<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mike Brunton:
The only place where I see similarity is in the rear 1/4 shot...
But to be honest, if you saw an SRT in person next to an S2000, you would not see any similarity, I don't think. I really think that the pictures hide all the curves the SRT has and make it look much more bland than it is - like an S2000.
Did you see the car in the flesh, Brad? If so, did you think it looked like the S2000? I know the SRT was in LA, not sure if you had a chance to go see it however.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Mike:
I took these pictures at the LA Auto Show in January. I thought that it would be interesting to take parallel pictures of these two cars (unfortunately there was just too much glare on the SRT to do it justice).
I will say up front that I personally prefer the lines and the look of the Coupe over the Convertible. I do understand DC's thinking in releasing the Convertible first, since it would be completely overshadowed by the Coupe when released. I don't hate the Covertible, but it doesn't have enough visual impact on me to make me want to sell my '96 GTS.
At first glance (from a distance) these two cars have very similar stylings. The shape of the headlights is uncanny, The shape of the flares (and how they integrate with the fascia is very simmilar. Even the center **** on the rear trunks are styled in the same ways.
What it comes down to is that if you saw these cars separately, you would say that they were designed by people who came from the same school of thought. The first thing I will say that is dramatically different in the scale of these two cars. The S2000 is a mini-me version of the SRT.
The things that differentiate the SRT are the etched lines (that to me define the muscularity of the car) are very different. The hood is the first thing that comes to mine. On the SRT there are very beutifully integrated scoop and exhaust vents (that I wish that I had on my GTS), that do not exist on the bland S2000.
The side vents on the SRT are also something very different on the two cars. What you don't see as obviously on the SRT is the width difference between these two cars. In this area, there is no comparison, the SRT wins hands down.
DC made a huge mistake in their display colors (which do not bring out the details and lines of the SRT) and terrible lighting when showing the SRT at the LA show. They also made a mistake by putting it on almost the identical platform that the S2000 was on across the room. Fire the events and marketing people for that one.
I believe that the market that DC designed the SRT-10 Convertible is not the same one that was targeted with the original RT and the GTS (hence the disappointment from many of the rank and file diehard Viper fans).
The SRT is an evolution on the Gen 2 Vipers. With that evolution comes improvements that we don't see such as (that were also born in the Oreca racecars):
- Lengthened A-arms for better handling and stability.
- The engine which was lowered in the compartment (to lower the center of gravity) to improve handling.
- Lower coefficient of drag to improve high speed performance.
- Aerodynamic underpan to improve high speed stability.
- Stiffer chassis making the foundation more stable.
- A well ventilated hood to reduce the amount of pressure build up at high speeds.
I really believe that the design folks at DC were truly listening to our input about performance and handling, and they delivered it in the SRT. Unfortunately for some of us, the packaging was a little more understated and conventional than we were used to in the first two generations.
I think that the SRT-10 will be raising the performance bar to new heights, and the Coupe (when it is released in '05) will slam the door on the competition. The only thing that was compromised on the new cars was visual impact.
That's my take on it Mike. Sorry for beinglong winded.
No flames please...
Brad
