SSRich

I was wondering how much faster is the 2.4 than the 2.2?

Is it worth the extra money for the jump to 2.4?

Scythe_Snake

Simply put...yes...yes..yes-yes-yes-yes-yes. Better suspension, better engine (displacement wise) and the second fastest car for under 20,000, right below the V-6 mustang.

halfj99

id like to take a run at a 2.4 auto specifically, but 5 speed would work, i expect it to be even tell vvt kicks in yo!

ICEMAN187

Yea in higher rpms it pulls a lot on the 2.2. I have a 2.4L SS and me friend has a 2.2, we raced when we both had an injen intake and it was close till about 60, then I pulled on him.

RedCobaltSS06

as a 2.4 owner, i recommend it. i drove a 2.2 on a test drive... the steering, handling, and power just arent there. they are very good, but if you want more performance w/o a sc, go with the 2.4

Halfcent

I own a 2.2, and even I would recommend that if you are thinking about a 2.4, that you should do it. Better aftermarket support, and much better right out of the box.

kovich14

the 2.4 SS doesn't cost much more then a 3LT 2.2. For the money, i think the 2.4 SS is a fantastic car. i am absolutely loving mine. great power, awesome handling, and pretty good fuel economy considering the power; its usually about 26 in the city and 33 highway with my foot in it.

rlinden86

2.4 all the way. everyone has the 2.0 SC, i figured go with n/a 2.4 and build on the engine and itl be better than the 2.0 with stage 2 upgrade. so hows that.......
and i think the 2.4 is a better platform to build on than the 2.0 i dont know.

ryan.

Black06SSNA

Agreed

rlinden86

i got the 2.4 becuase it has the biggest engine, best mpg, best N/A hp, very good setup as for suspension and tires and interior then the 2.2, and i like it cuz its 5k cheaper than the sc and that 5k il spend on not gettin the sc with only 205 at the crank. ill spend 4k and get 270whp with the 2.4 and still have 1k lol pistons cams lol.

ryan. a good start usually ends with a good ending.

redSSBalt

I agree with you as well on this. But there is another thread that this is an argument over.

rlinden86

ooh yes i beleive there is arguing over it. sc vs turbo 2.4 vs 2.0. i think the 2.4 will win the race. stage 2 2.0 sc whats that 260whp at most. and a 2.4 at about 270whp at most with good tune from hptuners or dyno tune which is definatly needed. i might get cams for that turbo to compliment it. maybe pistons too. that way ill be close to or at 300whp. might need to get new clutch and driveshafts too lol. gees it just keeps going and going.

ryan.

halfj99

sorry but your reallu just pulling numbers out of your ass, every car is diffrent as far as numbers, and numbers dont always mean who is faster

rlinden86

i know every car is different but i know what im running and i know that i will be getting atleast 265whp for what il be doing. and as far as whos faster well with my numbers out of the cobalts will see.

ryan.

Cloudio

Huh I own a 2.4l and as far as the 2.2 and the 2.4 go STOCK ..there is no comparison performance wise .....however I beg to differ about the 2.0l and 2.4l if you can afford the 2.0 overall it is a much better starting point then the 2.4l better suspension and FI from the factory .....which also means most of all it is much easier to add a turbo to a stock 2.0sc then it is 2.4 ............Iam not trying to down our car guys Iam simply being modest i know our car is the **** when properly equipped .....however if were talking stock for stock it would be easier to start off with the 2.0l

I dunno its all opinion I have a 2.4 full boltons and it kicks ass!!! I cant even imagine FI on this puppy

however IN MY OPINION it would be much easier to turbo charge or hell TWINCHARGE the 2.0 and make more power EASIER.........


lets face the facts when properly equipped a honda can make 700whp and 250wtq haha

so its not about the car making power ...because that it can do witht the right equippement its just about How easy its going to be to make that kind of power and how much its going to cost you to make that kind of power......

rlinden86

to me cost doesnt mean anything its just the preperation and work. im not going to do it il have it professionally done.

ryan.

Cloudio

haha a true enthusiast lol most of us on here are either college students or not in that same position finacially lmao

if money is no issue then the 2.4 by far is the way to go

rlinden86

well i dont have lots of money just when the time comes for turbo hahn!!!! then il borrow it from my grandpa and pay him back.

ryan.

Jimmys2007CobaltSS/C

iTrader: (1)

u tell it like it is..i like that man..you seem like a kool kid wish u live around in pa so we can cruise

senior_brown

2.4 baby ftw

jeweler54

2.4 FTFW, we gots a sedan, love it love it love it.

fbaero10

lol are you looking to set up a date, lol your always looking for people to cruise with, but when asked to come to a meet or cruise you dont lol. so stop blowing smoke up peoples asses

rlinden86

i wouldnt mind doing a small meet again soon but i just dont want to drive to far.

ryan.

stlurbanpunk

if you happy with the 2.2, then get it. if you want something more (performance, comfort, etc...) the 2.4 ss is ideal. i got mine for all the standard features (xm, pioneer,sport suspension,etc..), and the fatty 4 cylinder sounds nice....

-sean

btw...imo, performance wise i think he 2.2 and 2.4 are very close.

an0malous

the way i think of it is like this.
if you are "thinking" about it now it means youd probably like the 2.4, but just arent sure about cost vs satisfaction.
if you dont do it...you will most likely regret the decision later.





oh and 205 at the crank?
*roffelgiggles*