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

SS/SC vs STi/EVO

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-02-2007, 02:53 AM
  #26  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
SSBOOST's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-18-06
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's just great to know that an almost $10k cheaper car that looks better can keep up and beat these cars. Its a dream come true to me lol, just gotta get my 2.4 up to speed almost there
SSBOOST is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:10 AM
  #27  
Banned
 
ARedWhiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-01-07
Location: CT
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
sweet
ARedWhiner is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:14 AM
  #28  
Senior Member
 
cakeeater's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-17-07
Location: right behind you.
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mitsubishi-...slip-9322.html


haha good luck with those cammed evo's boys. 340awhp on mustang dyno = around 415hp give or take a bit. 115mph trap speed = absolute ownage of any cobalt here. ABSOLUTE ownage. That ones on the stock turbo too. So exhaust/cam/tune = cobalt +1 *******.
cakeeater is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:15 AM
  #29  
Banned
 
ARedWhiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-01-07
Location: CT
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
^^^hahaha owned
ARedWhiner is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:59 AM
  #30  
Junior Member
 
SSalexSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-12-06
Location: Florida
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RedbaltSS
Sti's are now rated at 293 at the flywheel and evos i think are 286. With stage 2 you might be able to beat a stock one from a roll, but from a stop they will still eat you alive.
roll u will destroy it go from 40 if u have stage 2 i just raced a stage 2 sti from a 20 roll and a 40 roll from 40 i killed him at least 2.5 cars from a 20 i had no traction so he got ahead by 2 cars but i started to creep on him
will have vids tmrw
SSalexSS is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 04:21 AM
  #31  
Banned
 
Super_SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-12-07
Location: N. Side Chi-Town
Posts: 6,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cakeeater
huh...what? a cammed evo with a tune will rip you a new *******. With just a tune and tbe on the IX's you wouldn't be able to keep up at all.
everyone can talk this and that..until it happens i aint beleievin nothing...

like ppl on here say ss/sc is faster than an evo ix...sorry guys but no way..

i race one STOCK VS STOCK,and he had me bout 1 car length from 40roll...we both started in 2nd...so like i said,i dont beleive it till i expierence it
Super_SS is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 05:27 AM
  #32  
Senior Member
 
cakeeater's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-17-07
Location: right behind you.
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SSalexSS
roll u will destroy it go from 40 if u have stage 2 i just raced a stage 2 sti from a 20 roll and a 40 roll from 40 i killed him at least 2.5 cars from a 20 i had no traction so he got ahead by 2 cars but i started to creep on him
will have vids tmrw
what stage 2?
cakeeater is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 09:00 AM
  #33  
Senior Member
 
firemanfrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-27-07
Location: USA
Posts: 1,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SSBOOST
Oh so GM posted more false info about that too? Lol, they say its 2815 and now the 07-08 ones are rated at even less weight.
Originally Posted by blackngold20
the weight is a funny thing. I read in car and driver the our cars are 2850, road and track had 2725, I think it was compact car that said 2925. So, I guess its a big guesstimation...lol
I didn't get my weight figures from GM, I got them from actual road tests of our car.

You guys ought to know me better than that by now!

Car&Driver
Chevrolet Cobalt SS Supercharged - Short Take Road Tests

http://www.caranddriver.com/shortroa...ged-page2.html
Curb weight: 2911 lb

Car&Driver
The Quickest Cars of 2007: $20,000 to $25,000 - Features

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ercharged.html
Curb weight: 2936 lb

Car&Driver
The Lightning Lap, 2006 - Features

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ers-page2.html
Curb weight: 2919

MotorTrend
Road Test: 2005 Chevrolet Cobalt SS Supercharged vs. 2005 Dodge SRT4

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
Curb weight: 2959 lb

So the average weight of our car from the above data is 2931 lbs.

Originally Posted by cakeeater
huh...what? a cammed evo with a tune will rip you a new *******. With just a tune and tbe on the IX's you wouldn't be able to keep up at all.
Originally Posted by cakeeater
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mitsubishi-...slip-9322.html
haha good luck with those cammed evo's boys. 340awhp on mustang dyno = around 415hp give or take a bit. 115mph trap speed = absolute ownage of any cobalt here. ABSOLUTE ownage. That ones on the stock turbo too. So exhaust/cam/tune = cobalt +1 *******.
"Cammed" this ... "Tuned" that ...

Get a clue man, we're not talking about modded cars here.

It's Stock vs. Stock, and the excess weight of the Evo's AWD system knocks down it's performance advantage quite substantially when it's not racing from a stop.

Them is the facts ... so get used to it.

Originally Posted by ARedWhiner
^^^hahaha owned
Ha Ha! You pwned yourself because you listened to someone who is clueless.

That must be embarrassing for you ...

Originally Posted by SSBOOST
It's just great to know that an almost $10k cheaper car that looks better can keep up and beat these cars. Its a dream come true to me lol, just gotta get my 2.4 up to speed almost there
Finally, someone who is talking some sense here!

For a minute, I had thought the world had gone completely mad.

Because someone would have to be totally insane to believe that an Evo, which only makes 10 more hp the wheels than our SS/SC, could annihilate our car when it weighs in almost 400lbs. more than an SS/SC.

THE FACTS:
3300lbs./225whp = 14.66 lb/whp
2930lbs./215whp = 13.62 lb/whp


It's just simple math people, it's not rocket science ...

Last edited by firemanfrank; 09-02-2007 at 09:00 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
firemanfrank is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 11:54 AM
  #34  
Senior Member
 
DTM2188's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-23-06
Location: S. Jersey
Posts: 5,165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From a stop and a dig, it will be the Evo. From a roll, it should be the Cobalt. And I put down 236 whp and 236 wtq on a Mustang Dyno with my bone stock Evo IX MR, hope that helps you compare a little better.
DTM2188 is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 12:08 PM
  #35  
New Member
 
Blk06CobaltSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-19-05
Location: NH
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ha alright, owning both cars at one time i can proudly say both cars are great! When it comes down to performance stock vs. stock an evo will rip you a new ******* anyday from a dig and WILL be you from a 20-40 roll also. Now stage 2+ SS vs. stock evo. this is a diffrent story. With just an Inatke/exhaust on my balt i raced the same but with stage 2 and he got me by id say 2 cars. So raceing a stock evo with stage 2 you def. have a chance from a roll, will still be close though. From a dig we still got you, but again still close. And people say the bolt is 10K cheaper than an evo and stilL can keep up. Bullshit. Ha people have to sit in an evo and drive it to really know why its 10K more than a bolt. And not to mention all the little **** that it has that the bolt doesnt and all the extra goodies. But as long as an EVO has TBE,intake,cams,tune,fuel pump blah blah blah...your fucked lol. Just giving you my 2 cents about both cars love both, the bolt is a nasty car, no hate towards the bolt i loved the thing, but after having an evo i wouldnt go back. hope that helps?
Blk06CobaltSS is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 02:07 PM
  #36  
Junior Member
 
SSalexSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-12-06
Location: Florida
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cakeeater
what stage 2?
GM stage 2 i will have a vid late tonight when my firend uploads it it was at night and he stuck the camera outside so windy and he was in the rear seat
SSalexSS is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 02:11 PM
  #37  
Banned
 
ARedWhiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-01-07
Location: CT
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
good i want to see!
ARedWhiner is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 02:11 PM
  #38  
Member
 
supercharged414's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-03-07
Location: Queens, New York
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by firemanfrank
A quick search of various Evo forums does in fact show that those cars are only pulling about 225whp stock.

And seeing that an Evo weighs in at 3300lbs, that means their lbs/whp ratio is 14.66.

Compare that with the average SS/SC weighing in at 2950lbs. and running about 215whp stock, and you get 13.72 lbs./whp.

So while the Evo's AWD greatly helps their starting line acceleration, it also takes a toll on their drive train hp loss. The Evo actually suffers 22% drive train hp loss, whereas our SS/SC only experiences 13-15% drive train loss.

Even if we take into account the lower figure of only 13% drive train loss, with 215whp that means our cars are making 245hp at the crank.

And that's why with any kind of race other than from a standstill, our SS/SC's will give the mighty Evo's a good run for their money.


Nice research, + rep
supercharged414 is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 02:11 PM
  #39  
Banned
 
Red2.4SS/SC's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-21-06
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 3,796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ive got a video for all of you to put everything in perspective it will be loaded shortly
Red2.4SS/SC is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 02:55 PM
  #40  
Senior Member
 
cakeeater's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-17-07
Location: right behind you.
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by firemanfrank
I didn't get my weight figures from GM, I got them from actual road tests of our car.

You guys ought to know me better than that by now!

Car&Driver
Chevrolet Cobalt SS Supercharged - Short Take Road Tests

http://www.caranddriver.com/shortroa...ged-page2.html
Curb weight: 2911 lb

Car&Driver
The Quickest Cars of 2007: $20,000 to $25,000 - Features

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ercharged.html
Curb weight: 2936 lb

Car&Driver
The Lightning Lap, 2006 - Features

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ers-page2.html
Curb weight: 2919

MotorTrend
Road Test: 2005 Chevrolet Cobalt SS Supercharged vs. 2005 Dodge SRT4

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
Curb weight: 2959 lb

So the average weight of our car from the above data is 2931 lbs.





"Cammed" this ... "Tuned" that ...

Get a clue man, we're not talking about modded cars here.

It's Stock vs. Stock, and the excess weight of the Evo's AWD system knocks down it's performance advantage quite substantially when it's not racing from a stop.

Them is the facts ... so get used to it.



Ha Ha! You pwned yourself because you listened to someone who is clueless.

That must be embarrassing for you ...



Finally, someone who is talking some sense here!

For a minute, I had thought the world had gone completely mad.

Because someone would have to be totally insane to believe that an Evo, which only makes 10 more hp the wheels than our SS/SC, could annihilate our car when it weighs in almost 400lbs. more than an SS/SC.

THE FACTS:
3300lbs./225whp = 14.66 lb/whp
2930lbs./215whp = 13.62 lb/whp


It's just simple math people, it's not rocket science ...
yea i guess that makes sense because we have only been talking about modded vs modded for half the thread right? and your car is 100% not as quick as an evo IX stock or modded, mod for mod, straight line, in the twisties, any way you want to look at it the IX is a faster car PERIOD. The IX has gone as fast as 12.9@106 stock. That is a car that will easily take you from a roll and absolutely annihilate you from a dig with the right driver. You guys are kidding yourselves if you think differently. I don't care how many of you have beaten them from rolls or digs, unless you have quite a few mods and they are stock it was driver error on their part it is just a much quicker car. This is what i am telling you from experience with friend's evos, evos at the track, on the street, etc. That doesn't show anything negative about the ss/sc, the evo is just in a different league here guys.

facts-

evo ix's put down around 225whp ON MUSTANG DYNOS. I have seen it done and just in case you didn't know, most mustang dyno's read lower than dynojets. They also put down about 240-245 ft lbs. On a dj that translates to eh 235awhp, 255-260 awtq. 8's read a bit lower, but not a ton. peak power numbers don't mean much and the evo has a great torque curve.
cakeeater is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:30 PM
  #41  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
SSBOOST's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-18-06
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm just happy GM did an extremely smart thing by making a car that could keep up with our popular Evo's and STi's and still be for the most part extremely affordable. Too bad they are discontinuing the SS/SC I really love the car. If only more people knew the REAL facts about it they probably wouldn't go buy an EVO or STi and could easily spend about $1000ish and cream these cars totaling to $22000ish compared to $30k.
SSBOOST is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:43 PM
  #42  
Banned
 
Red2.4SS/SC's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-21-06
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 3,796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SSBOOST
I'm just happy GM did an extremely smart thing by making a car that could keep up with our popular Evo's and STi's and still be for the most part extremely affordable. Too bad they are discontinuing the SS/SC I really love the car. If only more people knew the REAL facts about it they probably wouldn't go buy an EVO or STi and could easily spend about $1000ish and cream these cars totaling to $22000ish compared to $30k.
lmao take your car to the track kid people buy sti's cause they like the track , last time i checked they didnt have a freeway at the dragstrip you obviouslly dont know **** about evo's /sti's and i bet if you put 1,000 into your ss/sc you wouldnt break out of the 14's
Red2.4SS/SC is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:47 PM
  #43  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
SSBOOST's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-18-06
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe you should read the first 2 pages. Especially firemanfrank's posts.
SSBOOST is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:48 PM
  #44  
Banned
 
Red2.4SS/SC's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-21-06
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 3,796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SSBOOST
Maybe you should read the first 2 pages.
i did and i read enough to know that ALL you do is roll race
Red2.4SS/SC is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:50 PM
  #45  
Senior Member
 
cakeeater's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-17-07
Location: right behind you.
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Red2.4SS/SC
lmao take your car to the track kid people buy sti's cause they like the track , last time i checked they didnt have a freeway at the dragstrip you obviouslly dont know **** about evo's /sti's and i bet if you put 1,000 into your ss/sc you wouldnt break out of the 14's
+1, you guys are comparing a mid 14 second car (average) to a mid 13 second car (average) the ss/sc is capable of low 14's, ix's have gone 12's so i am really giving you the benefit of the doubt and the ss/sc is still waaaaay behind. trap speeds of around 100 vs 104-106? they are just incomparable stock and mod for mod. It seems like this forum sees one kill story that is proven by video and then all of a sudden BOOM everyone has beaten them and they are easy kills, no matter what it is.
cakeeater is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:50 PM
  #46  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
SSBOOST's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-18-06
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Actually I don't do either, I don't have an SS/SC. But all I really do is highway runs which is why I stated earlier that I ONLY cared about hp/weight ratio.
SSBOOST is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:51 PM
  #47  
Senior Member
 
blackngold20's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Newport News, VA from Pittsburgh, Pa
Posts: 3,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Red2.4SS/SC
lmao take your car to the track kid people buy sti's cause they like the track , last time i checked they didnt have a freeway at the dragstrip you obviouslly dont know **** about evo's /sti's and i bet if you put 1,000 into your ss/sc you wouldnt break out of the 14's
I guess I can argue that a little I've seen 13.9 w/stg 2, intake, and exhaust
blackngold20 is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:53 PM
  #48  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
SSBOOST's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-18-06
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cakeeater
+1, you guys are comparing a mid 14 second car (average) to a mid 13 second car (average) the ss/sc is capable of low 14's, ix's have gone 12's so i am really giving you the benefit of the doubt and the ss/sc is still waaaaay behind. trap speeds of around 100 vs 104-106? they are just incomparable stock and mod for mod. It seems like this forum sees one kill story that is proven by video and then all of a sudden BOOM everyone has beaten them and they are easy kills, no matter what it is.
They are definitely not comparable mod for mod. I'm generally saying you get more bang for your buck with the SS/SC and if you wanted to, you could invest $30k in the Cobalt inluding the car and go much faster than if you were to just buy a $30k EVO/STi by itself. Do you understand me now?
SSBOOST is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:58 PM
  #49  
Senior Member
 
blackngold20's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Newport News, VA from Pittsburgh, Pa
Posts: 3,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cakeeater
+1, you guys are comparing a mid 14 second car (average) to a mid 13 second car (average) the ss/sc is capable of low 14's, ix's have gone 12's so i am really giving you the benefit of the doubt and the ss/sc is still waaaaay behind. trap speeds of around 100 vs 104-106? they are just incomparable stock and mod for mod. It seems like this forum sees one kill story that is proven by video and then all of a sudden BOOM everyone has beaten them and they are easy kills, no matter what it is.
I agree with the comparison that it doesn't match. Obviously 2 different classes of cars. But I see some points others are making. Some people do act like cars like the evo or sti are unbeatable by cars from a less class. Stock vs. stock I agree those 2 cars are better and they should be for what you gotta pay for them. I would think that when you talk about mod vs. mod that you can do some things that will get you into the same league as the evo/sti. Obviously the only main mod you can do to get into that league is a turbo swap or twinscrew. Cause I'm more than convinced that no matter what you do the m62 just ain't gonna get it done.
blackngold20 is offline  
Old 09-02-2007, 04:01 PM
  #50  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
SSBOOST's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-18-06
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SS4lives
Yes we completely understand you are a ricer. You don't have to keep reminding us.
I understand you are ignorant but name-calling and obnoxious statements are unwelcome here and looked down upon. So please cut it out and stay on topic with the research and facts.
SSBOOST is offline  


Quick Reply: SS/SC vs STi/EVO



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:48 AM.