Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Toyota Celica vs. Mitsubishi Eclipse



  • badtoybadtoy Posts: 368
    that Sport Compact Car dynoed it and found an additional 8 WHP.
  • sergeissergeis Posts: 133
    marktest, there is something really wrong with your celica. I have GT auto, and it does 0-60 in 8.5 secs, the GTS auto should be slightly better, I guess ~7.5-8 s, and manual about 7. And leather is personal thing, I absolutely hate it, even if GTS would be same price as GT I would probably go GT because GTS comes with leather... Plus I can use regular with GT and get 39 mpg on highway.
  • boomn29boomn29 Posts: 189
    Take your 39 mpg, and I'll take the 40hp, wheels, suspension, etc and be happy.
    Besides, the GTS will pull 33mpg.
  • Sometimes I wish I would have forked out the extra $3k for the GTS, however, in normal driving situations (under 6,000 rpms) is there much of a difference?

    I thought the suspension was the same on both cars?
  • marktestmarktest Posts: 43
    If there is something wrong with my GTS Auto (0 to 60 in 10 sec), two dealerships say there isn't. I get, "it's performing within factory specified parameters". From torque curves I've seen and the weight difference, I wouldn't be surprised if the GT Auto is quicker than the GTS Auto. The GTS engine is really gutless with the gearing of the 4 speed automatic. It only has power for the brief time it's over 6000 rpm in first gear. The shift to second drops to 4000 rpm and it takes for ever to get back to 6000.

    I also never seem to get the mileage people talk about, only 29 on the highway, but that's close to the EPA sticker
  • badtoybadtoy Posts: 368
    put a low-boost turbo on it. That's what I did with my Corolla (same 1ZZ engine/auto), and it's a Mustang eater. Of course, your mileage will drop to 28 mpg, but what the heck -- you can't have everything!
  • I would never get the automatic in the Celica. The only advantage to the automatic is the fact you get better mpg because the final gear ratio is lower. However, you aren't going to notice a big difference in 32mpg to 35mpg. I also don't drive in traffic, so that may be another advantage to the auto.

    I have raced both GT-Ss and Mitsu GTs autos and beat them both. I also raced a Dodge Stratus R/T 5speed and was side by side with him from 0 - 65ish. (The Stratus R/T having the same drivetrain as the Eclipse GT) I have never raced a 6-speed GTS but I would like to, knowing that I would lose, I would like to see by how bad (and if the $3k option is really worth it).
  • 8u6hfd8u6hfd Posts: 1,391
    It's pretty quiet. I believe the 10 bhp figure was for the GTS, not the GT.

    THe Kazuma exhuast will make you deaf.
  • boomn29boomn29 Posts: 189
    Where do you live at silvercelica01?
  • St. Louis, MO.
  • boomn29boomn29 Posts: 189
    I'm there too. I have a 2001 6 speed GTS...
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,669
    They do have the same suspension. I confirmed this in the service department of the dealership where I bought my GT. The wheels and tires are different of course.

    I think the celica has really nice leather seats, as leather goes, but I still prefer the cloth, which is one of the reasons I went with the GT. All the GTS around here had the leather. Not to mention, they all had the "action package" with the huge rear wing, which is not to my tastes.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,669
    if anyone out there has raced a eclipse GT vs celica GTS? Kind of a loaded race, I know, with the eclipse's 6-cyl, but I was just wondering.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • SPYDER98SPYDER98 Posts: 239
    I took a co-workers out for a ride last summer. I concur once this thing gets around 6krpm it's a screamer. But as soon as the upshift happened, the engine would just bog down when dropping into the 5k rpm range.

    It would be a complete shame to own this car with an auto. too bad, the kid spent good money on the car too...
  • i need to get a new (to me) car, and i have it narrowed down to an Eclipse GS and a Celica GT. Both cars are 2000's, have ~25k miles, and are priced the same. Everything in my gut is leading me toward the Eclipse, but Mitsubishi's poor track record for reliability (esp. compared to Toyota), and the crankshaft problems they had in the mid 90's eclipses are holding me back. Also, from what i've found, it seems that the eclipse also depreciates faster than the celica. i've heard the latest (2000 and beyond) models for the eclipse are supposed to have improved reliability, but i've been unable to determine how true this is and will be. anyone have any insight to help me in my decision? i'm more interested in seeing if the eclipse would be relatively problem free to/for ~100k miles/5 years, not necessarily 10 years from now.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,669
    in the celica is looking to be up to the typical standard of Toyota engines so far. Mitsus in general have a lot of drivetrain problems as they age, but a lot of the biggest Eclipse problems from the mid-90's were on the turbo models, of which there is none now. Yes, the Eclipse will depreciate faster than the celica.

    These are two very different cars - you might want to make a higher priority of their differences relative to your driving style. Eclipse is porky and powerful with smooth ride, celica is modestly powered with rail-like handling.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • sergeissergeis Posts: 133
    I have GT 2000 with 34K. So far I had to replace tires - the original Dunlops were junk. Also the body paint is not very good, at least compared to Ford. I should also mention cruise control which is certainly faulty, sometimes goes into oscillations, but one can live with it.
    Otherwise very good car and I like it, especially sporty handling and gas milage. It certainly beats Eclipse in these departments. Acceleration is not impressive but not bad - 8.5secs for 0-60 (auto).
  • Does anyone know why the eclipse 99- is the strongest 4 banger available? Also I've heard that the crankshaft is poor on the GST & GSX, does anyone know where this rumor came from???
    If anyone knows please tell me.
  • "#55 of 61 I would like to know by nippononly May 21, 2002 (4:20 pm)
    if anyone out there has raced a eclipse GT vs celica GTS? Kind of a loaded race, I know, with the eclipse's 6-cyl, but I was just wondering"
    I was at the local street races by house and I raced one. Just to settle the which is faster question. It was very close. by the 1/4 mark I was maybe 12" ahead and by the 1 mile mark I pulled my rear past his front end and got in front of him. I was at 143 ish mph. The road got windy and I made it threw screeching all the way down to 60mph he however didnt make the second wind slid off the road and totaled his car. Lucily no one died. just badly injured. end result comes down to driver. and better handling in the celica. And yes a stock gts can break 140!!
This discussion has been closed.