Drove a 2.0 S/C SS today
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 04-17-04
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
From: Calgary Alberta Canada
Drove a 2.0 S/C SS today
First time and I was very impressed. Jase was kind enough to let me drive his, while I let him drive my 2.4L SS.
He has a CAI and man was the s/c whine very loud!! Trans felt totally different, as it should but I had no trouble with the take offs. Clutch felt about the same.
Boost built very fast and the rpms climbed at a very high rate torwards redline at an alarming rate. Not used to that!
I never got to try the handling but over bumps and road imperfections it was not very good.
I'd take the trade off for a better ride with good handling in the FE3 2.4L SS suspension.
Steering felt different too. Although the brakes are the same, they too felt different.
I love the extra hp and torque. If you wind out the 2.4L it goes pretty good (for NA) but it doesn't have the strong respose at part throttle/low rpms as the 2.0 S/C.
Likes: power, meaner look (front a rear lip effect), 18's sure fill the wheel wells nicey
Dislikes: noiser inside (his has sunroof, mine does not) vision blocking rear wing, bit of a rough ride, unless the pavement is glass smooth. Some rattles because of that.
Conclusion: Proably wish I had bought one, just for the hp alone. The 2.4L SS is definately toned down but felt more refined and I do like that.
Next car have to have alot more power!
Okay Jase--do a review of my car...and try to say something nice!!!
He has a CAI and man was the s/c whine very loud!! Trans felt totally different, as it should but I had no trouble with the take offs. Clutch felt about the same.
Boost built very fast and the rpms climbed at a very high rate torwards redline at an alarming rate. Not used to that!
I never got to try the handling but over bumps and road imperfections it was not very good.
I'd take the trade off for a better ride with good handling in the FE3 2.4L SS suspension.
Steering felt different too. Although the brakes are the same, they too felt different.
I love the extra hp and torque. If you wind out the 2.4L it goes pretty good (for NA) but it doesn't have the strong respose at part throttle/low rpms as the 2.0 S/C.
Likes: power, meaner look (front a rear lip effect), 18's sure fill the wheel wells nicey
Dislikes: noiser inside (his has sunroof, mine does not) vision blocking rear wing, bit of a rough ride, unless the pavement is glass smooth. Some rattles because of that.
Conclusion: Proably wish I had bought one, just for the hp alone. The 2.4L SS is definately toned down but felt more refined and I do like that.
Next car have to have alot more power!
Okay Jase--do a review of my car...and try to say something nice!!!
Senior Member
Joined: 01-21-05
Posts: 793
Likes: 0
From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
i'll have to say.. it was definately interesting driving the 2.4.
Like avro said.. the rpm climb from the 2.0 is much different than the 2.4. I had to push it a little to get it climbing.
Overall feel was nice, and was peppy considering NA. Found a couple things out.. Not digging the armrest. Maybe it was cause im so used to not having one. Lock button positions are on the opposite side as the SS/SC's (unlock left side lock right side yada yada)
Interior was nice. The guages were a little different but stylish. No reverse lock out on the 2.4l.
Likes: 1)great view from the rear (no blocking wing!), 2)looks stylish and different from the SS/SC
Dislikes: well, not many, if any.. i like the car. even though its not boosted its a good car for the buck! only one that i have is its labelled SS hahahaha j/k
Conclusion: good car for the buck. Even though its sharing the same badging as us, its still a good car. A good car for someone that wants something a little more power than the base.
Like avro said.. the rpm climb from the 2.0 is much different than the 2.4. I had to push it a little to get it climbing.
Overall feel was nice, and was peppy considering NA. Found a couple things out.. Not digging the armrest. Maybe it was cause im so used to not having one. Lock button positions are on the opposite side as the SS/SC's (unlock left side lock right side yada yada)
Interior was nice. The guages were a little different but stylish. No reverse lock out on the 2.4l.
Likes: 1)great view from the rear (no blocking wing!), 2)looks stylish and different from the SS/SC
Dislikes: well, not many, if any.. i like the car. even though its not boosted its a good car for the buck! only one that i have is its labelled SS hahahaha j/k
Conclusion: good car for the buck. Even though its sharing the same badging as us, its still a good car. A good car for someone that wants something a little more power than the base.
Senior Member
Joined: 09-01-05
Posts: 1,589
Likes: 0
From: Canada
I test drove a 2.4L, but didn't get on it much because it was brand new (and I wouldn't want some idiot thrashing my new engine if I were to buy it). It felt peppy, and looked good. I like the polished wheels. The FE3 suspension rode well, and was still plenty capable in the twisties. I took a winding offramp at speed, and it was glued pretty solid. The heated seats were tempting. I found the shifter to have a little too long of a throw to be really sporty, but it was fairly smooth. Not anywhere near the quality of the SS/SC, but good enough.
The SS/SC definately rides harsher. The suspension tunning is more performance oriented. The lower profile, wider tires don't help in that department either. I haven't pushed this car hard in a corner, so I can't compare it's grip level to the 2.4L SS (too much rubish still on the roads). Another guy who has one says it corners like nothing else he has ever driven, and I have no reason to doubt him. I love the Recaro seats in my car. The G85 is the one "must-have" option on the car. The LSD turns this car into a star. The shifter is pretty good in this car. Throws are longer than what a "short-throw" shifter should be (GM: see the Corvettes 6-speed on Z/51 cars and Z06). I am not huge on the wing, but it has grown on me. I actually don't mind the rearward vision for everyday driving. You can see under it still, and have a decent idea of what is going on behind you. It is only scarry when you have to back up, because the wing and it's endplates are always in your way. I avoid using reverse whenever possible for fear of hitting something. I like the lips on the front bumber and the rear valence. I don't like how the 2.4L SS has the body extentions on the rocker panel, and then no lower piece on the front and rear bumper. It looks better on the SS/SC where the front and rear have the lower trim piece. My only real complaint is that I couldn't order it with the block heater, and the lower grill should be stock. I wouldn't drive it without it. Might as well paint a target sign on your radiator, as it is only time until rock damage or something big that hits it costs you $$$! The grill at least offers some protection. The option of polished wheels would have been nice. I like the gunmetal ones, but certain colors look better with gunmetal (Black or SOM), while other colors look better with polished wheels in my opinion (ex. Silver or White).
Oh yeah, while I love the look of black, I will never buy it again. I wash it once a week, because I can't stand to see the dirt accumulate. I really wish I could have got Ultra Silver. It looks great, and is easy to maintain. Silly GM Canada!
Nice review guys.
The SS/SC definately rides harsher. The suspension tunning is more performance oriented. The lower profile, wider tires don't help in that department either. I haven't pushed this car hard in a corner, so I can't compare it's grip level to the 2.4L SS (too much rubish still on the roads). Another guy who has one says it corners like nothing else he has ever driven, and I have no reason to doubt him. I love the Recaro seats in my car. The G85 is the one "must-have" option on the car. The LSD turns this car into a star. The shifter is pretty good in this car. Throws are longer than what a "short-throw" shifter should be (GM: see the Corvettes 6-speed on Z/51 cars and Z06). I am not huge on the wing, but it has grown on me. I actually don't mind the rearward vision for everyday driving. You can see under it still, and have a decent idea of what is going on behind you. It is only scarry when you have to back up, because the wing and it's endplates are always in your way. I avoid using reverse whenever possible for fear of hitting something. I like the lips on the front bumber and the rear valence. I don't like how the 2.4L SS has the body extentions on the rocker panel, and then no lower piece on the front and rear bumper. It looks better on the SS/SC where the front and rear have the lower trim piece. My only real complaint is that I couldn't order it with the block heater, and the lower grill should be stock. I wouldn't drive it without it. Might as well paint a target sign on your radiator, as it is only time until rock damage or something big that hits it costs you $$$! The grill at least offers some protection. The option of polished wheels would have been nice. I like the gunmetal ones, but certain colors look better with gunmetal (Black or SOM), while other colors look better with polished wheels in my opinion (ex. Silver or White).
Oh yeah, while I love the look of black, I will never buy it again. I wash it once a week, because I can't stand to see the dirt accumulate. I really wish I could have got Ultra Silver. It looks great, and is easy to maintain. Silly GM Canada!
Nice review guys.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 04-17-04
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
From: Calgary Alberta Canada
Originally Posted by WSFrazier
Do we have another potential switcher? lol
Well no. I am not rich enough! I'll keep it 3 more years. Might go new Camaro or Cobalt again (turbo or s/c...which ever it will be)
Senior Member
Joined: 01-21-05
Posts: 793
Likes: 0
From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Originally Posted by voodooSRT
where are the pics??????????
Senior Member
Joined: 05-03-06
Posts: 4,638
Likes: 0
From: new jersey
i have driven both on numerous occasions with customers and what not. i like the n/a ss it's actually quite a good competitor in the n/a tuner market. it feels solid going down the road. the suspension ( as stated above) gives you better ride quality, but lacks in handling and driver feedback. pushing the gas leaves something to be desired for me (daily driving a modded ss s/c) but for a stock car it's not a bad vehicle. and i'm starting to wonder if its actually a better platform to start with than the ss s/c.
with the same $ invested ($5k or more) i think the ss n/a could be faster than the ss s/c.
all in all i think the ss rightfully deserves it's badging.
i think the ss s/c should be changed to SSr or something else..
most cars in the ss line have been N/A. other than the v-6 s/c monte carlo SS, i cant think of another one that wasn't N/A
with the same $ invested ($5k or more) i think the ss n/a could be faster than the ss s/c.
all in all i think the ss rightfully deserves it's badging.
i think the ss s/c should be changed to SSr or something else..
most cars in the ss line have been N/A. other than the v-6 s/c monte carlo SS, i cant think of another one that wasn't N/A
Senior Member
Joined: 03-17-06
Posts: 17,268
Likes: 0
From: Moncton Newbrunswick Can.
These are all great write-ups guys.I have driven both also and fully agree.If you want power in the 2.4 its' very high in the rpm range and it definetly does not climb as quick,maybe a pulley would be a nice addition
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Jesse
Problems/Service/Maintenance
2
Sep 28, 2015 12:51 PM