Ok, so since before the 2.4l SS came out, and after it came out, I kinda pictured it almost like the SVT Focus of the Cobalt world. I'm assuming it's pretty quick with the hp and torque it's putting out, but I'd really just like to know how it handles. So I'm hoping someone on here has ripped it around some turns, and can let me know how it does.

 

I think it handles pretty well. It doesn't have a suspension as good as the supercharged model, but it is still a far better suspension then the base and LS versions.

I have ripped it around some corners for sure, and it way outhandles my old alero (with lowering springs, low profile tires, and KYB struts) and it seems to handle better, or at least with more confidence, then my 96 Y87 Camaro.

I love the handling.

 

I hope they handle well. I have heard that they do. I'll let you know next week.

 

the 1 i test drove rode , and handled great


1st thing id do is change the tires though the 205/50/17's do not fit the wheels very well , the side walls are streched , a good 225 or 235/45/17 or a 245/40/17 will be alot better and fit the rims better


and that will help out in the corners alot more

 

i dont know anything about tire size. what do those numbers mean? how will the new tires fit better? I thought that if the tires were on the wheels then they fit.

 

the over all width of the 205/50/17's are wrong for the width of the wheels


the 205 is the width , and the sides wall kinda resemble this ^ , with the peak being the tread


the width of the tire should be atleast the width of the wheel , which the stock tires arent


its hard to expalin , but go look at the tires on the SS/SC wheels , then look at the 2.4SS , and youll understand what i mean

 

The 205 is in mm which is tread width and the 50 is the aspect ratio or 50% of the tread width which makes up the height of the side wall. the "R" stands for radial and of course the 17 is the rim diameter. So by getting a 245/40R 17 the tire would be a little bit wider and similar in height since the aspect ratio is a smaller percentage. Hope this helps.

 

i agree the car really needs a decent tire but i run a 245 and 285 on my mustang and it has 8inch wide rims.. i'm pretty sure these rims are only 6.5 inches wide. so id say u can't go much over 225 althought a nice sumer 225/45/17 would handle soo much better then an all season tire.

 

ahh cool, so then the rims are more acceptable to being cratched on curbs with the stock tires? or is t just for performance, traction?
btw thanks for clearing things up!

 

the rims are very easy to curb check the way they are


i think the rims might be 17x7 , but that could be the streched side wall making it look that way too , LOL

 

6.5 wide

 

gotta love GM and the odd ball stuff they do , LOL

 

I have gone 110 mph in mine so far and it handles great. Not sure when governor kicks in.

 

I don't think the SS has a govenor

 

Don't worry. Your SVTF will outhandle both SS'. I know from personal experience.

 

the SVT Focus is the best car ever built, no one should ever try to build a better car

RocktheSVT - the 2.4SS is going to be similar to the SVT Focus, it will not handle quite as well, but it will be faster. We keep hearing phxss talk about his svt tq at 2200rpm, but if he looked, the 2.4 produces more torque at a lower rpm then that. plus there is the proven track record of a regular 2.2l ecotec.

My job is driving used cars of all shapes, sizes, powers, trims, etc. I think some people will be surprised by the potential of the 2.4. It is no S/C 2.0L, but it isn't to be forgotten either.

 

Haha, good one mikeSS. damn, that sarcasm was so strong it about knowcked me over... lol. go SS go!

 

^^^^

 

Ok, what is the torque of the 2.4 @2200 rpm?

BTW, stop getting your panties in a wad. I'm not talking bad about the 2.4..I'm just saying it won't perform any better in stock form than a SVTF.

 

i still havent seen a svtf run 15's with out alot of work , ive out ran plenty of svtf's in my cav with a auto and beat them even worse in my g/fs eco cav 5spd , ive ran a 15.4 in her cav with just a intake


im not hating just saying my exp against them


they do ride nice , and the svtf have some nice seats , but 1/4 mile cars they arent


im still going with low 15's for the 2.4 cobalt once broken in

 

"plenty" of svtf's? Dudue, there only a little over 10k made in three years combined. And for two no way in hell is an ATX cavy gonna beat an svtf. That's a joke, unless the guy missed a gear. i used to own one..I know better.

 

Sorry, I wasn't trying to angry about it, its just the SVT never seemed to live up to its potential in my opinion.

2.2 makes 151hp at 2200-2300, it is hard to read the GM dyno graph.

As well, GM is using that new SAE Standard to rate its engines performance, that is why this engine is 171, and the G6 has it at 167, and the new 5.3L V8 is 303. I was wondering if the SVT would be rated any lower in the new system, or if GM's 2.4 would be rated any higher with the old system? No clue, just wondering.

 

I'm not trying to cause controversy or anything, but my girlfriend is still trying to get the 2.4SS, so I was just wondering how they handled. I'm more into handling than going fast in a straight line. And about not seeing a SVT focus run in the 15's without some work, I ran 15.9 stock, and 15.5 as is, both runs with the traction control on, so my launches sucked. I've seen people run 15.6 stock.
And yeah I figured the 2.4's would be quicker than my car stock for stock, as the hp rating is the same and the torque rating is higher.
Also, do the 2.4SS's have tall gearing like the SVT's? They look like they would make a fun autox car.

 

Not sure if it is tall or not, but here is my findings

1st gear - 50KM/H-ish
2nd gear - 100KM/H-ish
3rd gear - 140KM/H-ish
4th gear - Haven't had the ***** to read line it yet, I have been to 185KM/H with lots left still.

 

thats with the auto right? becaus last time i checked the manual had 5 gears correct me if im wrong, and if someone does have a manual SS 2.4, any top speed test or 0-60 times are welcome haha