Page 1 of 1

5 SXT ATX went to the dragstrip today.... SLOW!!!

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 6:04 pm
by timk225
I recently got my 98000 mile 5 SXT with automatic transmission, and it seems to run good, but I felt the top end was a bit soft. On a highway run from 80 to 100 mph, it took a little longer than what I thought was right to get there. And mixed driving gas mileage is around 25-26 mpg.

But today was a beautiful blue sky 60 degree day and my local 1/4 mile dragstrip had its opening day. I took it to get some baseline runs, and I'm glad I did, to confirm it is running weak.

So far it is stock. When I got it home from buying it, I blew out the air filter and air box, put in a fresh set of Champion copper plugs (OEM style copper ones, none of that platinum / iridium BS), changed the oil and filter to Mobil 1 5w-20 as the oil cap specified, and ran a can of Seafoam through the gas tank.

For the first run, I loaded the converter to around 1500 rpms, the remaining 3 runs I just wapped the gas pedal to the floor from idle, which gave better 60 foots.

When the shifter was left in "3", and WOT, the transmission shifted 1-2 at 6300 rpm, and 2-3 at 6100 rpm.

First run:

60 foot - 2.59
330 - 7.53
1/8 m time - 11.55
1/8 m speed - 62.52
1000 time - 15.02
1000 speed - 70.08
1/4 mile time - 17.98
1/4 mile speed - 75.11

WTF?!?!?!?! Slow as hell! The top end SUCKS! I was expecting 16 second times at 82-84 mph!!! The only thing that went as I expected was the 60 foot time.

Second run (Launch from idle the remaining 3 runs) This run I tried riding the gas pedal and getting it to shift at 6000 rpm for both gear changes. :

60 foot - 2.55
330 foot - 7.56
1/8 m time - 11.67
1/8 m speed - 61.80
1000 time - 15.18
1000 speed - 69.18
1/4 mile time - 18.18
1/4 mile speed - 74.27

Third run - WOT shifts at 6300 and 6100, launch from idle:

60 foot - 2.54
330 foot - 7.42
1/8 m time - 11.42
1/8 m speed - 62.57
1000 time - 14.87
1000 speed - 69.12
1/4 m time - 17.80
1/4 m speed - 76.18

Fourth run: Same WOT 6300/6100 shifts.

60 foot - 2.56
330 foot - 7.45
1/8 m time - 11.45
1/8 m speed - 62.54
1000 time - 14.90
1000 speed - 69.06
1/4 m time - 17.83
1/4 m speed - 75.39

Based on the 1/8 mile times and speeds, my 0-60 is right around 11 seconds! That is RI-GOD-DAMN-DICULOUS !!!

Car weight was exactly 3000 pounds with me and fuel, and based on these 1/4 mile speeds, that is 98-102 net hp. I am missing 10-15 horsepower!

I have had it code scanned at the local Advance Auto Parts, and there's no error codes.

I was thinking maybe the catalytic converter is clogged up, as it seems to run fine until it gets a load on it. It does not miss, stumble, backfire, hard start, or anything like that.

This is a good excuse to put on a header and magnaflow cat, IF that fixes the problem.

Any ideas on an explanation for these inexplicable timeslips?

Re: 5 SXT ATX went to the dragstrip today.... SLOW!!!

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 6:10 pm
by ThatKevin
timk225 wrote:Any ideas on an explanation for these inexplicable timeslips?
automatic neons are slow.

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 6:28 pm
by JeffB#2
Nope, that's just about right for a 2nd Gen ATX. Get used to it. Most lighter weight stock-is 1st Gen ATX cars won't go high 16s either. 1st Gen DOHC ATX bone stock will also run right with you in the high 17s/low 18s. Without boost, an ATX Neon is pretty much a slow rolling rock unless you throw a ton of other NA parts at it including a good, loose convertor to get RPM up as the lights come down.

I might take my 2.4 SOHC ATX out one time this year, just for shits and giggles. I don't know if it will run 16.xx either. We'll see.

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 6:36 pm
by Swordfish2Cowboy
Are you seriously expecting 16 seconds out of a stock ATX 2.0 standard Neon? O_O

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:01 pm
by timk225
Yes, I was expecting 16 second times.

What about the 11 second 0-60 times? Are you all telling me that is normal? It can't be! I sure hope not, anyhow.

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:33 pm
by occasional demons
timk225 wrote:Yes, I was expecting 16 second times.
Lol, my brother's CSX Shadow barely made 16's. Granted the turbo cars of that era did not make the same power as the SRT 4, but it was still a boosted MTX car. So there is no way a non boosted engine with ~13 less rated HP and an ATX is going to do better. (stock for stock)

And to be honest, IDK if the Shelby cars were rated as the same output as the regular cars. It was only a turbo 1, but as far as boost levels and ECU programming?

Reality Check. :lol:

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:09 am
by ejclide
those look like the exact same times I saw with my '05 ATX. I made a 16.4 with a 50hp shot of nitrous.

Re: 5 SXT ATX went to the dragstrip today.... SLOW!!!

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:23 am
by stdlystdmufn
timk225 wrote:that is 98-102 net hp. I am missing 10-15 horsepower!
That is what my 05 atx got when i dyno'd it

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:35 am
by ejclide
My cheapo computer dyno scan software showed mine right about that hp as well. Seems right.

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 10:02 am
by r/tguy02
Yeah power train loss from an atx is more than a manual, so those hp figures are correct.

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:55 am
by jonnymopar
ejclide wrote:those look like the exact same times I saw with my '05 ATX. I made a 16.4 with a 50hp shot of nitrous.
This illustrates the huge driveline loss with an automatic. Frank racer12306 ran a 16.1 with a stock manual Neon, same year I believe.

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:03 pm
by timk225
I'm having a real mental tug of war right now.

Sensible side and Racer side.

Sensible: "You bought this car to be a reliable daily driver for city driving, that was the whole point!"

Racer: "Yeah, but I'd like to have a little speed at least"

Sensible: "You knew going in what kind of power and speed an ATX 2.0 Neon has!"

Racer: "Well, kind of, I thought it'd AT LEAST be in the 16's!"

Sensible: "So what you gonna do? Build it up? Spend more money when you don't absolutely need to?"

Racer: "Well, I'd like to tune it up a bit, yes."

Sensible: "How much? Even if you dump $500 into it, and even IF that gets you from 17.8's to 17.2's, you'll still be rolling around in a 17 second car!!!"

Racer: "Well, low 17's is still better than high 17's..."

Sensible: "Dude. You KNOW what kind of driving this car is going to be doing. YOU KNOW!!! And there will be damn few quarter mile runs involved with this car!!!"

Racer: "..................."

Sensible: And even if you build it up, and even if you did get into the high 16's with it, NO ONE WILL CARE!!! EVER!!!"

Racer: "...................."

Sensible: "So sit y'ass down, keep the money in the bank where it needs to be, and stop your silliness."

Racer: "Well, maybe if I can get a few inexpensive parts CHEAP, maybe we can tune it a bit. 17.5's are still better than 17.8's."

Sensible: "Well, those parts had better be DAMN CHEAP."

Racer: "How about a 50 hp nitrous kit?"

Sensible: "NO!!! NO DAMN NITROUS! What did I just say?!?!?!?!?!?!"

Racer: "Oh MMMaaaaaaannnnnnnnnn..........."

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:30 pm
by INVUJerry
5 speed swap would be your best bet for money and performance.

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 2:17 pm
by ejclide
INVUJerry wrote:5 speed swap would be your best bet for money and performance.
And you'll get better mileage

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:25 pm
by timk225
This car will be doing a lot of driving in Los Angeles traffic. I did it for 2 years in a 2.5 Turbo 5 speed 1989 Spirit ES. No more manuals out there!

An automatic is a mileage and performance penalty, but one I will have to deal with. No way am I putting a 5 speed in it.

I considered getting an SRT-4 and doing a PT Cruiser 41TE automatic swap, but in the end I didn't.

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:50 pm
by Haganracing
Ok... Who is this guy on the forum? Which one of you are trolling us!!

It's an automatic neon, all motor. You really can't go slower..

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 7:12 pm
by occasional demons
Chevette. :D

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 9:12 pm
by MyNeonSaysHi
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 10:24 pm
by racer12306
This thread is humorous. 132 crank HP + auto + gas mileage minded gearing = slow.

You have the wrong car if you want a zippy auto