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.
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?
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.
QuoteCheaper 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.
QuoteCheaper 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.
QuoteQuoteCheaper 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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteCheaper 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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteCheaper 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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteCheaper 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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteCheaper 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.
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.
QuoteI'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.
QuoteQuoteI'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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteI'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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'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! ;)
What do they mean when they say it's "thirsty"...? :blink:
QuoteWhat do they mean when they say it's "thirsty"...? :blink:
Bad gas mileage, they averaged 15 mpg compared to the rating of 18/27.
QuoteQuoteWhat 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... <_<
QuoteQuoteQuoteWhat 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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWhat 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.
QuoteQuoteCheaper 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.
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.
QuoteThe 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.
QuoteQuoteThe 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.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteCheaper 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?
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteCheaper 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.
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.
QuoteYou 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.
The only Accord coupe over $28K is with the nav, and the Accord (and Solara) are both likely to be going farther under sticker than the just-released Eclipse.
It doesn't take any longer to get the TMV than sticker, why do you keep using the useless figure?
I don't think its a bad car. I would certainly like to drive one. I agree its not going to steal many Mustang intenders but that doesn't mean its a bad car.
If the reviewers on right, I could see myself choosing it over an Accord or Solara. As for it not having stand out performance...I think the whole points of cars like Coupe is not performance they are about style, which this car has in abundance.
A 330ci doesn't outperform (or really do anything different than) a 330i...but BMW sells plenty of them.
QuoteQuoteYou 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.
The only Accord coupe over $28K is with the nav, and the Accord (and Solara) are both likely to be going farther under sticker than the just-released Eclipse.
It doesn't take any longer to get the TMV than sticker, why do you keep using the useless figure?
Useless? Hardly, cardirect tells you whether or not a car is overpriced, but only in conjunction with msrp. Think about this stuff before you type, what people pay doesn't determine whether or not a car is overpriced, it is the difference between that and the msrp. MSRP is a better way of comparing cars because brand image and other emotional factors aren't included. Also, you are wrong, you can get an Accord over 28k without nav, I believe I selected an alarm system and CD changer as dealer installed accessories since they are factory installed options on the other two.
Edit- let me put this a better way, msrp determines if a car is overpriced while tmv determines if a car is overvalued.
QuoteQuoteQuoteYou 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.
The only Accord coupe over $28K is with the nav, and the Accord (and Solara) are both likely to be going farther under sticker than the just-released Eclipse.
It doesn't take any longer to get the TMV than sticker, why do you keep using the useless figure?
Useless? Hardly, cardirect tells you whether or not a car is overpriced, but only in conjunction with msrp. Think about this stuff before you type, what people pay doesn't determine whether or not a car is overpriced, it is the difference between that and the msrp. MSRP is a better way of comparing cars because brand image and other emotional factors aren't included. Also, you are wrong, you can get an Accord over 28k without nav, I believe I selected an alarm system and CD changer as dealer installed accessories since they are factory installed options on the other two.
Edit- let me put this a better way, msrp determines if a car is overpriced while tmv determines if a car is overvalued.
I use "price" to determine what it is actually likely to sell for. Very few cars are likely to sell for MSRP, especially on rebated models.
And I wasn't counting dealer-installed accessories, but with those I suppose the Accord can push past the mark.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteYou 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.
The only Accord coupe over $28K is with the nav, and the Accord (and Solara) are both likely to be going farther under sticker than the just-released Eclipse.
It doesn't take any longer to get the TMV than sticker, why do you keep using the useless figure?
Useless? Hardly, cardirect tells you whether or not a car is overpriced, but only in conjunction with msrp. Think about this stuff before you type, what people pay doesn't determine whether or not a car is overpriced, it is the difference between that and the msrp. MSRP is a better way of comparing cars because brand image and other emotional factors aren't included. Also, you are wrong, you can get an Accord over 28k without nav, I believe I selected an alarm system and CD changer as dealer installed accessories since they are factory installed options on the other two.
Edit- let me put this a better way, msrp determines if a car is overpriced while tmv determines if a car is overvalued.
I use "price" to determine what it is actually likely to sell for. Very few cars are likely to sell for MSRP, especially on rebated models.
And I wasn't counting dealer-installed accessories, but with those I suppose the Accord can push past the mark.
Yes, they can, as my numbers prove. And, the Eclipse isn't overpriced if people are willing to pay msrp, but it might be overvalued when compared to its competitors.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteYou 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.
The only Accord coupe over $28K is with the nav, and the Accord (and Solara) are both likely to be going farther under sticker than the just-released Eclipse.
It doesn't take any longer to get the TMV than sticker, why do you keep using the useless figure?
Useless? Hardly, cardirect tells you whether or not a car is overpriced, but only in conjunction with msrp. Think about this stuff before you type, what people pay doesn't determine whether or not a car is overpriced, it is the difference between that and the msrp. MSRP is a better way of comparing cars because brand image and other emotional factors aren't included. Also, you are wrong, you can get an Accord over 28k without nav, I believe I selected an alarm system and CD changer as dealer installed accessories since they are factory installed options on the other two.
Edit- let me put this a better way, msrp determines if a car is overpriced while tmv determines if a car is overvalued.
I use "price" to determine what it is actually likely to sell for. Very few cars are likely to sell for MSRP, especially on rebated models.
And I wasn't counting dealer-installed accessories, but with those I suppose the Accord can push past the mark.
Yes, they can, as my numbers prove. And, the Eclipse isn't overpriced if people are willing to pay msrp, but it might be overvalued when compared to its competitors.
Use whatever terms you like to convey the point that the Eclipse costs more than its competitors.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteYou 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.
The only Accord coupe over $28K is with the nav, and the Accord (and Solara) are both likely to be going farther under sticker than the just-released Eclipse.
It doesn't take any longer to get the TMV than sticker, why do you keep using the useless figure?
Useless? Hardly, cardirect tells you whether or not a car is overpriced, but only in conjunction with msrp. Think about this stuff before you type, what people pay doesn't determine whether or not a car is overpriced, it is the difference between that and the msrp. MSRP is a better way of comparing cars because brand image and other emotional factors aren't included. Also, you are wrong, you can get an Accord over 28k without nav, I believe I selected an alarm system and CD changer as dealer installed accessories since they are factory installed options on the other two.
Edit- let me put this a better way, msrp determines if a car is overpriced while tmv determines if a car is overvalued.
I use "price" to determine what it is actually likely to sell for. Very few cars are likely to sell for MSRP, especially on rebated models.
And I wasn't counting dealer-installed accessories, but with those I suppose the Accord can push past the mark.
Yes, they can, as my numbers prove. And, the Eclipse isn't overpriced if people are willing to pay msrp, but it might be overvalued when compared to its competitors.
Use whatever terms you like to convey the point that the Eclipse costs more than its competitors.
It isn't overvalued by any stretch of the imagination, it is smack dab between its main competitors despite having more features than both.
Only using sticker pricing.
QuoteOnly using sticker pricing.
If you want to look up the cardirect prices you can, but I have a hard time believing the Eclipse is selling that close to msrp, it is a Mitsubishi after all.
QuoteQuoteOnly using sticker pricing.
If you want to look up the cardirect prices you can, but I have a hard time believing the Eclipse is selling that close to msrp, it is a Mitsubishi after all.
An all-new sporty vehicle that came out within the last month is typically going to be at or above sticker. By the TMV, the Eclipse is selling at $200 under sticker, the Accord is selling at $2,000 under sticker, and the Solara is selling at $1,700 under sticker.
QuoteQuoteQuoteOnly using sticker pricing.
If you want to look up the cardirect prices you can, but I have a hard time believing the Eclipse is selling that close to msrp, it is a Mitsubishi after all.
An all-new sporty vehicle that came out within the last month is typically going to be at or above sticker. By the TMV, the Eclipse is selling at $200 under sticker, the Accord is selling at $2,000 under sticker, and the Solara is selling at $1,700 under sticker.
Okay, so for now the Eclipse is a bad value (but it isn't overpriced), however, that should be considered a demerit since that is the case with almost all new models and will change in a couple of months
In a few months, that may change. In fact, it almost certainly will. But right now, all evidence points to the Eclipse being a poor value even compared to the Accord and Solara.
QuoteIn a few months, that may change. In fact, it almost certainly will. But right now, all evidence points to the Eclipse being a poor value even compared to the Accord and Solara.
I'll agree with you on that one (though it is still worth $1000 more than the Accord imho just because it is vanilla on wheels), though it is still priced pretty well. Along with the typical first year problems, one of the biggest reasons not to buy a first year car is price inflation, but that should go down in a couple months, it is a Mistubishi afterall.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'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.
Like a number of newer cars, this one looks better in person than in pictures. I was checking one out at the local dealer over the weekend. Here's my one complaint, stylistically. they made the side profile resemble the 2nd generation cars (as evident by the C pillar), which is fine since most will argue that the 2g cars were the best looking. However, the profile looks like they took the 2g and added about 6 inches between the back edge of the door and the rear wheels. It throws the proportions off. Kind of the same aesthetic effect you get when you take a street bike and stretch the rear swingarm (common mod for guys who mod sportbikes for drag racing). I think if they had found a way to cut those 5-6 inches out of the car, it would have been better proportioned and really looked good.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'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.
Like a number of newer cars, this one looks better in person than in pictures. I was checking one out at the local dealer over the weekend. Here's my one complaint, stylistically. they made the side profile resemble the 2nd generation cars (as evident by the C pillar), which is fine since most will argue that the 2g cars were the best looking. However, the profile looks like they took the 2g and added about 6 inches between the back edge of the door and the rear wheels. It throws the proportions off. Kind of the same aesthetic effect you get when you take a street bike and stretch the rear swingarm (common mod for guys who mod sportbikes for drag racing). I think if they had found a way to cut those 5-6 inches out of the car, it would have been better proportioned and really looked good.
I don't think so...it's like seeing pictures of a hideous monster, and then actually seeing the hideous monster. You kind of just want to hide.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'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.
Like a number of newer cars, this one looks better in person than in pictures. I was checking one out at the local dealer over the weekend. Here's my one complaint, stylistically. they made the side profile resemble the 2nd generation cars (as evident by the C pillar), which is fine since most will argue that the 2g cars were the best looking. However, the profile looks like they took the 2g and added about 6 inches between the back edge of the door and the rear wheels. It throws the proportions off. Kind of the same aesthetic effect you get when you take a street bike and stretch the rear swingarm (common mod for guys who mod sportbikes for drag racing). I think if they had found a way to cut those 5-6 inches out of the car, it would have been better proportioned and really looked good.
Yeah, the back does look a little stretched out. Also, the mirrors are a little awkward.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteOnly using sticker pricing.
If you want to look up the cardirect prices you can, but I have a hard time believing the Eclipse is selling that close to msrp, it is a Mitsubishi after all.
An all-new sporty vehicle that came out within the last month is typically going to be at or above sticker. By the TMV, the Eclipse is selling at $200 under sticker, the Accord is selling at $2,000 under sticker, and the Solara is selling at $1,700 under sticker.
Okay, so for now the Eclipse is a bad value (but it isn't overpriced), however, that should be considered a demerit since that is the case with almost all new models and will change in a couple of months
Hey Ifcar.
Say ther are too cars that do everything exactly the same. Same speed, same handling, same everything.
But one car looks better than the other to you.
Would you pay an extra $1,000 for the better looking car?
Its not a rhetorical question BTW, I am genuinely curious. I just don't see $1-2,000 being that important if I like one car better than another.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteOnly using sticker pricing.
If you want to look up the cardirect prices you can, but I have a hard time believing the Eclipse is selling that close to msrp, it is a Mitsubishi after all.
An all-new sporty vehicle that came out within the last month is typically going to be at or above sticker. By the TMV, the Eclipse is selling at $200 under sticker, the Accord is selling at $2,000 under sticker, and the Solara is selling at $1,700 under sticker.
Okay, so for now the Eclipse is a bad value (but it isn't overpriced), however, that should be considered a demerit since that is the case with almost all new models and will change in a couple of months
Hey Ifcar.
Say ther are too cars that do everything exactly the same. Same speed, same handling, same everything.
But one car looks better than the other to you.
Would you pay an extra $1,000 for the better looking car?
Its not a rhetorical question BTW, I am genuinely curious. I just don't see $1-2,000 being that important if I like one car better than another.
Exactly.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteOnly using sticker pricing.
If you want to look up the cardirect prices you can, but I have a hard time believing the Eclipse is selling that close to msrp, it is a Mitsubishi after all.
An all-new sporty vehicle that came out within the last month is typically going to be at or above sticker. By the TMV, the Eclipse is selling at $200 under sticker, the Accord is selling at $2,000 under sticker, and the Solara is selling at $1,700 under sticker.
Okay, so for now the Eclipse is a bad value (but it isn't overpriced), however, that should be considered a demerit since that is the case with almost all new models and will change in a couple of months
Hey Ifcar.
Say ther are too cars that do everything exactly the same. Same speed, same handling, same everything.
But one car looks better than the other to you.
Would you pay an extra $1,000 for the better looking car?
Its not a rhetorical question BTW, I am genuinely curious. I just don't see $1-2,000 being that important if I like one car better than another.
It only comes down to a few dollars a month, whether you lease or finance.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteOnly using sticker pricing.
If you want to look up the cardirect prices you can, but I have a hard time believing the Eclipse is selling that close to msrp, it is a Mitsubishi after all.
An all-new sporty vehicle that came out within the last month is typically going to be at or above sticker. By the TMV, the Eclipse is selling at $200 under sticker, the Accord is selling at $2,000 under sticker, and the Solara is selling at $1,700 under sticker.
Okay, so for now the Eclipse is a bad value (but it isn't overpriced), however, that should be considered a demerit since that is the case with almost all new models and will change in a couple of months
Hey Ifcar.
Say ther are too cars that do everything exactly the same. Same speed, same handling, same everything.
But one car looks better than the other to you.
Would you pay an extra $1,000 for the better looking car?
Its not a rhetorical question BTW, I am genuinely curious. I just don't see $1-2,000 being that important if I like one car better than another.
Same everything but the look? I'm not paying thousands of dollars extra for something that looks nicer in my driveway. A few hundred? Maybe, but still unlikely.
QuoteQuoteIn a few months, that may change. In fact, it almost certainly will. But right now, all evidence points to the Eclipse being a poor value even compared to the Accord and Solara.
I'll agree with you on that one (though it is still worth $1000 more than the Accord imho just because it is vanilla on wheels), though it is still priced pretty well. Along with the typical first year problems, one of the biggest reasons not to buy a first year car is price inflation, but that should go down in a couple months, it is a Mistubishi afterall.
Even though I agree with the Accord being a soulless appliance, I don't see how ugly gives a car a soul.
QuoteQuoteQuoteIn a few months, that may change. In fact, it almost certainly will. But right now, all evidence points to the Eclipse being a poor value even compared to the Accord and Solara.
I'll agree with you on that one (though it is still worth $1000 more than the Accord imho just because it is vanilla on wheels), though it is still priced pretty well. Along with the typical first year problems, one of the biggest reasons not to buy a first year car is price inflation, but that should go down in a couple months, it is a Mistubishi afterall.
Even though I agree with the Accord being a soulless appliance, I don't see how ugly gives a car a soul.
Ever heard of opinion? In my opinion the Eclipse looks good, but there is more to it than that, the Eclipse is also supposed to be pretty fun to drive for a FWD car.
Anyone who buys an Eclipse over a 'Stang needs a check-up.
It's one of the ugliest abominations ever designed. The interior isn't special. And it's overpriced.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIn a few months, that may change. In fact, it almost certainly will. But right now, all evidence points to the Eclipse being a poor value even compared to the Accord and Solara.
I'll agree with you on that one (though it is still worth $1000 more than the Accord imho just because it is vanilla on wheels), though it is still priced pretty well. Along with the typical first year problems, one of the biggest reasons not to buy a first year car is price inflation, but that should go down in a couple months, it is a Mistubishi afterall.
Even though I agree with the Accord being a soulless appliance, I don't see how ugly gives a car a soul.
Ever heard of opinion? In my opinion the Eclipse looks good, but there is more to it than that, the Eclipse is also supposed to be pretty fun to drive for a FWD car.
I fully understand that you may like the Eclipse, but would you pick it over a Mustang?