I am looking at buying an eclipse and turboing it with hahn stage 2. But what year is the setup best for? I want a 97 but i read a post saying something about running steel-braided line for the fpr on a 96. Any help would be great. thanks
#9121, "RE: Best year to turbo?" In response to Reply # 0
DO NOT get ABS with your eclipse. Or you will have to re-do all the piping to make it fit the front mount. The side mount intercooler wont fit at all. Thats where the ABS is located. Unless your doing stage I and never plan on upgrading DO NOT get one with ABS!!
#9123, "RE: Best year to turbo?" In response to Reply # 2
Brad..what do you mean had??? How do you get rid of it?? Its soo much in the way, its pissing me off. I thought you couldnt take it off without losing your brakes
#9124, "RE: Best year to turbo?" In response to Reply # 0
Best year to turbo is, hands down, 95. OBD1, no heavy handed emissions requirements built in, fuel pressure regulator on the fuel rail, return line back to the tank .. it makes it all so much easier.
_____________________________________________ -Dino Yancey Hello me, it's Me Again!
For Mitsubishi Technical Manuals, INCLUDING the 97-99 electrical and service manuals, click HERE: http://www.heavenz-not-0verflowing.com/files/ No MP3 for YOU! Somehow, the Proud Owner of not-your.biz
______________________________ If a sentence found online has 35% misspellings or greater and includes at least two racially charged expletives, chances are it is a YouTube comment.
'95 Eclipse TurboGS (garage deco) '95 TSi AWD (restoring a survivor) '97 Talon ESi-T (poor impulse control) '99 Eclipse RS-T (daily beater) '13 Evo X (mostly stock) '17 Sienna (Middle Aged Dad Mobile)
#9125, "RE: Best year to turbo?" In response to Reply # 4
LAST EDITED ON 11-Nov-01 AT 00:38 AM (PST)
Yup yup 95 the best, easiest anyway. fuel mods are easier too. Haha fuel filter is a bitch to change though Plus you won't have that big mouth to show off the nice ass FMIC...
http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4292327299 Grrr it's gonna eat you up! ___________________ 95' Eclipse RS AFX Pulley | Autometer Bezel Gauge Holder | Modified A/F Ratio Gauge | B&M Super Oil Cooler | Energy Suspension Shifter Bushings | JAZ Oil Catchcan | 3" Magnaflow Muffler | 3" Car Sound Catalytic Converter | 3" Downpipe-back piping | HKS Air Filter | KYB AGX Shox | Skunk2 Coilovers | FU, RU, RL, and RRE FL Tie/Strut Bars | RS to TSi Rear Disc Mod | RS to TSi upgraded F&R Sway Bar | 97' Spyder Eclipse 5 Spoke Wheels | HKS Standard Blow off Valve | HKS TYPE 1 Turbo Timer | Star Stage 1 T3/T04E BB Turbo Kit | Starion Front Mount Intercooler | Schroth Autocontrol 3-Point Harness | and 1 HiGhLy SkIlLeD DrIvEr! | Performance b4 Lookz, a car can only be as fast as it's driver! ^_^
http://www.hadesomega.info -car specz and movies 95 Eclipse RS | 76' 280Z | 89' MR2 | 99 Neon | 91 Zephyr Who sez FF can't drift?
#9126, "RE: Best year to turbo?" In response to Reply # 5
1995 will definitely make the install easier. And I though that you could have ABS if you got a FMIC. I don't have HRC piping, but I do have FMIC and ABS...so it is possible.
#9128, "RE: Best year to turbo?" In response to Reply # 7
It is the same price either way. You just need to specifiy which version you need.
There are some small advantages to getting the later models as well. One being that there is a plastic cover right under the fuse box that you simply unscrew to make room for the IC pipes. Previous models have solid metal there.
#9129, "RE: Best year to turbo?" In response to Reply # 8
LAST EDITED ON 11-Nov-01 AT 09:03 PM (PST)
Yes, my initial knee jerk reaction would be to go with the 95's b/c of their less anal obd-1 ecu and return line fuel system. Additionally, the non modular clutches are cheaper to upgrade.
However, there are a lot of little other things that may convince you to go with a later model as well.
OBD-2's have the ability to read timing...(I'm not sure a obd-1 can read it to show you the timing over a datalogger...I've been told otherwise) The engine block is updated in terms of better HG's and bearings, and possibly other small things. This may make it difficult in upgrading your car while distinguishing 95's from 96 ups. There are also some aesthetic differences that might make you prefer a 97+. Moreover, if you purchase a 95 now, the mileage may not be pretty for a late life turbocharging effort.
So I don't know, I think you have to deal with gremlins and problems in either scenario. I say get the car you like the best (bargain, extras, color, mileage, manual/auto tranny...etc.), and turbocharge the hell out of it!
#9131, "RE: Best year to turbo?" In response to Reply # 10
all 2g's have the crappy headgasket. None come with the MLS from the factory, it is offered as a replacement part only..
All the bearings are the same quality-wise, 95's are just notched differently. The 95 ECU also may give you the option of using an ODB1 datalogger, as it has an OBD1 plug as well as an OBD2 plug (so you may be able to read knock sums as well as timing advance)
The non-anal ECU is a godsend. It reacts extremely well in odd situations and learns quickly. It has a habit of compensating for a CEL-causing problem, learning what it did, and exstingushing the CEL (like funky idle problems - it'll fix them itself over time)
Have any of the 96 and up guys ever considered a 95 ECU? Hmm..
_____________________________________________ -Dino Yancey Hello me, it's Me Again!
For Mitsubishi Technical Manuals, INCLUDING the 97-99 electrical and service manuals, click HERE: http://www.heavenz-not-0verflowing.com/files/ No MP3 for YOU! Somehow, the Proud Owner of not-your.biz
______________________________ If a sentence found online has 35% misspellings or greater and includes at least two racially charged expletives, chances are it is a YouTube comment.
'95 Eclipse TurboGS (garage deco) '95 TSi AWD (restoring a survivor) '97 Talon ESi-T (poor impulse control) '99 Eclipse RS-T (daily beater) '13 Evo X (mostly stock) '17 Sienna (Middle Aged Dad Mobile)
#9132, "RE: Best year to turbo?" In response to Reply # 11
That might be a neat proposition to see if a 95 ecu would run a 98 car. I'd try it for fun. The emissions stuff alone would be worth the change.
The 98 obd-2's have an obd-1 plug as well. Why? who knows!?!? (heheh)
I was under the impression that although none of us have the latest MLS HG, there have been like 4 updated versions between 95 and late 97. With finally, the MLS HG being the updated version in 99, but never utilized. Anyhow, although all of the HG versions aree not up to task compared to the MLS version, 95's seem (at least from my observation of both neons and 2gnt's) to be far more likely to be stricken with a HG leak.
But that's all in the percentages. Even people who've had the MLS HG installed have been stricken with leaks when improperly installed.
I'm glad the timing is available in obd-1. Someone told me otherwise in a "debate" and since Ididn't know about 0bd-1's, I'm glad to stand corrected.
Plus you won't have that big mouth to show off the nice ass FMIC...
