new eclipse
 

I couldn't believe the numbers on that car 14.4 at 101.1 mph with 263hp/260ftlbs of torque very impressive for a front driver.This looks like a true replacement for my fwd svx.

It also looks pretty good too. That copper orange color looks awesome.

BAHHH its ugly as hell!!!... you should look into the threads about this eclipse on the dsm forums... Most, and I agree, think that the 98-99 (2gb) body style looks better than both of the traveshamockeries mitsu has release afterwards. and I'm sorry, but with the potential of the 4g63, theres no reason to not have that engine as an option in the new eclipse.

14.4 at 101.1 would be the result of a much better launch then most people could accomplish.

but thats all just my opinion.

It is not that ugly, kinda like a 350Z in a bubble shape.

My God, Mitsu had to go to a 3.8L to get that hourse power up.That is only 69.21 hp per liter. It still falls short of our own SVX, 69.70hp per liter. If you think about those number suck for a new car when ours is over 13 years old.

God I love the boxer 6 :D

Steve

With the exception of the taillights, I love the new Eclipse. Now if Mitsu would do something about their reliability, I'd buy one :)

me likey! :)

GM supercharges its 3.8L engine to get a big......240hp. :D

oH noEsssss

IBbeforeshadowcomesintobeatusallup

:rolleyes:
Honestly... if you want anyone to take you seriously, figure out the facts first. GM's 3.8 thats supercharged puts out 260 hp and 280 lb*ft of torque.

Not to mention peak horsepower is a very unimportant number as far as overall car performance goes. :rolleyes:

maybe now it does. i know in the past GTP's and Bonnevilles it was 240. a supercharged 3.8L V6 with 240 or 260 hp is still sad.


i can roll my eyes, too, sizzlechest. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

How is an extremely easy and cheap motor to manufacture that produces a fair amount of power sad?? its not about "oh it has a supercharger so it should make another 100 hp" its, Lets manufactur an engine that makes this amount of power, uses this amount of gas, and is reliable. which, the 3800 does.

and for that matter, Mitsu's 3.8 makes 225 hp in other applications.

hp per liter is just a dumb comparison. take that thread from way back when about the S2000's motor and the LS1.

it sad that with a 3.8L six cylinder, it should be making that power WITHOUT needing a supercharger. see the Nissan 3.5L V6, or the Subaru H-6.

I prefer the 3.3L Boxer 6 supercharged with the massive 345hp.

oh did I mention with only 6lbs of boost.

Americian pushrod motors are so sad. I.E. the new Corvette with its hand build suped up 6.0L makes 400hp. BFD that is still only 66.67hp per Liter. Still under the SVX.

just imagine a boxer 8 6.0L SVX n/a would be around 418hp AWD monster :eek:

Steve

Do any of you remember that long "fyr4ce" thread??? go re-read it.

I say again. HP per displacement means NOTHING!!!!! absolute waste of time comparing those numbers.

Lets look at some REAL ways to compare engines/cars

1) Hp per lbs, this is the number one performance factor aside of gearing.

2) Hp*MPG well, fuel is a cost, so how much power do we make, per fuel we put in. simple efficiency calculation.

3) Hp per $. thats right, if it costs my company more money to make a less powerful engine, how smart is that?

If i have a small block "ancient technology" domestic engine that makes 320 horsepower, only has to rev to 5500 rpm to make that power, and gets better gas mileage then the 2 liter 4 cyl that revs to 8K to make its 250 hp... which engine is better. More horsies, More efficient, Lower RPM (which means less strain on engine components) and guess what, the small block probably costs less to produce.

However, the 2 liter makes 125 hp per liter OMGWTFBBQ the small block (say chevy 350) 5.7 liter engine makes 61.4 hp per liter. still, the CLEARLY better engine is the smallblock 350

I don't understand why people don't understand this concept.


and LandShark, yes, there are companies that manufacture engines, that make more horsepower naturally aspriated out of small engines. However, I bet GM can make 2 of its supercharged v-6s for teh same cost as 1 boxer 6. so which is really more "efficient"

hell, if hp/liter was so important, why aren't we all running model airplane engines (1.1 hp and about .0065 L) that make about 169 hp per liter?



Back onto eclipses... this thread shows what car and drive think of the car.

cheaper is bettAr! solid rear axles, drum brakes and carbuerators - i say screw modern advancement. who needs a fancy starter - i'd be happy with a crank i'd have to churn at the front of the car.