new v. old

my first car i ever could call mine was a 1990 plymouth laser 1.8 with the 5 spd. i had to get rid of it due to a rotten body ( i couldnt even put it on lifts anymore) and a blown motor (i didnt have the money to fix it anymore either). but i loved that car on 2 octane boosters and a little enginuity i pulled 45-50 mpg(on multiple ocassions, and i loved lighting up the tires (mostly because they were slicks cuz the tread was wore off). so my question is what is the best year of lasers talons and eclipses? personally i think the 90-91 eagle talon tsi awd holds the fort down pretty well some of the newer models are quick too but that was the fasted i drove. and i havent got to drive the new 06 yet, but im not sure i want to either, i like the gen 1 too much.

I'd say go for a 90-91 eclipse or talon, that is turbo awd. I like the 2g bodies more but i also love the early 1gs (90-91 had the flip up lights). Speed wise they are really close, so i don't think that's a factor. The 1g (again the early ones) have the 6bolt which is a stronger block. In the end it really come down to personal preference. As you can see by my sig i just couldn't make up my mind :)

I love the 90-91's flip up head lights. They rock. I also really like the 97-99's, sexiest cars ever engineered. I dont especially like the 95-96's but I dont mind them a whole lot. I despise the 92-94's though. I dont know, they are like a really hot girl (90-91 = hot girl) that gained like 30 lbs so you can see some of the hotness showing through, but its just not there. (Not to offend anyone) but I think the 93's and 94's are worthless. Ugly bodies and 7 bolts. Blah. On the other hand, I may end up with a 92, I'm diggin the 6/4 combo and looks dont matter a whole lot to me since its going to be a straight up track car. It will see the road to tune, a very few weekends and trips to the track, so it can be ugly because it will blow the haters into yesterday.

i do agree with the late 90's model and the 92's look like crap without the flip up lights. i hate the 00 and up. (except for the 06). but i just didnt like the body design. i also missed the gen 1 console and pistol grip shifter. that made you feel king throughing the grears through mountains. i think dodge should re introduce another laser type though. sure they were basically all the same car in the beginning but i started to like the different ways eagle and mitsubishi were taking the body to differenciate between them. i just hate how dodge is letting it go... i think thats one of the problems with the american auto market going down is there isnt much wide range of competition for the imports... not cheap and easily modded like the laser and talon though.

the 93's and 94's are worthless. Ugly bodies and 7 bolts. Blah.
:rofl:


A lot of people may disagree with me, but I'm really starting to like the new 06's. Not to start another thread on what's been heavily discussed in the past, but the designing on those is a little remniscent of the 2g's (not to be "hatin", but a breath of fresh air after the 3G's), and they look like nothing else on the road and really stand out. I recently saw pics of the 06 Spyders with the factory kit on them....good lord I want one so bad!

When you say "best" year of the eclipses, I assume you mean performance, since you posted in this sub-forum. A friend of mine test drove an automatic V6 2006 GT. He says it felt really fast (to his surprise), even though it was an auto. I have yet to drive one though. Given that unknown, and considering purely performance, I would consider a 90-92 GSX over a 2G. Reasons: 6-bolt, 14B, better BOV, AWD, costs peanuts. But keep in mind, these cars are getting old, and sometimes, you may get more problems and trouble than what you bargained for. For about $5000-$7000, you can pick up a superbly modded 2G, complete with a 6-bolt swap, a larger turbo, air/fuel stuff, and a bunch of other goodies. Nicely modded 1Gs are even cheaper, usually topping out a little north of $4500. Check out DSMtuner classified, there's amazing stuff on there sometimes.

Can someone tell me the difference between the 90-92 and 93-94 (body-wise).

Also, why does everyone hate the 3g's, sure they are not the greatest looking cars (especially after the 2g's) but they have some style to them, I wouldnt mind having one....but I would never buy one....as for the 4g's I guess they have to grow on me, just like the 3g's did.

The 4g's may stand out a lot more than the other generations. But NOTHING will ever stand out like this famous one that we all know...


http://img363.imageshack.us/img363/7629/ps39uu.jpg

Hehe... :thumbsup:

Damn Shpyder, your car is so sexy! If I am ever in Cali I will call you so I can look at that amazing piece of automotion. To see the difference in 90-91 and 92-94 go to cardomain.com or ebay and look ;).

Can someone tell me the difference between the 90-92 and 93-94 (body-wise).

Also, why does everyone hate the 3g's, sure they are not the greatest looking cars (especially after the 2g's) but they have some style to them, I wouldnt mind having one....but I would never buy one....as for the 4g's I guess they have to grow on me, just like the 3g's did.


well to start off you gotta think of what everyone refers to as a gen 1-2-3 and up. ive heard conflicting details over it. but what i refer to as gen 1 (which might be different then what others agree to... but i think my way tends to break it down a little more then others that go by the major body and performance changes) is the 90-91 with the flip up lights (90 came with solid platic trim on the doors and fenders)91 and up to 94 i belive went to a soft plastic side trim. 92 to 94 did away with the flip up lights (this was solely for aerodynamics (< kinda like what the corvette did) other then that much of the body stayed the same... but under the hood was a different animal though .< but thats something to ask someone who is a real pro at the power train stuff.

and speaking of performance pro's which is faster: the gen 1 or the late (like 97-99) gen 3? stock i mean. or we can also do a modified count too since there arent that many pure stock anymore.

Also, why does everyone hate the 3g's, sure they are not the greatest looking cars (especially after the 2g's) but they have some style to them

The grudge isnt isolated to it's design as a car; that, taken out of context, can sound strange, since it really is a sweet looking car. BUT, to most of the hard-core DSM crowd, it's design thesis simply didn't draw from Eclipses of the past; it's design heritage was ignored. That's what they tried to correct in the 4G: the sharp quarter panel rear window, the chunky rear bumper, etc, drawing on design elements of the popular 2Gs.

well to start off you gotta think of what everyone refers to as a gen 1-2-3 and up. ive heard conflicting details over it. but what i refer to as gen 1 (which might be different then what others agree to... but i think my way tends to break it down a little more then others that go by the major body and performance changes) is the 90-91 with the flip up lights (90 came with solid platic trim on the doors and fenders)91 and up to 94 i belive went to a soft plastic side trim. 92 to 94 did away with the flip up lights (this was solely for aerodynamics (< kinda like what the corvette did) other then that much of the body stayed the same... but under the hood was a different animal though .< but thats something to ask someone who is a real pro at the power train stuff.

The different body stylings in the seperate genrations is signafied by a or b.

1ga- flip up lights (90-91)
1gb- no flip up lights(92-94)
2ga- smiley face front bumper(95-96)
2gb- see my car in my signature(97-99)
3g- 00-05
4g- 06-?

thats exactly what i wanted to say clipsekid... i guess my explaination sucked.

thats exactly what i wanted to say clipsekid... i guess my explaination sucked.
Glad to be of some assistance :cheers: