Eclipse Vs Eclipse

[Legionofone]

Ok who would win

1999 GSX 15 PSI boost

1994 GSX 16 PSI boost

1999 V6 convo eclipse 180 ish HP? but a V-6 in a 2700 pound car more torque

2000+ V6 little bigger V-6 then the 1999 convo... by .5 L i dunno what the HP increase is there

2000+ super charged V6 (ya i know they dont come stock but theres upgrade kits) supercharged 3.0... might be running 250 HP? but heavy... 9 PSI the V-6 has a realy high compression N/A

would be a interesting race

[Savior1974]

Me.

[Legionofone]

pshhh
realy though .... i dont know if the GSX would beat a supercharges V-6 i think it would be a awsome race...

[kman10587]

'94 GSX. It's gonna launch a lot better than the FWD V6s, and I'm willing to bet that a 1st gen. DSM at 16 psi out-powers a supercharged 3rd gen. V6.

[Legionofone]

well a stock GSX runs i think 9 PSI and boost and 195 HP truely the best launch would be the 1999 because of the traction and higher power... if u could find a way to make the V6 AWD then u would get the best launch there... basicly the thing is that the 2g AWD has more torque and weighs more so it would get off the line so much faster... but that doesent mean that the 94 couldent be faster because it was lighter... lets see with the 3g eclipse... the power would come from the supercharger and the weight... as it is supercharged it has instant boost instead of turbo lag... the weight of the V6 helps keep the wheels on the ground and pull alot harder... so 250 HP (estimate) would be much better for the launch... its all about the advantages and disadvantages of each car..

[Raz_Kaz]

I'm sorry...too disttracted with your sig



put my money on red

[kman10587]

Even with the weight over the driven wheels, the FWD V6 isn't gonna launch nearly as well as the AWD GSX. When you take off, all of that weight shifts backwards off the front wheels, and you spin your ass off. Turbo lag is hardly an issue, since you'll be launching from an RPM above the lag anyways. A DSM's 4G63 at 16 PSI should be making close to 250 HP, the same as the supercharged V6. Add in the considerable traction advantage and I don't see why it should lose.

[Legionofone]

250 BHP maby but also u lose ALOT of HP in the AWD it probably drops to 180-190 WHP though a FWD loses some it doesent loose as much in the transfer case... trust me man my cirrus can launch like a beast and barrely squeel the tires... and no for 16 PSI u would have to drop the clutch at 4000+ RPM ur gunna destroy it... fast... even then ur gunna loose some RPMs and less boost 2500 is a desent speed to drop the clutch... and that would probably = 2000 RPM head start on the launch that would mean u would need 2000+ more RPMs thats some desent lag time... also a 4000 RPM clutch drop no matter what drive style ur gunna burn a little rubber... so... as i will say the 2800 pound 4g63 T AWD eclipse is nice... a 3000 pound 3.0L supercharged V-6 will pull almost as hard... if not harder... i know i can launch my car at 2000-2500 RPM and just barely chirp the tires and then fly off the line

[Master Hiko]

dont assume of the fwds are novices. if you know how to launch a front wheel (its not hard) the SCV6 is gonna take it with more tq off the line. the AWD's will be a close (really close) second. but my opinion is its a driver's race between the GSX's and the SCV6. thats the most logical answer.

[kman10587]

It is pretty hard to launch a FWD car with a supercharged V6 as well as an AWD car with a similar horsepower rating. Unless the S/C V6 Eclipse driver is very, very good, I'd say he's at a disadvantage.

[BP2K2Max]

since when does the 1999 eclipse have a v6?

[kman10587]

I'm assuming he did a swap. Oh yeah, and I'm pretty sure the 1999 Eclipse Spyder weighs more than 2700 lbs.

[Legionofone]

who said spyder? spyders are convertables and not only slower but less streamlined...

[kman10587]

I assumed "convo" in the original post meant convertible. I realize now that it means "conversion". My bad :P

[Legionofone]

:-)