Ok, now that I have your attention I would like to get your $0.02 on this topic as well as putting in my $0.02. Everyone is going crazy about the new 2.0L Turbo motor, however, have you actually stopped think about the pros and cons of both platforms? For instance, we complain that the 2.0LT (hence forth 2.0L Turbo) has a considerable power increase, but it seems far less likely that GM underrated this engine as was the case in the Cobalt. Why? Adjusting for 10% drivetrain loss the 2.0LS (yes, the S/C) would create about 230 hp which would put it squarely in range of other V6 SS models. Are Cobalt owner's likely to cross shop the Malibu SS? It's much more likely then not. In order to make the V6 attractive GM's only option is to under rate the 2.0LS and leave it to the underground enthusiast culture to know better. If GM actually designed the 2.0LS for 205 HP it would be at a significant disadvantage to the other FWD tuners hitting the market. GM did it's homework and knew that the enthusiasts would know better, while still making it's V6 models look attractive.

Ok, so I've speeled about the 2.0LS' rating, but what about the 2.0LT's rating of 260/260? As the Sky and Soltice are the new flagships for afforable sports cars, under ratting the engine is definately not attractive to your potential market. This market will definately be an older crowd then the Cobalt and therefore it is less likely that they will be modifying enthusiasts. These people want their power and they don't want to touch anything. Perhaps GM will introduce stage kits, but it is much less likely that this market will even want to adjust the power of their cars. The 2.0LT therefore becomes a complete performance package, willing to satisfy immediately, whereas the 2.0LS is an engine begging for upgrades in a market of power hungry enthusiasts.

Moreover, consider the boost running through a 2.0LT, stock boost is 20 PSI, whereas stock boost for a 2.0LS is 12.5, what numbers would a 2.0LS run on 20 PSI, this may be the most important aspect that has been overshadowed in so many of the debates.

Now I know people argue about the architecture of the 2.0LT being superior to the 2.0LS, however, where is the proof that VVT is effective for S/C applications, do you know of any other S/C cars with VVT? I am not saying it is not effective, I am simply saying I do not know the implications of VVT in regards to a Turbo setup vs. a S/C setup, please clarify.

To conclude, what is the potential for one over the other, swapping S/C's is certainly an option in the future, however, so is swapping turbos.

Please discuss!

Ryan

 

i think it will take alot less money to make HP in a turbo that it will with a supercharger, but ill be pushing close to 300HP by the time the turboed cobalts come out. ill be ready to take them on.

 

When hahn comes out with there turbo, I'm going with that.

 

Personally, I like my SCreamer.

 

Yea its nice and all, but it can only go so far, i want to make big power, and that will be with tubro.

 

supercharger swap, i plan on getting a whipple when they make and adapter plate.

 

has hahn even released numbers yet? everyone is getting excited over stuff yet nothing but small bits of info have been released. Same with this turbo ss that is sorry to say still only rumored to be coming up. Opinions aside most of this is only lady talk ie. gossip. So I think everyone needs to take it all with a grain of salt

 

Yea you can take it with a grain of salt, but sooner or later someone will release a turbo.

 

If I do a power adder swap it will be like cobaltss313 said and stepping up to a whipple. I like my power and all, but I like being different as well. And as it goes, I'm already one of the fastest cars in my area that will actually race/drag.

 

I guess we'll get a better idea once somebody dynos those turbo ecotecs. I do know that they're starting to show up at some dealerships (only one confirmed).

Silly question, but what is the redline on the 2.0LT and rpm at max HP/TQ?

 

No offence but I think your talk of Cobalt owners cross shopping a Malibu SS is totally out to lunch.

I would say its the opposite--a few will--most won't. Off the top of my head here are 4 good reasons why.

1. No 2 dr Malibu SS
2. No Manual Trans
3. More money
4. Worse fuel economy

I don't think GM sits around worrying that one models hp is too close to anothers and will steal sales. The average buyer does not care about hp---as long as it has enough for them. Each car has demographics of typical buyers. No enthusiasts are a bit different I know. I could have swung the payments on a S/C---I just did not want to.

I do like the Malibu SS 4 dr but it was about 8K more then my car---did not see the value in doing that.

as for the 2.0T--its the newest evolution of a boosted ecotec. Like an LT1 VS LS1.
Nothing wrong with LT1s but eventually all godd things must end and the newer version wins out because it is superior.

 

but you cant go wrong with a BLOWer either...(bov)

 

I enjoy being different. Everyone around here knew my car because of the noise, everyone knows what a blow off valve sounds like, but a screaming car?


I love the supercharger and I don't think I would trade it in for anything turbo.

 

the closest I will get on this car is maybe a super turbo but that is far down the road for me.

 

well if we go with the twin set up .....would you need 2 boost gauges?????

 

Yea the cobalt is different becuase it has a blower, thats cool and all, until your already past the blower eff. like iam now at 19lbs, Can only go so far with it, thats why i will be going turbo, and for the spool of a big turbo.

 

I kind of want to swap for a big turbo just because I would like the lag for launching. Like Shortbus is saying, big power possibility.

 

Are we going to have to listen to these what if turbo scenarios for the next two years?

I'm sorry but until this car is confirmed we are getting WAY ahead of ourselves. As for the turbo v supercharger discussion, which is where this looks to be going, who cares? Different strokes for different folks. Personally if I were GM I would keep the SC in the Cobalts just for some lineup variety. Offering a 2.0t in 3,4, or 5 different models is just being redundant to me. Another thing to consider is that with 260hp things like the clutch and axel are going to need to be upgrade to safely run that hp which means even more money, which puts this car in a different target price range.

To answer the question on if you need two boost gauges when twin charging, no. You measure at the manifold not the power added. You only need one boost gauge. I'm not sure that was a serious question though so if not sorry, I suck at pickup up internet sarcasim.

 

The LT1 and LS1 are nothing alike, I've seen the internals. That would be like comparing theTwinCam and ECOTEC. The 2.0T to the other ECOTEC's is like comparing the LS1 and LS7, they are totaly differant animals, but still the same species.

 

The new 2.0T is a more advanced engine, hands down, but the only thing everyone here seems to be thinking about is the power-adder, why? Direct Injection, thats power in it's self, increased cooling, better oiling, beefier internals, all come with the 2.0T, but why not slap a S/C on the new engine and make all you "My S/C is better than any thing else" guys happy? Because it's the only ECOTEC engine in GM worldwide that has a S/C, it's more cost effective to use the same thing that is being used many other places. Case in point, The LS2, it can be found in the C6 Vette, CTS-V, SSR, SS Trailblazer, and GTO. Same engine damned near the same output in each application, but it's in 5 VERY differant vehicals, same with the 2.0T and the Solstice GXP vs. Cobalt SS.

 

Look at the difference in these power curves:

At 1,000RPM, the LSJ is making a mere 125 lb-ft of torque. At the same RPM, the 2.0 Turbo is making 160 lb-ft. So impressive is its torque band, that it produces 260 lb-ft from 2,500 RPM up to 5,250 RPM (the LSJ only makes 200 lb-ft at 4,400RPM)! That is an insanely flat torque curve. The LSJ at 2,000 RPM produces about 65 HP. The 2.0 Turbo at the same RPM produces roughly 90 HP. The 2.0L Turbo is superior in every way. With the dual-scroll turbo, there is virtually no lag (the biggest downside to a turbo engine)! It will offer way more power, and better fuel economy than the LSJ!

Personally, I don't see how the LSJ even with stage II (241 HP, 218 lb-ft. torque) would stand a chance against a Cobalt SS with the 2.0L Turbo. It would get eaten alive!

I don't know about you, but if this engine is in the Cobalt in 2008, I will be ordering one ASAP. That is the most advanced engine ever developed by GM. Direct injection, VVT, 2.0L producing 260 HP!!! That is 130 HP per litre. That is absolutely incredible! Granted it does this while pushing 20 psi where as the LSJ only runs 12.5 psi stock (or 15 psi with stage II). Obviously the VVT and direct injection is where the big power improvement is gained.

Now, I am not saying that the Turbo will make it into the Cobalt with 100% certainty, but consider this. The Saturn Ion Redline is gone after 2007. That would mean that the Cobalt SS/SC would be the only GM car using the LSJ. Meanwhile the HHR SS (has been photographed running the 2.0L Turbo), Solstice GXP, Sky Redline, and Opel GT (Euro-only version of Sky) will use the 2.0L Turbo. Why would GM still produce LSJs when all their other cars (including the HHR on the same platform as the Cobalt) use the 2.0L turbo? It makes no sense. I gaurantee that by 2009 the Cobalt will have the 2.0L Turbo!

Also, look at the competition. The 2007 Mini Cooper S is going to have a 175 HP version of the 1.6L that is now TURBOCHARGED by a dual-scroll turbo. The SRT-4 will be out with a 2.4L Turbo with 300 HP (260 lb-ft). The Mazdaspeed 3 will be out with the 2.3L turbo producing 263 HP (280 lb-ft). Only the Civic Si with 197 HP will be slower than the LSJ Cobalt and possibly the Cooper S (though many disagree with me). Don't you think GM will want to compete better in this market???

 

Yes the new 2.0 has "2.1 horsepower per cubic inch, GM's highest specific output." Motor Trend Oct 06 issue, Solstice GXP vs. BMW Z43.0si vs. 350Z Roadster. That would be like the new uber Vette having 896.7hp if they are indeed using a supercharged LS7.

 

You honestly think those are real dyno graphs? They're generated to match GM's "numbers."

Screw all the possiblities of which engine gets 86'ed and which doesn't.

The bottom line is, FWD sux!

That's why I'm building a Fiero with an LS6.

 

Yeah, GM faked them!

Of course they are real! Why the hell would GM lie about them? Look at someone's dyno chart from a stock LSJ! It will be quite similar.

 

yea and when they get a tune and full turbo back exhausts they will be pushing close to 350 hp. I really love blowers, but on a small displacement engine a turbo is just plain more effecient.