2.2L L61 Performance Tech 16 valve 145 hp EcoTec with 155 lb-ft of torque

cobalt 2.2 vs ss 2.4 cobalt

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-07-2006, 10:27 PM
  #26  
I'm old school
 
Halfcent's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-16-05
Location: Nashville
Posts: 6,905
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by avro206
...5 speed F23s have 3.84 ratio...
Um, You haven't burst my bubble yet. I said the 2.2L, which uses the F23, has that ratio (3.84), so you haven't contradicted me. The 2.4L uses a final drive of 3.91.

Old 07-07-2006, 10:28 PM
  #27  
Senior Member
 
NoRemorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-24-06
Location: Michigan
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by joeworkstoohard
off idle, the 2.4 actually makes less power than the 2.2 once teh VVT starts doing it's magic the motor really comes alive. if you wind out a 2.4 it just feels a lot "sportier" than a 2.2 also, coil on plug ignition, forged interals, few other goodies, it's just an overall more performance based engine. with that said, the 2.2 is a lot quieter and a hair smoother.

Let me get this straigt, the 2.4 has forgen internals... but the 2.0 LSJ dosn't. I don't think that is an accurate statement.
Old 07-07-2006, 10:38 PM
  #28  
Senior Member
 
cobaltR's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-25-06
Location: Jaffrey, NH
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by NoRemorse
Let me get this straigt, the 2.4 has forgen internals... but the 2.0 LSJ dosn't. I don't think that is an accurate statement.
the ss/sc has forged internals
Old 07-07-2006, 11:40 PM
  #29  
Senior Member
 
avro206's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bykryder83
No Not Really But The 2.4 Has Some More High End Power And Torque,but Not Much...i Have Raced 2 A Auto And A 5 Speed And I Beat Them Both The 5 Speed Is A Little Faster Than The Auto But Not Much,so Basically A 06 5 Speed Ls Should Beat A 06 5 Speed Ss Coupe Any Day,its A Weight Thing The Ss May Have More Power But It Has More Weight Than A Ls Alot So There

please....a 5 spedd LS can beat a 5 speed 2.4L SS? haha--good one! Your completely ignoring the hp and torque curves. Don't just concentrate on peak numbers.

a 2.4 can waste a 2.2. I am trapping 91 mph at 3500 feet.

As for weight..well that depends some what on options. Mine weighs 2815.

FYI--a 5 speed 2.4 SS is roughly 0.5 sec faster in the 1/4 mile
Old 07-07-2006, 11:44 PM
  #30  
Senior Member
 
avro206's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Halfcent
Um, You haven't burst my bubble yet. I said the 2.2L, which uses the F23, has that ratio (3.84), so you haven't contradicted me. The 2.4L uses a final drive of 3.91.


I know what you said----I mean the F23 has the 3.84 final drive ratio for both the 2.2 and the 2.4---I e-mailed GM and will post the answer I get. I am not ure I buy your attached image....where is that from?

All we have to do to prove---go out on the highway... go 65mph (or what ever speed you want) drop it in 5th gear and post the rpms....be exact as you can. Then I'll do it at the same speed and post back
Old 07-07-2006, 11:50 PM
  #31  
I'm old school
 
Halfcent's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-16-05
Location: Nashville
Posts: 6,905
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I can't help you with your experiment, I have an auto. I got that data from my local dealership today. I went to pick up a part, look at some new 2007 models, and to try and find this exact piece of paper. I knew that I had heard somewhere that the 2.4 had a different final drive ratio as a result of a different differential gear ratio. I believe I first read it in a magazine review of the 2.4 SS. I scanned that data from the retail model quick reference guide that the sales people use. I have been trying to find more data sources on-line, but striking out. I'll look up some other sources over the weekend.
Old 07-07-2006, 11:56 PM
  #32  
Senior Member
 
avro206's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Halfcent
I can't help you with your experiment, I have an auto. I got that data from my local dealership today. I went to pick up a part, look at some new 2007 models, and to try and find this exact piece of paper. I knew that I had heard somewhere that the 2.4 had a different final drive ratio as a result of a different differential gear ratio. I believe I first read it in a magazine review of the 2.4 SS. I scanned that data from the retail model quick reference guide that the sales people use.
damn...oh well.


Like you---I am going by published data.

GM canada says 3.84 for both the 2.2 and 2.4

Just go the Chevrolet.com----look under the specs for the 2.4L---"not yet published??

Funny its been on GM Canadas site for at least 8 months! Go look under HHR--not yet published for the gear ratios.

This will just show you the sheer laziness/incompetence of whoever is resonsible for the US site. I mean, what to do you trust when they can't even have current, readily availbe data?

And tow different final drive ratios for a CDN and US car? Makes no sense. We don't even have any government mandated CAFE up here.....so why would we use a final drive for better mileage when we don't have to?
Old 07-08-2006, 12:17 AM
  #33  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
bykryder83's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-27-06
Location: indiana
Posts: 1,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i worked for gm for 2 years i drove all of them....anyone who can drive olll a bone stock ls 5 speed vs a ss 2.4 5 speed would tell you a 2.2 would win its a power to weight ratio thing the 2.4 ss is along the lines of luxury as the 2.2 ls coupe is a far lighter car
Old 07-08-2006, 12:53 AM
  #34  
Senior Member
 
snowbred's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-10-05
Location: Hackensack, NJ
Posts: 814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bykryder83
i worked for gm for 2 years i drove all of them....anyone who can drive olll a bone stock ls 5 speed vs a ss 2.4 5 speed would tell you a 2.2 would win its a power to weight ratio thing the 2.4 ss is along the lines of luxury as the 2.2 ls coupe is a far lighter car

minus the 17s how is an 2.2 ls coupe lighter than a 2.4 ss... given that you equip them the same..
Old 07-08-2006, 12:58 AM
  #35  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Brandon97Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-13-04
Location: Indiana
Posts: 3,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'll let the times speak for themselves.
Old 07-08-2006, 04:41 PM
  #36  
Senior Member
 
06G5GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-01-06
Location: Atlantic Canada
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bykryder83
i worked for gm for 2 years i drove all of them....anyone who can drive olll a bone stock ls 5 speed vs a ss 2.4 5 speed would tell you a 2.2 would win its a power to weight ratio thing the 2.4 ss is along the lines of luxury as the 2.2 ls coupe is a far lighter car
What does an SS have for weight over an LS. Let's see. A/C which will probably add 60lbs. ABS should be good for 10lbs. The wing which is probably 10lbs. P/W and P/L add 10lbs. Pioneer system add 10 lbs. So that's about 100lbs difference which is about right according to GM specs. So somehow 26hp cannot make up a 100lb difference?

Besides, the weight difference would make the cars even at the line. Once moving, aerodynamic drag plays a huge part. The LS doesn't have the high rpm power to keep up to an SS. The faster you go, the larger margin the SS wins.
Old 07-08-2006, 04:55 PM
  #37  
Senior Member
 
ecotecon18s's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-29-06
Location: Mulberry, Florida
Posts: 2,977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
According to the dealer brochure in front of me, it says the SS's come with a fully synchronized five speed automatic...
Old 07-08-2006, 06:44 PM
  #38  
I'm old school
 
Halfcent's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-16-05
Location: Nashville
Posts: 6,905
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by ecotecon18s
According to the dealer brochure in front of me, it says the SS's come with a fully synchronized five speed automatic...
Um, huh? Well, um, yeah, that's wrong.
Old 07-08-2006, 06:52 PM
  #39  
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
PenguinPIE's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-02-05
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 4,147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
five speed auto?!!! in a GM car??!!!

nah ....maybe its a typo
Old 07-08-2006, 06:57 PM
  #40  
Senior Member
 
06G5GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-01-06
Location: Atlantic Canada
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Halfcent
Um, huh? Well, um, yeah, that's wrong.
GM doesn't even have a 5 speed FWD auto unless Saab has one not listed and it certainly wouldn't be found on the Cobalt. Last I heard they were jumping from 4 speed to 6 speed.
Old 07-08-2006, 07:10 PM
  #41  
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
PenguinPIE's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-02-05
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 4,147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 06G5GT
GM doesn't even have a 5 speed FWD auto unless Saab has one not listed and it certainly wouldn't be found on the Cobalt. Last I heard they were jumping from 4 speed to 6 speed.
i hope thats what they would do. GM needs 6 speed auto tranny so badly and a lot of ppl consider 4 speed as "old technology".
Old 07-08-2006, 07:53 PM
  #42  
Senior Member
 
IonNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-05
Location: AZ
Posts: 7,926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bykryder83
i worked for gm for 2 years i drove all of them....anyone who can drive olll a bone stock ls 5 speed vs a ss 2.4 5 speed would tell you a 2.2 would win its a power to weight ratio thing the 2.4 ss is along the lines of luxury as the 2.2 ls coupe is a far lighter car
there is no way in hell that GM would make a more expensive, more powerful version of the Cobalt SLOWER than the LS. for one, luxury and Cobalt is an oxymoron (its a 20K car) and second its performance oriented which is why it has the SS badges. they aren't gonna make their econobox version quicker than one of the performance oriented models.

also the 1/4 mile times speak for itself... low 15's/mid 15's vs high 15's/low 16's
Old 07-08-2006, 10:51 PM
  #43  
Senior Member
 
avro206's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by IonNinja
there is no way in hell that GM would make a more expensive, more powerful version of the Cobalt SLOWER than the LS. for one, luxury and Cobalt is an oxymoron (its a 20K car) and second its performance oriented which is why it has the SS badges. they aren't gonna make their econobox version quicker than one of the performance oriented models.

also the 1/4 mile times speak for itself... low 15's/mid 15's vs high 15's/low 16's

whats with the stupid people? LS faster then an SS---stay off the crack please
Old 07-09-2006, 12:40 AM
  #44  
Senior Member
 
NJHK's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-05-06
Location: East Brunswick, NJ
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by avro206
whats with the stupid people? LS faster then an SS---stay off the crack please
"Did someone say crack?"
Old 07-09-2006, 01:53 AM
  #45  
New Member
 
Jasper's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-05-06
Location: Valencia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by roccityroller
i ran one on the street awhile ago, it was auto, i was stick it was pretty even, but i put about a car on him off the line and then he pulled me after that
Thats funny......I ran against an ion with a 2.2 with injen intake, headers, and full exhaust setup. And if you know anything about the difference between the 2, the ion is almost 150lbs. lighter then the cobalts. I beat him by almost two cars. Its sad you 2.2 think you have something until you run against an SS. And then through out the whole "well you spent more on your car....." Well with all the mods you need to keep up with us, your spending just as much.
Old 07-10-2006, 12:53 AM
  #46  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
bykryder83's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-27-06
Location: indiana
Posts: 1,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by IonNinja
there is no way in hell that GM would make a more expensive, more powerful version of the Cobalt SLOWER than the LS. for one, luxury and Cobalt is an oxymoron (its a 20K car) and second its performance oriented which is why it has the SS badges. they aren't gonna make their econobox version quicker than one of the performance oriented models.

also the 1/4 mile times speak for itself... low 15's/mid 15's vs high 15's/low 16's
that is funny my car stock ran a 15.6 and with my aem cai it ran a 15 flat so yeah,and if you want to get technical about the ss yeah they also make a malibu maxx and reg malibu with ss badges they are luxury leather,power everything,sunroof, 17 inch wheels,disc brakes all around,premium sound,cruise control,ect yeah with all of that extra weight they need the little bit larger 2.4 its not much different than the 2.2 and all of you with the 2.0 ss/sc all your car is,is the 2.2 destroked and supercharged so if you knock on the 2.2 your cutting yourself down
Old 07-10-2006, 12:57 AM
  #47  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
bykryder83's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-27-06
Location: indiana
Posts: 1,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jasper
Thats funny......I ran against an ion with a 2.2 with injen intake, headers, and full exhaust setup. And if you know anything about the difference between the 2, the ion is almost 150lbs. lighter then the cobalts. I beat him by almost two cars. Its sad you 2.2 think you have something until you run against an SS. And then through out the whole "well you spent more on your car....." Well with all the mods you need to keep up with us, your spending just as much.
well if ur ever out in indiana ill run ya hell i even give ya half a car length
Old 07-10-2006, 01:04 AM
  #48  
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
PenguinPIE's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-02-05
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 4,147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
well slower or faster ........one thing for sure is that the SS has better handling :P
Old 07-10-2006, 01:11 AM
  #49  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Brandon97Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-13-04
Location: Indiana
Posts: 3,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bykryder83
well if ur ever out in indiana ill run ya hell i even give ya half a car length
I'm from Indiana wanna run?
Old 07-10-2006, 07:32 AM
  #50  
Senior Member
 
avro206's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bykryder83
that is funny my car stock ran a 15.6 and with my aem cai it ran a 15 flat so yeah,and if you want to get technical about the ss yeah they also make a malibu maxx and reg malibu with ss badges they are luxury leather,power everything,sunroof, 17 inch wheels,disc brakes all around,premium sound,cruise control,ect yeah with all of that extra weight they need the little bit larger 2.4 its not much different than the 2.2 and all of you with the 2.0 ss/sc all your car is,is the 2.2 destroked and supercharged so if you knock on the 2.2 your cutting yourself down
Malibis SS does have leather or sunroof standard. It has a 3900 V6 auto as the only powertrain.

You cannot pick up 0.6 from an air intake


Quick Reply: cobalt 2.2 vs ss 2.4 cobalt



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:05 AM.