Does anybody know the HP and torque numbers this 2.0 puts out without the supercharger? I was just curious. My butt gauge estimates about 135HP and maybe 120ft.lbs of torque. That's when I try and drive without letting it boost.

I think it STILL has more power than a base civic even without the supercharger.

 

I think 130-140HP is about right. Even with a S/C it has a decent comp. ratio.

 

My lawn mower has more power than a stock civic. Aren't hey like 125 HP ? I bet it's like a bit over 100 HP at the wheels.

 

a stock 6th gen SI civic made 170 hp and 130 lb ft, give or take hondas are the torqueless wonder that never cease to amaze

 

oh and by the way i cant wait to sell my honda i dont like it at all only 33 days until my ss is delivered

 

Yes.. I think so. And sadly.. The stupid Honda Civic holds it's value so much better than most Ameican cars. I hate it. They are nothing special. They have pathetic torque compared to the Cobalt. I bet a few years from now, a used Honda Civic, same year, same mileage will be worth more than our Cobalt SS's. That's just wrong.. I really hope resale on the SS will be better than the Cavaliers.

 

i wish it wasnt like that either, however hondas last forever... they are built well and "putt putt" down the road for like 700 thousand miles until they finally die
its all about reliability...i mean im all for GM but when have they been know to put out a car that reliable? even my dad admits they are pieces, hes just gets them off his car lot
all in all they did a sweet job with the SS. ill have pix of mine up on tuesday thats when i can finally pik mine up

 

The reliability perception is crap. That's just what I'm talking about. A honda is no more reliable than a Cavalier! Take a look at recall histories. Honda vehicles have just as many recalls as most GM vehicles.

The Cavalier I just sold for my SS had 130,000 miles on it and was still running great. The only reason I got rid of it was because the AC was busted and the instrument cluster was starting to act up. The engine was still in great shape and I bet it could have gone to 200,000 miles.

In fact, a friend of mine had a '90 Z24 with the 3.1 and he drove his car over 200,000 miles.

It's all false perception if you ask me because of one or two unreliable cars GM did produce.