So I got to run my 2.4L auto 4 dr SS at the track last night. I was quite disapointed with the results. So much for VVT and ahigh comp ratio--the top end is pretty sad.

Keep in mind--the DA was rougly 4500-5000ft which is normal for Calgary. The 1/4 results are about 1 sec and 5mph slower then they would be at sea-level.

So for all the times I post--subtract 1 sec and they will make some sense

I am going to post my results against other cars I have run there. Then you can accurately compare them to eahother, head to head.

2.4L SS auto 88 IROC-Z 305 170hp Throttlebody auto

60ft 2.64 2.46
330 7.22 7.07
1/8 10.99 10.91
MPH 65.66 65.53
1000 14.23 14.21
1/4 17.01 17.02
MPH 80.65 80.08

TIE



2.4L SS auto 87 Monte SS 180hp 4bbl auto

60ft 2.64 2.55
330 7.22 7.02
1/8 10.99 10.72
MPH 65.66 66.61
1000 14.23 13.96
1/4 17.01 16.72
MPH 80.65 81.63


The Stock Monte Carlos wins!


2.4L SS auto 74 Firebird Potiac 350 2bbl (unknown rebuilt eng)

60ft 2.64 2.54
330 7.22 7.06
1/8 10.99 10.78
MPH 65.66 65.83
1000 14.23 14.01
1/4 17.01 16.75
MPH 80.65 82.06

Pontiac takes the flag!

2.4L SS auto Mitsu Ralliart 5 speed

60ft 2.64 2.30
330 7.22 7.10
1/8 10.99 10.88
MPH 65.66 66.22
1000 14.23 14.09
1/4 17.01 16.77
MPH 80.65 83.54

Ralliart wins--but I would kick an automatics ass

2.4L SS auto 96 2.4L 4dr Sunfire automatic

60ft 2.64 2.46
330 7.22 7.21
1/8 10.99 11.13
MPH 65.66 63.26
1000 14.23 14.50
1/4 17.01 17.37
MPH 80.65 78.39

Wohoo the 2.4L SS can beat something!!

I rememebr the Sunfire quite well. It sqealed and spun hard off the line with no brake-torqing. The Cobalt is terrible off the line--there is no go. Perhaps the tq management is to blame?? I am sad the 2.4L VVT ecotec is not much faster.


I went in with a prediction of 16.8@82. For a stock automatic 4cly the 2.4L is decent but thats not saying much. I do get alot better mpg then the V8 cars I had.

Its interesting to compare to my 5 speed times in my sig. You can fel the difference driving it and see it on the timeslips. Then engine is happy behind the manual but not the auto. 5mph!! in the 1/4 and 0.8 second.

I knew going in that it was slower--and I still like it. But I might take the SS badges off. For those times it is unworthy.

Sure i could do exhaust, header, DP, injectors and a tune. What would that cost? Over 2K.
What would it gain?? Maybe 0.5?? I am not sure anyone on this board has raced there auto stock and then done mods.

I bought a Westers tune for the 5 speed and it did not do a damn thing. I bought a TBI chip for my 88 Camaro with the same results. Wold a tune help the auto? I am almost hopefull but......

Rather then make a slow car a bit quicker---I am going to buy a 3rd gen Firebird thats fast already and go beat up on some S/C SS for fun!

My first run was against a Tarus SHO V8. These have Yamaha 3.4L V8! 225hp.autos---he ran 16.5!!! Made me feel sort of good

Just for the record....I also have slips for a 2000 Grand AM GT (16.3@85mph) and 2004 Saturn Vue (248hp/5 speed auto) 16.4@83

So if you have an stock auto 2.4L (or a 2.2L auto or I even doubt a 5 speed could win) you can't beat these cars.

 

nice runs. when i had my old 2.2 auto i ran 16.6 stock. now that i have my 2.4ss. i ran a 15.8 with a intake and a lil tranny tune. track was 48*..yeah lots of traction problems. keep up the good work.

 

the auto 2.4 has untapped potential, the tranny tuning makes the car slower off the line and once you tune that tranny to let the car breathe it will take off pretty good, with tranny tuning you would have beat all those cars.

 

damn those are the worst ive seen in a 2.4. are you taking off in L? you shouldve beat every car you raced, i dont know what the elevation is at mokan dragway, in MO. but our 2.4 auto sedan ran a 15.8 consistantly this last weekend. hum. . .

there are 2.4 SS Sedans automatic running 15.0-15.3 consistally, fully tuned, all bolt-ons, so keep your head up watch for good deals and mod it slowly

 

if you read the big bold type 4500-5000ft. It's murder on NA cars. Around 1 sec slower then sea-level. So right there its a 16.0--or mayba tad better.

Yeah I took off in "L"--big whoppdeedo--did not do anyting..loaded up the stall--and then in I once underway. It so was busy that i only got the 2 runs in--wanted to try just taking off in D--I seriously doubt it makes any difference under full throttle drag race situtation.


I was only 0.3 back of the Ralliart 5 speed--so theres nothing wrong with the car.

 

I am surprsed at the lack of responses. well..not really

I am just showing a comparision between a few of the cars I have owned (all were stock excpet for the Firebird) and what can beat or cannot beat a a stock 4 dr auto SS. Just a little list of what you'll win or lose against (stock)

Plus goes to show the difference between a stock 5 speed VS an auto---0.8 and 5mph!

 

Uh, so you ran 17.01 @ 80.65 for all five races? Either you have copied and pasted the same slip five times, or you are the world's best bracket racer.

 

X2. You did run more than once, didn't you? Even an auto tranny isn't that consistent, it still has a person driving it.

 

this is the same run from what i see and just putting his run against other cars he owned, so yeah just 1 run.

 

It's generally acceptable to make more than one run in a vehicle and to use the BEST time slip.
I'm sure that you didn't make one run in each of those vehicles on that SAME day, just to post the results up here. Those are probably the best of some older time slips you have for those cars.
Different days, different conditions, fluctuating driver performance. You really need to run the balt several times before posting up "Concrete" comparisons.

 

my eclipse GS (130 crank hp i think) was doing better than that (16.1 - i forgot the trap speed..) but then i sold that POS and got a GS-T. then i totalled that POS and got a Monte Carlo! I loved it. But i traded that on my cobalt. (all of my cars have been faster than all of yours horray for sea level! hahaha

 

Something aint right i can eat those cars alive in my 2.4 4dr auto hmmmmm

 

they aren't racing you! At sea-level--every singe car is in the high 15's. Damn near the same as a stock 2.4L auto

your making a huge assumption I made 1 run. Why??

They are close enough that maybe TBI IROC could win or lose. But the rest are 0.3 faster.
Yeah weather conditons do play factors. Either way its not 100% conclusive. But damn close.

I'd love for a 2.2l 5 Speed or auto tomcome race me.

 

hell i should be getting high 14s then easy with my mods and the way my car is running

 

1/8 i ran 10.007 in my 2.4l coupe against an acura that ran a 9.998...

Injen CAI, GMPP exhaust manifold, GMPP Performance exhaust system.

 

Most of you are going to get all butt hurt but I have a gentleman that is in our car club that ran a 15.6 bone stock in a 2.2L 5 speed base Cobalt Coupe. I do not remember the trap speed but he ripped out of the hole pretty good.

 

I don't doubt it. They're hella good engines. MOST people couldn't get a mid/high 15 in a LS/LT cobalt, but then again MOST people can't get low 15 in a SS/NA...but it happens

 

BTW, your car is a mid 15 at best on street tires. With the change in elevation in Ohio being almost 500-1,000 ft over Michigan I lost .2 with the same numbers I got in Michigan when I went to a track just a 1/2 hr from Springfield when I met some other fellow OH members.

Not trying to down play or anything. Just trying to be realistic. Most 2.8+ pullied SS/SC's that were netting a 2.2x/2.3x were lucky if they hit mid to low 14's down here.

Thanks, some people could not believe it even with a timeslip and video from last year. I was told "impossible" or the tree was off. Milan Dragway happens to be one of the most premier and well taken care tracks in the state of Michigan.

 

Am I reading this right? Did you turn a 17.01 and 80.65 EXACTLY in EVERY race?

Man, don't they have bracket racing up there? It don't matter if you run 25 second quarters in brackets, the key is ABSOLUTE consistency. With a 17.0 dial-in, your car would be a KILLER! This is exactly what I've been looking for to dominate brackets here in Denver. Since I have a 4-door 2.4 auto, maybe I should give it a try...

 

i think those times are way to close. did you seiously just run once or what. by the way. you want a 2.2 to come race. i ran a 15.36 at 88 bone stock with 1300 miles on the clock. thats barely broken in

 

the 2.4 has great down lower power to get itself going. those cars you raced you should have beat.

 

I explained earlier...that was my best run to date in the 2.4L VS my best runs in the other cars.

see above. Too bad you did not live closer at 5000ft your car would choke and be slow.At least 1 sec. But a good race for me

why should I have? It has to make up for pathetic 60 ft time. The top end on an uato 2.4L is nothing to write ho,me about either. I have been racing for 15 years....I have the timeslips to prove--so it's a fact.

I have to laugh at al the ppl who don't race--have no timeslips either. I come with proof and I get dismissed. Go figure--god I cannot wait to get my Firebird

 

those times are pretty high, you should be getting mid to high 15s

 

Its cause of his elevation. I swear i think 75% of the people on this site look at only the pictures and numbers and skip reading all together.

 

thanks! I am getting so tired of repeating myself

The elevation is irrlevant ina sense--it equals out things--all the cars wee run at this elevation. So it would not affect the outcome even if it was at sea-level.

I will take the 2.4L to the track again. Loading up the stall was a joke--the computer knows what your doing and does not let you do it. Maybe I can get better then a 2.6 60ft time.