"yes but we are talking about the V6 equipped Eclipse here, as the thread starter had posted stats on such. Bring the 4 banger into the equation is irrelevant."
Uhh...
I was responding to --->"There will be a lot of these cars on the road before year's end, but most will be the base model IMHO."

 

Ok sorry - I couldnt tell because you didn't quote who you were answering to.

 

i gotta agree with most people.. nice times.. but it's still fugly..

 

A few clarifications...

The six speed GT's generally weigh 3,450-3,500 lbs, the heavier optioned GT's weigh close to 3,600 lbs.

Oh yeah, those times were done on crappy Eagle RS-A tires; better rubber could net you at least another few tenths.

 

IMHO this is a big step back for the eclipse. Who cares about a v6 in the 14 second range!!!!!

I never thought I'd say this but I rather buy the Neon srt then that POS!!!!!

 

I definately would buy the SRT over this--but at that price point--i'd rather an RX8.

 

never. the 300C is a car my grandma should be driving. those things are huge and ugly (like most other dodge/chrysler cars)

 

Maybe it is just me but the pics look like they bought the rights to the mercury cougar. And we all know how well that went.

 

I should have clarified--I mean SRT4; but I would get a SRT8 300 or Charger.

 

barf....oh wait, double barf

 

Several women buy the Eclispes.

What ever happened to the most beautiful car ever built?

The 3000 GT.

 

I read just the opposite; it's based on the same platform that the Galant shares with the Endeavor SUV, which offers AWD. There have been rumors going around that both the Galant and Eclipse will offer the AWD system too in a few years, but those are just rumors at this point.

 

I have to admit this thing is really growing on me. I can already say if I was looking for a V6 sports coupe, I'd buy one over a Z or its cousin.

 

They look much better in person, but still not my thing.

 

thats even worse.

 

Most beautiful car ever built? I'm gonna have to disagree with that one. I use to own a 99 3000GT SL (222HP front-wheel drive) for a very short time--hated it. It was flashy but a POS. Granted the VR4 was 320HP and all-wheel drive but it was extremely heavy. Its not an ugly car but definately not the most beautiful--its styling is forgettable. The 3000GT was killed in 99 for the same reason the other japanese sports cars were.

LOL @ the talkin down on me liking the SRT8 Charger and 300C :p

 

I think the car is an improvment over current model. I like the gauges.

 

The TTish back is 10 years late... looks okay from the back only... once you go to the side view, the image of overweight comes to your mind... a big assed overweight car. The front looked okay too... nothing special.

And if they are serious about making a good sports cars, they shouldnt even consider FWD...

Pity all that money is used to make a Celica-classed car... they should have rework that boring Evo model... make it a true sports coupe with beautiful flowing shape... with the same performance, that will rescue the company... not this thing.

 

More numbers, from Motor Trend this time.

0-60, 5.9
1/4 mile, 14.2@100.9
60-0, 116 ft
slalom, 65.8 mph

Summation: "This is an impressive new coupe, a vibrant alternative on streets thick with Mustangs and Z's, and the best Eclipse yet-by far."

I'm sure 2g owners wont like that last part.

 

this picture makes it look sort of like the gto. from this angle it looks pretty good. i had the last gen eclipse it was ok just didn't have any power and the handling was pretty lousy. would have to actually see and drive this car to make a comparison.

 

I just saw one on the streets a couple of hours ago! It was in the same color as all of these pics.

I personally think that a color other than that funky orange will make a difference in the way that car looks (I actually think that with most cars though)!

So for what I have seen of this car so far I don't like the front! I kinda think the side view is okay and I actually like the back. The performance numbers are pretty good!

 

Edmunds decided not to do a clutch drop and got...
0-60 in 6.8
and 1/4 in 14.9
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=105582

 

Road & track: 14.4 @101 mph

Motortrend: 14.2 @100.9 mph

Edmunds: 14.9????? <---------- .5 to .7 second difference here = Anomaly

The Edmunds numbers are so divergent than the rest because they cannot launch, or they drove the car like a grandma.

This Eclipse is no street terror, but it moves fast enough for most people.

 

They were easy on it: "With medium throws and easy clutch work, our six-speed Eclipse GT pulled a 6.8-second 0-60 and a 14.9 quarter-mile."

 

I think that's probably better than what an 8 could do, considering the 8's slow 5-60 of ~7.3