How reliable are Eclipses? also, opinions on 3000GTs?

[gnuel3]

I see them for pretty cheap (Eclipses), but are they reliable?

test...
:wine::sun::Q

:music::moon::|:lips::light::heart::gift::frown::evil::disgust::clock::camera::brokenheart::beer:

 

[efript]

well mitsubishi has a nice 10year 100k mi warranty, cant go wrong with that.

 

[boyRacer]

You'll hear about tranny problems most of the time but thats mostly from idiots that launch their AWD cars at high rpms and dump the clutch... well no duh the tranny is going to crap on you.

For more info on the Eclipse go check out Club DSM

For more info on the 3000GT go check out 3KGT.com

The previous Eclipses were pretty fast once modded... 3000GTs on the other hand are pretty heavy and most of the used ones available are the Base and SL models... which makes you look like a poser since even the lowest Integra LS is probably faster than you. Only VR-4 for me. Good luck.

 

[gnuel3]

Ah, I was getting excited when I saw that have 222/300hp (3000gt). :x heh

 

[Gunslinger08]

My bro bought a new eclipse in 2000, uncle got one in 2001. Only problem my bro has had is a broken piece in the windshield wiper transmission.

Consider the cost of upkeep. Low profile tires = $$$

 

[AzNmAnJLH]

it sucks didn't you watch the fast and furious

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: gnuel3
Ah, I was getting excited when I saw that have 222/300hp (3000gt). :x heh

222HP isn't bad... but when you consider how heavy the car is and its FWD... not much you can do from there. The VR-4 has 320HP stock... but weights too close to 4000lbs... ive seen people running high 11s with this thing though... has nothing more than a boost controller and an exhaust i think. Motor definitely has a lot of potential. But a turbo and AWD makes you your insurance company's dream.

 

[EvilYoda]

mmmmm, VR4

 

[Talon02]

rice

 

[gnuel3]

 

[Mutilator]

For 3000GT info visit 3SI.org, specifically the forums.
The weight thing ISN'T the problem with VR4s... they only weigh about 50-100lbs more than Supras. (It's not 4000lbs) The problem is the aftermarket support just isn't there. What is there is incredibly expensive and the cars don't take well to mods like the Supras do.
I've got a base model 3000GT w/ATX so I've almost got the crappiest of the bunch lol... glad I don't have the 167HP SOHC w/ATX.

I'm seriously considering buying a 2000 Lightning though... that should be a nice performance boost.
Don't get me wrong... I love my car. It's a great daily driver and is reasonably quick, just don't try to race somebody at a street light because chances are they'll go to their favorite forum and yell "I JUST KILLED A VR4!!"

 

[Encryptic]

I've never really heard "reliable" used to describe Mitsubishi, if that tells you anything.

That said, my dumbass brother had a new Eclipse briefly about 5 years ago and had to take it back to the dealer several times for various issues before he let his friend borrow it and said friend got into a wreck.

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: Mutilator
For 3000GT info visit 3SI.org, specifically the forums.
The weight thing ISN'T the problem with VR4s... they only weigh about 50-100lbs more than Supras. (It's not 4000lbs) The problem is the aftermarket support just isn't there. What is there is incredibly expensive and the cars don't take well to mods like the Supras do.
I've got a base model 3000GT w/ATX so I've almost got the crappiest of the bunch lol... glad I don't have the 167HP SOHC w/ATX.

I'm seriously considering buying a 2000 Lightning though... that should be a nice performance boost.
Don't get me wrong... I love my car. It's a great daily driver and is reasonably quick, just don't try to race somebody at a street light because chances are they'll go to their favorite forum and yell "I JUST KILLED A VR4!!"

Oops... 3SI.org is what i meant. My mistake.

Well the 1998 3000GT was tested at 3737lbs... and who said the Supra wasn't heavy? The same year Supra weighs, last year it was sold here, was 3505. The technogadgets on the VR4 were actually removed already, like the two tone exhaust, so i'm guessing it was hovering around 3800lbs. They're still nice cars though and Id buy one in heartbeat if i had the money just because the fast and the furious crowd doesn't know much about it... unlike Supras and RX-7s which have been marked up the @$$. An 8 year old supra turbo is selling for $35k. Riiiight.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Talon02
rice

die, moron... the '89-'99 Eclipses were made in Michigan by American auto workers.

And no, they're not particularly reliable. Usual problems are turbos, trannies, and crankwalk. But they're a hell of a ride. The GSX is, with some modification, the fastest 4-cyl ever sold in America. This is "rice" that actually can do 10 sec if you have the money.

 

[RossMAN]

They're not reliable but they look badass if that counts for anything.

 

[Chadder007]

Originally posted by: boyRacer

Originally posted by: gnuel3
Ah, I was getting excited when I saw that have 222/300hp (3000gt). :x heh

222HP isn't bad... but when you consider how heavy the car is and its FWD... not much you can do from there. The VR-4 has 320HP stock... but weights too close to 4000lbs... ive seen people running high 11s with this thing though... has nothing more than a boost controller and an exhaust i think. Motor definitely has a lot of potential. But a turbo and AWD makes you your insurance company's dream.

I could see Turbo, but why would AWD make an insurance companies dream?? I would think that would lower insurance because it adds to stability of the car.

 

[Spooner]

Originally posted by: RossMAN
They're not reliable but they look badass if that counts for anything.

Reason why I got my '03 Spyder

 

[dxkj]

Does anyone else think the model ending in the year 1999 looks superior to the newer models? The newer 2000-2004 look nice, but the older ones just look slicker.

 

[LAUST]

4000lbs

 

[Lifer]

Originally posted by: joshsquall
My bro bought a new eclipse in 2000, uncle got one in 2001. Only problem my bro has had is a broken piece in the windshield wiper transmission.

Consider the cost of upkeep. Low profile tires = $$$

why is that? treadwear? less sidewall?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dxkj
Does anyone else think the model ending in the year 1999 looks superior to the newer models? The newer 2000-2004 look nice, but the older ones just look slicker.

The older ones were nicer. They were also an entirely different car.

 

[minendo]

Originally posted by: Talon02
rice

What do you drive? Guessing off of your user name I would go with a Talon.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: dxkj
Does anyone else think the model ending in the year 1999 looks superior to the newer models? The newer 2000-2004 look nice, but the older ones just look slicker.

that they do... infact i think the new ones are disgusting.
also, the engine sucks compared to the old 2.0L turbo..

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: Chadder007

Originally posted by: boyRacer

Originally posted by: gnuel3
Ah, I was getting excited when I saw that have 222/300hp (3000gt). :x heh

222HP isn't bad... but when you consider how heavy the car is and its FWD... not much you can do from there. The VR-4 has 320HP stock... but weights too close to 4000lbs... ive seen people running high 11s with this thing though... has nothing more than a boost controller and an exhaust i think. Motor definitely has a lot of potential. But a turbo and AWD makes you your insurance company's dream.

I could see Turbo, but why would AWD make an insurance companies dream?? I would think that would lower insurance because it adds to stability of the car.

Well when I got quoted... AAA saw it as more things that can break... and that drivetrain is gonna be expensive to fix.