firebird vs eclipse

i have a 97 v6 firebird and i was wondering how my car would do against an eclipse. One of my friends has a 99 eclipse gs spyder. My other friend has a 96 gsx. Im pretty sure i couold take the gs but would the gsx beat me? The only mod i have is a cold air intake.

gsx would beat u, but u could take the other one :icon16:

Originally posted by idunno
gsx would beat u, but u could take the other one :icon16:

i agree

The GSX will be tough for you to hang with.

If the guy in the GSX knows how to drive it he will SMOKE YOU! Trust me those things are fast, I barely beat one in my 350 HP truck. Well, I wasn't really trying hard, I left it shift normally - which is shifting at 5K RPM. If I really want to race I shift it manually and take each gear to 6500 RPM.
I agree though you should beat the GS, especially a spyder cuz they are heavy.

the GS spyder is powered by a dohc 2.0 liter neon motor making 140hp. the GSX is powered by a near indestructable turbo 4 cyclinder that can handle atleast 25 lbs of boost on stock internals with the combined traction off the line from its AWD. stock he will beat you by a good amount. if he has mods even just bolt ons, he will murder you becuase those cars are really really detuned from the factory. just bolting stuff on will net you over 300hp.

The Spyder is a silly little pose car- you'll eat it- but the GSX- from what I hear about them would trash the Firebird I'm afraid

Originally posted by TatII
the GSX is powered by a near indestructable turbo 4 cyclinder that can handle atleast 25 lbs of boost on stock internals

Too bad the turbo can only put out 16 PSI:tongue:

yes 16psi is what it can do. but you can actually get it to hit 19psi. but thats only for a split second though.

Originally posted by TatII
yes 16psi is what it can do. but you can actually get it to hit 19psi. but thats only for a split second though.

Yeah I heard 18 PSI for more than a couple seconds and it roasts.
Of course once you change the stock puny turbo, then you got potential. I wonder why they put such a small turbo on it, even my Daytona has a T3 that can handle 21 PSI in stock trim. :confused:

the spyder has a 2.4l actually. it's the 4g64, made espically for the gs spyder. the GSX will smoke you dude. AWD 210 hp? out of a light car?

Depends on what the GS has. Just an intake and exhaust and the GS could beat a stock v6 firebird. My friend's 96 GS hung with mustang gt until the mustang kicked it in 3rd. But the GSX is gonna put you over a fire and roast you like a marshmellow. Those suckers are fast.

Originally posted by Twyzz
the GSX will smoke you dude. AWD 210 hp? out of a light car?

I wouldn't call it a light car. Plus a GS-T is faster cuz of less losses in the drivetrain. Of course off the line the GSX will win, but after 100 feet there goes the GST. The GSX looses 40-50 HP through the drivetrain, GST looses like 20-25. So for example on the highway already going 60 MPH, the GST will smoke the GSX.

Originally posted by PWMAN

I wouldn't call it a light car. Plus a GS-T is faster cuz of less losses in the drivetrain. Of course off the line the GSX will win, but after 100 feet there goes the GST. The GSX looses 40-50 HP through the drivetrain, GST looses like 20-25. So for example on the highway already going 60 MPH, the GST will smoke the GSX.

I begs to differ. I used to race a guy with a nicely modded 97 GST. I had a 92 Eclipse GSX. I could smoke him off the line hardcore , and he would NEVER catch up. May have something to do with the 92's having a much bigger turbo stock , I dunno. But I also beleive that the drivetrain loses on the GSX aren't as high as you think they are. If fact the AWD drivetrain gives the GSX more of an advantage all around , because ALL the wheels contribute to driving the car , not just 2. Not to mention there is not much difference in weight between the 2 cars , depending on the years built. Heres a list of the curb weights of all the DSM's
http://members.shaw.ca/costall/1000Q/Frameless/answers-specifications.htm#curbweight

Originally posted by RockinWRX


I begs to differ. I used to race a guy with a nicely modded 97 GST. I had a 92 Eclipse GSX. I could smoke him off the line hardcore , and he would NEVER catch up. May have something to do with the 92's having a much bigger turbo stock , I dunno. But I also beleive that the drivetrain loses on the GSX aren't as high as you think they are. If fact the AWD drivetrain gives the GSX more of an advantage all around , because ALL the wheels contribute to driving the car , not just 2. Not to mention there is not much difference in weight between the 2 cars , depending on the years built. Heres a list of the curb weights of all the DSM's
http://members.shaw.ca/costall/1000Q/Frameless/answers-specifications.htm#curbweight

Hmm, you have a good point. I like hearing peoples experience rather than just opinion. I have never owned a GST or GSX, I have had a ride in a 320 WHP GST though, that was nice. Yeah I know the 1G's have a better head, I looked into buying an eclipse once and came across this. Something about you can boost a 1G more, the 2G will blow the head off. Maybe it has something to do with the size of the studs? do you know? I guess the GSX doesn't follow the same guidelines as a WRX, cuz I know the WRX looses like 60 horses by the time it hits the ground. And you are right about AWD's having more advantages, like cornering and wet traction and other weather traction.

yup. the first gens came with 16g's i believe and the second gen's comes with 14g's. so the first gens are lighter and has a larger turbo. there is this guy that i talked to, he has a first gen talon tsi. when he was still runnin his stock turbo on 15 psi with a full catback and a intake, he ran a 13.1 impressive.

Let me be so kind as to correct you. And throw some of my DSM knowledge out there.
The 1st gens , 89-94 , came with a 14B turbo stock. The 89-92's had the 6-bolt motor , the rest have the 7-bolt motor , the crankwalker.
The 2nd gens , 95-99 , came with the T-25 turbo , a Garret unit , used primarily for its low rpm spool-up qualities.
The heads are no different between the gens , only the intake and some changes to the block , higher compression pistons in the 2G only 7-bolt motor , and smaller rods in the 94-up 7-bolt motor.
The 2nd gens have a bigger MAF , which is sought after by the 1G crowd as an upgrade to their pitifully small stock MAF.
The 94-up cars came with the bigger brakes , also sought after by the pre 94 modders.
To get a truely awesome car , you have to mix and match parts from both gens.

yup that was exactly what he told me now, i remember. i just wasn't sure. yeah he said that the first gen came with a 14B turbo and he upgraded it to a 16G now. also he told me that his car was hesitating on the high revs on high boost because he maxed out what the stock MAF can read out. ahhhh yes. alrighty then. thanks for the info. by the way i always thought that the first gens all came with that turbo. and that only the 2gens had the motor with the crank walkin problems. i guess not.

Oh it must have been the rods was the reason you can boost a 1G more, also because of the larger turbo. Thanx for the info ROCKINWRX.:bigthumb:

I did forget to mention that the 1G automatic cars , 91-94 , came with a weird little turbo called the 13G , and cams profiled for more low-end torque. Bigger than a T-25 but smaller than a 14B , the 13G turbo was installed in the A/T cars to help overcome the slow acceleration they naturally have. The 13G is considered an "upgrade" by the 3000GT-VR4 guys , as those cars come with a pair of T-25's stock.
The 2G A/T cars have the same T-25 as the M/T cars.

And yes , the 7-bolt 1G 1994 motors are subject to crankwalk as well , although not as infamous as the 2G cars.
To build the perfect DSM would require an early 1992 year car , which was the first year for the stationary(non-pop-up)headlights , taking about 40lbs off the front of the car , and the 4 bolt LSD rear axle , which is prefered by the racers. The big brakes and 7-bolt engine came in 1993(the engine in late 92) , and the 2G body style , with the bigger MAF , in 1995.

Heres a rundown of what happened between 92 - 93

1992

Non-popup headlights introduced on all models.
The first AWD Lasers were introduced.
Few (or no) ECUs have EPROMs.
ABS now available with LSD.
The engine changes from the 6-bolt version to the 7-bolt version in April.
Second and final year of the Galant VR-4 - 1000 sold in the American market.
The last year of the Dodge 2000GTX.

1993

"Big brake" 2-piston front calipers become standard on turbo models.
7-bolt engines are now standard.
No ECUs have EPROMs.
Diamond-Star Motors ceases to exist

Heres what happened 94 - 95

1994

All cars built to California emissions standards - there are no "Federal" cars.
The last year of the 1G car and the 1.8L NT models.
The last year of the Plymouth Laser.

1995

The inagural year of the 2G DSM.
Significant changes to the engine, body, and electronics.
New transmissions.
All ECUs have EPROMs.
Non-turbo models are based on the Chrysler 420A engine instead of the Mitsubishi 4G63 engine.
OBD-II becomes standard on DSMs, along with two oxygen sensors.
Mitsubishi begins using some substandard crankshafts, leading to crank walk on some 2G cars.

Thanks again for the info.:smile: