New eclipse4 Banger feels like it has more power than the 6

[psycovette]

Test drove an eclipse and I was not impressed with the power of the V6. I was expecting alot more power than what it delivers. The 4 banger seemedlike it had more get up. I had a Daytona with the V6 which would be same engine I assume and it had alot more power than this thing. What did Mitsu do?:shocked:


Altough they did improve the looks on it. The looks of the new model is a drastic improvement over the big "Whale Butt" :smoker2:

[DVSNCYNIKL]

I actually preferred the whale butt one as you so eloquintely put it than the new one. But I'm surprised that it doesn't perform better then the previous one. Maybe it weighs more and therefore, doesn't have the torque to move it I guess. I don't know.

[enzo@af]

WEll, Mitsu (as far as I know) also doesn't have plans for a GS-X model...turbo, all wheel drive. I guess sales of the "whale Butt" GS-X weren't up to par for it. Too bad, because the GS-X is a fast, fast, fast, car. I think a turbo'd V6 of the new model would be nice. Maybe with some different body moldings or something too.

I agree with psycovette, that the new look is much better.

[psycovette]

It proabably is a weight thing. Because my old Dodge Daytona(Chrysler Eclipse) that I used to own had alot of low end tourque and power. Its to bad they dont put the turbo back in it.

I was running with one in a street race one night with my saturn. I was right behind the eclipse at the stop light and a honda "ricer" pulls up and they both reved it. Just for curiosity I decided I wanted to see how my saturn would run with it, and surprisingly I was able to run with the eclipse. In fact I started to gain on it until I decided 50 was as fast as I was going to take it. The eclipse did take out the Honda though, at arround 75mph est.:flash:

[redvalkrie]

:o I am not quit found of the Eclipse's new look as an x owner of the "whale butt" I was enchanted by that ass maybe its a jennifer lopez thing but that ass was nice ( I lost my eclipse in a car fire) to me the new eclipse looks like a scale down version of the 3000GT with less power and even a lot less performance about the only things I really like from the new eclipse is the fuel door.

Sorry don't mean to upset no one just my 2cents.

[redvalkrie]

Dont get me wrong if I was given one for free I wouldn't say no!

[DVSNCYNIKL]

Originally posted by redvalkrie
Dont get me wrong if I was given one for free I wouldn't say no!

I would!

[Moppie]

I remeber reading a review of what ever the last years model eclipse was. It was in one of the Ausie car mags, And I cant remeber which one. But they noted that the 6cly wasnt much faster then the 4cly, and then pointed out all the extra add ons that came with 6cyl car, basicly just extra weight that did nothing for the cars hadleing and general road manners.

[150mph]

There is a huge diff in the 6 and the 4. The 4 is only like 165hp...and the 6 is 200. Thats a big diff. The 4's are running 16's on the track. With my stock GT I was running 15.1. Im down to a 14.8 with intake and lowring springs. There is a huge diff. I hope u drove a GT five speed. Because the sludgmatic is horrible for our cars.

[3g01Gs]

Hi all, im new here so Im not going to flame anyone too bad... But there seems to be a good bit of miss-information going on here..

1.) the V6 daytona did NOT use the same engine as the new eclipse, they were rated at 140hp peak. ( originaly designed for the Chrysler minivan )

2.) the turbo model had 191hp peak

3.) The Daytona was not chryslers version of the eclipse, the laser was.

4.) the new 3g EGT ( 3rd gen eclipse GT ) runs mid to low 15's stock, I can see 14.8 or 14.9 with an intake.

5.) the 4cy is BIG and Fast for a 4, 154bhp peak out of a N/A I4 is impressive. Roughly 109whp (147bhp peak for Cali cars 2001+)

6.) the GT has 205 bhp and roughly 160whp. (200bhp for cali emissions cars, 2001+)

7.) lowering springs will not make a car faster.


Like I said im not trying to flame anyone, but please do a bit more research before blabbing. 150mph, what elevation is the track youre running 14.8's at??

The 3G eclipse is a nice quick car, and it was designed for sales, and is the second best selling sports compact car in north america. (mustang is first). Personally i like my GS, I didnt want a 4cyl at first but after driving it, i wanted it. I also didnt wanna spend and extra 3 - 4k for 50hp. Besides the Evo VII will be out in 2003, and im getting one =P.

Anyone that wants some info on the 3G, go to www.neweclipse.org and check out the forums.

[boostin94]

I won't give my "total" opinion on the 3G Eclipse, but I will say that the 3G guys got it in the bum when it comes to looks and performance. The 2G DSMs (not to be confused with the 3G Eclipses; they are *totally* different) looked much better and handle much more like a sports car should, and with just $110 (basically the cost of an intake for the 3G guys) you can add ~30hp to the car

IMHO, they are a waste of money *only b/c you have the EVO coming in 2003 and you had the 2G DSMs before them. I'd be willing to bet that the owners of the '99 Eclipses are feeling much smarter than the owners of the Y2K ones

[3g01Gs]

I agree, the 3G is just NOT what it used to be...

Personally, I cant wait for the 2003 lancer EVO VII, but the dealer practicly begged me to take the car because it had been sitting there forever, I dont know why, i have had NO problems with it. They gave me great payments on it. MUCH less than $400/mo with nothing down and a trade in that i actually owed more on than it was worth.


I almost got a 99 GS-t, but im waiting for the EVO

[tuffguy]

it feels faster only if you drove a STICK 4 and an AUTO 6.

fyi, the new eclipse was designed as a cruiser, not as a racer's pocket rocket. compariong the different generations, the new gen (3G) is the only one during which the high end model outsold the low end models. i think that more GTs were sold than RSs and GSs COMBINED.

with prior gens, the GS-T and GS-X models made up a small percentage of the sales with the low end NON-TURBO models making up the gross of the sales.

SOOOO, on average the 3G is faster than the 1G or 2G. which means that the MAJORITY of 1G and 2G owners should not be talking about the 3G being slow.

[boostin94]

Originally posted by tuffguy
which means that the MAJORITY of 1G and 2G owners should not be talking about the 3G being slow.

You maybe correct, but I am not one of those 1.8L guys. I'm one of the GST guys I'll make it a point this week to actually go test drive a 3G, but as a cruiser or a racer, I doubt I will change my mind... but we'll see