2.2L L61 Performance Tech 16 valve 145 hp EcoTec with 155 lb-ft of torque

Went to the track

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 07:59 PM
  #1  
NoMoreLS1's Avatar
Thread Starter
New Member
 
Joined: 12-21-07
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Schererville, IN
Went to the track

Hey guys, this is my first post here.

Took the car to the track for my f-body club's rental. I no longer own a Camaro but I'm still a member/mod on their board. Car is a bone stock stripper '07 LS with a 5sp. I'll just list the times up to the best pass. Times got progressively better as I experimented with launch RPMs and shift points.

15.92 @ 87.50 (2.48)
15.55 @ 88.29 (2.32)
15.59 @ 88.68 (2.33)
15.49 @ 88.94 (2.33)
15.59 @ 88.16 (2.28)
15.40 @ 89.51 (2.28)

The rest of the passes were done during bracket racing (which I won), so on some of the passes I was on the breaks and they are not worth listing. The passes were made in early November at Cordova, IL. The air was very good and DA was around sea level. How do these runs compare with other stock cars? I did better that I thought I would, would have been happy with a 15.7.
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 08:01 PM
  #2  
SS_Ry's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 08-29-06
Posts: 4,132
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg
uhhh....are you sure that its not a 2.4? im not too sure what the 2.2's are running....but that seems a little low to me....maybe im wrong
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 08:04 PM
  #3  
NoMoreLS1's Avatar
Thread Starter
New Member
 
Joined: 12-21-07
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Schererville, IN
The air was very good and I consider myself a pretty good driver. The car is an LS with a 2.2.
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 08:09 PM
  #4  
outtamymind's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-21-07
Posts: 16,180
Likes: 1
From: Calgary, Alberta
ya thats pretty damn good for a 2.2 seeing as most stock 2.4's are running those times.
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 09:23 PM
  #5  
Thatsit's Avatar
New Member
 
Joined: 06-03-07
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
From: Arlington Heights/Palatine (Lake Zurich) IL
what were your launch and shift point RPMs? (if you remember)
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 09:46 PM
  #6  
durka's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 06-12-07
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
From: Oregon
2.4 are not too much faster than 2.2.. not sure how much 2.4 ss weighs, but my car weighs 2750lb with me in it and 1/4 tank of gas.
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 09:47 PM
  #7  
outtamymind's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-21-07
Posts: 16,180
Likes: 1
From: Calgary, Alberta
ya but on average the 2.4's are roughly a second faster then the 2.2's
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 09:48 PM
  #8  
hatrickstu's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 05-03-05
Posts: 15,395
Likes: 0
From: Ar-kan-sas
Originally Posted by durka
2.4 are not too much faster than 2.2.. not sure how much 2.4 ss weighs, but my car weighs 2750lb with me in it and 1/4 tank of gas.
no way bro, that scale was off. that is unless you took lots of **** out of it
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 09:57 PM
  #9  
SpeedJunkies07LS's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 09-26-07
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
From: Talbot Co. Maryland
yeah mine is around 3000-3200 and i dont have anything taken out and thats dry whieght
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 10:08 PM
  #10  
NoMoreLS1's Avatar
Thread Starter
New Member
 
Joined: 12-21-07
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Schererville, IN
Originally Posted by Thatsit
what were your launch and shift point RPMs? (if you remember)
If I remember right, I was leaving at about 4k, slipping the clutch but letting it up quickly, there is a fine line between bog and spin. I found that the best shift point (not surprisingly), was right before redline 6300-6400ish. I tried short shifting at 6k but slowed.

Originally Posted by outtamymind
ya but on average the 2.4's are roughly a second faster then the 2.2's
So you are saying there are stock SS's that regularly run in the 14's? I highly doubt that.

Last edited by NoMoreLS1; Dec 23, 2007 at 10:08 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 10:28 PM
  #11  
outtamymind's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-21-07
Posts: 16,180
Likes: 1
From: Calgary, Alberta
no i was saying that on average the 2.4's are running the times he put in the first thread. im running those times. so when i said the 2.4's are on average a second faster then the 2.2's i meant that the 2.2's were in the 16's. thats what i meant by that. also this is based on complete stock times.
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 10:31 PM
  #12  
hawlyns711's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: 02-19-07
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
From: tax free NH
timeslip?
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 10:33 PM
  #13  
outtamymind's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-21-07
Posts: 16,180
Likes: 1
From: Calgary, Alberta
for who?

here's my time slip for a stock 2.4L in calgary, alberta. due to altitude and all the like i run a 16.6 up here but if i were to run down in some of the tracks you guys run i would be roughly a second faster due to the change in altitude and density. oh and im car 438

Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 11:08 PM
  #14  
NoMoreLS1's Avatar
Thread Starter
New Member
 
Joined: 12-21-07
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Schererville, IN
Originally Posted by hawlyns711
timeslip?
I'll post it up tomorrow after work. My battery in my camera is dead and I don't have a scanner, so I can't right now.
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 11:13 PM
  #15  
pjk91's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 03-07-05
Posts: 1,733
Likes: 0
From: San Pedro/PV
Those are definitely some solid times on a 2.2. Good for you man. To the guy that posted a slip...your 60s are way high man. 2.4 & 2.6 isn't an impressive 60. I'm not bashing, just informing. I have a disgusting 60ft average as well. I think with a 2.49 when I was stock netted me a 15.8@89. It will show in the sig.
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 11:43 PM
  #16  
outtamymind's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-21-07
Posts: 16,180
Likes: 1
From: Calgary, Alberta
ya i know by the time i started getting the hang of quick shifting the race season up here came to an end this year was my first year at the drag track so i still have alot of practicing ahead. that and i kept losing traction going from 1st to 2nd
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 11:52 PM
  #17  
Brandon97Z's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 04-13-04
Posts: 3,394
Likes: 0
From: Indiana
Nice times but doesn't surprise me. Some base 03+cavaliers with the 2.2 5-speed were running low 15's stock, but they weight a few hundred less.
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2007 | 11:59 PM
  #18  
killah_thug08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 03-04-07
Posts: 865
Likes: 0
From: Canada
Originally Posted by NoMoreLS1
If I remember right, I was leaving at about 4k, slipping the clutch but letting it up quickly, there is a fine line between bog and spin. I found that the best shift point (not surprisingly), was right before redline 6300-6400ish. I tried short shifting at 6k but slowed.

So you are saying there are stock SS's that regularly run in the 14's? I highly doubt that.
is that a ss/sc that ran 15.9 with you?
Reply
Old Dec 24, 2007 | 12:05 AM
  #19  
outtamymind's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-21-07
Posts: 16,180
Likes: 1
From: Calgary, Alberta
ya it was an ss/sc he had a bad launch and left his ac on full blast so he bogged it a little off the tree. he's a buddy of mine and i laughed so hard at him when he told he that he had left the ac on lol.
Reply
Old Dec 24, 2007 | 12:05 AM
  #20  
Helltime's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-01-07
Posts: 1,082
Likes: 0
From: Des Moines, IA
Originally Posted by outtamymind
no i was saying that on average the 2.4's are running the times he put in the first thread. im running those times. so when i said the 2.4's are on average a second faster then the 2.2's i meant that the 2.2's were in the 16's. thats what i meant by that. also this is based on complete stock times.

https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/drag-racing-52/official-cobalt-1-4-mile-list-65389/

All depends on driver and elevation (that and auto or manual).
Looks like some good times though. I can't wait to go to Cordova one of these times and see what my 07 LS will run
Reply
Old Dec 24, 2007 | 12:09 AM
  #21  
outtamymind's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-21-07
Posts: 16,180
Likes: 1
From: Calgary, Alberta
ya thats why i always say roughly or an estimate as there are always some variable's to screw around with the times namely driver, elevation and air density.

that and the 06 ss/na are slightly faster then the 07 ss/na's. i have an 07 and my brother has an 06 and we always raced each other and he was consistently .3 seconds faster then i was.
Reply
Old Dec 24, 2007 | 03:15 AM
  #22  
CobaltTSX's Avatar
New Member
 
Joined: 12-16-07
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: Belvidere, IL.
Good times out of a stock LS. My buddies 04 Cavalier 2.2 ran consistant 15.2's at Byron Dragway so for a couple hundred pound heavier car thats not to bad.
Reply
Old Dec 24, 2007 | 10:20 AM
  #23  
IonNinja's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-29-05
Posts: 7,915
Likes: 0
From: AZ
thats the fastest "stock" 2.2 I've ever seen...

with weight reduction and the right location I guess its possible, 2.2's out here are running mid 16's.
Reply
Old Dec 24, 2007 | 04:00 PM
  #24  
NoMoreLS1's Avatar
Thread Starter
New Member
 
Joined: 12-21-07
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Schererville, IN
Here is my crappy picture of my time slip, sorry its so hard to read. I'll have to scan it at work Wednesday, maybe it will come out better.



Later in the day I tried taking the spare and jack out but by that time the air got worse and I went no faster. In the spring maybe I'll try taking out the seats and whatnot to trim some weight and try again.

On my Camaro I even went so far as to take out the bumper supports but I won't be doing that with this car.
Reply
Old Dec 24, 2007 | 04:32 PM
  #25  
outtamymind's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-21-07
Posts: 16,180
Likes: 1
From: Calgary, Alberta
ya the altitude and density here in calgary sucks ***** so we get a little screwed in our times but ya good times by the way.
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:25 AM.