well my brother has a 2002 eclipse gs-low and he beat a 1g eclipse gs by about 10 lengths and a 2g eclipse gs by about 2, i mean my brothers car has 108whp lol are NA dsm's really that slow or do the people just suck at driving? please discuss

bump

my friend has a 98 GS eclipse and idk how good of a driver he is but i can stay up with him in my mirage lol, his car is stock tho cept for the catback

lol well now they cant be that fast then. i was thinkin the 420a was faster for some reason but apparently not lol

that aint a DSM lol

yeah dsm stricktly means diamond star motors NOT 4g63 therefore the 420a made by Chrystler is included in the dsm community simply becouse it is in a 2g eclipse.


DSM
1.1st gen plymouth Lazer
2.1st gen Eagle Talon
3.1st gen Mitsubishi Eclipse
4.2nd gen Mitsubishi Eclipse
5.2nd gen Eagle Talon

also in some cases people count the rare galant vr-4(4g63t) as a DSM

now back on topic a completely stock 99 Eclipse gs vs completely stock 02 Eclipse gs in perfect conditions and perfect drivers who do you guys think would win?

its really just the drivers. Because both are pretty slow cars and even though the eclipse comes with the slightly bigger engine (2.4l) it still is very close. 10 car lengths on a 1g is wrong though. they were not trying then because i dont care who was driving. 10 lengths will not happen

are you aware that the 1g in question has like 95hp? and its automatic. they raced from complete stop to.

ORIGINAL: davidmitsusrock

yeah dsm stricktly means diamond star motors NOT 4g63 therefore the 420a made by Chrystler is included in the dsm community simply becouse it is in a 2g eclipse.


DSM
1.1st gen plymouth Lazer
2.1st gen Eagle Talon
3.1st gen Mitsubishi Eclipse
4.2nd gen Mitsubishi Eclipse
5.2nd gen Eagle Talon

also in some cases people count the rare galant vr-4(4g63t) as a DSM


but didnt the DSM era end in 1995 , making part of the 2g a dsm and the other not?

the 2g came out in 1995 but the lazers praduction was ended. so yes tecnically(how the hell do you spell that?) only 1st gens are true DSM's i believe but when they all had the 4g63 option they pretty much consider the 2g's and galant VR-4 DSMs.

I think its all in the driver.

ORIGINAL: davidmitsusrock

the 2g came out in 1995 but the lazers praduction was ended. so yes tecnically(how the hell do you spell that?) only 1st gens are true DSM's i believe but when they all had the 4g63 option they pretty much consider the 2g's and galant VR-4 DSMs.


ok lol, but in true fact only 1g's are real dsm's lol right because if it was determined on the engine, then an Evo would be a dsm right?

like i specificaly said a 4g63 does not make a DSM not all 1g's are 4g63's

ORIGINAL: davidmitsusrock

like i specificaly said a 4g63 does not make a DSM not all 1g's are 4g63's


ok thanks lol

i dont mean to interupt yalls convo but if DSM means dimond star motors, wouldnt alll mitsubishi vehicles be a DSM?

ORIGINAL: 00Mirage

i dont mean to interupt yalls convo but if DSM means dimond star motors, wouldnt alll mitsubishi vehicles be a DSM?


i dont think so because the dsm was when chrysler, mitsu, and eagle were like a joint thing, where they came out with the plymouth laser, eagle talon, and the mitsu eclipse, as far as the 3kgt and the dodge stealth. and since 1995 when the dsm era was over, technically dsm was only pre 95

ok well i wasnt gonna chime in but since it really hasnt been said yet ill say it.

DSM (Diamond Star Motors) ended when mitsubishi bought out their stock in it in 1993. Sooooo technically in 1993 DSM became Mitsubishi Motors. However they still used the name DSM for the cars and we still associate the 2g with it mostly just becuase they were built relativaly the same and had mostly the same look.

So if you ever wondered why in the hell the 6-bolt was abandoned in 1992.5, its because Mitsubishi Motors took over the factory in Illinois.

well aslo the diamond is for mitsu Mitsubishi means 3 diamonds i believe, and the star is for the old chryster star, jsut some interesting facts.

What engine was in the 1g? If it was the 4g93, it's no wonder you beat it, my 1.5L SOHC Mirage w/ exhaust & intake chewed those things up and spit em out. The 1.8 model made children on tricycles look fast. Made something like 92hp and weighed almost 2700. IMO, if it was a 1.8, I could see that happening, the 2.0 NA maybe, but it would come down to the driver. Maybe he just really really sucked at driving

ORIGINAL: Lil Evo

What engine was in the 1g? If it was the 4g93, it's no wonder you beat it, my 1.5L SOHC Mirage w/ exhaust & intake chewed those things up and spit em out. The 1.8 model made children on tricycles look fast. Made something like 92hp and weighed almost 2700. IMO, if it was a 1.8, I could see that happening, the 2.0 NA maybe, but it would come down to the driver. Maybe he just really really sucked at driving


wth is a 4g93?

thought it was pretty well explained there, but ok.

the 4g93 is a 16 valve 1.8L single over-head cam engine that produces 92hp at the flywheel in a 1g Talon/Eclipse. The engine is shared with the 3g Mirage/Summit/Colt's, was dropped from the Eclipse/Talon line up (thank God) for the second generation and retained and reworked to produce 113hp and 111 ib/ft tq in the Mirage/Summit LS trim for the 4th generation, and to the LS and ES trim for the 5th Mirage generation. Basically, the engine is reliable and capable of producing power with forced induction and other such modifications, but not suited for a car as heavy as the Eclipse/Talon (the Mirage being almost 500lbs ligheter still struggles with to move with this engine).

ORIGINAL: Lil Evo

thought it was pretty well explained there, but ok.

the 4g93 is a 16 valve 1.8L single over-head cam engine that produces 92hp at the flywheel in a 1g Talon/Eclipse. The engine is shared with the 3g Mirage/Summit/Colt's, was dropped from the Eclipse/Talon line up (thank God) for the second generation and retained and reworked to produce 113hp and 111 ib/ft tq in the Mirage/Summit LS trim for the 4th generation, and to the LS and ES trim for the 5th Mirage generation. Basically, the engine is reliable and capable of producing power with forced induction and other such modifications, but not suited for a car as heavy as the Eclipse/Talon (the Mirage being almost 500lbs ligheter still struggles with to move with this engine).



ok thanks

OK since we are bringing the DSM debate/topic in here I might as well chime in also. TheEngineer is PARTIALLY correct in that Mitsubishi Motors did buy back into the USA in 1993. But the "DSM" coop was simply this...a JOINT VENTURE between Mitsubishi Motors and DaimlerChrysler. That relationship was not scrapped until Feb 14,2005 (took me a minute to lok up the date and I MIGHT be off a day or 2, but I am close). So if someone was so inclined, DSM can mean any multitude of things/cars ranging from 1990-2005. Thats why the 3000GT was also given a Stealth name. The Eclipse has been called a few things now. Talon and Laser are the fanboy "DSM" cars, but the 3gen Eclipse is also a Dodge Avenger. A chrysler vehicle. Built with the same parts on the same chassis with the same EVERYTHING. So to say that a 1990-1993 Eclipse ONLY classifies as DSM is just LAME. And you will notice that the end of that coop made the release of the new Eclipse with MIVEC possible. Anyone notice the quality of car getting better lately??? I DO!

But to say that the coop between Chrysler and Mitsubishi is gone is not paying full attention...the Raider is a rebadged Dodge Dakota.



And to get back on topic...the race at hand. 1gen 1.8 SOHC Eclipse is AWFUL and Slow!! The 2.4 SOHC has 147 HP in CA Spec and 154 Fed Spec I believe. The 420A is 140 HP give or take. The 1gen 4G63 NA was 136 or 138...but damn close. In a race, all things being equal, the 3gen 4cyl would win. More HP, more TQ, and car weighs about the same. Those 2.4's do OK. Not gonna scare anyone, but in a 5 spd they get up the street OK.

Hope that helps.
Michael

ORIGINAL: Lil Evo

thought it was pretty well explained there, but ok.

the 4g93 is a 16 valve 1.8L single over-head cam engine that produces 92hp at the flywheel in a 1g Talon/Eclipse. The engine is shared with the 3g Mirage/Summit/Colt's, was dropped from the Eclipse/Talon line up (thank God) for the second generation and retained and reworked to produce 113hp and 111 ib/ft tq in the Mirage/Summit LS trim for the 4th generation, and to the LS and ES trim for the 5th Mirage generation. Basically, the engine is reliable and capable of producing power with forced induction and other such modifications, but not suited for a car as heavy as the Eclipse/Talon (the Mirage being almost 500lbs ligheter still struggles with to move with this engine).

well you are partially correct here. The 1st gen did gome with a 1.8L SOHC engine but it wasnt the 4g93, im pretty damn sure it was a 4g37.