Someone who knows a lot about eclipse's?????
Hello can anyone tell me what the difference between the 1997 Eclipse RS and GS is? Thanks
Eclipse GS cheap and crappy, Eclipse RS cheaper and crappier
http://www.theautochannel.com/media/photos/mitsubishi/1997/97_mitsubishi_ec lipse.jpg dat du GS, heres the RS http://www.intellichoice.com/reports/vehicleReport/vehicle_nmb/100003618/ty pe/used/year/1997/make/Mitsubishi/model/Eclipse
Since Slapshot proved how much of a dumbass he is, the RS is the base one, the GS is the middle grade one that has a little more modifications to the body, and maybe suspension
is there any major difference though? and which is better?
The GS is a sportier package than the RS lets just say that, if you don't care about upgrades then just get the RS for basic transportation
thanks brah. so what have you done to the 'teg so far?
oh and how do you get the big picture under your post's? it wont let me use a big picture
do you know if there is as many performance part upgrades for the 97 eclipse spyder?
RS is lighter and had smaller wheels and tires
GS is the opposite with the option of leather
They are both 2 liters but I've heard the GS engine is better.
Spyders are 2.4's and I am sure they had performance parts, possibly shared with the 4 cyl. Sebring Convertible.
thanks' which do you guys think i should buy? 1997- eclipse rs, gs, spyder? give your opinion
Personally, I'd get the Spyder. I also think that the '96-'99 Clipse's look much better than the newer 2001 models (I think they look like chick rides such as the new beetle). my :2cents:
I sold it but I made it run 9.6@145 or somewhere round there
Thats a GSX and a Spider.
RS- Rally sport, base model. Lowest version of the Eclipse,420a engine by chrysler group
GS- Grand Sport, best non-turbo model, 420a engine by chrysler group
GS-T- Grand Sport Turbo, turbo FWD model of the Eclipse, Mitsu's 4G63 engine
GSX- Grand Sport Cross, turbo AWD model, highest, Mitsus 4G63
Those names apply to 1st and 2nd gens, first gen lasted to 1994, 2nd gen lasted to 99. 3rd gen is not worth getting.
You could always get an Eagle Talon, which is the same thing as the Eclipse but under a different brand. Package codes from worst to best go as follows, base, ESi, TSi, and TSi AWD. Plymouth Lasers were also around in the 1st gen, which was the same thing as Talon and Eclipse.
Listen to Oomba, he's the only one that has posted correct information.
Other useful info is that all RS's come with rear drum brakes and lack proper rims and sideskirts.
Unless you're doing a complete re-do of the vehicle, I'd buy a GS.
Hey What, missed your presence :laughing:
does the extra .4 liters in the spyder make a difference if anyones driven one in here?
And you can tell an RS because it always has black door handles.
does it matter... both have no balls
What do you drive?
The question is, what do YOU drive? Keep dissing the imports, lets hear yours :thumbs:
Let him get a taste of his own medicine Integra.
Anyway it would have been cool if the Eclipse made it to the UK.
Whatever, might as well
You could also get a GST Spyder... just a thought.
I have not driven a 2.4L Spyder, but the extra 25% displacement should amount to some very nice low-end torque.
I'd stay away from the Spider and 3rd gens. Theyre bad news all around. Besides, convertables are heavier then their coupe counterparts.
I will definitely agree with part of that. I've never heard anything particularly bad about the 2G spyders (reliability wise), but I've never payed a whole lot of attention to the spyders either. They are heavy and I've never really understood the whole Eclipse spyder thing. I would recommend a coupe if you're remotely interested in performance.
i have nothing against imports i just would never buy an eclipse unless it was a gsx or gst. I actually prefer imports over domestic.
anyone seen the 2006 Eclipse? I thought that thing was pretty hideous..
I think the 2006 Eclipse is sexy as hell. Especially in person. Its like a hot chunky girl, great personality and looks. Whats not to love?
"Chunky" - That's the thing I don't love about it.
It sure was shiny in person though. :D
The Eclipse is not an import.
Its not really a big car, just the way the curves are make it look like it.
The new Eclipses are pushing the weight of the 3000GT though... the new ones are pigs.
Yeah they are heavy, but what do you expect from a sport compact built on a Galant frame?
You might just go for the gsx. even though more cash its worth its weight in gold after the correction in crank walk. not enough money then go to the GS version because it is the best to modify. you can convert the GS to GST to GSX with a little more money but works just as well. :thumbs:
No, you can convert a GS to a GST or a GSX with a crap load of money.
Given that the motor in the GS and the GST/GSX isn't the same, doesn't use
the same motor mounts, doesn't use the same computer, and isn't even
oriented the same direction.
But thanks for resurrecting a dead thread.
20% my friend.
and the 2.4L engines were non turbos(141hp), whereas the 2.0L engines had the turbos(210hp).
in other words... dont get the 2.4L engine. :mrgreen: unless you want to put a turbo on it yourself... in which case go for it.
I'd say if you're gonna get an eclipse, get a GST or GSX. They're great looking cars, and pretty quick. My friend has a 96 talon TSi AWD (same thing as the GSX) and its fun to drive.
But the bottom line on an increase in displacement isn't the hp. It's the usable torque at the lower portion of the RPM range.
But, having said that, I'd definitely go with the GST over the 2.4L.