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

Stage 2 vs. Stock

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 21, 2006 | 11:52 PM
  #26  
leviticus88's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-22-06
Posts: 1,730
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
Well, this went south fast...

anyway, Altitude sux. the stage 3 cobalt I know only went 14.8 at 5300 ft. makes me want to cry...
Reply
Old May 22, 2006 | 01:26 AM
  #27  
cobalt8's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 04-15-06
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
From: London, Ont
Originally Posted by leviticus88
Well, this went south fast...

anyway, Altitude sux. the stage 3 cobalt I know only went 14.8 at 5300 ft. makes me want to cry...

Ok, soo lets just say were all dealing with normal altitude here, since no one mentioned anything about that at all, what makes you bring that into the conversation?

14.4 stock, I live in canada, normal alt, I believe with good driving that those kind of times can be hit, as they have been hit already by members; with intake you can trim a few 10ths of a second off your time.

And if your bringing altitude into it, how am i so wrong to bring slicks into the mix?

Intake+stage2+good run=mid 13s, I guess Ill have to do it when im all setup, Ill have intake soon like I said, so ill track it and see what I hit and until then I can't say much for myself, just from what other people have posted. Plus he was rude about it to begin with, I guess two wrongs don't make a right.. but still.

Xenozx, dimeo09 went 14.4 with intake and exhaust, nick went 14.4 STOCK. Lets say, with intake and exhaust, nick does do somewhere around 14s, like 14.1, then shave the same .5 off the time, theres mid 13s..

It all depends I guess on the driver and the conditions. I say where I am, with intake, and stage 2, Ill hit mid 13s on good runs, if im lucky, maybe a bit lower, with slicks, low 13s hopefully. Anyways, sorry for the flame, I just dont like it either when people jump on my back about what I think my times would be when he doesn't know my conditions either.
Reply
Old May 22, 2006 | 03:36 AM
  #28  
ReMz's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-24-06
Posts: 1,142
Likes: 0
From: Fort Collins, CO
Originally Posted by cobalt8
Ok, soo lets just say were all dealing with normal altitude here, since no one mentioned anything about that at all, what makes you bring that into the conversation?

14.4 stock, I live in canada, normal alt, I believe with good driving that those kind of times can be hit, as they have been hit already by members; with intake you can trim a few 10ths of a second off your time.

And if your bringing altitude into it, how am i so wrong to bring slicks into the mix?

Intake+stage2+good run=mid 13s, I guess Ill have to do it when im all setup, Ill have intake soon like I said, so ill track it and see what I hit and until then I can't say much for myself, just from what other people have posted. Plus he was rude about it to begin with, I guess two wrongs don't make a right.. but still.

Xenozx, dimeo09 went 14.4 with intake and exhaust, nick went 14.4 STOCK. Lets say, with intake and exhaust, nick does do somewhere around 14s, like 14.1, then shave the same .5 off the time, theres mid 13s..

It all depends I guess on the driver and the conditions. I say where I am, with intake, and stage 2, Ill hit mid 13s on good runs, if im lucky, maybe a bit lower, with slicks, low 13s hopefully. Anyways, sorry for the flame, I just dont like it either when people jump on my back about what I think my times would be when he doesn't know my conditions either.
the fact is that u came at this immaturely and called this guy a bad driver based upon his comment and what you concluded from the 1/4 time from his signature.

now, altitude could play a HUGE role in his 1/4 time. slicks IMPROVE 1/4 times regardless. not to say he knew your conditions, but he certainly did not jump on your back like your previous comment.

This was a calculation based upon a quick google search. I quote:
"Your BHP loss computed from your BHP of 205 at sea level and Elevation of 7000 feet is 43.05 HP loss." I live at 7k ft elevation .... this is a very conservative BHP number aswell. now take into consideration altidude hp losses.
Reply
Old May 22, 2006 | 10:09 AM
  #29  
LittleMT's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 05-12-06
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
From: HepCat City
Originally Posted by ReMz
the fact is that u came at this immaturely and called this guy a bad driver based upon his comment and what you concluded from the 1/4 time from his signature.

now, altitude could play a HUGE role in his 1/4 time. slicks IMPROVE 1/4 times regardless. not to say he knew your conditions, but he certainly did not jump on your back like your previous comment.

This was a calculation based upon a quick google search. I quote:
"Your BHP loss computed from your BHP of 205 at sea level and Elevation of 7000 feet is 43.05 HP loss." I live at 7k ft elevation .... this is a very conservative BHP number aswell. now take into consideration altidude hp losses.


Exactly........
Reply
Old May 22, 2006 | 10:52 AM
  #30  
mark0113's Avatar
New Member
 
Joined: 04-30-06
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
From: Northeast Ohio
Smile hmmm

Originally Posted by dimeo09
wrong but nice try, you act like taking tenths off your 1/4 mile time is nothing, it takes more than just better air flow and a smaller pulley
Ok, i have a few things to address. First off, i dont know where the heck this dimeo kid comes in because the last forum he took part in that i read was him trying to defend his friend who ran a 14.1 STOCK. now if he stil ldoesnt think some "airflow and a pulley" wont bring his lil buddy there into the 13's, then he has to go take some math classes or something. And second of all, the stage 2 kit isnt just "air flow and pulley", it comes with the bigger injectors which is primarily the main part to the kit along with the reprogramming for the ecu to handle the injectors. but oh well, let him be ignorant. i just find it funny that he cant defend his lame 14.8 run, because i know for a fact that he is at a perfectly fine altitude, unless hes just a big liar, because his "friend" ran a 14.1 stock. go check in the drag section of the forum if u dont believe me.... way to contradict yourself buddy
Reply
Old May 22, 2006 | 05:23 PM
  #31  
M62SS's Avatar
New Member
 
Joined: 01-18-06
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
From: Canada
i have race yesterday with a stock one from 40 mph to 120mph and i pull like 3 to 4 car lenght on him...with and WRX STI from 60 mph to 120mph and i pull like2 car lenght and the last one was with a 350z 2003 from 40 mph to 110mph and it was bumper to bumper...no one gain on another...thats really make my day....
Reply
Old May 22, 2006 | 11:54 PM
  #32  
ReMz's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-24-06
Posts: 1,142
Likes: 0
From: Fort Collins, CO
Originally Posted by M62SS
i have race yesterday with a stock one from 40 mph to 120mph and i pull like 3 to 4 car lenght on him...with and WRX STI from 60 mph to 120mph and i pull like2 car lenght and the last one was with a 350z 2003 from 40 mph to 110mph and it was bumper to bumper...no one gain on another...thats really make my day....
damn... the stage 2 must be doing a lot for these cars cuz if you HONESTLY pulled on an STi (and you are certain it was an STi), that is quite impressive.

i know once we have traction, it's hard to compete with an SS/SC..... but my STi puts my cobalt to shame. i dont have the stage 2 tho
Reply
Old May 23, 2006 | 10:48 AM
  #33  
M62SS's Avatar
New Member
 
Joined: 01-18-06
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
From: Canada
yep...the only thing is that i dont talk to the guy after we race so maybe he had a good explanation for my kill but i'm pretty sure he was in 3rd gear at wot too..
Reply
Old May 23, 2006 | 09:28 PM
  #34  
8cd03gro's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 05-09-06
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
From: .
Originally Posted by ReMz
damn... the stage 2 must be doing a lot for these cars cuz if you HONESTLY pulled on an STi (and you are certain it was an STi), that is quite impressive.

i know once we have traction, it's hard to compete with an SS/SC..... but my STi puts my cobalt to shame. i dont have the stage 2 tho

that is impressive, but the sti loses its advantage in a roll. The 350z is more impressive imo.
Reply
Old May 24, 2006 | 04:03 AM
  #35  
cobalt8's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 04-15-06
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
From: London, Ont
stis are faster then the sssc, its easy to make an sti jump in hp too, chip it and it will fly lol..

BTW ReMz, read the posts, I already apologized for that, but anyways.
Reply
Old May 24, 2006 | 04:52 AM
  #36  
Mike's SS's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 12-23-05
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
From: STL
Originally Posted by nick11
Sorry He was a bit rude but hes right, myself living in Canada Alberta I pulled 14.4 STOCK. Was pushing close to 14.1 after intake and exhaust. Anyone doing close to 15 stock has some issues, call it alitude or whatever. But realistically its BAD driving . Same reason why my car STOCK has beaten a few BRAND NEW mustang GTS cause people simply dont know how to drive them. By the time they are done spinning their tires I am a car length or two ahead of them.
what are you on?
Reply
Old May 24, 2006 | 05:20 AM
  #37  
cobalt8's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 04-15-06
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
From: London, Ont
this thread sucks.. /lock :P
Reply
Old May 24, 2006 | 05:22 AM
  #38  
LittleMT's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 05-12-06
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
From: HepCat City
Originally Posted by cobalt8
this thread sucks.. /lock :P

Your atitude in it doesn't help much.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Supercharged06SS
08-10 SS Turbocharged General Discussion
21
Dec 11, 2022 04:47 PM
taintedred07
2.0L LNF Performance Tech
32
May 28, 2022 03:47 AM
Zharrington_2010LNF
2.0L LNF Performance Tech
21
Feb 8, 2016 01:43 PM
Jesse
Parts
15
Oct 13, 2015 09:32 PM
Jesse
Stuff
0
Oct 1, 2015 05:47 PM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:51 PM.