Added: 3 years ago
From: JAMESJAKEGO
Views: 134,885
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (692)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Comment removed

  • this has to be one of the closest races i've ever seen....

  • Eclipse sounds automatic.

  • lol funny part is if u didnt get early start on the go he still would of beat you, sure the specs on ss are superior but think the wieght holds it down vs a light car like the eclipse

  • you cant have 1 person say go because obviously they will know when to go first...to truly race stop the car then have someone else other than the driver say when to go...goodluck

  • lol, 5.3 ltre v8 versus a 3.8 ltre v6, good race! HA

  • good race.

  • im buying an 08 SS today i cant wait

  • Mivec just kicked in yoo

  • Windows....

  • pull up the god damn windows

  • yep look at his other vids. there is an SS embroidered in the headrests

  • Yo why are you saying youre in an impala SS? its a pretty big giveaway youre in a v6 when the camera looks at the dash. Stop making us SS owners look bad almost losing to a damn eclipse

  • mitsubishi really went down with the new eclipses, losing to an impala ss....

  • @1ElClown5 umm it just lost to a v6 impala. this isnt an ss. the dash gives it away. eclipses are garbage

  • @Coy1750 they r garbage now, but bak in the 90's they were in the same league as mustang gt's, 300zx, rx-7s, and faster than cars like bmw m3's, mitsubishi went wrong 4 3g n 4g eclipses

  • @1ElClown5 idk about all of that, but they were once respectable cars for sure. They are just a little too flashy looking these days though with the lack of power.

  • @Coy1750 they were, it was jst a drivers race between those cars back then, and with a few simple mods u could push 300hp to the wheels...now cant even beat the v6 girl mustangs

  • thats no impala ss

  • @mikec81 if you watched it to 1:25 u would clearly be able to see it is.. only an impala comes with that sign.

  • @denny099999999 yep, its clearly an impala, whats your point...i said its not an ss

  • @denny099999999 its a v6 impala, SS's dont have wooden dashes and the symbol is placed differently. this guys a poser

  • Lol eclipse are fucking nasty looking. Check out my Mazda videos I think there better than this piece of shit! Thank u!!! Lol

  • wow i see alot of shit talking here to be honest it dosnt matter how fast your car is its how it looks in my oppinion i have a 2000 nissan altima (looks new) with tinted window +underglow with a body kit but in a race i would lose but at least i go out not looking like a stock boy

  • @IDGAFIncorperated usually you look better when you don't get shit on in a race... thats why they are arguing.

  • @pjbadgersuw26 yea i agree

  • @IDGAFIncorperated U suck at life dude......u know wat the definition of a "ricer: is..........YOUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • @SupraMane69 i think you mean racer and you dont know me dude so stop trying :)

  • @IDGAFIncorperated im pretty sure he ment ricer.

  • @denny099999999 yea srry about that i looked up the term ricer after hearing it in a movie called "street racer"

  • @SupraMane69 not tottaly a ricer thinks he can take on every car unlike in my comment prior i said i would lose so why try?

  • And my Mustang would eat your alti lol!

  • @Still2ManyChoices and my ls7 beats your pony lol wtf

  • Damn they both suck. My alti would walk both xD maybe even sprint

  • @Stevenhiggles n my g8 would fuck ur alti up

  • @silveradomanz71 you would be surprised unless you have a 6.2. I love Holden don't get me wrong. G8 is a fine fucking car. Ima trade the alti in if I fine a 6.2 G8

  • thats not even the v6.. lol it a 4 ci=ylinder with a spoiler... haha bullshit

  • @Ntx234 that's because people rag them out. My dad's 96 eclipse rs over 300k same engine and tranny. The first fast and furious movie was the death of the early 90s eclipses.

  • @ pilot guess the spoiler made the diffrence eh? How may whps you guess it added? Rofl to use an already coined phrase. "Noob"

  • Sad partis the eclipse is probably stock roflmao. I smoke lil mustanks in mine. A v6 mustank just seems to have a nice exhuast and no ass.

  • Comment removed

  • @abrettelle

    Why would you brag about beating a v6 Mustang? I used to beat them in a n/a 3800 LeSabre. 

  • @etb4u HAHAA. REALLY? COME RACE MINE IN YOUR GRANNY MOBILE

  • @DIENAMICProductions

    Yes, I'm going to NM to race you, fucking twit. 

  • @DIENAMICProductions

    Oh and my current granny mobile is boosted. Already beaten exhaust GT's

  • @etb4u haha yea sure buddy. show me the vid?

  • @DIENAMICProductions

    What, do you think exhaust mod 99 GTs are fast? LMAO I know I'm not fast, and I'm quicker than those.

  • @etb4u no im not saying that they are fast... im just saying that you talk alot of smack

  • @DIENAMICProductions

    Actually, I said v6 Mustangs are slow. Which they are. Very slow. You're an idiot to think otherwise. 

  • @etb4u yea sure im an idiot? cause i can beet wrx's in my mustang? haha sure. 

  • @etb4u not the 2011's bud, maybe the old 4.0s and 3.8s yeah but the ecoboost is no joke.

  • @mikec81

    The 2011's aren't ecoboost motors.

  • @mikec81 whatever man 2012 so sorry mr technical

  • Wow those eclipse's are faster than they look,. didnt give a secound thought to think my crown vic would smoke it but I see that aint happenin even on the highway.

  • very nice

  • Comment removed

  • Eclipse is not stock. Mitsubishi does not put those stupid park bench spoilers on the car.

  • @PilotNewman wrong.

  • @tcsoccer09 Ok, and I own that exact model but I am wrong.

  • @PilotNewman Mitsubishi put that on, it was a appearance package you could buy extra from them. came with spoiler, front bumper and rear bumper

  • @thecitysitsinflames

    thats not sotck spoiler its not like that its more "smooth" around the corners, and curved top, i have the 2011 model gt that came with it, well at least in Canada its isnt like that =S

  • @MoreBetterTimes I agree a bought a 2012 model GT.. It didnt have the spoiler but I have ordered the carbon fibre GSX style wing. yes OEM spoiler is very different much smoother along the edges and fits the car well. I have seen this style(one in video) on ebay and other sites its called "SE" style...

  • @4geclipsegtp just sayin its a FWD so its dumb to get a spolier on a FWD people will think ur a ricer

  • @adcstmh i see what you're saying yeah its true thats what alot of people think...big exhaust=ricer, spoiler=ricer but who cares what they think... if the owner wants to put money into his car why not right?

  • @4geclipsegtp Yeah, that's what I've always said. Honestly I'm fine with doing WHATEVER you want to your car cosmetically, I just think you should make sure your car has the power to back it up. I just think it's a little bit ridiculous what some people do to some of the cars out there.

  • @AStaticCharacter  yeah... for sure man... But you gotta think if it weren't for those guys who put ridiculous bodykits on their automatic kia rios and their oversized wings and like 100 air dams we wouldn't have people to call chaches lol...but no for sure totally agree with what you said...

  • @PilotNewman its called 'rear wing spoiler'...do some research on your car man lol...go to mitsubishi's website if you still dont believe me...its under accessories

  • @PilotNewman actually you are... its called the Aero sport package. comes with fangs and a rear lip AND that spoiler.. I have a bone stock (from factory anyway far from it now) GS. no sport pack. and i know plenty of people with it. and they have the spoiler... so... research bro.

  • @PilotNewman LOL, what makes you think that it having a spoiler automatically makes it a non-stock car?

  • @PilotNewman lmao "park bench spoiler"

  • You sure that eclipse is stock?

  • the impalas are fast there just heavy

  • i just saw your other videos and you have acceleration videos ...very kool bro

  • wow stock eclipse can take an ss impala kool ...sometimes impalas trying to play with my evo9 and i just rip them ....am a big fan of v8 like the hemi engine...or my friend's 70 chevelle ss with a 454 engine ....i love the torque of the v8 like my brother's 7.3L turbodiesel f350 is nice... how fast is you impala ss bro ..like to 100mph to 60 mph

  • @sameguyever sometimes evo's try playing with my trailblazer ss and i just rip them.

  • @BLACKLACDTS if you have the ss why not making a video bro

  • @sameguyever i am goin to make a video when i get it back from the perfomance shop. there will be videos up next week hopefully

  • @BLACKLACDTS kool man

  • @BLACKLACDTS Sometimes trailblazers try playing with my Suzuki Grand Vitara V6 and I rip them. Yeah totally.

  • @tammo2011 i know man i stay away from those vitaras. everybody knows that the 230hp v6 vitaras rip 400+hp v8 trailblazer ss's. lol

  • @sameguyever that isnt an impala ss so id say thoses eclipses are pretty slow a v6 impala beat it,

  • SS =JOKE,  57 hp/liter. I thought my eco-box (without vtec) was bad with 67 hp/liter..

  • @TomOEM2 because hp/L makes you go faster

  • @TomOEM2

    HP/L doesn't mean anything in the performance world. Horsepower doesn't win races torque+driver+traction does, not hp/l.

    Plus it's a 4door sedan vs a 2door coupe, both wrong wheel drive but the Eclipse should have the advantage (if he could drive).

  • @TomOEM2 actually a trailblaszer ss comes with a 6.0l 395 hp motor.. thats 65 hp/liter almost 66.. and im guaranteed itd beat ur eco box so ur eco box is still s pos.

  • ur ss is lame man the dude driving the eclipse was lame ive smoked mustangs with my eclipse and its bone stock... its always aboutthe driver and next time start at a line u failure....

  • 2nd race wayy unfair. Impala was way ahead.

  • the eclipse is the winner it is a 3.8 v6 vs 5.3 v8 and it was a tie if the eclipse was a 6 speed it wouldve pulled on the shitty impala hard

  • @coreys96n00maximas im pretty sure this impala is either the 3.5,3.6 or 3.9l only impala ss's come with the 5.3l so the ecliipse kinda isnt the winner.

  • reace my ss sc ill kill u lol

  • SAD!!! Just plain SAD!!!!

  • 04 and 05 were only years for the impala to have the 3.8 supercharged and its only 240 hp....when the new model ss came out it was the 5.3 with 303 hp....the 5.3 is a way more efficient engine considering its basically a smaller ls1.....i have an 04 ss and i even admit that a 3.8 supercharged only puttin out 240 is weak but still fun and with a pulley swap and a few other small mods itll wake it up.

  • How fast did you get up to?

  • Nice match up

  • awe automatics.

  • I hate peoples stupid sound effects, WOO, WOO, WOO.

  • @doctorrhys You're not supposed to ask. Just assume it's great and you're willing to pay a lot for it.

  • id think the SS would cream that ricer....maybe the driver sucks? eclipse must be a shit load lighter too

  • @fenfal Obviously you don't know the definition of ricer. Regardless, the Eclipse's weight is about the same.

  • @TheRealVice the impala actually weights more, just putting it out there

  • @xxKolt45xx Indeed, but the Eclipse isn't a skinny chick in comparison as Fenfal suggests. Regardless, a similar weighing vehicle with 2 less cylinders is keeping up with a V8. The Eclipse GT is far from rice.

  • Comment removed

  • @xxKolt45xx quite a bit more its like 600 pounds more.

  • the impala v8 is a total fail 5.3 litre = 303hp mustang 5.0 litre = 500 hp haha fail chevrolet fails but the impala vs supercharged is not bad tho

  • @maxim8724 Well the Impala V8 is some pretty old equipment, nothing really fancy going on under their. That Mitsu is using a much newer engine technology which is called Mivec (basically just Mitsu's VVT technology) but the the Eclipse is the real failure here. A sports coupe that handles no better than the much bigger car its racing against. The Eclipse sucks so bad they won't even sell it here in Japan. Also the new Coyote engine only produces 412HP not 500.

  • @maxim8724 what car is super charged? the eclipse isn't... it;s just a n/a 6 cyl.

  • @mambacx What i meant to say was that the impala supercharged is better then this v8, the 3.8 produces 270 hp while the 5.3 produces 303hp lol 1.5 L more and it only produces 33 hp more and it is a lot heavier :( lol this impala is crap the best impalas are the ones from the 90's and the old ones from 1960-70 peace

  • @maxim8724 its also N/A.....270 for a supercharged 3.8L anything is weak. just my 2 cents...

  • @agitatedxreason Nissan 3.7 v6 332hp, nissan 3.5v6 270hp,290hp and those engines are N/A

  • @TheNissanbest

    Nissan 370Z 3.7L V6 = 332hp w/ 280 torque and the 350Z with 287hp and 274 torque/300hp 260 torque. It's not all about hp, torque is more important.

    1999 5.7L Camaro SS 320hp (rated) and 340 torque @ 4000rpm. Nissan doesn't make it's peak torque until 4800rpm.

  • @thetravdawg Actually torque is not all that important the eclipse has less torque and less hp and still kept up. Yeah torque is everything. -_-

  • @TheNissanbest

    The Eclipse kept up because it's lighter. Were the vehicles the same weight the one with more torque has the advantage. So yes torque is very important.

  • @thetravdawg Yeah whatever. -_-

  • @TheNissanbest

    Typical fanboy response when confronted with hard facts. Keep up your delusion.

    What do you drive?

  • @thetravdawg Actually look at races where another car has more torque and hp and loses. It's not about torque idiot. It's about hp and gear ratios. Trust me torque does'nt win all races. What do you drive? And if you try to get msart or whatever your dumbass is trying, it;s not going to work. :) Did I comment to you? So why did you comment to me? Btw that comment was a month ago and now you want to bitch about it? Get real.

  • @TheNissanbest

    What races would those be?

    Here are some examples:

    1993-1997 Camaro Trans Am makes 275-285hp w/ 320 torque @ 2K rpm vs 2003-2006 350Z makes 287hp w/ 270 torque @ 4800 rpm and the 350Z is a touch lighter and they run similar 1/4 mile times except the Camaro is typically faster stock for stock.

    '98-'02 Camaro - Trans Am makes 305-310hp w/ 340-345 torque at 4000 rpm vs 2007 350Z makes 300hp w/ 260 torque @ 4800 rpm 350Z is lighter marginally and the Camaro - T/A is faster stock.

  • @thetravdawg Ok you are comparing V8 to v6. sports car vs muscle car. Compare something close to a 350z or whatever.

  • @TheNissanbest

    It's a valid acceleration comparison, pay attention.

    In both scenarios the Camaro/Trans Am and the 350Z/370Z weigh about the same, have similar dimensions only the V8s make more torque.

    What do you think the video you commented on is? A V8 vs V6 race.

    Maybe this works better for you:

    2002 LS1 Camaro/Trans Am 310hp w/ 345 torque @ 4000rpm 13.4 @ 106mph

    vs

    2010 Mustang GT 315hp w/ 325 torque @ 4250rpm 13.5 @ 103mph

  • @thetravdawg Wow is faster but is it faster than the new 5.0 huh? Btw the 370z accomplished both times.

  • @TheNissanbest

    An LS1 needs bolt-ons to be faster than the new 5.0. I don't know that a 370Z w/ bolt-ons would run with a 5.0.

    The '01-'02 Camaro SS / Trans Am WS6 / Firehawk make 325-335hp and 340-355 torque @ 4000rpm and run the 1/4 from 13.1-13.5 1/4 mile @ 104-108mph (the Camaro and Firebirds are heavier than the 370Z)

    The 370Z w/ 332hp 269 torque @ 5200rpm runs 13.1-13.5 @ 103-108mph (the automatic is the only one that has run the 108mph trap speed) and the 370Z is also lighter.

  • @thetravdawg both amke about the same hp, but the cam or trans has 2 more cylinders and has more torque. True thre z is lighter

  • @TheNissanbest

    Now you're getting it, that's the point. Even though the Camaro/Trans Am weigh more and are rated at equal to or less than the horsepower of the 370Z they still run with if not beat the newer car because they make A LOT more torque which is more power to the wheels.

    Whining about two less cylinders is just whining. Sounds like an excuse to me.

    There's a reason why a lot of people drop LS1/LS2 in 240sx/280Z/RX7/Miata because it's a light weight aluminum block that makes POWER!

  • @thetravdawg actually im not whining. Can you even do that in typing? Yeah i? have seen alot of swaps in those cars.

  • @TheNissanbest

    Whining is just as much verbiage as tone. What does two less cylinders have to do with it? Unless you're making an excuse for the V6.

    Regarding LS1 swaps, I have a friend that swapped an LS1 in his S14 and all it has is long tube headers, intake, straight pipes and cam and it runs high 10s and is still well balanced.

  • @thetravdawg Whatever I don't think it's an excuse. Nice.

  • @TheNissanbest

    When mentioned as "but the cam or trans am has two more cylinders" it looks an awful like an excuse for the V6. As if it's not fair or something.

    Oh well, I have however sufficiently proved my point regarding the potency of torque.

  • @thetravdawg Weight is excuse then. More tq and still acomplished the same times .

  • @TheNissanbest actually torque does mean alot and this sint the 5.3l the biggest it could be is the lz8 3.9l which is 233/240 hp and tq with 90% of torque between 1500-5500. which is also pretty rare to get in an impala so this impala is probally the 3.5l lz4 which is 211/214 hp and tq and also weighs 3700+ pounds the eclipse is less than 3500 pounds and has 263/260 hp and tq. id say the eclipse is the real loser here weighs lighter and has more hp than any of the v6s impalas but barely wins

  • @denny099999999 Actually torque sin;t everything .This is a ss it's has a V8 so it has 323trq compared to 260 . So the impala is the real loser . Plus it has a V8 . And this is a V* listen to the V8 rumble. And a 3.5 or a 3.9 would never keep up with a Eclipse V6 . Cause neither one does 0-60 in 6.3 sec so your point ? Andthis arguement was over 6 months ago didn't nobody ask you to comment so I really don't care for your opnion . And when you have 53 morehp and still can't beea it whos loser ?

  • @denny099999999 Are you deaf ? Cause no3.5 or 3.9 will sounds lke the 5.3 . And look at the other videos dumbass it's a V8 so SDFU and stop trying to argue over something that doesn't even matter. Sound like an idiot

  • @maxim8724 it's 240 for a supercharged 3.8, the 5.3 is still faster but not by much

  • @maxim8724 yes chevy fails but in 1967 they had a 400 hp+ 4.9l 302 back in 69... im pretty sure chevy doesnt fail anyways too.. there kinda the best and most reliable brand and they look a whole lot better than a ford.. and i dont think a brand is good just by there motors.. one of my buddys have a 2011 ford ranger one has 2006 ford f150. both of them get the worst service when they go to get stuff done. like oil changes take them 4 hrs to do....

  • Too bad the 4g Eclipse V6 is ONLY available with an Automatic/ Triptronic transmission. That means you gotta run extra vacuum lines and hydraulic actuators, not just a shift linkage and clutch cable.

  • @wes39393 no its not its got manual transmission u failure...

  • both cars are slow as fuck

  • sounds like an automatic and two fags took out their parents cars

  • new impala ss's are slow. i have an 08 lancer, not an evo, a 5 speed lancer with a couple bolt ons and a short shifter and i raced a stock 08 impala ss from a 40 roll and beat it by like 2 cars.

  • @MattH12491 Post the video. I smell BULLSHIT !!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • @smczack1 i smell JEALOUSY!!! haha dont be mad

  • @MattH12491

    Oooh you know you're exaggerating a bit there, haha

  • @Sr20d3t im really not. im not a liar kid. why would i care if kids on youtube think im "exaggerating" ha. my car's quick.

  • @MattH12491

    an inline 4 with minor bolt-on against a 5.7 v8 that puts out 300+ horses?

    call me a kid but, a grown up would know the outcome.

    I wonder whats next, you gonna pull a rabit out your ass?

  • @Sr20d3t well now i know not to take you seriously. because the new ss has a 5.3L LS4. and my car has minor bolt ons but i have a programmer and ive tuned quite it well. it puts down. and by the way your sr20, if you even have an sr swapped nissan, is just an inline 4 as well. regardless of the turbo. do your homework boy ;)

  • @MattH12491

    lmao, ok 5.3? I couldnt care less what the new impala has in it, but to hear you say your riced out lancer can put 2 cars on an impala SS just makes me lmao, an EVO would do that with no problem, i mean even a dumbass would know the outcome. now see if you were to turbo the 4G63 then maybe it would keep up, but minor bolt on no chance BOY.

  • @Sr20d3t ok kid youre probably one of the dumbest fucks ive ever talked to. haha how is my car "riced out"? if mine is riced because ive modified the motor and computer and not the exterior then your turbo nissan is a giant ricer turd, that is if you even have one. secondly the new lancer and evo have a 4B11. you dont know shit about cars hahahaha im gonna block you before your dumbass starts spreading your stupidness lmfao

  • @MattH12491

    lmao, oooh is somebody mad? calm down before you have a heart attack oldman..lol

    oh and i was referring to the 02 model. hahaha this is too much fun talking to a ricer, an intake and a fart cannon don't do the job old man...hahahahahaha

  • Comment removed

  • @MattH12491

    oh the the the older model lancer has the 4G63 motor in it dumbass

  • Comment removed

  • @Sr20d3t hahahahaha you are the dumbest person ive ever talked to. i know what the old lancer has. i know what the new lancer has. i said it not you. you dont know anything. i think you should calm down haha btw im 18. so calling me old would make you like 12? thats about as smart as you are in comparison lmao.

  • @MattH12491

    ROFL

    you know how ridiculous you sound? 18? well according to you profile your 44, that's old as fuck...lol and technically you're messaging not texting, but wow the way you talk, you really is 18. haahahahaahhahaahahha

  • @Sr20d3t because i dont care what my profile says. i rushed through making it. and i sound ridiculous but you say "you really is". i guess yor grammar sucks as bad as your car knowledge lol

  • @Sr20d3t ... I know a couple 08 Lancer bolt ons that would shit on an SS. Why pay inurance of an evo when you can make a turbo project out of a lancer. Same cars except for the AWD.

  • @joshtard1111

    I'd have to see a vid to believe that, I would think your talking about a ralliart, but a regular lancer with bolt ons, I doubt it.

  • @MattH12491 hows that make the stock impala slow then if you have a modded lancer. its still quicker than most STOCK cars.

  • u tillin me u did eat the up gt up i lev thes lol u dut no how to drive lol

  • @chevyboisskevin09 and you cant spell for your life

  • did the guy jizz in his pants? cuz he sounds like he did

  • wow..... so slow..

  • @StevenBTT

    I thought I was the only one who think these cars were slow.

    Oh and....RACING WITH A AUTOMATIC=FAILED!

  • @Sr20d3t you no manual cars aint always fast

  • @TheGabrielcollier

    I never said they were always fast, I see no point racing with an auto, there's no fun.

    on a side note, manual are somewhat 1(or less) second quicker an auto. =D

  • I think this Eclipse is the NEW generation one, It has 3.0L Dual Cam 24v Twin Turbo Engine. No wonder it kicks ass.

  • @aleksankazakov It is a 3.8 V6 and doesn't have a turbo. Its 263 hp from the factory. I have an 07 eclipse gt and are pretty quick.

  • @southpaw1000 They can be quicker. I own one as well (07 GT w/mt, cai and exhaust) and my buddy's stock 05 2.5 Legacy GT romps on my car.

  • @Reaper6207 thats like comparing jap crap to good jap cars.

  • im surprised by how close it was, considering how BIG of a car the impala is, but very nice work, good video

  • i knew eclipses were slow but i had no idea the ss was too

  • @mcromance1 The Impala has a V8 and is RWd that is an advantage out the hole

  • @MaddDogg81 no the new SS is FWD