Why a 2g?

Besides the nicer body, wouldn't the 3G be faster? The 2G is 205 hp with stock boost, the 6 cyl GT is 200 hp with NO boost.. wouldn't the potential be much better with a boosted 6 cyl?

its 210 hp if ur talkin 5 speed. lol unless you drive an automatic ahah but i think the 2gs are lighter but doo see ur point about the whole 6 cyl thing i guess it just never caught on cause nobody likes 3gs

3G's are heavier, uglier, slower, and have much less bang for the buck. It's probably at least $3k to boost a 3g 6cyl. $3k into a 2g (or 1g for that matter) will put you into the 12's easily with money left over. That about sums it up ;)

I can see uglier and heavier.. but I'm not understanding slower..

If it's equal to a boosted 2g with N/A.. boosting it would provide much more power than a boosted 2g.. wouldn't it? Without taking money into consideration.

boosted is always faster than n/a.

think of boosting the v6, its not cheap.

Like Guitar X geek said...the whole point is that if you did boost a 3g the car itself would cost more, and it would cost about 3,000 to boost it properly(which im guessing would include all the supporting mods).....that being said, buy a 2g for a few grand less and spend the 3,000 that you had planned for the 3g on modifying the 2g and you still have a faster car with less money and better looks...

Well I'm planning on buying a 2g AWD.. if only just for the AWD.. the V6 is kinda tempting though.

save the money of buying a 3g and then spending 3 grand to put on the turbo and supporting mods, b/c by the time you spend all that money on the 3g only to get into the 13's you could of bought a turbo 2g upgrade it with all the supporting mods and for a couple grand less than have a 13 second 3g you could have an 11 sec 2g. not to mention the 2g is alot lighter and just looks better overall.

3g 200-205 HP 205 LBS of torque Curb weight 2822 lbs
2g 205-210 HP 214 LBS of torque Curb weight 2767 lbs AND TURBOCHARGED

thats says it all

here is the 1g for any one interested

1g 180-195 HP 203 LBS of Torque Curb weight 2542! A LOT lighter!

3g 200-205 HP 205 LBS of torque Curb weight 2822 lbs
2g 205-210 HP 214 LBS of torque Curb weight 2767 lbs AND TURBOCHARGED

thats says it all


I fail to see how that says anything. If anything it says that the 3g has better potential.

The 2g is already turbo'd.. so if you turbo a 3g it would, presumably, have much more power than a 2g.

Basically, if the 3g GT came stock with a turbo, it would be much faster than a 2g?

read the previous posts SAVE YOUR MONEY! buy a 2G!

I plan to. I'm just curious is all.

the 3g body is ugly.. i think its the headlights and taillights that makes it look ugly and also that 3 stripe things on the door.. minus well get an rsx or 04 Si if your going to get the 3g. =\

Well I'm just looking at the engines.. looks don't matter.. I don't mind the 3g look that much.

I fail to see how that says anything. If anything it says that the 3g has better potential.

The 2g is already turbo'd.. so if you turbo a 3g it would, presumably, have much more power than a 2g.

Basically, if the 3g GT came stock with a turbo, it would be much faster than a 2g?

the 205-210 hp 214 lbs tq is all on a stock turbo, when you start upgrading the turbo with supporting mods you change that by quite a bit.
a 3g eclipse will only boost 8 psi on stock internal...and get you into the 13's depending on your elevation. where as the 2g eclipse can boost up to 22/25 psi. granted your taking risks with the bloock running that high of boost.

drop to 3g idea. a 2000 3g eclipse is gunna run you 12-15 grand then 3 grand more to put a turbo kit on it boostin 8 psi. then if you plan on goin higher than that its gunna get un-godly expensive.so far you've spent 15-18grand on a 13 sec car
-or-
you buy a 2g GSX but a 90-92 6 bolt motor in. 20 g turbo. fmic. turbo back exhaust. rebuilt or new tranny, short shifter, 95 EPROM ecu, fuel pump, injectors, cams, port and polish, oversized valves, titanium valve springs. you do all that your looking at a low 12's/. this is gunna run you maybe 10-12 grand. if you wanna get faster you would have to do like a garrett t4 turbo and supporting mods.

uh so is the 1g engine more reliable than the 3g engine?

1997 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX 0-60 6.4, 1/4 mile 14.9
2000 Mitsubishi Eclipse GT 0-60 7.0, 1/4 mile 15.4

simply the 2g is faster stock than the 3g, and its easy to get hp gains out of a stock boosted car than a n/a car

1g engine is very similar, mildly more reliable because most 1g engines are 6bolts instead of 7bolt engines (6bolts practically never crankwalk). Other than that, I wouldn't consider either more reliable than the other.

One thing to consider is that the 3g may make the same amount of power, but its only a relatively short peak, as it is with most NA motors. The turbo motor on the other hand with only ~10 more HP is making more hp over more of the rpm band. Area under the curve ;) The difference is small though since a V6 will have a wider hp curve than a NT 4 cylinder. Compare NT vs NA with the same power and the difference will be greater. Kind of had to do though naturally ;)

And as far as the 6 having more potential, it does just because it has more displacement. So 20 psi on that motor will make more power than 20 psi on a 4 cylinder. But as already mentioned the difference is cost. Plus all V6 eclipses are Wrong Wheel Drive. 400 HP on a AWD 1g or 2g and 400 HP on a 3g are two very different things, especially on the street. Spinning aint winning :lol:

uh so is the 1g engine more reliable than the 3g engine?

yes the 1g(90-92) 4g63 turbo engine aka the 6 bolt is much more reliable than even the 2g(93-99) 4g63 turbo motor aka 7 bolt which was highly prone to crankwalk. even the n/a 420a motor(95-99)(chrysler built) and the n/a 4g63(90-94)(mitsu built) engines are more reliable than a 3g engine if you put a turbo on them. the 3g was not meant for anything but good looks and ouch they didn't do a good job with looks either. so all around the 3g is a waste of money and time. i dunno how many 3g eclipse kills i have but its like 10 or so. my lil 98 GS will bust its balls to beat any 3g eclipse.

The major difference here is how much power the stock engine can handle. You spend about $1200 on supporting mods for a bigger turbo, then $500 on an evoIII 16g, and for $1700 you're in the 12s--possibly deep in the 12s, depending on how much weight you want to lose, how well your car is tuned, etc.

The stock 4g63 can handle in excess of 400 hp without upgrading internals--pistons, rods, the block itself, everything. A 3g eclipse just isn't built to handle that kind of thing--it is NOT built to be a BOOSTED car, and if you put a turbo kit on it and expect the car to become fast, you'd better plan on replacing the internals you're going to break.

If you want pure speed, buy a 1g awd DSM. They can look plenty clean as well


:iagree: thas the message i've been trying to get across. amen brother mathews, preach the good, solid, saving facts of the dsm world.
and not to mention the dsm you just spent $1700 on only ran you $6500 to buy. for $8200 you now have a awd 12 second vehicle.
-OR-
you can spend between $15,000 and 18,000 for the vehicle and a turbo kit that only gives you 8 psi and puts you into the 13's. chances of having to replace the stock internals are very likely. not to mention you'll need to put in a built tranny to support that power. and while the gsx is kickin your ass off the line because your 3g is to quote 95 GSXracer "Wrong Wheel Drive." so while you sit and spin the gsx will have already made 60 ft time.

for the love of god listen to everyone. go with a 1g or 2g.you'll be saving somewhere between $6800 and $9800 buy going with a 2g. you'll save even more by buying a 1g awd. then you take the money you've saved buy a beater car $2000 to make your daily driver. god knows the faster your dsm gets the longer it will sit in the driveway. then with the $4800 you have left now spend that on your dsm in parts and tuning. chances are you'll get close to the 11's or even in them.

so now that we've been over the options again and agian with everyone, if you're still considering buying a 3g eclipse fine waste your money but before you do....GET THE F**K OUT OF THE DSM FORUM.

A 3G shouldn't even be an option. I also think the 3G is ugly.
How many fast 3Gs do you see out on the road/track? Not that many compared to 2Gs.

i agree w/actinide. the 2Gs are way easier to make fast and they cost less to begin with, it's just common sense!

Also, please correct me if I am wrong, but the market for 2G parts is bigger than the market for 3G parts, making it easier to find what you want.

As I said.. twice.. I'm planning on buying a 2g after next summer.. I was just looking for some comparison.

Okay then. There's no comparison!

honestly , i dont even know why they had to punish the eclipse name by making a 3g...

to me the 2g just looks like a real Japaniese sports car, you know its in the style of a 3000 GT (as both ended in 1999), same turbo spoiler, or the "whale wing" as i call it. which is why i love the car. and the curves, hump on the hood, just the bad ass looks of a 2g. the 3g anyone will tell you time and time again is a chick car. IMHO the 1g looks old and dated to me compaired to the timeless looks of a jap sports car the 2g has.

just my opinions

Which would you choose, a galant motor(3g) :confused: or an EVO motor(2g) :iceslolan ? You decide

2 > 3
It makes sense.

A 3G shouldn't even be an option. I also think the 3G is ugly.
How many fast 3Gs do you see out on the road/track? Not that many compared to 2Gs.
they mite not have them at the track because its still a fairly new car. Not that many people want to mod cars that cost alot. but still the 3g is ugly. lol