Cobalts SS banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
its nice to hear that our cars are as praised as a proven car like the Rsx which has had years to improve itself and be as refined as it is now.. GM's going in the right direction IMO


NOW THEY JUST NEED TO BRING BACK THE CAMARO!! LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Is 14.8 a normal time for the SS? I also love how they say in a caption in the mag that the RSX has 5 more HP than the SS but the SS is quicker through the 1/4 and traps higher than the RSX that is 100lbs lighter than the SS. Don't most RL and SS dyno about 200 at the wheels? Which would really be closer to 230 crank which would explain why the heavier car would be faster. I bet the RSX puts down like 170 at the wheels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
i've seen dynos on here upwards of 217whp.... i love how GM underrates their stuff.. my insurance payments love it too :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
krzykarl said:
i've seen dynos on here upwards of 217whp.... i love how GM underrates their stuff.. my insurance payments love it too :D
Ya, dodge did the same with the SRT4. I think they do it so they can get younger buyers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,460 Posts
Insurance purposes....

I think they've averaged 215 at the wheels so far.

14.8=test driver error

low 14's are possible
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,648 Posts
LOL KSE kills me!! Always doggin those HIGH et's LOL!! I think KSE might be a CSS fan! LOL You want one man? It was a decent article... though I hate how they use RATED hp #s instead of true dyno numbers.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
I love the part of the article that talks about the "FMIC" that you guys have. Yet it is the a/c condersor:rolleyes:. I almost fell outta my chair when I read that part, but the article seemed fairly fair with the exception of some numbers like whp and et for both cars (since if they can't drive one, they probably can't drive the other...and I don't know what the rsx-s can do at the track).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,444 Posts
You guys make me laugh soooo much. :D <----me laughing soooo much.

First KSE... 14.8 = average. 16s are possible for the Cobalt SS/SC and that would = driver error.

Cobizzle... define "true dyno numbers". Every other day a dyno is completely different. Dynos are only used for tuning. It is so easy to make a car dyno with +/-10-20hp. by accident.

PocketViper... the RSX type- S is now rated at 201hp. And most dynos(like they really matter) I have seen 175-183hp.

Now for the rest of you guys(not all)..... the main reason for me laughing is with how you guys love this article but hated the Car and Driver one. Look at how they rated each car. Now add in things like resale value, longevity, warranty, etc... which are things I bet Car and Driver factored in.

PS... Cobizzle, KSE, and 87camaroPA...you 3 should go in together and buy a Cobalt SS. :p :D

Peace
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
wasey13 said:
You guys make me laugh soooo much. :D <----me laughing soooo much.

First KSE... 14.8 = average. 16s are possible for the Cobalt SS/SC and that would = driver error.

Cobizzle... define "true dyno numbers". Every other day a dyno is completely different. Dynos are only used for tuning. It is so easy to make a car dyno with +/-10-20hp. by accident.

PocketViper... the RSX type- S is now rated at 201hp. And most dynos(like they really matter) I have seen 175-183hp.

Now for the rest of you guys(not all)..... the main reason for me laughing is with how you guys love this article but hated the Car and Driver one. Look at how they rated each car. Now add in things like resale value, longevity, warranty, etc... which are things I bet Car and Driver factored in.

PS... Cobizzle, KSE, and 87camaroPA...you 3 should go in together and buy a Cobalt SS. :p :D

Peace
Good reply :) , I think that a 15 could be considered driver error, I ran at a pretty unprepped track and the lowest I ever got was 14.88, and you guessed it, I F'd it up and missed 3rd, if your running 15's (in an SS/SC) you need to look at your driving, only mod was removing the spare tire, can't wait to find out what it runs with this 75 shot, drag radials, and my other, well we will say secret info... :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Good article! Finally one that doesn't seem to be loaded with biased writing. And none of those "We chose the car that we could best sip lattes in" excuses.

Glad to see the SS come out on top of the Integra. :)

And the quarter mile time issue...might as well get used to seeing those numbers all over the board. I've seen an SS at the track run a 14.1 et w/ drag radials, but honestly think the car could at least approach that time on the street tires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
KSE said:
Insurance purposes....

I think they've averaged 215 at the wheels so far.

14.8=test driver error

low 14's are possible
even though i would like to belive you on that one.....nah 14.8 sounds about right for the average person. But i feel they'll be enough people between 14.5 and 14.8. But thats in stock form i could see some 14.1's -14.5's more offten with a simple tire/wheel size change. me I got a 14.806 at 95.39mph with a 2.298 60ft so i could see toppin out at around 14.5 or 14.6. Honestly i could see the redlines maybe being able to hit 14-14.5's stock on there tire package but us not to sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
234 Posts
XeroState said:
I love the part of the article that talks about the "FMIC" that you guys have. Yet it is the a/c condersor:rolleyes:. I almost fell outta my chair when I read that part, but the article seemed fairly fair with the exception of some numbers like whp and et for both cars (since if they can't drive one, they probably can't drive the other...and I don't know what the rsx-s can do at the track).

I heard that the CobaltSS has some kind of intercooler for the supercharger up front.

Does it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
137 Posts
Yes, the SS/SC is indeed intercooled.
I think it's interesting how different this article was than the C&D article. C&D basically doesn't consider the two cars even in the same class.
Personally, I think guys who like domestic cars wouldn't consider the RSx and vice versa.
Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
That was a good read for you SS/SC Cobalt guys. But I want to know how the 2.4L SS does against the RSX type-S or any other JDM in this segment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
tomt5078 said:
I heard that the CobaltSS has some kind of intercooler for the supercharger up front.

Does it?
Well the heat exchanger part of the "intercooler" (if you wanna call it that) is sandwhiched between the ac condensor (thing you see out front) and the rad (thing you see inside the car). So what they were seeing was the ac condensor yet they called it a mean looking FMIC.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,648 Posts
wasey13 said:
You guys make me laugh soooo much. :D <----me laughing soooo much.

First KSE... 14.8 = average. 16s are possible for the Cobalt SS/SC and that would = driver error.

Cobizzle... define "true dyno numbers". Every other day a dyno is completely different. Dynos are only used for tuning. It is so easy to make a car dyno with +/-10-20hp. by accident.

PocketViper... the RSX type- S is now rated at 201hp. And most dynos(like they really matter) I have seen 175-183hp.

Now for the rest of you guys(not all)..... the main reason for me laughing is with how you guys love this article but hated the Car and Driver one. Look at how they rated each car. Now add in things like resale value, longevity, warranty, etc... which are things I bet Car and Driver factored in.

PS... Cobizzle, KSE, and 87camaroPA...you 3 should go in together and buy a Cobalt SS. :p :D
Peace
Alright smart eleck! You're banned!! LOL jk! I'll have one soon enough.

But as far as the dyno numbers go, I was talkin (like someone else stated) about how the SS is rated at 205 but actually throws down about 215 (avg.) at the wheels... and the RSX was rated at 210... Now what 201? And puts less to the wheels. In the article he/she stated that the SS had 5 less hp yet was still quicker down the 1/4mile. Thats just simply not the case. The SS CLEARLY has more power than the Type S. Not a WHOLE lot but still pretty significant. Thats all I was really gettin at was they were goin off of Chevy's underrateings other than the cars true power. I understand every dyno will be different but I was just tryin to get the point across that we all know the Chevy has more than 205 horses.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top