Mitsubishi Eclipse vs. Supra

Home  \  Asian Imports  \  Mitsubishi Eclipse vs. Supra

Which do you think looks, performs, and is overall better? An older Mitsubishi Eclipse (95-98) or a Supra?

posted by  SilverCivicSi98

Is this a joke?

Normally Aspirated, Turbo, or twin turbo 6 cylinder
Rear wheel drive

Normally aspirated 4 banger
front wheel drive

Those are just the basics, need I say more?

posted by  abless


is this a joke?

supra - either n/a, single or turbo RWD

eclipse gs/rs - n/a L4 FWD
gst - turbo FWD
gsx - turbo AWD

there are some factors that you seem to have missed... the eclipse is a lot lighter, and if you take the GSX, its AWD... taking off HARD, the supra far heavier, and only RWD, since the wight isnt in the back it cant take of as hard without spinning the meats (tires).... there are many factors to say... so i think you "need say more"

posted by  mazda6man

Actually, thank you. I wasn't even aware an awd model existed. I guess I was wrong.

posted by  abless

I'm sorry but this is a good candidate for the thread entitled..."Dumbest questions you've ever heard" or something like that.

Can we move away from these questions asked around the monkey bars or the slide... :banghead:

posted by  BavarianWheels

supra looks better, probably has more potential, and is generally found to be 500+hp these days.

posted by  importluva

dunno about performance
but i found a red eclipse spyder
pretty schweet
although i dont know if it looks better than a supra

posted by  nitehawk_87

oh and ask Jeff God of Biskut
hes seemingly in luv with eclipses

posted by  nitehawk_87

dont worry, its cool... i didnt mean to sound like a butthead, but its fun to get people on mistakes everynow and then

posted by  mazda6man

I think that the eclipse looks alot better then the Supra. Its just personal preference, but i do not like the design of the Supra. Performance wise, it depends on how much money do you want to put into it. The 1998 Eclipse GSX runs 210hp with 4WD. The weight to power ratio is much better in the Eclipse, the supra is one heavy sob. And plus the Eclipse runs the 4G63 which is the same general engine as the evo, but without all the expensive mods and the more sophisticated suspension system. So, if you were to put a average amount of money into it (7-10k) you can get the Eclipse faster and better handling. But if you spend any more then that, you can get the Supra faster easily, it has a way bigger engine. Anyways, thats my :2cents:

posted by  aerith

most everything that has to do with a car depends on about 3 things... how much money you have, what you do with the money, and how well you do it

posted by  mazda6man

for any of u that keep track of the import world and all that DSM and JMD, etc,m kraze, then u should know the complete and true answer to this. the truth is that its alot cheaper to tune an Eclipse than a Supra, theres no doubt about it, but ask any DSM owner n put them to a lie detector test and ask them, how many times has it broken down. those cars suffer from something serious called the crankwalk and 2 other major problems if i remember right. wat is crankwalk u ask? this is when the crank wears into the thrust bearing n eventually moves the trigger plate into some sensor (cant remember its name), it breaks it, n shuts the damn car down. no reason for this event has been found yet, but can be found alot more commonly in cars with heavy pedal pressures. still, thats not the end of their problems, they have many more. for some reason, they love breaking down alot. so in the end, while at the beginning its gonna be alot cheaper to tune one of these than a Supra, in the end, the Supra is a toyota, which u know that is going to last a very long time, while the Eclipse is gonna keep breaking down n cost u a fortune. who cares about AWD and RWD? the truth is, good sticky wide tires in the Supra can make it almost as good as the AWD. theres something called limited slip differentials, which will stop the rubber burns ¶;)

posted by  Inygknok

Thanx for the insight, I prefer the RWD of the Supra myself anyway....but then the Mitsubishi isn't sold in the UK, so who am I to judge lol...Oh, and lie detectors only accept yes/no answers lol :thumbs:

Copper: "Tell me many times has your Supra broken down?"

Supra owner: "No"

Copper: "Throw him in the cells"

Sorry, couldn't resist lol :hi: :laughing:

posted by  Cliffy

supra is defenatly better :)

posted by  xX-CaR-mAsTa-Xx

UMMMMM.. OK.. HERE GOES.. LSD's don't stop the tyres spinning, they distribute the torque evenly between two drive-shafts.. Whether these be to two prop shafts or two half-shafts is irrelative because a well tuned 3.0 Twin Turbo’d Supra will dislodge any amount of road legal rubber you can put on it.. Sometimes it is better to have 2 wheel drive only because this reduces the weight and also means the car is less lightly to cook the clutch when launching it.. :2cents: :screwy: :hi: :thumbs:

posted by  R34RB30DETTV

ummmmmmmmmm no, else, why would so many RWD cars even have LSD's? the LSD also helps contribute to the distribution of the left and right tires.

posted by  Inygknok

I think the Eclipse tooks better but,I think the Supra performs better.

posted by  archangle

eclipses look better in stock form, but supras with exterior mods look wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better

posted by  Inygknok

not me, i think the supra looks a lot better....... but of course its only a judgement call (opinion)

posted by  mazda6man

well the supra is my favorite car, but i admit that in stock trim, there r a few things that dont really attract me. the supra looks too high in its stock trim, n u kinda get used to seeing it with bigger rims :P, so its probably that.

though, the way it got very simple mods (exterior) in Getaway in Stockholm 2 is by far the sexiest look i have seen so far, mainly cuz of how attractive the car looks in its simplicity. (Mr. X's Supra that is)

posted by  Inygknok

My :2cents: on the car: the supra is really heavy, but more importantly, its not produced anymore! Instead, toyota has happily distributed the amazing 2jz motor to the sh!tty IS300 and other lexus cars. I mean, wtf???

posted by  importluva

yea, its odd. i know that the Supra was discontinued cuz, like the 300zx and RX-7 and all those cars from the 90's of the same class, could not pass emissions tests and other things, so they were put to sleep for a while until their new childs were born in an improved form. i just dont get, why put the damn 2jz engine in the is300 instead of just making those same changes to the engine n putting it in the Supra so it could still be produced, like the NSX.

i guess Toyota maybe thought that the car kicked so much ass that they wanted to let other companies produce some competition cars while they worked up their new formula (hehe, just spicing this up a bit :P, its 12:20am and im seriously bored).

nah, back to being serious, maybe they wanted to discontinue the car for now in order to start focusing completely on the new Supra, and maybe in order to do so, they had to give up their prize car for a while.

posted by  Inygknok

To stop just one wheel spinning.. :banghead: Go look it up.. :banghead: I've spent 2 years studying Automotive Engineering (Auto design, construction, repair and dynamics) and no longer have the patience to deal with you... :banghead:

Well, you were correct this time.. The emmissions were why they stopped them.. The only reason the cars were produced was so the companys could compete in the JTCC races.. They producaed enough cars to qualify for entry and once the emmissions got tighter the cars were no longer worth producing and sadly we shall probably never see anything like the Skyline or the Supra again.. Even the new "Skyline" (Infiniti G35) is pretty poor and is not as good-a-car as the R34 GT-R.. :2cents:

posted by  R34RB30DETTV

Actually, thank you. I wasn't even aware an awd model existed. I guess I was wrong.

your an idiot, next time know what the hell your talking about before u make a stupid brainless response like that. :clap:

posted by  big16ggsx

wont argue ya on that one, but not cuz of the 2 years of krap, mainly cuz i know that differentials help cars remain stable on turns. they help from having one tire spewing smoke, which means that ur pretty much gonna die (being exaggerated) if u dont get a hold of the vehicle.

as for the whole damn eclipse ordeal...... for whoever was originally wanting to know..... ever heard of the Talon? its the same damn thing. look up the Eclipse GSX, its the AWD model for the Eclipses. it has been around ever since the first gen eclipse. its really sad if u know about the existance of the Talon, but not of the eclipse gsx, after all, its basically the same damn car, even the exterior looks the same (minor details change, but unnoticed to the untrained eye).

posted by  Inygknok

okay... this doesn't refer to the thread but i feel like i have to ask it :doh: in your name, silvercivicsi98, does the 98 mean "year", or just a number in your name :ohcrap: cuz the si, they made it in 99-00 and 02-present. :read:

posted by  allroundcarguy2


Looks: Supra/The looks of an Eclipse have diminished overtime from so many people owning then or ricing them out with incredibly ugly body kits. The Supra has that speeding bullet look.

Performance: Eclipse/While there is no doubt that the Supra may posess more horsepower stock than a GSX, but the GSX would beat the Supra on a 1/4th run. I could really care less about Top Speed or HP,I'm an American and if you can't win in the 1/4rth then your car aint jack. I got some info on a 99GSX(apparently the person who made this thread is'nt aware that 99 still is a model of the late 2gen) that ran a 13.200` completly bone stock(not even a CAI and on pump gas). From what was discussed in a previous forum Supras run somwhere in the 13.900-600`. Haha my GST could beat a stock Supra :laughing: .I've driven a Supra but only in a straight line so I can't really say much about handling, but they have both decent handling.

Overall: The overall aspect of these two cars is personal preference. Some people like to have Dyno queens wich in that case the Supra suits you well. Some people like to have Drag cars wich in that case they both do well but the GSX would probably be better for that application. Some people like show cars, wich both do well in that category.

My DSM has never once broken down on me Inygknok. Thats a common misconeption that DSM's always break down. The reason they do is because newbs like to push hard on them and never give the car tune-up wich could lead to..yes breaking down. Not to mention the infamous 95-96 crankwalking 4G63(The sensor you refer to is the crankshaft angle sensor(CAS).

posted by  DSMer

a bone stock gsx running 13.2? a freaking evo has atleast around 50 more hp and i believe its lighter, if not weigh the same and its mechanics are much better, and even the evo has to be pushed to its maximum limits to run that, even the STi would have to. a GST beating 13.9? i cant believe that either, i would have to see proof to believe something as farfetched as that.

just cuz a car has AWD doesnt mean its always gonna beat a RWD. if it doesnt have the gears or the proper weight, even a FWD can beat it. sometimes dsmer, u talk as if AWD's have their horsepower multiplied by the tires or something.

so im guessing a ferrari f50 will lose to the gsx just cuz the gsx is awd? or the f50 wins cuz its right on top of the axle it powers? or lets put a cheaper example, an NSX? how bout the skyline? it loses cuz its only RWD in first gear and then its AWD kicks in?

posted by  Inygknok

Meh, I care not to even prove you wrong. I posted facts, I lied about nothing. If you're not aware that a stock GS-T DSM can run under 13.9's well you should do some homework, and if you did'nt know a GSX can run a 13.2's well again you need to do some more homework. Thats all I have to say.

posted by  DSMer

Hey DSMer dont waste your time trying to prove this guy wrong... to him supras rule above all other cars... and nothing is better than a gay poopra! At least I know my car isnt the fastest around... hell I admit a get spank by DSMs at the track... but I can still take down those dyno queen supras!

posted by  SunDown13X VR4

oh wow that was so mature :clap:

kudos to u!

geez.... u guys are thicker than full length of the wall of china. how many times have i admitted that there are even faster cars out there? quite many times, hell, i wish i could get my hands on a koenigsegg. i prefer the supra over anything else on a best performance for your buck thing and reliability, just like a skyline.

i only like the supra better than a skyline cuz im not a fan of modern automobile technology (my friends can vouche for that). i like the days where cars had no cats, where there were no damn air bags, TCS systems, etc.

honestly, the only things i really do like are A/Cs, power windows, power locks...... and well ABS just to have some safety, and u just cant beat ABS.

the supra does have this technology and more, but its still good enough for me. u guys just think that if anyone else likes some other car thats not AWD u think that he/she is a complete idiot when u guys yourselves are acting like children.

"poopra"? oh yea sure, thats sure to get ya somewhere. its a known fact that dsmer is always getting into arguments cuz he still lacks alot of maturity and needs to learn when to start respecting other's opinions and when to calm the hell down instead of going into sugar rampages.

posted by  Inygknok

rx-7 would eat a supra :laughing: but a supra would eat any gs-x.

posted by  jzxTT

in handling yea. so many cars would eat a supra that its shamefull :P, otherwise, no :P, SPECIALLY on reliability (go apex seal hell!! :D)

posted by  Inygknok

Supra is an amazing machine though. RX-7 is sexier though. :hi:

posted by  jzxTT

actually, i dont like the front section of RX-7's, but the rear really is sexy. the FD3S i really like is the R1 version that has some sort of special body kit or something (correct me if im wrong but ive seen the differences and it looks just like that). same goes with the supra in stock trim, i dont like the front bumper and i think it rides too high in stock trim, but the rest i really like though, on both cars.

posted by  Inygknok

Spirit R fd. :drool:

posted by  jzxTT

Kind of like its a known fact that Supras are piss weak on the drag. Oh, but I guess you allready know that. Kind of like how you knew that DSM's ,GST and GSX's, can run under 13.9 stock either FWD or AWD?

You can go babling all you want about how good the "old days" were, and that still won't rectify your Supra. You were wrong when you said Supras can beat GTO's and you're wrong thinking that a Supra can beat a DSM Turbo.

Oh and I respect peoples opinions...Just not YOURS. I think my signature explains it all. Maybe if you stop crying, pissing and moaning about everything you'd have time to wipe the tears from your eyes long enough to find some evidence to back up your shitty opinions.... Until then you can piss into the wind.

posted by  DSMer

if anyone had been moaning, we would have dropped to your level and put 10 year old comments in our signatures, but thats not the case, is it? you are all by yourself with your 10y/o attitude posting comments that you think anyone gives a damn about, but no one does at all. and no, you dont respect anyones opinion, not just mine, and this is something that has been discussed before already.

so no need for me to repeat it for your immature mind.


never heard of the spirit r

posted by  Inygknok

No its just your constant bitching...You're not gonna do anything about it so stfu. I don't give a damn and thats the way it is. You just need to realize no one gives a rats-ass about your shitty opinions(with no fact to back them might I add) ,and If you don't like it, you can go piss into the wind. (Yeah, I voiced my opinon, so sue me)

posted by  DSMer

:clap: ... You've just called yourself a moron. Change your profile dumbass. :laughing:

posted by  jzxTT

Time to close threads where we can't control ourselves.

posted by  BavarianWheels

Your Message