700 lb car you can feel 15 hp. And the ST has more torque. And you run 93 octane to get more power right??? WRONG!! in fact you could be loosing power by using 93 octane. Oh... it must be that massive rubber you have right? [rolleyes]

yeesh chill out man, why does his age matter anyways?? Get over yourself man. [rolleyes]

 

1st off im 21... i race at a track here in atl its an 1/8 mile track so thats what im basing it off of so sorry if i make anyone made but my car takes a crap at like 112 so i know i have zero top end thats why i was asking if anyone else noticed and peoples opinions

 

ecu puts in the same amount of gas but 93 has a better ignition in the chamber
_______________

do a search and you will read LOTS of info about using higher octane than recommended. Every one you find will say don't do it. Higher octane is harder to ignite to help keep detonation away. Higher octane allows you to do things to the engine to make more power. Higher octane doesn't increase power

 

2.3L duratec = potential, not outa the box performance

but if you wanna really get down to it, they are quite similar in how people compare the zetec and svt..the svt just has a better start, but the zetec has just as much potential..its the same way w/ the 2.0 and 2.3L duratecs especially with tom and his new stroker kits

 

I want me a stroker kit

 

I test drove both when buying my ST (a ZX3 and the ST, and I actually could tell quite a bit of difference, of course I don't think stock for stock the ST will blow the doors off the ZX3 or vice versa. The biggest difference I could feel was the torque difference, not so much the horsepower. The ZX3 felt like it had to be shifted a lot more, where as in the ST, shifting on hills, etc isn't done as much. In the end the ST felt stronger off the line with a lot less agressivenss than the ZX3, just my opinion though.

The problem with the SVT is, they just keep going in the rpm range, you might hang with one for a while, but once they really get in the high rpms, it never ends, and they are gone? Do you SVT guys ever have to shift?

 

wow i never knew dat i cant wait for some out da box turbo charged power though can u agree