C/D's Eclipse Review

[TBR]

Highs: Hips you'll want to grab with both hands, meaty V-6 power, some Evo handling behavior

Lows: Thirsty, needs a telescoping steering wheel, thumping stereo option lacks the latest add-ons

The Verdict: Almost two tons of fun

Choice Quote: "You may prefer Little Eclipse, but the public has voted with its wallet for Big Eclipse, so another one is what we get, and this one is pretty good"

Acceleration:
0-60: 6.1
0-100: 14.5
1/4 mile: 14.5 @ 100

Braking:
70-0: 182 ft

Handling:
Roadholding: .81 g

Estimated price as tested: $28000 (fully loaded)
Estimated base price: $25000 (GT V-6)

So, what do you guys think? The review pretty much confirmed the impression of the Eclipse I had after reading R&T, it may not be as fast as Mustang and it may not handle as well as 350z, but it is cheaper than both and is a better daily driver than both. All in all, a good effort by Mitsubishi, I just wish AWD was an option.  

[mazda6er]

I really like the looks of the new Eclipse, I'm not crazy about the interior though, but maybe it's better in person. The breaking distance seems a tad long doesn't it?

[ifcar]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

[mazda6er]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

I hope it doesn't handle better than a 350Z.   <_<  Because what does that say about the Z?  Anyway, TBR said it does NOT handle as well as a 350Z, and I'd assume he's correct.

[TBR]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

I am sure it handles better and it certainly looks better and more exciting.  

[ifcar]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

I am sure it handles better and it certainly looks better and more exciting.

I doubt it's any more significant than the difference between the Accord sedan and the Galant: the Galant is more agile, but a Mazda6 is far better than either.

I see the Eclipse as a pleasant enough vehicle, but not the sort of vehicle that someone looking for something sporty would want to put their $28,000.

[mazda6er]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

I am sure it handles better and it certainly looks better and more exciting.

I doubt it's any more significant than the difference between the Accord sedan and the Galant: the Galant is more agile, but a Mazda6 is far better than either.

I see the Eclipse as a pleasant enough vehicle, but not the sort of vehicle that someone looking for something sporty would want to put their $28,000.

Not to look a gift horse in the mouth (strange sayings  <_< ), but I wouldn't say that a Mazda6 is far better than either. I've driven an Accord and it felt pretty responsive.

[TBR]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

I am sure it handles better and it certainly looks better and more exciting.

I doubt it's any more significant than the difference between the Accord sedan and the Galant: the Galant is more agile, but a Mazda6 is far better than either.

I see the Eclipse as a pleasant enough vehicle, but not the sort of vehicle that someone looking for something sporty would want to put their $28,000.

I disagree with you on that one, I can't imagine someone looking for a sporty car buying an Accord but the Eclipse actually looks sporty and has good power to back-up those looks.  

[ifcar]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

I am sure it handles better and it certainly looks better and more exciting.

I doubt it's any more significant than the difference between the Accord sedan and the Galant: the Galant is more agile, but a Mazda6 is far better than either.

I see the Eclipse as a pleasant enough vehicle, but not the sort of vehicle that someone looking for something sporty would want to put their $28,000.

I disagree with you on that one, I can't imagine someone looking for a sporty car buying an Accord but the Eclipse actually looks sporty and has good power to back-up those looks.

No, but by the time you add on the options, a Mustang GT or RX-8 would be much more tempting for $28,000. It's definitely not what I would buy, a sports car just has to have something extra. Outhandling the Galant and Accord doesn't count.

[TBR]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

I am sure it handles better and it certainly looks better and more exciting.

I doubt it's any more significant than the difference between the Accord sedan and the Galant: the Galant is more agile, but a Mazda6 is far better than either.

I see the Eclipse as a pleasant enough vehicle, but not the sort of vehicle that someone looking for something sporty would want to put their $28,000.

I disagree with you on that one, I can't imagine someone looking for a sporty car buying an Accord but the Eclipse actually looks sporty and has good power to back-up those looks.

No, but by the time you add on the options, a Mustang GT or RX-8 would be much more tempting for $28,000. It's definitely not what I would buy, a sports car just has to have something extra. Outhandling the Galant and Accord doesn't count.

Why not? The Accord and Solara are supposedly its competitors. What reason would you have for buying an Accord or Solara over a RX-8 or Mustang? None except for their increased comfort and capability in snow, same reasons you would have for buying an Eclipse over those same cars, except it is actually exciting.  

[Raza]

I'd choose a Mustang, 350Z, RX8, and/or MR-2 Spyder over this.  Hell, I'd take a 1987 944 Turbo over this.  And save 15 thousand dollars.

[TBR]

I'd choose a Mustang, 350Z, RX8, and/or MR-2 Spyder over this.  Hell, I'd take a 1987 944 Turbo over this.  And save 15 thousand dollars.

So would I, I am just saying it is an exciting alternative to the Solara and Accord Coupe.  

[Raza]

I'd choose a Mustang, 350Z, RX8, and/or MR-2 Spyder over this.  Hell, I'd take a 1987 944 Turbo over this.  And save 15 thousand dollars.

So would I, I am just saying it is an exciting alternative to the Solara and Accord Coupe.

To a Solara, yes, but hell, the Accord at least looks better.  The Eclipse is so ugly a drunk mother couldn't love it.

[TBR]

I'd choose a Mustang, 350Z, RX8, and/or MR-2 Spyder over this.  Hell, I'd take a 1987 944 Turbo over this.  And save 15 thousand dollars.

So would I, I am just saying it is an exciting alternative to the Solara and Accord Coupe.

To a Solara, yes, but hell, the Accord at least looks better.  The Eclipse is so ugly a drunk mother couldn't love it.

I personally think it looks pretty good and so do quite a few people, I guess it is one of those love it or hate it designs.  

[Raza]

I'd choose a Mustang, 350Z, RX8, and/or MR-2 Spyder over this.  Hell, I'd take a 1987 944 Turbo over this.  And save 15 thousand dollars.

So would I, I am just saying it is an exciting alternative to the Solara and Accord Coupe.

To a Solara, yes, but hell, the Accord at least looks better.  The Eclipse is so ugly a drunk mother couldn't love it.

I personally think it looks pretty good and so do quite a few people, I guess it is one of those love it or hate it designs.

If I had the chance, I'd find them all and push them over the side of a boat into the Marianas Trench.

[TBR]

I'd choose a Mustang, 350Z, RX8, and/or MR-2 Spyder over this.  Hell, I'd take a 1987 944 Turbo over this.  And save 15 thousand dollars.

So would I, I am just saying it is an exciting alternative to the Solara and Accord Coupe.

To a Solara, yes, but hell, the Accord at least looks better.  The Eclipse is so ugly a drunk mother couldn't love it.

I personally think it looks pretty good and so do quite a few people, I guess it is one of those love it or hate it designs.

If I had the chance, I'd find them all and push them over the side of a boat into the Marianas Trench.

Lol, I think the Accord is decent looking, just bland, and as you already know I like the Eclipse, but I would certainly join you in anything that involves the destruction of a Solara. That is one ugly car. I just really don't know what Toyota was thinking, but, then again, I rarely do.  

[Raza]

I'd choose a Mustang, 350Z, RX8, and/or MR-2 Spyder over this.  Hell, I'd take a 1987 944 Turbo over this.  And save 15 thousand dollars.

So would I, I am just saying it is an exciting alternative to the Solara and Accord Coupe.

To a Solara, yes, but hell, the Accord at least looks better.  The Eclipse is so ugly a drunk mother couldn't love it.

I personally think it looks pretty good and so do quite a few people, I guess it is one of those love it or hate it designs.

If I had the chance, I'd find them all and push them over the side of a boat into the Marianas Trench.

Lol, I think the Accord is decent looking, just bland, and as you already know I like the Eclipse, but I would certainly join you in anything that involves the destruction of a Solara. That is one ugly car. I just really don't know what Toyota was thinking, but, then again, I rarely do.

Ha!  As you know, I love Toyotas.  They can do no wrong.

[TBR]

I'd choose a Mustang, 350Z, RX8, and/or MR-2 Spyder over this.  Hell, I'd take a 1987 944 Turbo over this.  And save 15 thousand dollars.

So would I, I am just saying it is an exciting alternative to the Solara and Accord Coupe.

To a Solara, yes, but hell, the Accord at least looks better.  The Eclipse is so ugly a drunk mother couldn't love it.

I personally think it looks pretty good and so do quite a few people, I guess it is one of those love it or hate it designs.

If I had the chance, I'd find them all and push them over the side of a boat into the Marianas Trench.

Lol, I think the Accord is decent looking, just bland, and as you already know I like the Eclipse, but I would certainly join you in anything that involves the destruction of a Solara. That is one ugly car. I just really don't know what Toyota was thinking, but, then again, I rarely do.

Ha!  As you know, I love Toyotas.  They can do no wrong.

Of course, that's a given. My favorite car of all time is the Avalon Touring or perhaps the Sienna XLE Limited, what a predicament, so many bland cars and so little time!

[giant_mtb]

What do they mean when they say it's "thirsty"...?  :blink:  

[TBR]

What do they mean when they say it's "thirsty"...?  :blink:

Bad gas mileage, they averaged 15 mpg compared to the rating of 18/27.

[giant_mtb]

What do they mean when they say it's "thirsty"...?  :blink:

Bad gas mileage, they averaged 15 mpg compared to the rating of 18/27.

Oh...15 MPG isn't so good for that car... <_<  

[TBR]

What do they mean when they say it's "thirsty"...?  :blink:

Bad gas mileage, they averaged 15 mpg compared to the rating of 18/27.

Oh...15 MPG isn't so good for that car... <_<

No not really, but they do tend to flog cars pretty hard, and bigger displacement engines typically suck more fuel under those conditions than smaller engines do, even if they have the same ratings. I suspect that in real life it would average 23 mpg or so.  

[giant_mtb]

What do they mean when they say it's "thirsty"...?  :blink:

Bad gas mileage, they averaged 15 mpg compared to the rating of 18/27.

Oh...15 MPG isn't so good for that car... <_<

No not really, but they do tend to flog cars pretty hard, and bigger displacement engines typically suck more fuel under those conditions than smaller engines do, even if they have the same ratings. I suspect that in real life it would average 23 mpg or so.

Yeah...I guess with their enthusiast lead foots 15 isn't so bad...but you're right...20+ is typical (most likely) for the average driver.

[280Z Turbo]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

I hope it doesn't handle better than a 350Z.   <_<  Because what does that say about the Z?  Anyway, TBR said it does NOT handle as well as a 350Z, and I'd assume he's correct.

It might. The 350Z didn't fare too well when compared to the Z4, Boxster S, and TT. It also wasn't too good in R&T's sports car test a couple issues back.

From what I understand, it's easy to drive, but isn't particularly fast.

What do you expect? It's a sports car that shares a platform with a luxury SUV.
----------

I think the Eclipse looks OK. A little cartoony, but I guess the kids will like that.

The interior certainly looks nice.

[GMPenguin]

The Mustang is definitely the better buy, but I must say that from the sounds of this, it's quite a lot better than I had expected.

[TBR]

The Mustang is definitely the better buy, but I must say that from the sounds of this, it's quite a lot better than I had expected.

Yep, that's pretty much my opinion. I figured it would be a piece of crap and in reality it turned out to be a pretty decent sports coupe.  

[giant_mtb]

The Mustang is definitely the better buy, but I must say that from the sounds of this, it's quite a lot better than I had expected.

Yep, that's pretty much my opinion. I figured it would be a piece of crap and in reality it turned out to be a pretty decent sports coupe.

I agree as well.  

[ifcar]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

I am sure it handles better and it certainly looks better and more exciting.

I doubt it's any more significant than the difference between the Accord sedan and the Galant: the Galant is more agile, but a Mazda6 is far better than either.

I see the Eclipse as a pleasant enough vehicle, but not the sort of vehicle that someone looking for something sporty would want to put their $28,000.

I disagree with you on that one, I can't imagine someone looking for a sporty car buying an Accord but the Eclipse actually looks sporty and has good power to back-up those looks.

No, but by the time you add on the options, a Mustang GT or RX-8 would be much more tempting for $28,000. It's definitely not what I would buy, a sports car just has to have something extra. Outhandling the Galant and Accord doesn't count.

Why not? The Accord and Solara are supposedly its competitors. What reason would you have for buying an Accord or Solara over a RX-8 or Mustang? None except for their increased comfort and capability in snow, same reasons you would have for buying an Eclipse over those same cars, except it is actually exciting.

The Accord and Solara are less expensive and have more interior space, and the Accord 6-speed is competitive with the Eclipse in terms of performance. The Mustang and RX8 are sportier, with better acceleration and handling. Where does the Eclipse stand out?

[TBR]

Cheaper than the Mustang? Only than the V8 GT. Handles better than the 350Z? Sure, but it doesn't compete with that two-seat RWD coupe.

What does the Eclipse compete with most directly? Accord coupe, IMO. Both are coupes with powerful V6s that are largely based on but not identical to FWD family sedans. And what does the Eclipse do better than the Accord? Shave a few tenths off the 0-60, but not much else.

I am sure it handles better and it certainly looks better and more exciting.

I doubt it's any more significant than the difference between the Accord sedan and the Galant: the Galant is more agile, but a Mazda6 is far better than either.

I see the Eclipse as a pleasant enough vehicle, but not the sort of vehicle that someone looking for something sporty would want to put their $28,000.

I disagree with you on that one, I can't imagine someone looking for a sporty car buying an Accord but the Eclipse actually looks sporty and has good power to back-up those looks.

No, but by the time you add on the options, a Mustang GT or RX-8 would be much more tempting for $28,000. It's definitely not what I would buy, a sports car just has to have something extra. Outhandling the Galant and Accord doesn't count.

Why not? The Accord and Solara are supposedly its competitors. What reason would you have for buying an Accord or Solara over a RX-8 or Mustang? None except for their increased comfort and capability in snow, same reasons you would have for buying an Eclipse over those same cars, except it is actually exciting.

The Accord and Solara are less expensive and have more interior space, and the Accord 6-speed is competitive with the Eclipse in terms of performance. The Mustang and RX8 are sportier, with better acceleration and handling. Where does the Eclipse stand out?

I guess I am going to have to look up pricing info for the 3rd time today. I believe both the Solara and Accord are a bit more expensive, but let me check.  

[TBR]

You are sort of right and I am sort of right. An Accord EX-V6 6MT is a notch over $28k(accidentally closed the window before I got the exact number)  while a Solara SLE V6 is $26,840 compared to $27,239 for a loaded Eclipse.