2nd gen Eclipse GSX vs. 6th gen Celica GT-Four, pros an cons of each |
2nd gen Eclipse GSX vs. 6th gen Celica GT-Four, pros an cons of each |
Nov 14, 2006 - 9:56 PM |
|
Enthusiast Joined Oct 2, '06 From Boston Currently Offline Reputation: 0 (0%) |
Well I want a GSX cuz I'm sucka for AWD Turbo coupes but I've always like the 6th gen celica as well but from a performance point of view it seemed like the the GSX was the obvious choice until I found out about the GT-Four that never made it to the states. So which do you think is better and why? There's a GSX running 6.97 in the quarter mile so what do you guys think?
|
Nov 15, 2006 - 1:25 PM |
|
Enthusiast Joined Aug 31, '02 From Philadelphia, PA Currently Offline Reputation: 8 (100%) |
QUOTE(celica3sgte @ Nov 15, 2006 - 12:32 PM) [snapback]502584[/snapback] Not to defend DSM's but crankwalk was fixed after 97'. Aside from that my friends haven't had any problems. One has 450whp the other has 265whp. there is really no proof that they fixed it in 97. thats only 2yrs after the 1st 2g's came out, and at that point, most people didnt know about that problem. only thing thats known for sure is that its most common on the awd version . gs-t's dont seem to get it as often, and automantics almost never get it. they are very nice looking cars, with an amazing aftermarket support and lots of potential. problem is, the build quality is very poor. the car will turn you into a full time mechanic, trying to fix little issues that pop up. if your the type of guy that normally goes to local shop, then you wont be able to keep up with the repair bills for any dsm. " DSM's. turning average people into mechanics since 1989 " This post has been edited by lagos: Nov 15, 2006 - 1:26 PM -------------------- 15PSI - 30MPG - Megasquirt Tuned
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: November 25th, 2024 - 8:23 AM |