Well, seeing as you started off running 17's and got it down to low 15's, I'd say thats a big improvement. Now considering the company, not too many people are gonna agree on your choice of automobiles, however I know what it's like to wanna modify what you have.

If you can fix that traction problem, I don't see why you wouldn't be able to break 14's. 2.6 60ft is horrible...........for any car.

 

spyder, i give you hella props on taking two seconds off your 1/4 mile time. i dont car what car you have....thats still impressive in my book. i mean hell, i havent taken my car to the track yet, but you figure if i run 13.3-13.6 at the track. and if can get it down to a 11.3-11.6 i know damn well i would happy as a pig in S***.

but i can see where warrtalon, annd the others are coming from. with as much money as your goin to poor into the lancer your could probably save up and get an EVO or something else.

but thats your choice, i had an 03 OZ....and i would like to see what it could have done. but the money i was goin to put into that i saved and bout my 05 EVO. But what ever, you do good luck andi got your back!!!!

 

it may not be the craziest thing on earthj...but ill tell ya what..its a hell of alot of fun comapared to a stock one...props to you spyder becasue i get the same crap all of the time...

 

thanks everyone.

 

which motor mounts should i get flex or firm?

 

what thos evos fail to see is that we are taking a very difficult car to mod, the car is not supported by even an 8th of the amount of manufacturers as the evo, so blow it up your tailpipes

 

Not sure...
They are both firmer than stock. After reading the Ralliart how to review on some mounts I went firm front and flex rear.

I get them installed on Thursday.

The firm might be a little too hard but we'll see. I can barely depress the urethane in the firm mounts but the flex I can atleast get a thumbprint in.

you'll have to decide how much vibration you want to live with vs wheel hop reduction. I hope my choices won't be too bad but people say you only feel it at idle.

WADAD

 

i got both firm and getting them in the mail soon......what other mods u have....that seems a little slow.....do u have clutch or flywheel?? also what elevation and temp u at? read my mod list....i know im running faster than that.....but i havent been to the track yet....just from running other cars i get a ballpark figure.....once i get my motor mounts installed im goin to the track and see what i can lay down.

 

the lancer is not a great straight liner... i think if its heavily modded with great suspension.. it can make a really good AutoX'er

 

Is that slow? What should i be getting, i dont really know. I dont have either flywheel or clutch, whatever I listed is what i have. elevations was 1121.27 ft above sea level and the temp was about 70-75

 

You are right on par with other stage 1's. The 15.2 is actually on the low end of what I have seen. Usually 15.3-15.4 in that range. The 60's for all have usually been terrible.

I really think if you guys eased it off the line that you should be able to run better but the tendency is to be too agressive on the launch.

WADAD

 

No, we don't fail to see that. In fact, that is our point. Why bother wasting money on such a terrible platform when you could take another platform that is just as cheap, and go MUCH faster for LESS money. Not only that, but you can get a car that looks much better, handles better, and holds its value better. What car is that? A turbo DSM like I said before.

A few guys said they were impressed that he dropped 2 seconds. Well, I suppose that's an accomplishment, but when you're talking about 15s vs 17s, that's not really significant. Going from 13.1 to 11.1 is a _HUGE_ accomplishment. Going from 17.1 to 15.1 is so-so and still puts you slower than most stock performance cars.

As for DSMs, you can get a 1G AWD Talon for $3-4k that runs 15.1 stock and get it down to 13.1 with way less mods than was needed to turbo-ize this Lancer. You can run high 12s on the stock 14b with an MBC, K&N cone filter, and 3" exhaust, but that takes great driving. With average driving, you can run low-to-mid 13s all day. I know, because I did it and had several friends do it, too, after I showed them the potential of DSMs. Hell, I went 12.58 in my FWD Eclipse on the stock turbo, and I didn't even buy an exhaust. I just unbolted that sucker at the downpipe. So, why go through all this trouble to end up with a slow Lancer, when you could have a much better platform that looks better, has nicer interior, is just as fast stock as yours is modded, and that can go as fast as C5 vettes with minimal mods?

 

i would think it should be in the mid 14's if not low 14s....i have raced a GTi that was a friend and he pulled a 14 flat....i raced him at 5.6psi and my AFR ****ed up and he didt move that much on me.....let me get to a track and see what i can do...

 

I did exactly what you mentioned and man i do not regret it at all. This turbo eclipse just makes my hair jump everytime boost kicks in. I love this DSM because of its very tunable and has the bulletproof 4G63T. I plan on tuning it to run 12s by next spring. I bought my eclipse gst a week ago, car is sick. has alot of miles (90k) but its a 1999 and i only got it for $4500 (bargained from $5995 asking price) and is in pretty damn good condition. Now im gonna spend plenty of money from left over insurance money for my lost OZ and tune my eclipse. I cant wait, i just wish i had the awd model but they are sooooooooooooo hard to find. Atleast this fwd came stock with a lsd. But, i miss the oz and its 4 doors...if you are a family person and likes a little speed for less money...go with the oz and turbo it...but if youre single and just looking for a quick ride that looks pretty cool...go with a turbo eclipse.

 

Thanks for your input on helping us run faster guys.

WADAD