cobalt ss

**guitarjay76** · 04-28-2009, 07:15 PM

I've been hearing a lot of Cobalt SS stories lately. Has anyone actually ran one with a few mods under its belt? Are they REALLY all that, or just another little car trying to compete?

**noxside** · 04-28-2009, 08:13 PM

Originally Posted by guitarjay76

Are they REALLY all that,

No. Ive raced a few, each with mods done (ie intake,exhaust,pulley). And they were all slow. Never seen a TC one though, so that would probably be a different story.

**Superluminal** · 04-28-2009, 09:09 PM

The supercharged models are decent. You can get them into the high 13s for cheap, but there's not too many faster than that. The new turbo ones, you can get 300hp out of the box with a dealer re-flash and some bolt ons. They run in the 13s as well. They should have more potential since they're turbocharged, but they're also FWD, so that's another problem area.

99% of the ones you'll run into on the street you should have no problems with in an LS1 powered car.

**Zinergy** · 04-29-2009, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by Superluminal

The supercharged models are decent. You can get them into the high 13s for cheap, but there's not too many faster than that. The new turbo ones, you can get 300hp out of the box with a dealer re-flash and some bolt ons. They run in the 13s as well. They should have more potential since they're turbocharged, but they're also FWD, so that's another problem area.

99% of the ones you'll run into on the street you should have no problems with in an LS1 powered car.

The new cobalt SS is a whole different machine compared to the supercharged version, not just because its turbo but for a couple reasons.

1. turbo makes more power and is easier to make power
2. brembo brakes and a slightly revised suspension makes the car the fastest FWD drive car you can get for the price
3.The new GM direct injection system has the ability to supply the car with enough fuel to make 400whp, no fuel system upgrades are needed until after that point
4. They now have launch control and no lift shift feature which means you launch perfect everytime and you launch on boost and you lose less boost when shifting

**98T/Aformula.** · 04-29-2009, 09:30 AM

I ran one a cupple years ago the guy said it was pertty much stg3. I am not to sure what that means, he told me at the time but I forgot now, but even then I still had no problem with him. We went from a 20mph roll because fwd=no traction. I want to go test drive a new one just for fun just so I could shift gears without taking my foot off of the gas lol.

**JoeShmoe** · 04-29-2009, 07:53 PM

I heard they're all that on a race track. The new Cobalt SS set the front wheel drive record at Nurburgring (spelling?).

Also, it barely, and I mean just BARELY lost to a Mitsubishi Evo MR at Mazda Raceway (Laguna Seca). The Evo was much higher priced and had like 30 more horsepower. Motor Trend, pretty recent issue.

And it also beat out the new WRX on one of those tracks (forget which one).

**blue02Z** · 04-30-2009, 03:24 AM

car and driver got an cobalt ss around a road course like 3-5 seconds faster than the evo or sti. new ss's are very potent and if you get one with just a few mods be ready for a good race. they are very light and the fact that you can get more than 300whp in a few mods makes em pretty damn fast. youtube some vids

**Electric** · 04-30-2009, 08:03 AM

The New Cobalt SS in my mind is a GREAT BUY. Why buy an EVO or STi when the Cobalt is on their ass in the twisties and a straight line for over $10,000 less!

**Zinergy** · 04-30-2009, 08:56 AM

Originally Posted by Electric

The New Cobalt SS in my mind is a GREAT BUY. Why buy an EVO or STi when the Cobalt is on their ass in the twisties and a straight line for over $10,000 less!

For 1 it wont beat them in a straight line, even the new turbo SS is a 13.8-14.2 car and the EVO X and STI have both hit 12s bone stock. And both the STI and EVO have more aftermarket. People have made 800whp with the boxer engine and 1000whp with evo and DSM engine

**JoeShmoe** · 04-30-2009, 12:12 PM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sounds like you're comparing the average time for the Cobalt SS vs. the best possible time for the Evo/STI.

**jlindelow** · 04-30-2009, 12:15 PM

they cant hang with an f-body though can they???

**Zinergy** · 04-30-2009, 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by JoeShmoe

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sounds like you're comparing the average time for the Cobalt SS vs. the best possible time for the Evo/STI.

AHHHH no, people have gone high 12s with bone stock evos and STIs, But the average driver with a little practice can knock of low to mid 13s easy. The cobalt cant plain and simple.

**Sarvoth** · 04-30-2009, 12:53 PM

Originally Posted by Zinergy

AHHHH no, people have gone high 12s with bone stock evos and STIs, But the average driver with a little practice can knock of low to mid 13s easy. The cobalt cant plain and simple.

You are comparing average to best. IF you're going to toss out the best stock quarter mile times of one car then include the best stock quarter mile times of the other.

As of right now the best stock times are 13.5-13.6 with the SS/TC.

Anyone who has even the slightest idea what they're talking about knows that a front wheel drive car has serious traction problems. The SS/TC does not shine in the quarter mile where as an all wheel drive car obviously will.

Stock for stock an SS/TC on the highway will stick right with most stock Evos and STIs and around most tracks the result is the same. I'd say that's decent.

**Zinergy** · 04-30-2009, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by Sarvoth

You are comparing average to best. IF you're going to toss out the best stock quarter mile times of one car then include the best stock quarter mile times of the other.

As of right now the best stock times are 13.5-13.6 with the SS/TC.

Anyone who has even the slightest idea what they're talking about knows that a front wheel drive car has serious traction problems. The SS/TC does not shine in the quarter mile where as an all wheel drive car obviously will.

Stock for stock an SS/TC on the highway will stick right with most stock Evos and STIs and around most tracks the result is the same. I'd say that's decent.

I agree that on a rol lrace the new SS would be a good run. But me personally i would still get the new WRX over the SS for the same price.

FWD cars do have traction problems but the new cobalt has launch control to solve that problem.

**Sarvoth** · 04-30-2009, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Zinergy

I agree that on a rol lrace the new SS would be a good run. But me personally i would still get the new WRX over the SS for the same price.

FWD cars do have traction problems but the new cobalt has launch control to solve that problem.

The launch control is terrible, really. lol.

**Zinergy** · 04-30-2009, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by Sarvoth

The launch control is terrible, really. lol.

Have you used it? I heard from alot of people that you can leave at 4krpms at 7psi. Thats alot better than leaveing on no boost and spinning the tires if you launch above 2500rpms

**Sarvoth** · 04-30-2009, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by Zinergy

Have you used it? I heard from alot of people that you can leave at 4krpms at 7psi. Thats alot better than leaveing on no boost and spinning the tires if you launch above 2500rpms

Yes, I have an SS/SC but one of my best friends owns a TC and the launch control bogs the car like hell. I imagine it varies with climate at bit how the car responds.

**JoeShmoe** · 04-30-2009, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by Zinergy

AHHHH no, people have gone high 12s with bone stock evos and STIs, But the average driver with a little practice can knock of low to mid 13s easy. The cobalt cant plain and simple.

Dude, no one said the Cobalt would win in a drag race. But your post made it sound like.....

Cobalt = 13.8 - 14.2

STI/Evo = 12's.

You took the average time for the Cobalt and the best times for the STI/Evo.

**JoeShmoe** · 04-30-2009, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by Zinergy

I agree that on a rol lrace the new SS would be a good run. But me personally i would still get the new WRX over the SS for the same price.

They're not quite the same price. Cobalt SS as tested = $24K

**Wesman** · 04-30-2009, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by Zinergy

For 1 it wont beat them in a straight line, even the new turbo SS is a 13.8-14.2 car and the EVO X and STI have both hit 12s bone stock. And both the STI and EVO have more aftermarket. People have made 800whp with the boxer engine and 1000whp with evo and DSM engine

Looks like someone struck a nerve

Sounds like you've been listening to the wrong people though.

First off, RARELY do Evos and STI's hit 12's. I don't believe its ever even been officially documented by any mag or legitimate source. So that bs is out the window. They are mid-low 13 second cars at best. The Evo X and new STi are actually slower, and run high 13's @ 99-100MPH due to less power and more weight.

Aftermarket?? Who cares, the car just came out. At least give it a chance to get some aftermarket support.

As for your assinine 800-1000WHP numbers, get a grip. Those are highly inflated, and are only made by all out race engines. You won't ever seen one on the street because its not reasonable and wouldn't last more than a couple miles. The STi shortblock won't even take 400WHP without coming apart, they don't even have forged internals.

You would need to compare a 1000WHP Evo to a 2000WHP LSX in order to get an idea for the effort and funds required to build such an engine. And in the end you're still stuck with a 2.XL 4 banger thats not going to last more than a couple runs without either blowing up or needing to be rebuilt.

Heres the bottom line: Cobalt SS Turbo was faster around VIR and Leguna Seca than the Mitsu Evo MR and beat the STI on the Nurburgring, all for 10K less while getting about 10MPG more and looking much nicer. How can you argue with that??