why the **** is the tls so slow?
#1
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: usa
Age: 44
Posts: 1,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why the **** is the tls so slow?
god damn i have a 2003 tls with aem cai and a comptech exhuast.
and well i dont get that rush i had with my 1997 eclipse gst.
yes the tl is much more refined and comfortable and just over all a better car. but i dont get any chills when i accelerate with my tls..
i miss my eclipse so much. there is no comparison to how my eclipse made me feel to the tls. in no ****ing way.
i think i should of kept my eclipse for another 3 years then get a car then.
****.
and well i dont get that rush i had with my 1997 eclipse gst.
yes the tl is much more refined and comfortable and just over all a better car. but i dont get any chills when i accelerate with my tls..
i miss my eclipse so much. there is no comparison to how my eclipse made me feel to the tls. in no ****ing way.
i think i should of kept my eclipse for another 3 years then get a car then.
****.
![Cry](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/cry.gif)
#5
Burning Brakes
Well, no turbo, and the car is at least 500 pounds heavier. There you go.
If you were looking for raw power, you bought the wrong kind of car, that's for sure. Try a Z06 next time.
If you were looking for raw power, you bought the wrong kind of car, that's for sure. Try a Z06 next time.
#6
Re: why the **** is the tls so slow?
The CL-S is faster than the GST I know the TLS is as well.
A more refined car you will not feel the speed as much as you do in a pocket rocket.
A more refined car you will not feel the speed as much as you do in a pocket rocket.
Originally posted by asloudasitgets
god damn i have a 2003 tls with aem cai and a comptech exhuast.
and well i dont get that rush i had with my 1997 eclipse gst.
yes the tl is much more refined and comfortable and just over all a better car. but i dont get any chills when i accelerate with my tls..
i miss my eclipse so much. there is no comparison to how my eclipse made me feel to the tls. in no ****ing way.
i think i should of kept my eclipse for another 3 years then get a car then.
****.
god damn i have a 2003 tls with aem cai and a comptech exhuast.
and well i dont get that rush i had with my 1997 eclipse gst.
yes the tl is much more refined and comfortable and just over all a better car. but i dont get any chills when i accelerate with my tls..
i miss my eclipse so much. there is no comparison to how my eclipse made me feel to the tls. in no ****ing way.
i think i should of kept my eclipse for another 3 years then get a car then.
****.
![Cry](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/cry.gif)
#7
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Plantation
Age: 59
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hahaha...I know what you be talkin' 'bout, however, you know, if you were to put that eclipse next to the TL, you'd see how all that extra rubber, soundproofing, and overhead the TL has, insulates you from that get-up-and-boogie feeling you say is missin'
The two vehicles being discussed here are in totally different classes. If you want speed rush, ride a two wheel 4 cylinder.
The two vehicles being discussed here are in totally different classes. If you want speed rush, ride a two wheel 4 cylinder.
Trending Topics
#8
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (5)
![Lightbulb](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/icons/icon3.gif)
Originally posted by stiletto
Hahaha...I know what you be talkin' 'bout, however, you know, if you were to put that eclipse next to the TL, you'd see how all that extra rubber, soundproofing, and overhead the TL has, insulates you from that get-up-and-boogie feeling you say is missin'
Hahaha...I know what you be talkin' 'bout, however, you know, if you were to put that eclipse next to the TL, you'd see how all that extra rubber, soundproofing, and overhead the TL has, insulates you from that get-up-and-boogie feeling you say is missin'
#9
My A4 1.8T turbo feels faster because it takes a split second for the turbo to spool up and then it lurches forward throwing you back in your seat.
However, my TLS is light years faster. It's not even funny how much faster it is.
If you want a placebo effect then go back to a turbo car.
However, my TLS is light years faster. It's not even funny how much faster it is.
If you want a placebo effect then go back to a turbo car.
#11
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Boston (Stoneham) MA
Age: 47
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My A4 1.8T turbo feels faster because it takes a split second for the turbo to spool up and then it lurches forward throwing you back in your seat.
But on another side note....I don't think a TLS is as fast as a turbo eclipse. I'm not sure what they run stock, but I know a guy who ran a 13.8 with just a boost controller his second time at the track. With a beefier clutch to ensure some nice AWD launches, imagine the potential of just the stock turbo. I would guess mid to high 14's are the norm for a turbo eclilpse.
#12
Senior Moderator
Re: why the **** is the tls so slow?
[QUOTE]Originally posted by asloudasitgets
god damn i have a 2003 tls with aem cai and a comptech exhuast.
and well i dont get that rush i had with my 1997 eclipse gst.
yes the tl is much more refined and comfortable and just over all a better car. but i dont get any chills when i accelerate with my tls..
i miss my eclipse so much. there is no comparison to how my eclipse made me feel to the tls. in no ****ing way.
i think i should of kept my eclipse for another 3 years then get a car then.
****.
[/QUOTE
you think its faster only because you feel the onslot of the turbo kicking in, whereas the tl is more refined and linear acceleration but faster
god damn i have a 2003 tls with aem cai and a comptech exhuast.
and well i dont get that rush i had with my 1997 eclipse gst.
yes the tl is much more refined and comfortable and just over all a better car. but i dont get any chills when i accelerate with my tls..
i miss my eclipse so much. there is no comparison to how my eclipse made me feel to the tls. in no ****ing way.
i think i should of kept my eclipse for another 3 years then get a car then.
****.
![Cry](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/cry.gif)
you think its faster only because you feel the onslot of the turbo kicking in, whereas the tl is more refined and linear acceleration but faster
#14
Eclipses will not run 13s with just a boost controller. lol.
The CL-S or TL-S will smoke a Eclipse turbo or non-turbo easy. I ran a guy in Houston which we became friends afterwards in my Maxima 5spd which was a 98 190 hp model with just CAI and exhaust. We ran, I left him each time. He had alot of mods too.
The CL-S or TL-S will smoke a Eclipse turbo or non-turbo easy. I ran a guy in Houston which we became friends afterwards in my Maxima 5spd which was a 98 190 hp model with just CAI and exhaust. We ran, I left him each time. He had alot of mods too.
Originally posted by Ray_Khan
very true....on a side note...the big tuebo kits on the 1.8T's don't feel as fast as stock turbos with a chip....probably because the spool up time is more gradual where the stock K03 just kicks in right away full force. so the big turbo kits are in a way, deceptively fast with a peakier (less flat) torque curve.
But on another side note....I don't think a TLS is as fast as a turbo eclipse. I'm not sure what they run stock, but I know a guy who ran a 13.8 with just a boost controller his second time at the track. With a beefier clutch to ensure some nice AWD launches, imagine the potential of just the stock turbo. I would guess mid to high 14's are the norm for a turbo eclilpse.
very true....on a side note...the big tuebo kits on the 1.8T's don't feel as fast as stock turbos with a chip....probably because the spool up time is more gradual where the stock K03 just kicks in right away full force. so the big turbo kits are in a way, deceptively fast with a peakier (less flat) torque curve.
But on another side note....I don't think a TLS is as fast as a turbo eclipse. I'm not sure what they run stock, but I know a guy who ran a 13.8 with just a boost controller his second time at the track. With a beefier clutch to ensure some nice AWD launches, imagine the potential of just the stock turbo. I would guess mid to high 14's are the norm for a turbo eclilpse.
#16
Hahahaha! guess i'm not the only one who feels that the TL-S is kinda slow. I know it's fast but it feels slow. I'm doing 45 and 50 on a 30 road and didnt even realize it until i look at the speedometer. Where as when i'm in my brother's camry, doing 40 and i will notice it right away. Just the other nite i did 95 on the freeway and i thought i was going 70. LOL! Damn i think i need to get myself a radar.
#17
Race Director
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 11,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by this is me
Hahahaha! guess i'm not the only one who feels that the TL-S is kinda slow. I know it's fast but it feels slow. I'm doing 45 and 50 on a 30 road and didnt even realize it until i look at the speedometer. Where as when i'm in my brother's camry, doing 40 and i will notice it right away. Just the other nite i did 95 on the freeway and i thought i was going 70. LOL! Damn i think i need to get myself a radar.
Hahahaha! guess i'm not the only one who feels that the TL-S is kinda slow. I know it's fast but it feels slow. I'm doing 45 and 50 on a 30 road and didnt even realize it until i look at the speedometer. Where as when i'm in my brother's camry, doing 40 and i will notice it right away. Just the other nite i did 95 on the freeway and i thought i was going 70. LOL! Damn i think i need to get myself a radar.
#18
Originally posted by 2004TL
YOU GUYS ARE COMPLAINING? You should be glad a car going that fast isnt shaking, that means its built well when your going 95 your can barely feel it, that means that they made a nice smooth ride..
YOU GUYS ARE COMPLAINING? You should be glad a car going that fast isnt shaking, that means its built well when your going 95 your can barely feel it, that means that they made a nice smooth ride..
#19
Instructor
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In addition to use regular gasoline. Once in while, there is a chance that the regular TL engine is installed in the Type-S thus performed poorly like the 16 seconds 1/4 mile 03 Type-S tested by Car and Driver recently
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
#20
Cruisin'
Join Date: Oct 2002
Age: 54
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is fast...it does "feel" slow...I tried to explain that to the highway patrol BOTH time they pulled me over within 4 weeks.
I use cruise control all the time now...since I cannot trust the "feeling" of speed in my TL-S.
Now, in my Integra GSR, you could feel it and hear it. I miss that little car, ONLY because I went 129K before EVER needing breaks. I have had a break job already at 9K in the TL-S...I don't know how that can happen...I NEVER use them!
I use cruise control all the time now...since I cannot trust the "feeling" of speed in my TL-S.
Now, in my Integra GSR, you could feel it and hear it. I miss that little car, ONLY because I went 129K before EVER needing breaks. I have had a break job already at 9K in the TL-S...I don't know how that can happen...I NEVER use them!
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
#21
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Boston (Stoneham) MA
Age: 47
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eclipses will not run 13s with just a boost controller. lol.
look at the bottom of this thread
#22
Corrrection. Only AWD GSX or Talons can put down good times just like the WRX because they are AWD and launch really hard. A GST willl never hit 14s stock ever or even with basic mods. AWD in a way is CHEATING for most 1/4 races against other cars because they have 4 tires getting grip instead of 2. They can produce a llow 1/4 time, but most other car swill kill them on a roll.
Originally posted by Ray_Khan
people often say the east coast tracks are faster, but I have no idea if they are and how much faster, but I guy I know ran a 14.0@93 in his eclipse in New Hamshire in teh spring with basic mods. I can't find the post, but when the guys went up to the same NH track a few weeks ago, and it was really cold, he ran a 13.8. I know a stock eclipse is about 210 hp and 205 ft lb tq. It is relatively light and can launch well with it's AWD. Turbo cars really run well in the cold (all cars do of course) since the air is denser...so more air mass at the same boost. I have ni idea what an intake, exhasut and boost controller can do witha stock turbo, but I would assume it can be close to 250 hp and a crapload of torque. My puny little 1.8T Audi engine can be tuned to 220-230 hp and 250 ft lbs of torque on 93 octane fuel. So I'd assume the potential of the lighter, better geared eclipse is about what I've guessed. I know a guy who has ran 14.6@93 in a porky A4 on 93 octane fuel in 70 degree weather with 17" wheels. Actually, Ferizzo was there that night as well. he ran a 15.2@93. The guy in the A4 had a stock turbo but a chip, and I belive an exhasut and possibly an intake. The guy obviously drives well since he had a 1.8 or 1.8 60 ft time. So with allthat said, turbo eclipses are fast. Witrh a good driver, they can put down some good times with very few mods.
look at the bottom of this thread
people often say the east coast tracks are faster, but I have no idea if they are and how much faster, but I guy I know ran a 14.0@93 in his eclipse in New Hamshire in teh spring with basic mods. I can't find the post, but when the guys went up to the same NH track a few weeks ago, and it was really cold, he ran a 13.8. I know a stock eclipse is about 210 hp and 205 ft lb tq. It is relatively light and can launch well with it's AWD. Turbo cars really run well in the cold (all cars do of course) since the air is denser...so more air mass at the same boost. I have ni idea what an intake, exhasut and boost controller can do witha stock turbo, but I would assume it can be close to 250 hp and a crapload of torque. My puny little 1.8T Audi engine can be tuned to 220-230 hp and 250 ft lbs of torque on 93 octane fuel. So I'd assume the potential of the lighter, better geared eclipse is about what I've guessed. I know a guy who has ran 14.6@93 in a porky A4 on 93 octane fuel in 70 degree weather with 17" wheels. Actually, Ferizzo was there that night as well. he ran a 15.2@93. The guy in the A4 had a stock turbo but a chip, and I belive an exhasut and possibly an intake. The guy obviously drives well since he had a 1.8 or 1.8 60 ft time. So with allthat said, turbo eclipses are fast. Witrh a good driver, they can put down some good times with very few mods.
look at the bottom of this thread
#23
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Boston (Stoneham) MA
Age: 47
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Corrrection. Only AWD GSX or Talons can put down good times just like the WRX because they are AWD and launch really hard. A GST willl never hit 14s stock ever or even with basic mods. AWD in a way is CHEATING for most 1/4 races against other cars because they have 4 tires getting grip instead of 2. They can produce a llow 1/4 time, but most other car swill kill them on a roll.
#24
Re: why the **** is the tls so slow?
Originally posted by asloudasitgets
god damn i have a 2003 tls with aem cai and a comptech exhuast.
and well i dont get that rush i had with my 1997 eclipse gst.
yes the tl is much more refined and comfortable and just over all a better car. but i dont get any chills when i accelerate with my tls..
i miss my eclipse so much. there is no comparison to how my eclipse made me feel to the tls. in no ****ing way.
i think i should of kept my eclipse for another 3 years then get a car then.
****.
god damn i have a 2003 tls with aem cai and a comptech exhuast.
and well i dont get that rush i had with my 1997 eclipse gst.
yes the tl is much more refined and comfortable and just over all a better car. but i dont get any chills when i accelerate with my tls..
i miss my eclipse so much. there is no comparison to how my eclipse made me feel to the tls. in no ****ing way.
i think i should of kept my eclipse for another 3 years then get a car then.
****.
![Cry](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/cry.gif)
![Wink](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif)
#27
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Francisco
Age: 42
Posts: 1,408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anything but slow. I was racing a CL-S the other day and I smoked him at 130 and I didn't even know that I was goin that fast. My girl was sitting nest to me and she was on the cell phone chatting away like nothing was happening. I shut it down at around 138.
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
#28
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Plantation
Age: 59
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anything but slow. I was racing a CL-S the other day and I smoked him at 130 and I didn't even know that I was goin that fast. My girl was sitting nest to me and she was on the cell phone chatting away like nothing was happening. I shut it down at around 138.
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
#29
Cruisin'
Join Date: Nov 2002
Age: 62
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe he's missing the torque?
Maybe he thinks the TL-S is slow because it is lower in torque than other cars of similar horsepower? I know in my comparison when I drove the G35 vs. the TL-S, there is a definite difference in launching the cars. Once you get beyond that, they're equal. Every Honda I've had have always been high revvers and a little less torque.
#30
I'm not complaining either...I had an Accord V6 before my TL and it felt a little faster, but of course it wasn't...I know because after getting my TL-S I smoked the shiet out of my sister's Accord v6...bad...hahahaha But don't sweat it because it just goes to show that the TL was well built.
#31
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Boston (Stoneham) MA
Age: 47
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe he thinks the TL-S is slow because it is lower in torque than other cars of similar horsepower? I know in my comparison when I drove the G35 vs. the TL-S, there is a definite difference in launching the cars. Once you get beyond that, they're equal. Every Honda I've had have always been high revvers and a little less torque
agreed...but add in RWD vs FWD and the shape of the torque curve. A flat torque curve makes with more low end torque will make a care feel faster as well. Part of the reason a turbo cars feel so fast. Unless they are running big turbos of course.
#32
A stock 99 Eclipse GSX will smoke a TL-S! That is a fact. Off the line the Eclipse will take at least a car and a half. AWD is no joke when theres someone who knows how to drive.
GS-T on the other hand will lose to the TL-S due to loss of traction.
99 ECLIPSE GSX vs. 2003 CL- Type S (6spd) Now thats a race!
What do ya guyz think?
GS-T on the other hand will lose to the TL-S due to loss of traction.
99 ECLIPSE GSX vs. 2003 CL- Type S (6spd) Now thats a race!
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
What do ya guyz think?
#33
Lead Footed
Originally posted by 1SICKLEX
The TL-S is anything but slow. It feels fast to me and is fast. It is a fast car, this is really weird.
The TL-S is anything but slow. It feels fast to me and is fast. It is a fast car, this is really weird.
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
BTW - we'll see how fast mine is next weekend . . . if it doesn't rain or sleet. :P
Ruf
#34
Originally posted by tls988
Once in while, there is a chance that the regular TL engine is installed in the Type-S thus performed poorly like the 16 seconds 1/4 mile 03 Type-S tested by Car and Driver recently
Once in while, there is a chance that the regular TL engine is installed in the Type-S thus performed poorly like the 16 seconds 1/4 mile 03 Type-S tested by Car and Driver recently
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
yure not serious, are you?
#35
Originally posted by Edr0e
A stock 99 Eclipse GSX will smoke a TL-S! That is a fact. Off the line the Eclipse will take at least a car and a half. AWD is no joke when theres someone who knows how to drive.
GS-T on the other hand will lose to the TL-S due to loss of traction.
99 ECLIPSE GSX vs. 2003 CL- Type S (6spd) Now thats a race!
What do ya guyz think?
A stock 99 Eclipse GSX will smoke a TL-S! That is a fact. Off the line the Eclipse will take at least a car and a half. AWD is no joke when theres someone who knows how to drive.
GS-T on the other hand will lose to the TL-S due to loss of traction.
99 ECLIPSE GSX vs. 2003 CL- Type S (6spd) Now thats a race!
![Big Grin](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
What do ya guyz think?
#36
AWD most definitely gives one the advantage for 60 ft. times. Many guys with only 'lightly modded' Stealth RT/TTs and 3000 GT/VR4s are getting 1.6 and 1.7 sec. 60 ft. times.
Car And Driver tested the 3000 GT/VR4 when it first came out. They were getting 5.4 sec from 0 - 60. The 1/4 mile was coming by at high 90's at 14.3 or so. Later that year they got a clue and figured if they slipped the clutch (better to slip the clutch then to blow a differential) at 5500 rpms and launched the car a lot harder, then the 0 - 60 time went from 5.4 to 4.8 and the 1/4 mile dropped from 14.3 or so (I say 'so' because I can't remember exactly) to 13.8. That is a full .5 second gained just by learning how to launch an AWD car.
I also raced twice from a dead stop to 80 mph or so an 99 Eclipse GSX with my 02 TL-S. He instantly gained 1 length on me out of the hole and another .5 car length through 1st gear. From about 45 to 80 though I kept it even at 1.5 car lengths behind him. He was stock and so is my 02 TL-S. AWD kicks ass especially from stoplight to stoplight. Even a bad driver can race as long as he slips the clutch and gives it full throttle when launching the car.
I have 13g turbos and various aother mods and I have beaten many a C5 Corvette by two three and even four lengths from roughly 0 - 60 (they give up after that eve though they can close the gap a 'little' with the broad torque of the pushrod V-8). With the mods I have and putting out roughly 500 HP at the crank, I am probably doing 0 - 60 in the 3.7 to 4.0 range and since my car is AWD I get nearly a perfect launch every time.
Car And Driver tested the 3000 GT/VR4 when it first came out. They were getting 5.4 sec from 0 - 60. The 1/4 mile was coming by at high 90's at 14.3 or so. Later that year they got a clue and figured if they slipped the clutch (better to slip the clutch then to blow a differential) at 5500 rpms and launched the car a lot harder, then the 0 - 60 time went from 5.4 to 4.8 and the 1/4 mile dropped from 14.3 or so (I say 'so' because I can't remember exactly) to 13.8. That is a full .5 second gained just by learning how to launch an AWD car.
I also raced twice from a dead stop to 80 mph or so an 99 Eclipse GSX with my 02 TL-S. He instantly gained 1 length on me out of the hole and another .5 car length through 1st gear. From about 45 to 80 though I kept it even at 1.5 car lengths behind him. He was stock and so is my 02 TL-S. AWD kicks ass especially from stoplight to stoplight. Even a bad driver can race as long as he slips the clutch and gives it full throttle when launching the car.
I have 13g turbos and various aother mods and I have beaten many a C5 Corvette by two three and even four lengths from roughly 0 - 60 (they give up after that eve though they can close the gap a 'little' with the broad torque of the pushrod V-8). With the mods I have and putting out roughly 500 HP at the crank, I am probably doing 0 - 60 in the 3.7 to 4.0 range and since my car is AWD I get nearly a perfect launch every time.
#37
Re: why the **** is the tls so slow?
Originally posted by asloudasitgets
god damn i have a 2003 tls with aem cai and a comptech exhuast.
and well i dont get that rush i had with my 1997 eclipse gst.
god damn i have a 2003 tls with aem cai and a comptech exhuast.
and well i dont get that rush i had with my 1997 eclipse gst.
![Jump](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/jump.gif)
_
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Pham Alvan
2G TL (1999-2003)
38
03-16-2016 09:17 AM