I know that 143 hp for the 2.2 is significantly less than the 171 of the 2.4, but torque is actually really close...155 vs 163. Is the 2.4 really THAT much better? Torque is what makes the car move so it seems to me that 8 ft/lbs of torque isn't worth the extra dough.

Help me understand...

I never drove the 2.2, but i own a 2.4 and i've yet to regret buying... its perfect in nearly every way to me for its class.

i think you bet better suspension, better wheels and some other stuff, i don't know what all you get since i don't own one.

um, more hp... SS badges of course, better 5 lug wheels, front fog lights and lower grille opening with insert... there are other differences... i am just having to think about them.

its worth it for the 4 way disc brakes, better exhaust, better rims, the styling is a bonus.... imo you cant go wrong with the 2.4 SS...... Its not much more than the 2.2 with similar options is it.....

the brakes and suspension alone are worth getting the 2.4

the tq output on the 2.4 is alot wider accross the rpm than the 2.2's tq output

if your gonna turbo or s/c the motor the 2.2 has a edge , because it doesnt have the vvt , and it has lower compression


me i plan on getting the 2.4 , over both the 2.2 and 2.0s/c

I like the 2.4... the engine may not be as easily upgraded, but i like the stock. i am a daily driver, so styling matters more to me for now. after school, i'll get something i can beef up under the hood.... dare i say a new camaro??? COME ON GM!

while the 2.4 vvt engine is pretty equivalent to the scion tc vvt 2.4. they both have the same torque at 163 ft.-lb but the scion only has 160 hp compaired to the cobalt which has 171 hp. also the scion weighs about 2970 lbs. our weight is 2991 is the coupes/ 3216 is the sedan.

so i personally think that the base model w/ the ecotec may be able to hang w/ the vvt 2.4. cuz i have raced a scion tc and i was dead even w/ him even tho he did have a heard start w/ the inside lane.

but imo the ecotec would still prolly lose but not by much and also the ss n/a are pretty sweet looking i thnk. much better looking then the ls/lt's.

and also the ss n/a has a sport tuned suspsension. cd.mp3 17" rims pioneer sound system and vvt engine along w/ some more options.



ryan

while the 2.4 vvt engine is pretty equivalent to the scion tc vvt 2.4. they both have the same torque at 163 ft.-lb but the scion only has 160 hp compaired to the cobalt which has 171 hp. also the scion weighs about 2970 lbs. our weight is 2991 is the coupes/ 3216 is the sedan.



On the surface they seem comparable. But the Ecotec is a much better engine.
6750 redline on the 2.4L Ecotec VS 6200rpm Scion---haha thats low
Higher 10.4 to1 cr, engine oil cooler, forged con rods. All this the Toyota engine does not have. God I wish I lived in the US---I would spend my weekends hunting down those Ugly Scions and destroying them in a race!!! :guns:

As for the weights......Noooo......you have then way to heavy.

Here are the correct weights:

SS Sedan 2871

SS coupe: 2815

Learn it and know it! ;)

http://gmcanada.com/english/vehicles/chevrolet/cobalt/coba_opti.html
(scroll way down)

There is this crazy MYTH they weigh that much. I beleive it somes from the US website
Chevrolet.com <----those fools have no publisehed data on the website for the 2.4L Ecotec.

Rest easy---are cars are not heavy pigs. BTW---Car and Driver tested a Scion and weighed it---a touch over 3000lbs.

And yes---the 2.4L is a big improvement over the 2.2L

I own both the 2.2 L62 Sedan and the 2.0LSJ SS/SC and they are different ball parks.

Never drove a 2.4 but it looks like it rides rougher then say a 2.0. Sometimes in my sedan I can't even hear the damn motor it's so quiet.. it needs more noise captain.

2.4 is the way to go if you want more realistic modfications that will get you places. 2.2 has the edge in aftermarket right now even though not much is even out. Most 2.2 parts bolt on the 2.4

2.4 has a more refined torque curve and steady horse power rise while the 2.2 dies in what power it does have stock in the 5,000 ish rpm range.

Hope that does it for you.

take it easy there. i got my weights from gm also on there american webstie :usa:

http://www.chevrolet.com/cobalt/specifications/

Coupe Sedan
Seating (front/rear) 2/3 2/3
Fuel tank capacity (gal./L, approx.) 13/52 13/52
Curb weight, estimated (lbs./kg) 2,991/1,356.7 3,216/1,458.8


ryan

take it easy there. i got my weights from gm also on there american webstie :usa:

http://www.chevrolet.com/cobalt/specifications/

Coupe Sedan
Seating (front/rear) 2/3 2/3
Fuel tank capacity (gal./L, approx.) 13/52 13/52
Curb weight, estimated (lbs./kg) 2,991/1,356.7 3,216/1,458.8


ryan

I know, its okay I am relaxed. I just hope you that those weights are wrong. Impossible to make an SS sedan 300lbs heavier then a normal one. Its all aout education :)

"There is no replacement for displacement"

Seedy salesman told me yesterday that the 2.4's powerband was MUCH higher in the RPM range than the 2.2, so you'd have to really ring it out to feel the extra horses. What do you guys think of that?

Ring Ring.. Mofo! That's why they made it...

http://www.ipresents.co.uk/assets/images/telephone.jpg

i have driven both extensively and my friend that has the 2.2 drove mine and said its way faster, i thought the difference would be small but its not they are way different engines

Ring Ring.. Mofo! That's why they made it...

http://www.ipresents.co.uk/assets/images/telephone.jpg
You said mofo! :lol:

His point was that there was very little difference in everyday driving and that the 2.2 actually was "faster" when you kept the speeds lower...now that I've typed that, it doesn't really make sense at all. What a jerkoff! I'm pretty sure I'll be dealing with someone else when my wife's HHR gets in...

Seedy salesman told me yesterday that the 2.4's powerband was MUCH higher in the RPM range than the 2.2, so you'd have to really ring it out to feel the extra horses. What do you guys think of that?

This is true the 2.4 is a more high end performer than the 2.2. The 2.2 has it torque band lower in the RPMS while the 2.4 has it higher much like the 2.0. If you look at the numbers you can get a good sence at the powerband.

2.2 more tq than HP

2.4 More HP than Tq

2.0 Mor hp than tq

If a engine has more torque its almost always has a good some of torque off the line. When it has more Hp then your torque won't get as high until later in the RPM range.

My truck has 325 HP and 375 Tq, it flys off the line but it doesn't have much top end.
My cobalt gets off the pretty fast but you don't really feel a hard pull until 3500 RPMs

Seedy salesman told me yesterday that the 2.4's powerband was MUCH higher in the RPM range than the 2.2, so you'd have to really ring it out to feel the extra horses. What do you guys think of that?


the 2.4 vvt , has the vvt for a reason , it helps keep the power range alot wider , which allows the 2.4 to have a wider power range and the higher redline


for example (not actual range) say the 2.2 has a power band from 2500 to 5500 , the 2.4 would have a range of 2000-6500

so the 2.4 would be a better choice for some one that drives more spirited

I have driven 5 speed coupes of both engines down the 1.4 mile in stock form

2.2L = 16.1 (probably 15.8 with practice)
2.4L = 15.22 (15.05 with WAI)

There is a big difference.

So.. "There is no replacement for displacement"

"There is no replacement for displacement"

turbo and s/c replace displacement

while the 2.4 vvt engine is pretty equivalent to the scion tc vvt 2.4. they both have the same torque at 163 ft.-lb but the scion only has 160 hp compaired to the cobalt which has 171 hp. also the scion weighs about 2970 lbs. our weight is 2991 is the coupes/ 3216 is the sedan.

so i personally think that the base model w/ the ecotec may be able to hang w/ the vvt 2.4. cuz i have raced a scion tc and i was dead even w/ him even tho he did have a heard start w/ the inside lane.

but imo the ecotec would still prolly lose but not by much and also the ss n/a are pretty sweet looking i thnk. much better looking then the ls/lt's.

and also the ss n/a has a sport tuned suspsension. cd.mp3 17" rims pioneer sound system and vvt engine along w/ some more options.



ryan

The pionere system and reciever is an option.
But, yeah I think the 2.4 is worth it only if you can get a deal on it. right now i think its 2,000 off. I have controled both engines, family owns a couple 03 cavys (auto) and the other 06 cobalt (auto) I test drove. From what i felt the 2.2 is snappier off the line. i couldnt get the 2.4 to light up at all.
One a reltaed note the 2.4 polluts less then the 2.2 and gets just the same gas milage.
I read that the 2.4 was a second faster than the 2.2 in 0-60.
Can anyone confirm?

the 2.4 ive driven would smoke the tires with ease , both the auto and the 5spd


but the auto you had to put it in 1st gear to shut the trac control off

turbo and s/c replace displacement


You would have thought that Me being a Turbo guy would have thought that one through. I used to believe fully that all people who made the statement that I made were old school gearheads that just didn't know due to ignorance what was possible from a 2.0L motor. I see your point, but Go toe to toe with a Chrysler 300-C SRT and tell me that you wouldn't rather have the 6.1L on the line. I would...

Although they are good power adders, They increase the strain as well. Currently the fastest available Porsche Carrera GT is Normally Aspirated at over 600+BHP.






Here is the car I sighted as an EG..

The ten-cylinder power unit with dry sump lubrication behind the cockpit of the Carrera GT is based on a 5.5-litre V10 normal-aspiration engine which might well have been raced in the 24 Hours of Le Mans, given its qualities as a genuine racing machine. Engine capacity has been increased to 5.7 litres for the production car, enabling the power unit of the Carrera GT, with its tremendous performance, to meet all requirements for circuit racing and at the same time providing all the qualities required in everyday motoring.

http://www.germancarfans.com/photos/3030204.002/1062big.jpg

well mod for mod the bigger engine will always be on top with power but its the traction thats the elimating factor

well mod for mod the bigger engine will always be on top with power but its the traction thats the elimating factor
So I should take the Model T wheels off my dragster...??? :)

So I should take the Model T wheels off my dragster...??? :)

LOL :lol: :lol: :lol:


take them off the rear and use them on the front

The pionere system and reciever is an option.
But, yeah I think the 2.4 is worth it only if you can get a deal on it. right now i think its 2,000 off. I have controled both engines, family owns a couple 03 cavys (auto) and the other 06 cobalt (auto) I test drove. From what i felt the 2.2 is snappier off the line. i couldnt get the 2.4 to light up at all.
One a reltaed note the 2.4 polluts less then the 2.2 and gets just the same gas milage.
I read that the 2.4 was a second faster than the 2.2 in 0-60.
Can anyone confirm?

In the 2.4SS the pioneer system is standard.

And how could you net smoke the tires in a 2.4??? I smoke my tires all the time, mostly when I don't want too. compare the torque numbers and rpm's, there is no reason the 2.2L should take off faster.

and yeah, motor trend got the 2.4L SS Sedan to 60MPH in 7.1 seconds.

In the 2.4SS the pioneer system is standard.

And how could you net smoke the tires in a 2.4??? I smoke my tires all the time, mostly when I don't want too. compare the torque numbers and rpm's, there is no reason the 2.2L should take off faster.

and yeah, motor trend got the 2.4L SS Sedan to 60MPH in 7.1 seconds.


I'll clear up a little confusion. The Pioneer system is standard in Canada but optional in the US.


So M/T tested a 2.4L SS? :nuts: about time somebody did! :twothumbs

Yeah, M/T tested a Cobalt 2.4SS Sedan with the 5-speed.

0-60 7.1 seconds
1/4 mile 15.6
.83g's on the skidpad.

Motor trend uses this little road course to time cars on, it was really fast. beat a GS430, and the A3 2.0T

I'll clear up a little confusion. The Pioneer system is standard in Canada but optional in the US.


So M/T tested a 2.4L SS? :nuts: about time somebody did! :twothumbs
WTF? and there is no base price difference?
I guess there was something wrong with the car I test drove, as far as not lighting them up. I tried the L gear too. throttle just seemed mushy. maybe I should come up to canada to buy my cobalt, or maybe even a persuit!...... :)

my tires vurn out in any gear d l or i with no problem

Note that the 2.4L SS makes 90% of its torque at 2400rpm. It is true that it doesn't really "open up" until 3000-3500+, but it's pretty damn fast below that. The SS is a totally different beast in my opinion. I also think it's the best "tuner" car of the three because you have the largest and most advanced engine.

Does anybody know of an ECU reprogrammer that lets you change your fuel map etc. to let you boost your ponies? My buddy has one for his Mustang that adds like 30hp to it and only cost him $200, and he can revert the program back to stock for when he takes it to the dealer. I'm sure they'll be available sooner or later, just wondering if one was out now.

^ I've been looking for something like that for a while...I don't think it will be here anytime soon though. Maybe in a few years.

they will come out as more cobalts go forced induction besides the ss/sc

I like my 2.4 SS. Alot. The only thing I really don't care for are the seats. It's not that they suck...but you can't really get confortable in the IMO. In my Monte, I can sit back real nice. In my moms Mustang, you can get remotely comfortable, but it sits kinda high for my liking. The lower back support is incredibly uncomfortable. I always find myself leaning forwards.

Having said that, the brakes on all Cobalts suck to my understanding. They pulsate alot. It's kinda annoying, but if it doesn't annoy you...good job. I like the SS 4 wheel discs though. I've always been partial to discs. I love my FE3 suspension. I've never driven an SS s/c, but even the SS n/a's FE3 "sport" suspension is better than my Monte SS's sport suspension. It's basically the same, but the Monte is slightly more giving, due to it being a "touring" car I suppose. But the suspension is very nice. It keeps you planted...unless you take bends at 90.

I have an auto. I would've rahter not. But considering the circumstances, I didn't want to waitfor them to order me in a 5 speed ,then not like it anyway. Plus it's a lease, so I didn't care. The auto almost always is very responsive. When you tap the gas, it goes. It's always in the proper gear IMO.

But yes, it's a very willing engine. I love putting it into 1st, getting up some speed, balancing the gear to a speed, then punching it. It goes. You can certainly drive it pretty fun-like if you so desire. And I like the extra boost from the VVT. My old Honda was before Honda really used VTEC mainstream. Accords got it the next year. But I like the extra boost in the higher RPM's.

Yes, the Pioneer IS optional on the US SS's. The original black one at my dealership was a black SS n/a with everything I wanted but the MP3 and Pioneer. The Pioneer is worth the money IMO. Even if you replace the components, it at least gives you a descent platform, as well as pre-cut tweeter holes.

All together, I think for whatever the extra cash is, it's worth it. But it's still suggested to use premium. After I got the car, I suspected the dealer put regular in it becasue when it got all of that out and was just premium, it was noticible.

My uncle just got a 2006 Cobalt LS, and eventhough it's the sport package and has all the options, I don't care for it. It doesn't get the same idea across IMO.

Represent the SS n/a's.

yeah the only gripes i have on my ss is that the seats are weird, the trac control doesnt have an on/off switch, drive by wire sucks imo, the brakes pulsate, and a few other things but its all good i love my car

Oh...another problem...but all Cobalts (coupes at least) have this. There's no rear inside dome light. WTF. I keep stuff back there, and at night, I can't see jack. lol.

what is the 1/4 mi time for the 2.4l ss coupe auto?

i saw the manual sedan runs 15.6 :( that would give me a run for my money

:) my 1st post!

I think 15-16 depending on transmission. Anyone able to verify?

I think 15-16 depending on transmission. Anyone able to verify?
so high 15's to low 16's in an auto?

Yeah someone here got a 15.2 i think 5-speed. W/intake he ran a 15.05. Not sure of the guys name but he did make a post about it.

Word on the streets (lol) the auto has a tad more torque initially. But the 5 speed makes up for it in mid to high I suppose. The 0-60 and 1320 in the 5 speed are better. Having that said, I certainly don't have any problem with my auto tranny being reponsive. Plus, I never liked GM manuals.

My SS is auto, and it is very responsive and will bark the tires off the line... it is really good up through the gears. its really fun to drive. i am not a huge fan of GM manuals either, but i have never driven the s/c so i don't knowhow that one responds... i just know in the 2.5 i liked the auto over the 5 speed. more practical for me.

Don't forget though 5-speed weight less and have less drivetrain loss. That helps alot right there. And i dunno about you guys but i love my getrag. Get a short shifter and your good to go.

i cant wait to run at the track this spring to see what i get

My SS is auto, and it is very responsive and will bark the tires off the line... it is really good up through the gears. its really fun to drive. i am not a huge fan of GM manuals either, but i have never driven the s/c so i don't knowhow that one responds... i just know in the 2.5 i liked the auto over the 5 speed. more practical for me.

Exactly. I was very skeptical when I went for a test drive at my dealership with a 2.4 SS auto. I said... "I don't like GM 4 cylinders...so why'd I like one in auto?" But I gave it a go anyway. I was pleasantly surprised. The Cobalt SS auto does a better job of keeping the engine in a usable powerband than my Monte's Hydramatic with the 3.8. In the Monte you have to actually control the gears yourself to not let it bog. Butin either car, when you floor it, they fly. I was surprised by the 2.4. When the VVT kicks in, it's noticible. I have a video my friend took and you can hear the VVT real well. But about the GM manuals. I'm a valet. So I think I am fully authorized to make that judgement. I just never liked the Getrag. Cobalt, Cavalier, Sunfire, Alero, Grand Am, all of them. Aren't they used in some Saabs too? I don't know. I was just so used to the "Honda style" clutch in my Accord and the Getrag is just weird to me. But if you guys like it, that's great! Just not my style.

:beer: :thumb:

Not sure how an automatic can bog....?

I notice some of you have driven older getrags. Don't compare them to the 5 speed 2.4L

I drove an Alero 2.2L 5 speed it was hard to learn how to drive smoothly. The clutch acts like an on/off switch.

Now a 2.4L 5 speed (Cobalt) is so different you'd swear they are different transmissions. Very easy to drive. Nice progresive clutch take up. And very short shifter throws.

Can't say I can hear the VVT or notice it kick in. (but thenagain I haven't been able to get on it lately cause of the weather--maybe I am just used to it. Pretty mild system we have.

at high rpms i can feel a slight boost with the vvt

For me it's not as much feel the VVT as it is hear the VVT. Especially now with the SRI... total change in engine note when ya get on her.

i guess ill see soon with my injen intake on the way, then in feb ill be getting the corsa exhaust

so i can beat an auto cobalt ss? a kid at my school got a yellow one. (the bumble bee or school bus) some of the other kids make fun of it :lol: but i like it.

im somewhere around 15.5 on a 1/4 mi. but i beat a se-r sentra last week which i think are low 15's high 14's

My question.... what mods do you have on that V6 stang?

My question.... what mods do you have on that V6 stang?

my answer... a stock (99+) 3.8 can run mid 15's, i only have intake and that will not make any differece.

mid 15's only w/ a manual the autos are a totally different story and the ending is well slower.

but i dont want to start shit about my car, i know there is a LOT of v6 mustangs that can't get under 16's but thats not the car, and i have never been on a track so i have nothing to back this up.

but anyway... well just say i can run 15.5 what will his auto run.
i can give him a run and see if i can back up my talk :lol:

Edit: here is a time slip(this is not me but the car only has intake)... http://3.8mustang.com/timeslips/index.php?action=view&id=99
this is another one w/ intake and exhaust.
http://3.8mustang.com/timeslips/index.php?action=view&id=71

For me it's not as much feel the VVT as it is hear the VVT. Especially now with the SRI... total change in engine note when ya get on her.


That "Note" Gets better at around 7000 RPM! :)

I think I'm qualified to make fun of V6 Mustnags. We have one.

:P

It wouldn't bee to bad with a stick probably. I just don't like how Fords drive. I don't know why.

I think I'm qualified to make fun of V6 Mustnags. We have one.

:P

It wouldn't bee to bad with a stick probably. I just don't like how Fords drive. I don't know why.
you have a v6 mustang (auto) and a cobalt ss auto? what do u think about the race?

My auto run so smooth... i love it... and i love how the car sounds too. i can't wait to get exhaust and an intake.

you have a v6 mustang (auto) and a cobalt ss auto? what do u think about the race?

Yeah. The Mustang is my moms. It'd be hard to say. I don't drive the Mustang that incredibly often. But I also have that 2004 Monte SS. The Monte also has a 3.8 with auto. The HP is 200/225 for the Monte and 193/225 for the Mustang. I'd most certainly put all of my money on the Monte. The powerband is much better for my tastes. The Mustang V6 auto just feels like it's hesitating. Maybe it's just becasue of the auto? I don't know. But it's not working for it. So then for the Cobalt SS 2.4 auto, 171/163. Obviously the numbers aren't as great, but just like for the Monte, I love the powerband. Different manufacturers have different ways their engines feel. I just like GM's better. They feel more smooth. I'd say the Cobalt SS 2.4 auto wouldn't be a complete blow-away against a Mustang 3.8 auto. Grantid, I've never raced the Cobalt against anyone just yet (I got the car in the beginning of winter) but I am pretty confident in the cars power.

Yours is a stick though you said? Again, I've only ever driven a Mustang GT that had a stick. Besides that, I've never driven ford sticks. Well no...a ZX2 also. lol. The GT seemed like it liked the manual alot. But I can't speak for the 3.8. I can only say what I know about the auto from experience.

The only way to know is to go race that bumble bee.

:guns:

haha i will! a group of us go out to lunch every day, in the group 1 kid has a v6 mustang auto, and i make that thing look silly. there is another kid that has a v6 camarro that i beat pretty easy, he isnt a good driver. i just want some of the bumble bee. maybe i can get a video.

I have the 06 HHR 2LT w/2.4 Engine. I have driven a 2.2 and I only notice a slight difference in speed. But I have learend there are always more preformance parts for cars with the better engines

I like my 2.4...

:D

I like my 2.4...

:D

i like mine more everytime i drive it

I love mine more and more each day... i had an avalanche before this car so the gas savings and the handling of the car ROCK!