|
Car and Driver reviews '06 Mitsuibishi Eclipse
"The elcipse casts its biggest shadow yet:"
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....rticle_id=9634 Notable quotes: With 3.8 liters, 263 horsepower, and 260 pound-feet of tire-peeling torque, the V-6 seems big enough to move mountains, or at least move this six-speed manual Eclipse—a five-speed auto is optional—to 60 mph in 6.1 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 14.5 seconds at 100 mph. That's a little quicker than an Acura RSX Type-S, a lot quicker than a Hyundai Tiburon GT V-6, VW New Beetle Turbo S, and last year's Eclipse GTS. But a Mustang GT will smoke it. After 300 miles our fuel card reported 15 mpg. Heaven and ANWR help us! Mitsubishi claims 18 mpg city and 27 highway for the manual V-6, near the bottom in the segment (the Tiburon is slightly worse). |
It's a cool car for the casual car enthusiast. Real car guys and gals see V6, 260hp and FWD and can't help but imagine intolerable torque steer and extreme forward weight bias.
|
Over 3500 lbs... Thats a fat ass car.
|
eclipses are fat mothers! almost every Gen was a heavy weight...
|
if i had to chosse id choose the tiburon
|
I think this is a great car for your average car buyer who loves sportiness and power. We can criticize this car with it's disadvantages, just like people criticize the RX8 for what it lacks, but the reality is, like the rx8, it's a great car for the value, and I believe it will be a big seller for Mitsubishi.
|
^i bet mitsubishi hopes so....i don't really care for this car..i don't hate it..just not my cup of tea. i'm still blown away by how heavy it is.
oh and is this the car adn driver that has a pic of this on the cover (a lill one in the corner) and says mitsubishi's new eclipse...their 350z fighter...or somethign liek that? it isn't all that bad a car i guess but a 350z fighter it is not just MHO |
Its a typo-they meant biter instead of fighter.
|
Its quick... if all your roads are straight.
|
its somewhat quick if you spend 28k on the top of the line GT v6, if you think 6.1 seconds is quick. still will have bad torque steer, bad weight distribution, and terrible understeer.
looks bad too, reminds me of the volkswagen beetle |
I gotta say for a 3.8L v6 it doesn't seem to put out that much power... I think the Z has a 3.5 and gets 285 hp or so. Plus the Z looks better and handles way better. Yea the eclipse has back seats but they aren't so usable like those of the 8. I think this might be a winner for mitsu, it is fast and looks good although the styling is not exactly my taste.
|
Originally Posted by StealthFox
its somewhat quick if you spend 28k on the top of the line GT v6, if you think 6.1 seconds is quick. still will have bad torque steer, bad weight distribution, and terrible understeer.
looks bad too, reminds me of the volkswagen beetle And the torque steer really isn't that bad. Have you even driven the car? I doubt it. The Eclipse actually handles it's FWD layout better than the TL. Some torque steer is evident, but not intrusive in the least. |
Originally Posted by tazzydnc
I gotta say for a 3.8L v6 it doesn't seem to put out that much power... I think the Z has a 3.5 and gets 285 hp or so. Plus the Z looks better and handles way better.
|
Not to mention that the VQ in the Z is not a particularly strong motor. They've about eeked out all they can out of that motor to get that power. The bottom-ends are incredibly weak.
Mitsubishi on the other hand can build a damn strong motor. Whether this new MIVEC is or not I don't know. But often times when you see a larger motor with less power, that just means there's a lot of extra strength in there and power that can be grabbed if you want it. |
I think... it's the ugliest car I've seen ever produced. It's either you like it or hate it.
And the numbers aren't very impressive really... |
Originally Posted by LNWLF
Not true at all. A GT comes in around 23.5K, and all of the options (leather, subwoofer, etc), with the exception of the 18 inch wheels make the car slower. Thus, the trim level capable of running 14.2-14.5 in the quarter can be had for around 23-24K.
And the torque steer really isn't that bad. Have you even driven the car? I doubt it. The Eclipse actually handles it's FWD layout better than the TL. Some torque steer is evident, but not intrusive in the least. |
Originally Posted by StealthFox
for about 23k total, i could buy a barely used rsx type S, and modify it to put the eclipse to so much shame its not even funny. the car stock would smoke it even though it has 220 hp because of its major weight advantage. lets not even get into handling...the type S is one of the best handling FWD's you can buy today. not to mention the rear seats are usable in the rsx, and it has honda reliability.
|
Originally Posted by StealthFox
for about 23k total, i could buy a barely used rsx type S, and modify it to put the eclipse to so much shame its not even funny. the car stock would smoke it even though it has 220 hp because of its major weight advantage.
From C&D: 0-60: 6.2 0-100: 16.6 5-60: 6.9 1/4 mile: 14.9@95 vs. 0-60: 6.1 0-100: 14.5 5-60: 6.4 1/4 mile: 14.5@100 Pretty clear which has the power advantage. lets not even get into handling...the type S is one of the best handling FWD's you can buy today. not to mention the rear seats are usable in the rsx, and it has honda reliability. |
Saw one up close the other day and thought it looked much better then previous attempts. Bigger then the 8, yet smaller cabin dims.
|
Originally Posted by RX8_Buckeye
LOL. Come on now, you are comparing a used car to a new car to try to make your point.
|
Originally Posted by RX8-79
It has 210 hp, and anyone who thinks stock for stock the little honda will beat an eclipse gt is the one smoking something.
From C&D: 0-60: 6.2 0-100: 16.6 5-60: 6.9 1/4 mile: 14.9@95 vs. 0-60: 6.1 0-100: 14.5 5-60: 6.4 1/4 mile: 14.5@100 Pretty clear which has the power advantage. Please. The rsx, for a coupe, is an average handler at best. There are plenty of other coupes in its range that embarrass it, and several small similarly weighted sedans that outhandle it too, while having actual usable rear seats. |
Originally Posted by RX8-79
It has 210 hp, and anyone who thinks stock for stock the little honda will beat an eclipse gt is the one smoking something.
From C&D: 0-60: 6.2 0-100: 16.6 5-60: 6.9 1/4 mile: 14.9@95 vs. 0-60: 6.1 0-100: 14.5 5-60: 6.4 1/4 mile: 14.5@100 Pretty clear which has the power advantage. Please. The rsx, for a coupe, is an average handler at best. There are plenty of other coupes in its range that embarrass it, and several small similarly weighted sedans that outhandle it too, while having actual usable rear seats. either way even if the eclipse has a .1 0-60 adantage and a few mph trapped quarter mile, you're talking about a car that costs substantially more than a brand new RSX-type s, and by the means of a 200 dollar AEM(probably less) intake you can get 15-20whp. oh, also the honda has incredibly better efficiency, the mitsu has a 6 cyl but only gets a little better power, not to mention it gets terrible gas efficiency(much worse than i would have expected, but either way not bad considering the way rotary cars sip gas) |
Originally Posted by StealthFox
which coupes that cost under 22k new with the functionality of the car handles better and has comparable power?
either way even if the eclipse has a .1 0-60 adantage and a few mph trapped quarter mile, you're talking about a car that costs substantially more than a brand new RSX-type s, and by the means of a 200 dollar AEM(probably less) intake you can get 15-20whp. oh, also the honda has incredibly better efficiency, the mitsu has a 6 cyl but only gets a little better power, not to mention it gets terrible gas efficiency(much worse than i would have expected, but either way not bad considering the way rotary cars sip gas) 2.) Lay off the crack, you're not getting 15-20whp from an intake. 3.) Get back to us when you can actually drive one of these cars |
2.) Lay off the crack, you're not getting 15-20whp from an intake. |
Originally Posted by Sigma
Sure you can, depending on the car. Some cars like the Mazda6 for example have incredibly restrictive induction systems, likely to keep the noise down more than anything, and benefit greatly from being able to breathe freely. I dunno if the RSX-S qualifies, I'm betting not, as I'd imagine that'd be the first thing that Acura would optimize for easy added power.
I'm not saying cars can't get gains from an intake, but the RSX is not getting 15-20whp from an intake I've seen dynos and he's dreaming and would fit in great over at ClubRSX :p Spend enough time there and a Hondata #4, intake, and 3rd gear will allow you to outrun low flying cruise missles. |
Originally Posted by StealthFox
which coupes that cost under 22k new with the functionality of the car handles better and has comparable power?
either way even if the eclipse has a .1 0-60 adantage and a few mph trapped quarter mile, you're talking about a car that costs substantially more than a brand new RSX-type s the mitsu has a 6 cyl but only gets a little better power, not to mention it gets terrible gas efficiency(much worse than i would have expected, but either way not bad considering the way rotary cars sip gas) |
Yup, a car with muscle-car performance and one that doesnt look like a civic with a cheap bodykit thrown on. Maybe 10 years ago. In my book if you're not in the 13s you're not in the league of being considered "muscle car performance" by today's standards. A 14.6 is "muscle car performance"? Please, a stock Altima can easily beat that, and I sure wouldn't put it in the same category as a mid-13 Mustang GT or a high-12 GTO. And looks. Well looks are subjective. While I agree on the RSX-S comment, I wouldn't consider the new Eclipse a shining beacon of beauty either. Looks like a leaping turd to me, especially in that shit-brown burnt umber color they've been pimping. 53 more HP and 117 extra lb-ft of torque isnt a 'little better power'. But I guess to you the z only has a 'little better power' over the 8 too then, eh? |
Originally Posted by Sigma
"Muscle Car Performance"? Maybe 10 years ago.
I'm going to assume by "power" he meant performance. As in 0-60 and 1/4-mile times. How much literal "power" you have means nothing if you can't go any faster. And, yes, that same argument applies to the Z and the 8. |
Well, I can't say I've ever heard Nissan or Infiniti refer to either of their respective cars having "muscle car performance", but if they did I'd find it just as laughable, yes. Sports Cars, yes, Muscle Cars, no.
|
Originally Posted by Sigma
"Muscle Car Performance"?
Maybe 10 years ago. In my book if you're not in the 13s you're not in the league of being considered "muscle car performance" by today's standards. A 14.6 is "muscle car performance"? Please, a stock Altima can easily beat that, and I sure wouldn't put it in the same category as a mid-13 Mustang GT or a high-12 GTO. And looks. Well looks are subjective. While I agree on the RSX-S comment, I wouldn't consider the new Eclipse a shining beacon of beauty either. Looks like a leaping turd to me, especially in that shit-brown burnt umber color they've been pimping. I'm going to assume by "power" he meant performance. As in 0-60 and 1/4-mile times. How much literal "power" you have means nothing if you can't go any faster. And, yes, that same argument applies to the Z and the 8. 53 horsepower doesnt mean squat when your car is wider than most SUV's and weighs in nearly two tons. and you are correct rx8, it is a honda civic with a cheap body kit put on, but at least it's remotely well proportioned and has good understated styling compared to the...well...not so well proportioned eclipse. |
Originally Posted by IkeWRX
I'm not saying cars can't get gains from an intake, but the RSX is not getting 15-20whp from an intake I've seen dynos and he's dreaming and would fit in great over at ClubRSX :p Spend enough time there and a Hondata #4, intake, and 3rd gear will allow you to outrun low flying cruise missles.
Well, I can't say I've ever heard Nissan or Infiniti refer to either of their respective cars having "muscle car performance", but if they did I'd find it just as laughable, yes. Sports Cars, yes, Muscle Cars, no. You are correct in stating Nissan/Infiniti never claimed their respective cars to have "muscle car performance" or anything like that, hell, even nissan didn't/doesn't market the V35 skyline/G35 Coupe as even a sporst car. |
Butt Ugly is all I can say about the new Eclipse...
|
Originally Posted by StealthFox
really, since you have so much time on your hands ike why dont you go look up soem dyno charts of the AEM CIA for the RSX Type-S.
yeah, japanese "muscle cars" are long gone, whoever said the eclipse has "muscle car" power is terribly wrong, the eclipse(especially the DSM) is one of the staples of massive fad driven rice cars, next to the civic, very different from a muscle car. its a front wheel drive car that's not even a sports car, japanese muscle cars would be the Nissan 300ZX TT, Mazda RX-7, Toyota Supra TT, Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4, Nissan Skyline GTS-T/GT-R, Acura NSX-S, etc You are correct in stating Nissan/Infiniti never claimed their respective cars to have "muscle car performance" or anything like that, hell, even nissan didn't/doesn't market the V35 skyline/G35 Coupe as even a sporst car. Also, when I see an NSX or RX-7 I think Japanese muscle car :rolleyes: In order to be a muscle car the car should have a large V8, be performance oriented, be affordable, and being built in the 60s or 70s doesn't hurt either... |
I thought the definition of a muscle car is when you need a bunch of guys to help you push that heavy POS with the v-8 when it breaks down.
|
You know when you get into the modifying discussions you can pretty much just chuck everything out the window.
I mean you can buy a 90's civic hatch, gut it, and throw a prelude engine in it, and it'll slaughter everything discussed in this thread for a mere fraction of the cost, and in pretty much every catagory of performance. |
Originally Posted by StealthFox
53 horsepower doesnt mean squat when your car is wider than most SUV's and weighs in nearly two tons.
and you are correct rx8, it is a honda civic with a cheap body kit put on, but at least it's remotely well proportioned and has good understated styling compared to the...well...not so well proportioned eclipse. Not. |
hmmM this Dose not LOOK good for the 4g Mitsubishi Eclipse HALTS !!!!Click here for it !
|
Originally Posted by RX8 XTC
hmmM this Dose not LOOK good for the 4g Mitsubishi Eclipse HALTS !!!!Click here for it !
OUCH! That can't be good at all. |
Ouch, indeed. Almost as embarrassing as Mazda having to offer to buy back our cars right after they were introduced.
Almost every new car has teething problems that first year. NO company is immune to it. |
I am not sure about the styling of this car. The rear looks way to fat...like the 350Z.
|
Nice breaking news on the brief halt...welcome to three weeks ago.
PS: The problem has already been addressed. |
Originally Posted by LNWLF
Nice breaking news on the brief halt...welcome to three weeks ago.
PS: The problem has already been addressed. P.S. just because the problem has been addressed doesn't mean the problem never happened. who knows what's next! |
Originally Posted by Mugatu
It's new here on this forum, buddy. It's obvious you'll defend the Eclipse no matter what since 80% of the whopping 27 posts you have are defending Mitsu's latest.
P.S. just because the problem has been addressed doesn't mean the problem never happened. who knows what's next! All first year cars have problems, I'm here to point that out. |
^yawn..well since everyone is aware of issues with new cars and everyone agrees new cars have "teething problems"...why teh blantant attack on the 8 in your post? just curious.....seems childish. also i get 17.8 mpg.adn have never flooded. mpg can be attributed to the driver as much or more than to the car..same goes for flooding.
so if you are going to bash at least come up with something good :p |
I was considering the RX-8 as a new car (that's why I initially signed up), but aside from it's tremendous balance and slick exterior, I felt the car was a bit lacking in the power dept.
I used to be a 2G eclipse owner, and the relentless Mitsu bias, just gets old, so I felt like giving the good sides to the perpetual bad story that is Mitsu. I think the 8 is an awesome ride, and if a MS version hits, there's a good chance that I'll pick it up. But I felt as though Mugatu was just sniping, without being constructive, so I sniped back. I admit, it was a bit childish... |
hehe no biggie it is the internet after all..hehe everyone is allocated 10 childish moments per day :D
i never really messed around with any of teh eclipses..but i do dig the evo....but i dunno if i could have it for a daily driver it's interior and comfort are lacking...but it's got performance to spare. too bad mitsu wont' do the same for the current gen eclipse |
It looks like an Audi TT the most.
|
Originally Posted by LNWLF
Nice breaking news on the brief halt...welcome to three weeks ago.
PS: The problem has already been addressed. |
:(
I don't care how it looks or performs. Bottom line the eclipse, new or older gen. is simply a girl's car(just like the celica), and I will remind anyone if I ever see some dumbass kid who thinks he's too fast too furious driving one.
Guys you shouldn't be driving one unless you're either a metrosexual or batting for the wrong team. my two cents |
my gf thinks the 8 is really cute ;)
Makes me wonder what team you're batting for. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:14 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands