Boo hoo wrechlet, you gonna cry about breaking a nail too while you get overwhelmed by a sideways engine?
I'm not an insecure homosexual like you who needs to flex in order to justify moronic asinine opinions.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>doesn't post anything
kys projecting wrenchlet dilettante
He can't even post A car. Let alone one he's modified.
https://i.imgur.com/M3lomkh.jpeg
Boo hoo wrechlet, you gonna cry about breaking a nail too while you get overwhelmed by a sideways engine?
I'm not an insecure homosexual like you who needs to flex in order to justify moronic asinine opinions.
>t. doesn't even own a car and is clearly projecting about being insecure and no wrenching skills
Sad Anon.
Harder to work on belt driven accessories or anything else on the front of the engine as they're now sandwiched between it and the frame rail. Terrible weight distribution because every single one has the engine 90+ percent in front of the front axle, lol you think subarus and audis are bad about that? Try every car with a transversely mounted engine ever and especially V6 ones. Manual transmission shifter feel will never be as good because you can't mount the shifter directly to the transmission, you have to use a cable or linkage. And most importantly, transverse engine means FWD (or dogshit AWD that never works as well as proper longitudinal systems.) No fricking thanks.
Hondas are comically easy to work on while being FWD with the best shifter feel out of any car only rivalled by Miatas, and Subarus are longitudinal and also have excellent shifters.
Turbo V6s are often longitudinal with ridiculous packaging, turbo replacements on most of them are engine out jobs. B5 S4, Z32TT are old cars that come to mind
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Depends on the Honda, I did a water outlet on an eighth gen accord k24 and they buried that motherfricker
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Turbo V6s are often longitudinal with ridiculous packaging, turbo replacements on most of them are engine out jobs. B5 S4, Z32TT are old cars that come to mind
Same applies to transverse turbo V6s, 3000GTs are notoriously terrible to work on. The only olf turbo V6s I can think on that would be easy to work on are the GMs (firebirds, Sy/Ty). I suppose a turbo replacement on an A610 wouldn't be too difficult at least.
eclipse but only at an angle that shows off the POWER BULGE, and also in bright red with the pick-a-nic basket spoiler because it looks just like the generic race cars in the ps1 racing games i loved
These were my two favorite cars as a teen. :3
Both the 4G63t and 3S-GTE still have parts availability, but I assume the GSX will have better parts availability. The All-Trac is probably more-reliable, but good luck getting transmission parts if you need 'em.
I think the GSX looks better (and I had a GS in HS so I really like DSMs) but all-tracs are rare as shit and have that X factor.
I now hate AWD (12th year of Subaru DDing) and would recommend a gloriously-dangerous SW20 in stead.
>dogshit engines.
I've grown a distaste for Subarus and AWD, but I don't get this meme. Their engines are great (and sound great). I even have the one engine that gets headgasket failures (EJ253) at 140k miles and I'm not worried at all. Slow as frick and gets worse gas mileage than a truck tho.
flat 4s wear the worst of any layout. it's just physics. and also they're super weak
4 weeks ago
Panda5
>flat 4s wear the worst of any layout. it's just physics.
Absolutely untrue, look at V6s. Flat-4s are some of the most-balanced engines. Subaru just cheaped-out on headgaskets for one engine 20 years ago (the one I have) and everyone assumed it was inherent to flats in general.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
i'm talking about gravity wearing the cylinders into eggs
4 weeks ago
Panda5
>i'm talking about gravity wearing the cylinders into eggs
It crossed my mind when I envisioned a free-body-diagram, but the proof is in the pudding and generally flat-4s are just as reliable as I-4s. I don't see any evidence of stock Subarus (excl the headgasket-eating EJ253 which, again, is what I have) getting engine failures at higher rates than other cars.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
they burn oil like mad at high miles
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
my meme ej25d has 225k (original engine) and doesn't burn much
They were made and designed by Diamond Star Motors, they're DSMs.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
so it's a Mitsubishi or DSM?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Both, clearly.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Both, clearly.
Initially Diamond-Star Motors was a 50-50 joint venture between Chrysler and Mitsubishi. However, in 1991 the Japanese company purchased its partner's interest, and thereafter the manufacture of Chrysler vehicles was on a contractual basis. Chrysler sold its equity stake to Mitsubishi in 1993, and Diamond-Star Motors was renamed Mitsubishi Motors Manufacturing America (MMMA) on July 1, 1995.[3] Despite the departure, the two companies have maintained various co-operative manufacturing agreements since and considered all vehicle produced until 1995[9] as Diamond Star Motors.
No Mitsubishi Sirius engine, no DSM.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Well according to your logic the 2G GSX isn't a DSM either. I've owned a non-turbo 2G DSM, there were DSM stickers under the hood.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
iirc only early 95 eclipses (build date sometime in 94) use the DSM sticker, anything later uses a mitsubishi sticker.
https://i.imgur.com/oSVuoM2.jpeg
How do you guys feel about the A60 Celicas? I know it's not the one everyone pictures when someone says "Celica" but I think it has its own charms. There's a GTS available a few states over with 190,000 miles going for ~$6,500 but I'm afraid it could shit the bed and rack up maintainace bills soon after I buy it just due to age and mileage.
Think it's worth the risk? Would be my first actual car past the crumbling Civic I've been driving for 11 years since I was a teenager. I just want a fun car, bros.
hardest part about owning them is finding a good example and finding body parts, it's got a 22re and a w58 so drivetrain-wise it's pretty solid.
source: i own both a early 2g gsx and a a65
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
The DSM name gets thrown around a lot when talking Eclipses
I just realized I have not seen a 2g dsm on the road or even car meets in my flyover state in 5+ years. And I have been daily driving Z32s and E36s for that whole time.
How do you guys feel about the A60 Celicas? I know it's not the one everyone pictures when someone says "Celica" but I think it has its own charms. There's a GTS available a few states over with 190,000 miles going for ~$6,500 but I'm afraid it could shit the bed and rack up maintainace bills soon after I buy it just due to age and mileage.
Think it's worth the risk? Would be my first actual car past the crumbling Civic I've been driving for 11 years since I was a teenager. I just want a fun car, bros.
>troonyverse engine
I'd rather walk
Lol ski issue wrenchlet. Gitgud
post your fwd shitbox you converted to rwd yourself then
Boo hoo wrechlet, you gonna cry about breaking a nail too while you get overwhelmed by a sideways engine?
I'm not an insecure homosexual like you who needs to flex in order to justify moronic asinine opinions.
>doesn't post anything
kys projecting wrenchlet dilettante
He can't even post A car. Let alone one he's modified.
>t. doesn't even own a car and is clearly projecting about being insecure and no wrenching skills
Sad Anon.
This.
The correct choice is the all-trac motor swapped the right way around into the last good Celica.
whats wrong with transverse engine? Genuinely curious as Im a wrenchlet aspiring to start wrenching
Implies that it's probably FWD or FWD based/derived
Nothing legitimately wrong just a purist, DA is like DA or DA where your opinions are worthless and automatically wrong if it's different from the OPs
thanks anon, thought it was much worse judging from the reaction but yeah shouldve expected
Harder to work on belt driven accessories or anything else on the front of the engine as they're now sandwiched between it and the frame rail. Terrible weight distribution because every single one has the engine 90+ percent in front of the front axle, lol you think subarus and audis are bad about that? Try every car with a transversely mounted engine ever and especially V6 ones. Manual transmission shifter feel will never be as good because you can't mount the shifter directly to the transmission, you have to use a cable or linkage. And most importantly, transverse engine means FWD (or dogshit AWD that never works as well as proper longitudinal systems.) No fricking thanks.
Hondas are comically easy to work on while being FWD with the best shifter feel out of any car only rivalled by Miatas, and Subarus are longitudinal and also have excellent shifters.
Turbo V6s are often longitudinal with ridiculous packaging, turbo replacements on most of them are engine out jobs. B5 S4, Z32TT are old cars that come to mind
Depends on the Honda, I did a water outlet on an eighth gen accord k24 and they buried that motherfricker
>Turbo V6s are often longitudinal with ridiculous packaging, turbo replacements on most of them are engine out jobs. B5 S4, Z32TT are old cars that come to mind
Same applies to transverse turbo V6s, 3000GTs are notoriously terrible to work on. The only olf turbo V6s I can think on that would be easy to work on are the GMs (firebirds, Sy/Ty). I suppose a turbo replacement on an A610 wouldn't be too difficult at least.
Transverse engines are cool.
I will only buy a J*panese car when they figure out rustproofing
>Is it the salt we pour on the roads?
>NO! It's the car manufacturers who are wrong...
Let's ignore that nippon 1000x folded steel still rusts much faster than any other brands under the same conditions
Every car company has their rotboxes.
1990s-2000s GMs and Fords (even 2010s like GMT900s rot out QUICK)
MkV VWs
W210 Mercedes
E36/46 BMWs (even E90/92s are rotting out)
Now try to find a rusty 2000s Toyota or Honda. They actually got them right by that time.
>2010s like GMT900s rot out QUICK
can confirm mine was new off the dealer lot and rusting beyond believe 3 years after buying.
eclipse but only at an angle that shows off the POWER BULGE, and also in bright red with the pick-a-nic basket spoiler because it looks just like the generic race cars in the ps1 racing games i loved
>it looks like the generic race cars in the ps1 games
Anon, those "generic race cars" were just Eclipses slightly changed to avoid copyright
yes that's the point
i want it and i want to stick a big white stripe and NAMCO letters on the back
2g eclipse has such a great ass, only the carrera 4s has it beat
Sportwagen Alltrack
These were my two favorite cars as a teen. :3
Both the 4G63t and 3S-GTE still have parts availability, but I assume the GSX will have better parts availability. The All-Trac is probably more-reliable, but good luck getting transmission parts if you need 'em.
I think the GSX looks better (and I had a GS in HS so I really like DSMs) but all-tracs are rare as shit and have that X factor.
I now hate AWD (12th year of Subaru DDing) and would recommend a gloriously-dangerous SW20 in stead.
i'd get a subaru if they didn't have dogshit engines.
>dogshit engines.
I've grown a distaste for Subarus and AWD, but I don't get this meme. Their engines are great (and sound great). I even have the one engine that gets headgasket failures (EJ253) at 140k miles and I'm not worried at all. Slow as frick and gets worse gas mileage than a truck tho.
flat 4s wear the worst of any layout. it's just physics. and also they're super weak
>flat 4s wear the worst of any layout. it's just physics.
Absolutely untrue, look at V6s. Flat-4s are some of the most-balanced engines. Subaru just cheaped-out on headgaskets for one engine 20 years ago (the one I have) and everyone assumed it was inherent to flats in general.
i'm talking about gravity wearing the cylinders into eggs
>i'm talking about gravity wearing the cylinders into eggs
It crossed my mind when I envisioned a free-body-diagram, but the proof is in the pudding and generally flat-4s are just as reliable as I-4s. I don't see any evidence of stock Subarus (excl the headgasket-eating EJ253 which, again, is what I have) getting engine failures at higher rates than other cars.
they burn oil like mad at high miles
my meme ej25d has 225k (original engine) and doesn't burn much
gt4
is that even a question?
Why would you want a GS/RS?
GS/RS 95-99 Eclipses are not DSMs.
They were made and designed by Diamond Star Motors, they're DSMs.
so it's a Mitsubishi or DSM?
Both, clearly.
Initially Diamond-Star Motors was a 50-50 joint venture between Chrysler and Mitsubishi. However, in 1991 the Japanese company purchased its partner's interest, and thereafter the manufacture of Chrysler vehicles was on a contractual basis. Chrysler sold its equity stake to Mitsubishi in 1993, and Diamond-Star Motors was renamed Mitsubishi Motors Manufacturing America (MMMA) on July 1, 1995.[3] Despite the departure, the two companies have maintained various co-operative manufacturing agreements since and considered all vehicle produced until 1995[9] as Diamond Star Motors.
No Mitsubishi Sirius engine, no DSM.
Well according to your logic the 2G GSX isn't a DSM either. I've owned a non-turbo 2G DSM, there were DSM stickers under the hood.
iirc only early 95 eclipses (build date sometime in 94) use the DSM sticker, anything later uses a mitsubishi sticker.
hardest part about owning them is finding a good example and finding body parts, it's got a 22re and a w58 so drivetrain-wise it's pretty solid.
source: i own both a early 2g gsx and a a65
The DSM name gets thrown around a lot when talking Eclipses
I just realized I have not seen a 2g dsm on the road or even car meets in my flyover state in 5+ years. And I have been daily driving Z32s and E36s for that whole time.
doesn't help that every wigger buys these things to rice the frick out of them just to do a burnout in an intersection & drive through a burger king.
How do you guys feel about the A60 Celicas? I know it's not the one everyone pictures when someone says "Celica" but I think it has its own charms. There's a GTS available a few states over with 190,000 miles going for ~$6,500 but I'm afraid it could shit the bed and rack up maintainace bills soon after I buy it just due to age and mileage.
Think it's worth the risk? Would be my first actual car past the crumbling Civic I've been driving for 11 years since I was a teenager. I just want a fun car, bros.
it's the sexiest but it's not AWD