2.0L LSJ Performance Tech 205hp Supercharged SS tuner version. 200 lb-ft of torque.

Cobalt ss beating a LS (turbo'd) unlikely? Finally proven

Old Oct 3, 2005 | 11:53 PM
  #26  
MarcS's Avatar
The Stig
 
Joined: 05-11-05
Posts: 6,484
Likes: 1
From: New York
Originally Posted by OniMirage
honestly this is started to sound like a thread from the ************* forums ... if you took the guy kudos to you. Now if you didn't ... still kudos on the upgrade. The only prob with the he said she said stuff going on is that it starts flamming. Post a vid then we will give you allllll the props you deserve on a job well done. Put it to rest man everyone is ready to congradulate the winner put it on film.
Amen.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 12:02 AM
  #27  
phxSS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-20-05
Posts: 2,621
Likes: 0
From: Buckeye, Az
^^ yes we can, but the 2.2 has a larger aftermarket right now, which makes sense from a business perspective there are more 2.2's on the road than 2.0's..So there is naturally going to be more demand than for us right now. But I'm not worried. We will soon be hearing stories of the "other" guys blowing internals, and spending buttloads of money to hang with our modded cars.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 09:37 AM
  #28  
Halfcent's Avatar
I'm old school
 
Joined: 02-16-05
Posts: 6,905
Likes: 3
From: Nashville
I said it in his OTHER thread too. I'm calling bull ****. No pics, no vid, no name on the type of kit installed, no name on his SS owner buddy, nothing. I don't think he has it.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 10:20 AM
  #29  
BlueSSupercharged's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 01-02-05
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
From: Appleton, WI
Originally Posted by halfcent
I said it in his OTHER thread too. I'm calling bull ****. No pics, no vid, no name on the type of kit installed, no name on his SS owner buddy, nothing. I don't think he has it.
im with halfcent on this one!!
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 10:32 AM
  #30  
codyss's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 05-12-05
Posts: 2,698
Likes: 0
From: Nebraska
This story makes no sense at all.

A 145HP engine with 8psi beats a 2.0 (130-140HP N/A) with 12psi? Without getting technical it still sounds impossible.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 10:53 AM
  #31  
CobaltBurst's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-08-05
Posts: 2,152
Likes: 0
From: U.S.A.
dunno but i always hear that 1psi=10hp so 145+80=225, cobalt SS has 200 right?
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 11:04 AM
  #32  
NJBLUESS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-27-05
Posts: 592
Likes: 0
From: NEW JERSEY
Hey, that's great! Even if it is faster, it's only in a straight line. Any SS/SC will kill it on a road course. An LS has no suspension, performance wise, nor the strength in the transmission or the stopping power.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 11:11 AM
  #33  
CobaltBurst's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-08-05
Posts: 2,152
Likes: 0
From: U.S.A.
Originally Posted by NJBLUESS
Hey, that's great! Even if it is faster, it's only in a straight line. Any SS/SC will kill it on a road course. An LS has no suspension, performance wise, nor the strength in the transmission or the stopping power.
This is true, but i believe we were talking about horsepower....
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 12:05 PM
  #34  
phxSS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-20-05
Posts: 2,621
Likes: 0
From: Buckeye, Az
Yea, halfcent is right. This guy is just causing trouble. But he is a God in the 2.2 forum lol, even though he has no evidence, people still worship him.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 12:26 PM
  #35  
CobaltBurst's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-08-05
Posts: 2,152
Likes: 0
From: U.S.A.
I agree with half that its probably BS, but isnt it possible? if not enlighten me. 205HP ss 145HP LS+8psi=80hp, =225HPLS, im talking about a straight line
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 12:31 PM
  #36  
BeastlyTA's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: 09-05-05
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
From: Rowlett, TX
Originally Posted by CobaltBurst
I agree with half that its probably BS, but isnt it possible? if not enlighten me. 205HP ss 145HP LS+8psi=80hp, =225HPLS, im talking about a straight line
Well your theory is flawed. The SS is underrated by GM. They say it has 205 but in reality its dynoing that amount at the wheels. So the SS would still be more powerful than the LS with 8 psi.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 12:34 PM
  #37  
SwizzDSMSS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 08-01-05
Posts: 1,252
Likes: 0
From: Maine
Cant happen!!! You would need a new fuel pump. Your **** would be bogging like a ****.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 12:40 PM
  #38  
phxSS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-20-05
Posts: 2,621
Likes: 0
From: Buckeye, Az
even if it was true, if one of us did a turbo swap, and that's it, it would demolish a 2.4 or 2.2 with just a turbo. We can hanblde more boost from the turbo, but they are very limited.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 12:42 PM
  #39  
CobaltBurst's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-08-05
Posts: 2,152
Likes: 0
From: U.S.A.
Originally Posted by BeastlyTA
Well your theory is flawed. The SS is underrated by GM. They say it has 205 but in reality its dynoing that amount at the wheels. So the SS would still be more powerful than the LS with 8 psi.
I would think it would be the same for the LS being under rated then, guess only way to find out is dyno both , hopefully soon we will.

Cant happen!!! You would need a new fuel pump. Your **** would be bogging like a ****.
.....that 100 bucks really hurts when your spending 2000 on a turbo
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 12:45 PM
  #40  
phxSS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-20-05
Posts: 2,621
Likes: 0
From: Buckeye, Az
Have fun spending thousands more upgrading your brakes, tires, wheels, transmission, and engine internals to hang with an SS
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 01:02 PM
  #41  
Permafried-'s Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-21-05
Posts: 5,060
Likes: 0
From: London, Ontario
Originally Posted by phxSS
Yea, halfcent is right. This guy is just causing trouble. But he is a God in the 2.2 forum lol, even though he has no evidence, people still worship him.
Not everyone in the 2.2 forum...some of us actually stop and think things through before believing everything we read . I have a feeling both these threads may be locked...at least one of them should be why in the hell did he need two? Oh right how could I have forgotten...looks like we could potentially have a troll on our hands .

Permafried-
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 01:12 PM
  #42  
CobaltBurst's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-08-05
Posts: 2,152
Likes: 0
From: U.S.A.
phxss has his facts mixed up

i agreed with halfcent on the other forum that it is probably BS
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 01:20 PM
  #43  
SwizzDSMSS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 08-01-05
Posts: 1,252
Likes: 0
From: Maine
Originally Posted by CobaltBurst
.....that 100 bucks really hurts when your spending 2000 on a turbo
True...but what if you waste all of your money on the turbo and your retarded like this canuck? haha True?
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 01:24 PM
  #44  
CobaltBurst's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-08-05
Posts: 2,152
Likes: 0
From: U.S.A.
Originally Posted by SwizzDSMSS
True...but what if you waste all of your money on the turbo and your retarded like this canuck? haha True?
Again turboing my ls is cheaper than me buying the SS, i know it doesnt come with the fancy brakes tranny or whatever, but its cheaper powergain for me then buying the ss would have been, i drove it also and didnt like it. anything else ?
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 01:40 PM
  #45  
SwizzDSMSS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 08-01-05
Posts: 1,252
Likes: 0
From: Maine
oh no I think it is great you even have a Cobalt! Yes I know exactly what your saying but then again you got to look at it like this. You buy the "LS" and 4 years down the road the value of your car will go down and never be as much as the best possible trim of the car which is a "SS" Say you buy your car for 12k and it will only be worth 6k in about 4 years. Where opposed to an SS that costed me 21k and I will get about 14k. All in all I had/have the better investment. There is something to look at.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 01:45 PM
  #46  
CobaltBurst's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-08-05
Posts: 2,152
Likes: 0
From: U.S.A.
it will be interesting to see the long term effects talking in 5 years to the SS engine, modded or not. i know the srt 4's were having problems with their engines and turbos, at least so i heard. But again i drive my car's until they are at there end, not buy sell buy sell.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 01:48 PM
  #47  
love my SS's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: 07-23-05
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
From: Brownstown, Indiana
Originally Posted by jiveturkey
I just recently finished a stage one turbo setup (@ 8psi) on my cobalt LS 2.2 ltr. My friend owns a cobalt ss supercharged. So we raced them both 5 times and each time the race went down the same way. The ss supercharge pulled out at the start but my LS turbocharge blew by it at the end. The race was a little over a 1/4 mile long. We also switched and I raced with his ss supercharged and he beat me in my LS turbocharged. So I guess the only time the SS would be faster is in a 50 foot race Can't wait to upgrade to the next stage!
anybody care to think who would win this in a stage 2 upgraded ss/sc???

at what speed where u running at the 1/4 mile distance??

id need to see a video!!! else id have to raise the bs flag
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 02:05 PM
  #48  
phxSS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-20-05
Posts: 2,621
Likes: 0
From: Buckeye, Az
this is all bs until there is video proof
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 02:25 PM
  #49  
Darksun's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-04-05
Posts: 2,040
Likes: 0
From: LongIsland
you know what im ganna say i believe it up to a point. after market boost on an n/a car is nothing to laugh at. Also he beat one cobalt ss its not like he's saying he can beat them all. I've meet plenty of cobalt drivers who can't break outta the 15's so whats hard to believe. Also 14.5 is not average in a cobalt ss/sc 14.7- 14.8 seems to be where most of the numbers are at.
Old Oct 4, 2005 | 02:30 PM
  #50  
SuperchargedSS's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 09-07-05
Posts: 3,532
Likes: 0
From: Canada
I test drove the LS "Basic Balt''", SS "Lite" and the SS/SC before buying the supercharged. There is no comparing the ride between the LS and the SS/SC. Our transimission and shifting is quite a bit better, like night and day. The brakes and handling of the LS are not even comparible to the SC. The LS brake pedal is quite spongy and slowing down with those drums is a bit of a nightmare. That, and the fact that its goverened at 130...... In fact my Mazda 3 GT would pull the LS no probs. We figuired this out on the test drive Now the SC handed the 3 its ass, it wasnt even a contest. No surprise though, the 3 is NA.

I am not saying this because I have an SC.
Any 8psi'd turbo'd LS around Ottawa? I would love to put an end to this myth. Both cars are completely different from a driving feel and performance point of view. Hell, the LS is a great car, but its not built for performance like the SC. If you are planning on buying an LS for modding, just save yourself the trouble and buy an SC model, if you can. If not, drive what you wanna drive. And if any turbod LS's want to have some fun you know where I am. I will have a camera to put this to sleep. As mentioned above, they are both great cars. LS owners, you can always try to pull us, but it's going to take thousands and thousands of dollars just so your LS can beat a bone stock SC? Even if you win your still losing at the bank. Just get an SS/SC. I am not even going to touch on the fact you may get all the way to the point where you can slightly pull an SC just to have the SC owner bolt up a stage two for under a grand and feed you your lunch like no tomorrow. At that point if your going to try to one up the stage two , bring a 5 gallon pail along for your tranny... LOL Just having some fun here.

Now I am done with this arg until I see a video of an LS pulling an SC with the SC driver driving the car properly and not shifting at 2000...

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:50 PM.