Street/Strip Raced a guy from a light? Had that ride of yours on the timed track? Tell your story here.

Eclipse...

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 01:55 AM
  #21  
jericho73's Avatar
jericho73
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 788
From: Coral Springs, Fl
Default RE: Eclipse...

ORIGINAL: petepete

at least the new srt 4 is goin gto be a magnum not neon so now being heavy no way they can beat us
It's a Dodge Calibur, the new SRT-4, and it will be 300hp/ 300tq, no chance for us lol, its not heavy at all.

The smallest Magnum engine is a 2.7 six, so they wouldn't make an SRT-4 Magnum. A guy as work has a 2.7 Magnum and all he does is say how slow it is, lol. 190 hp/190tq in a 3900lb car, jeebus []
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 02:04 AM
  #22  
petepete's Avatar
petepete
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,250
From:
Default RE: Eclipse...

my bad always mix calibur and magnum :P but check this out http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/06/...-and-sluggish/
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 02:30 AM
  #23  
jericho73's Avatar
jericho73
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 788
From: Coral Springs, Fl
Default RE: Eclipse...

ORIGINAL: petepete

my bad always mix calibur and magnum :P but check this out http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/06/...-and-sluggish/
Yeah, but thats the r/t, and it is sluggish at 172hp/ 165tq and a 0-60 time over 10 secs...but 300hp is alot different from 172, and 300tq is worlds from 165. I've heard the Calibur SRT-4 will be a mid-high 13 car, which makes sense as its lighter then a T and has much the same power. Ugly as sin though.
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 04:41 AM
  #24  
Gizzmo0411's Avatar
Gizzmo0411
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 39
From:
Default RE: Eclipse...

I understand HP is way higher...but torque...260 on the GT...240 for us...Isn't that really the deciding factor for the short races? If what I'm seeing on here is true then people are pretty easily getting 20 hp gains with a CAI, tune, headers...etc...What does that translate to in torque gain?

Also...I would consider the Eclipse GT a direct price competitor to a V6. 23k for a base model vs 20k for a base model? 3k difference doesn't put it in a different price point in my book. Add upgrades and you're up into the 26 to 27 range...which is what you're paying for the upgrades to the v6 as well (understand you can buy a baseline GT for that also...but I'm doing v6 comparison here). I don't know...looks like the Eclipse GT out-priced us to me. Especially when you consider that most of us are adding another 4-5k for addons.

And as far as the Neon srt-4...yeah they beat us stock for the hp and torque but barely...I'm sure they're considerably lighter than ours so I imagine that's what gives it it's 14 second times and whatnot...But man it's frusterating because they're just cheap cars at 18k. Ugly as sin in my opinion, but its frusterating to have such a HUGE engine and be competing with 2.4 liter v4. And did somebody say the Cobalt would beat us?? I'm seeing 205 hp for the supercharged SS...missing something?

I'm not complaining about my car, I love it...wouldn't trade it for the world (figure of speech of course), as far as pure sexiness you can't beat it. But it doesn't make me want to go to the track. I think I'll just stick to cruising...

Old Jun 29, 2006 | 08:35 AM
  #25  
toosober's Avatar
toosober
I ♥ Acer
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 483
From: Columbus, Ohio
Default RE: Eclipse...

+1
ORIGINAL: fazm

cobalt SS, neon srt4. Only 2 cars i can thinkk of in our price range that can beat us. Dont forget they look like *** though.
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 12:28 PM
  #26  
Goliath's Avatar
Goliath
1st Gear Member
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 148
From: Atlanta
Default RE: Eclipse...

I like SRT4's simply because of the MOPAR upgrades. You can get the car up to 355 HP without voiding your warranty (stage 3 turbo + intercooler sprayer, dial-a-boost). That's a whale of a car for the money. Also have lots of suspension upgrades, but after you go through those the car starts to weigh the same as a mustang. I kinda like caliburs, but I doubt I'd get one.

The cobalt SS i have a soft spot for. Which would be cheaper, insurance on a v6 mustang or a SRT4/Cobalt SS? I'm just curious whether it's engine size or stock HP that determine the insurance rate.
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 01:19 PM
  #27  
Harry_F's Avatar
Harry_F
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 543
From:
Default RE: Eclipse...

you forgot some cars. mini cooper S, honda civic Si, VW golf GTI. all so ugly i would buy a 150 hp mustang over all of them.
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 01:25 PM
  #28  
Derf00's Avatar
Derf00
Gentleman's Relish
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 13,189
From: AZ
Default RE: Eclipse...


ORIGINAL: beaustang

Compare our cars to comparably PRICED cars! I keep hearing how all of these other V6's are so much faster than ours, but those cars cost more than a GT! Let's keep it apples and apples! We have a $20,000. base price car, not many if any $20k cars beat us!
ORIGINAL: Horrific_Ending

Dang i am starting to wonder what our cars are good for. Like not to **** anyone off but are our cars really that slow stock?
I've already pointed that out on several past threads about "why does this V6 make more power than us" or "smaller V6 import makes more HP than us, why?"

Eclipse V6 is what? 26k-28k? Even a Honda Civic Si is 20k+

Old Jun 29, 2006 | 01:28 PM
  #29  
Derf00's Avatar
Derf00
Gentleman's Relish
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 13,189
From: AZ
Default RE: Eclipse...


ORIGINAL: fazm


ORIGINAL: Derf00

IF it's a V6 (GT) You'd be seeing his tailights unless he doesn't know how to drive...

C/D TEST RESULTS
ACCELERATION: Seconds
Zero to 30 mph: 2.2
40 mph: 3.1
50 mph: 4.6
60 mph: 6.1
70 mph: 7.7
80 mph: 9.5
90 mph: 11.9
100 mph: 14.5
110 mph: 17.3
120 mph: 23.5
130 mph: 29.3
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.4
Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 10.0
50-70 mph: 9.8
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.5 sec @ 100 mph
Top speed: (governor limited) 134 mph

2005 Ford Mustang 4.0l 6.9 15.3 (C&D Feb 05)

I can take em Already taken a couple gt's at the track. Remember, FWD cars are hard as hell to get the launch down right. The 2 i beat were running 15.0 and 15.4. They both trapped higher MPH though (like 95 and 97 i think) my highest is 93.6.
That's why I said, IF s/he can drive...

All the mags are conservative. So the Eclipse is probably capable of 5.8-5.9 0-60 and 14.3-14.4 1/4 miles and the 4.0 stang is probably good for 6.6-6.7 0-60 and 15.0-15.1 quarter. Still slower with equal driver.
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 01:45 PM
  #30  
jericho73's Avatar
jericho73
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 788
From: Coral Springs, Fl
Default RE: Eclipse...

The Cobalt will beat us stock for stock, it runs mid 14's easily, the 205 hp is underrated most dyno that to the wheels stock, and also due to the s/c, they have a good amount of tq. And they're about 500lbs lighter...the downside being it's an ugly cookie cutter POS FWD econobox dressed up with a laughable boy-racer spoiler strapped to it.

The SRT-4 is even better, performance wise, low 14's out of the box and it takes to mods like water. The negative is the same as the Cobalt. The SRT-4's a fast POS but in the end it's still a Neon and a POS.

And hp still matters in a short race, else we'd be losing to diesel Jettas that are chipped, and they have more tq, and weigh less..



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:46 AM.