#153, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 0
I think you have a good chance of winning against a GT. They don't have a lot of torque which we do. So you'll probably take it off the line and take it in topend. Then again we're pretty heavy, if you've got any performance mods like pulley of intake/exhuast you'll be able to take a stock one or even a slightly modded one.
My friend HAD a GTS and that thing was pretty quick I don't think you'll be able to cream one of those, even I have a hard time catching up to them on the freeway.
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?
#154, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 0
I raced one before. The guy I raced had a black 2000 Celica GT manual tranny with all the nice features, but it was totally stock. The only thing I have right now is a catback exhaust. By the way, the GT has a 1.8L engine with 140hp and it has 125 ft/lb of torque. Basically we were close from the beginning (i had a bad launch plus i have a slightly slipping clutch), we were basically neck and neck into 2nd, but as soon as I hit about 5500rpm in 2nd i basically pulled away from him. I didnt win by much (it wasnt a long race) maybe about 1 1/2 car lengths. With my 2.5" piping I was probably even with him in torque, maybe even a bit less, thats why we were probably even in the beginning, but in the end I won pretty easily.
-Celica- HP: 140 @ 6400rpm Torque: 125 @ 4200rpm
-Eclipse- HP: 140 @ 6000rpm Torque: 130 @ 4800rpm
IMHO, basically we Eclipse owners have a typical advantage. And as HadesOmega said correctly, we do have higher torque (but not much more), and basically the same HP although we hit it at a lower RPM. Plus if you have any mods any eclipse should easily beat a GT, in acceleration and top speed. And the GT-S isnt that much better, it has 180HP, but only 130 ft/lb of torque... same accel but more top end... an eclipse with a few simple mods should be able to at least match a GTS. Theyre nice looking cars, but they dont really have that massive performance that you would expect.
If anyone thinks im wrong, please let me know
NeoVB 1997 Eclipse GS
NeoVB 2005 Subaru Impreza 2.5RS 1997 Mitsubishi Eclipse GS TURBO 1995 Mitsubishi Galant ES DOHC TURBO 1991 Eagle Talon TSI AWD
#155, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 2
so basically its all on the driver. i think ima go celica hunting which will take awhile because theres hardly any and i never encountered a challenge from one
#156, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 3
Hehe good luck man - although you dont need it or anything. Yeah, there arent that many around, and when you see one its usually some hot chick who wont race for her life
Anyways, youre car looks like its got a hell of a lot of mods. What do you have in there under the hood and on the inside and on the outside? Post up those mods for me if you can, thanks..
NeoVB 1997 Eclipse GS
NeoVB 2005 Subaru Impreza 2.5RS 1997 Mitsubishi Eclipse GS TURBO 1995 Mitsubishi Galant ES DOHC TURBO 1991 Eagle Talon TSI AWD
#157, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 4
Oh by the way, I checked out youre site and Im taking a wild guess and saying that the white eclipse was yours before you changed it . How did you pull off the GS spoiler without having holes in your rear quarterpanels? I wanted to put on a different spoiler but I dont want to have holes in my car
NeoVB 1997 Eclipse GS
NeoVB 2005 Subaru Impreza 2.5RS 1997 Mitsubishi Eclipse GS TURBO 1995 Mitsubishi Galant ES DOHC TURBO 1991 Eagle Talon TSI AWD
#159, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 6
Well yeah the GTS are nice cars, but I think theyre overrated. AND its almost 22500$ for a new one... I dont get why they make cars like that, nice HP but shitty torque - just like the typeR integras. But as for the normal GT's, our cars can kick thier ass
NeoVB 1997 Eclipse GS
NeoVB 2005 Subaru Impreza 2.5RS 1997 Mitsubishi Eclipse GS TURBO 1995 Mitsubishi Galant ES DOHC TURBO 1991 Eagle Talon TSI AWD
#161, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 8
Those CARZ your talking about are high rev cars. In Japan turbocharging is the thing and high revving NA cars. With high RPM horsepower you can race the car at higher rpms and just cruise at lower rpms. Just different style of racing.
I like our engine though good torque and horsies, and as HP goesup torque pretty goes up progressively as well.
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?
#162, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 9
do you mean you shaved the body lines in the roof. did you do that your self? did you use fiberglass? my friend is shaving the bodyline all the wya around is s-10
http://home.bendcable.com/optimuspeterson <<<<HRC Stage 2 and Star Instructions 95 Eclipse - SOLD | 93 BMW 318is - SOLD | 2000 S-10 Extreme on 20's - SOLD 93 Toyota/shaved/bagged/body dropped - SOLD | 97 GSX - SOLD 2006 Scion tC
#163, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 10
The new celicas are very light, lighter than us. We'd need a few bolt ons to stay even with the GT models even though their engine isn't terribly different from ours, the GT-S are tough to catch.
But, I've heard that Toyota is having some trouble with the GT-S engines, when they get up to their 8K rpm redline, the valves sometimes just drop into the cylinders. That would majorly suck.
#164, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 11
<<GTS's run a 14.9. I don't think any 2GNT can do that. But if its auto or a shitty driver a 2GNT with mods might hang with it.>>
I know that the GTS's are supposed to run 14.9's...but those cars are tested with AWESOME drivers on AWESOME days at the tracks...I think a normal everyday driver can make a new GTS pull a 15.X. My friend has a '99 Civic Si (which is supposed to run a 15.9 stock) and he has intake, headers, exhaust, wires, plugs...and he barely runs a 16.1 (his reaction time is like a .6X something too...according to his time slips). So I think a good 2GNT driver with your basic mods can hang with your everday joe schmo GTS driver (based on my race with a newer GRS one time..he didn't beat me by much at all...maybe a car length to a car and a half...and I have a stock ESi). Hope that helps....that GT is toast dude...hehehe!!! Good luck and happy hunting!
~Darby Ellis 2004 Mazda 6 Sedan w/auto-dimming mirror w/homelink and compass, Sportkit w/spoiler, Bose system upgrades
Formerly:
*'96 Eagle Talon ESi-T (TOTALED) = Mods: HRC Stage 2 turbokit / Pilot Motorsports Short Throw / Tokico Illuminas (5 way externally adjustable) / Eibach Pro-Kit
#166, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 13
GTS is over rated. I have 2 friends that both have them. One has a 2000 GTS. It is fast as hell top end. Both are auto. I can pull him till about 90 and then, he smoothly hits about 140. The other is a 2001 GTS with the TRD factory kit. He has an AEM cai and a TRD $600 catback that is basically a polished stock GTS exhaust with a chrome tip. He topped it out at 120. So, I guess it depends on the years. Both guys are auto.
#167, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 12
>I know that the GTS's are supposed to run 14.9's...but those >cars are tested with AWESOME drivers on AWESOME days at the >tracks...
True, they are just as hard to launch as the VTEC hondas since they don't have much bottom end. It doesn't mean it can't be done, but it's not as easy as most cars.
My friend has a '99 Civic Si (which is >supposed to run a 15.9 stock) and he has intake, headers, >exhaust, wires, plugs...and he barely runs a 16.1 (his >reaction time is like a .6X something too...according to his >time slips).
Yea, I've seen that at the drag strip too. I have seen lightly modded Si civics (intake, loud exhaust) run 16.1's while I was hitting 15's with the same mods. And it isn't the reaction time you should be looking at, it's his 60' time. If that is 2.4 sec or slower, then he can't launch.
So I think a good 2GNT driver with your basic >mods can hang with your everday joe schmo GTS driver
As long as it's a short race from a dead stop. That's our advantage.
#168, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 15
i've raced my friends bone stock gts as i am now and another one with and i've beaten both with ease. my friend's is a 6 spd. the key to drivin them is to skip a gear or too, they're geared close and have high redlines. if you shift at red line you only get knocked down to like 6500 and the vvtli kicks in at 5, skip a gear and drop it to 5k rpms and then you can run the 14.9's. my friend runs through every gear and i smoke his ass. he raced my other friend with a bone stock rs and the gts just barely edges out the stock rs (5spd)
#169, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 16
No offense but how can you guys say that the Celica GTS has no torque?? We have two cars, my 99 GS manual and my G/Fs Celica GTS 6 speed. Ive raced them both ways and the Celica beats my GS everytime we race. I have tried all the different ways to launch, shift, lean, yell, hold my face, none of it works. There is one conclusion to all this rambling about the two cars...... A lighter car with 40 more horsepower is going stomp stock eclipses. Period, end of story. Intakes and exhaust add maybe ten HP, still thats 30 more ponies. Now I am a huge DSM fan, hell ive owned 4 of them in my short lifetime. But its simple physics.... and if anyone wants to test this then drop me a line. I aint mad at ya... nothing but love for ya
#170, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 17
Yeah, I dont think your average modded 2GNT would outrun an expertly driven GTS. As far as torque and Celicas, here's my 2 cents. Its not that they lack peak torque. Its where in the powerband the torque peaks at. If I'm not mistakened, its at something like 7200rpm I believe. Ours is 4k. 4k and below we are producing much more torque, which makes our cars easier to launch, and quicker off the line. Unless of course youre a professional drag racer who has alot of seat time in high revving small displacement engines with peaky power bands.
91 awd: 60-1, 880's, E-Prom, etc. 93 awd: JDM 6 bolt, K&N, full exhaust, Wally 255, otherwise stock.
R.I.P. the original "Factory Freak" 15.5's with short ram and catback only 1996 RS 5-speed
#171, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 18
I know this girl at work who was looking into buying a 2k Celica GT, she took it for a test drive and bitched that is was way too slow for her, especially on the freeway, well she ended up buying a 2000 Mitsubishi Mirage and she seems to be satisfied with it.
#172, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 19
I raced one recently but that same night is when all this shit happened w/ my car so I need to get my bitch tuned w/ my AFC so I dont make a fool outta myself again. I still beat it of course but barely. He is spreading shit around my old HS that he beat me and my car is slow but everytime I see him I cant race him cause I STILL cant get above 4000RPM(be 2 weeks a least). I dont I can beat a Geo Prism shifting at 4000 so I guess Ill have to be patient before car is fixed, then spank is sorry ass. I need to take some anger out on some Civics or something fellas. -Dave
2009 Corolla S - waiting until 2012 for my next toy! *SOLD* 1992 3000GT VR4 - pearl white and 45,6xx miles! *SOLD* 2007 Subaru Legacy GT sedan *SOLD* 95 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4 - BPU *SOLD* 97 Eclipse GS Star Stage 2
#173, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 20
Jake, I think you've got it right, they are hard to launch due to the torque being so high in the power band, but if you know what you're doing, they will fly.
But, the average driver out there probably won't launch it very well. The best bet is race in the 1/8th mile, that'd be the best chance of a win.
Also, I found out the new 2002 GT-S celicas have the rev limiter lowered from about 8300 to 7700 rpms because of the valve problems
#175, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 22
Hey sorry bout that earlier post... it just makes me angry when people talk about stuff that they have no idea about. And I suppose it is different for me because I do drive the celica quite often. But after reading all this I went out and did a little experimenting. First I tried launching both cars and it is hella different. When you take off in the GS you can just feel the torque, and you can feel it in the gas pedal too. Now the GT-S launched fairly well too, but you have to get the RPM's way up there to realy get it going. And first gear is basically just to get the car rolling, it redlines REAL quick. So in my expert analysis id have to say the eclipse would probably take it off the line, but after the Celica gets high into 2nd gear, its all over. Im gonna have to get someone and race the Celica again..... I will post that when it happens
#177, "RE: 2gnt VS. CELICAS GT 2000????" In response to Reply # 0
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!
I'm sorry, but if you can't beat a new celica n/a(no matter how many mods they have), i feel sorry for you!
Toyota forgot to put anything good under the hood of that car. it may look good, but my mom's 92 ford escort station wagon can keep up with a gt!! LMAO
No worries, race the car and find out for yourself!!
