driver mod is a big part of it. somedrivers push cars harder than others. from the video the tack appeared wet and the driver was driving hard but i imagine it could've been pushed a little harder with the right conditions. either way 8:22 is nothing to snicker at if in fact the numbers are accurate. after i watched the video i pledged m allegiance to the tc.

 

why is it so hard to believe a cobalt can run a ring faster than cars that cost 10k more? that has nothing to do with how fast they are. cars that cost as much as some of those do arent high priced because of their speed totally . i believe the cobalt did it and can do it. but i also know if you put them in a straight line our cars will lose their ass towards the top end, atleast thats my opinion.

 

I'm not questioning the track times, I'm merely saying that it's hard to use these numbers as a true benchmark unless you have the same driver test all the cars . I'm sure there is a skill level difference between all the different jockey's . I think the TC is a great step forward over the SC in many ways , i think these cars are a good thing for the cobalt community in general . Just because i have an SC doesn't mean i'm on the "hate the TC bandwagon".

 

i don't belive that a FWD 260 HP/TQ car is only half a sec behind a dang Nissan Skyline R32 GT-R just no way and all those cars are RWD if not AWD!!!!! i call B.S.

 

Whats the gtr weigh in at? second, its not a drag race its a circle. even if the gtr had 1k hp if it can not maintain high speeds in turns then yes a cobalt could beat it. im not saying its all true or anything i am just argueing just because a car is way more expensive and would normally smoke the cobalt, does not mean a cobalt couldnt complete a course quicker. i also believe turbos have an advantage over the sc, however, whats the difference in hp? 30? we dont even know what upgrades are going to be possible with the tc. for all we know its limitations might be less then potential power in an sc. there are alot of tc'ed 4 bangers running around, not too many of them are sporting a roots style blower. JMO. i think a good point here is, what does who ever published this article have to gain by bsing? unless they were paid off by gm ofcourse, but i dont see anything like that being the case. thats why i like gm, they like for their cars to be able to back up all the hype, unlike some other makers (cough.. ford)

 

Case and point, Bugatti Veyron. Fastest car in the world.....on a straight line.

 

ok iv serched for 4 hours now trying to find cobalt ss/sc times for nurburgring and well they dont exist on the internet i found about 40 different lists rangeing from the fastest car to 10:00.000 and the cobalt was no were to be found in any of them. now im sure it would run faster then a 10:00. in most of the offical lists there was a 05 ford focus ST that ran a 9:05 and i think it would be safe to assume that the sc balt is faster then that

 

i believe it. the hhr ss ran 8:43, which is what 5 seconds slower then a ms3. i surely believe it. i think its downright nasty.

 

I'd say the SS/SC is somewhere between TC Balts time of 8:22 - 8:39 of the MazdaSpeed3 / Honda S2000

 

The Real Deal ...

 

This is definitely plausible. Top Gear proved that an Evo 8 could handle better and out-do a Mercialago on a track with loads of turns. Nurburgring is a CURVY ass track, so HP has no bearing.

 

And the STI is competition for that, I would have a hard time believing that a fwd cobalt can handle better than an STI

 

The only main problem in handling with AWD and FWD cars is the under-steering problems.
They can both under-steer dependent on the suspension. An STI with a crap suspension VS a 'balt with nice suspension, the STI would lose when it would come to handling. Now, I'm not saying that AWD isn't generally better, but I am saying that under specific specifications and conditions, FWD is grossly under-rated compared to AWD.

 

I was just watching some of the coverage on speed yesterday from daytona for the GT style racing and they had one cobalt onin the race in which they were talking about it's dominance over the past years. They interviewed the driver of the "01" car and asked him about it. He said that this year is the "08" model in which GM gave it some more hp with the "turbo" engine going in and increased the brakes in the front but that the car weighs an additional 200lbs this year and said that it's tuff to manuerver the car because it is heavier.
Almost as if he wanted the SC back.
kinda funny

 

Well is Heinricy isn't complaining, we shouldn't be complaining. All you have to do is tear apart the inside of your car and !BAM! you get that 200lbs back. Wait, hold up. The S/C was 2850lbs last time I checked and the T/C is 2950lbs - how is that 200lbs?

 

All I know is the driver was saying that it was 200lbs heavire this year for the LNF

 

LSJ SS was 2950lbs

 

a stock ms3 out handles an sti,and its bein proven...so i guess a fwd with good factory suspension can out handle a car that costs 15+k more...but nothing touchs the evo's handling stock vs stock

 

it said 2911lbs. on the sticker inside the drivers door. i'm not sure if its curb weight, with fluids or not though.

GSXR 1000

j/k

 

The video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urwJVnWHjiI
Eight minutes, 40 second "tour" around Nurburgring...

 

so wait.... am I correct in thinking that suddenly a set of brembo's in the front a turbo swap make this car suddenly that much better? i'm not saying it's impossible, but there has to be more to it.

 

Understand, that if the brakes only cut down on stopping time by say 5 tenths of a second from 60-0, would mean that means 16 hundredths of a second from 60-20. Figure every single turn and braking point on the Green Ring. Those 16 hundredths adds up to a lot. I would figure the braking alone makes up about 10-15 seconds of time on the Green. Then take into account the extra 15-25hp, 40+ torque, and then add in the increased tire width, and the tighter suspension. All of those things make a lot of sense now, huh?

 

It's still fwd though.

 

that is very impressive indeed

 

Your point being what exactly?

The only disadvantage to racing a fwd car is on the drag strip. It is fine going around turns, because when you lose traction, it is extremely predictable, and you don't lose much time. Compare that to an awd car losing traction. Like explained earlier, it isn't nearly as predictable.

That is, unless you are a pro driver, and know exactly what to do on every car. But since 99% of the people on this forum aren't pro drivers,...