2.4L LE5 Performance Tech 16 valve 171 hp EcoTec with 163 lb-ft of torque

Is a cobalt SS 2.4 Auto good

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 6, 2007 | 10:47 AM
  #76  
chevysalesman614's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 05-03-06
Posts: 4,638
Likes: 0
From: new jersey
Originally Posted by cobaltsslover07
autos are good.....if you dont know how to drive a stick hahaha
once you do a tranny tune, i believe the auto would beat the stick
Reply
Old Sep 6, 2007 | 11:18 AM
  #77  
monkeiboy's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 11-30-06
Posts: 3,505
Likes: 0
From: West Memphis, AR
Originally Posted by chevysalesman614
once you do a tranny tune, i believe the auto would beat the stick
ehhhh. It's will be within .10 seconds of one, but I think a good stick driver will beat an auto everytime. they've got five gears to run through and not as much parasitic loss through the drivetrain. But the auto will definitely be more consistent, plus I think the auto transmission can handle more power. That's just a guess based on what I've read, though. I really don't know how much the manuals can handle.
Reply
Old Sep 6, 2007 | 04:11 PM
  #78  
matt8478's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 10-06-06
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
From: Apple Valley
The 5 speed manual is quicker than an auto unless the person does not know how to drive. I have raced my brothers ss auto and have beaten all the time ( stock for stock). Now he has tune intake and exhuast as well as header, and I have stage two exedy clutch intake exuast and hp tune and I beat the **** out of hi auto.

However the auto is extremly good, and this is just my observation.
Reply
Old Sep 6, 2007 | 04:20 PM
  #79  
RaineMan's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 09-02-05
Posts: 5,446
Likes: 0
From: Salt Lake, UT
The 2.4 auto is nice... but it's not what I would call fast (believe me, I owned one). It will take care of Civics, tCs, Tiburons, etc... but once you start going up against something with real power you realise how slow the auto really is.

A 5-speed is definately a better choice... unless you are gonna add F/I or something... b/c the auto can handle more power.
Reply
Old Sep 6, 2007 | 04:24 PM
  #80  
Jimmys2007CobaltSS/C's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 01-30-07
Posts: 7,835
Likes: 1
From: Philadelphia, Pa
2.0 s/c swap bro..dats what im doing ..dats gonna be serious power amd i be happy
Reply
Old Sep 6, 2007 | 09:17 PM
  #81  
avro206's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 04-17-04
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
From: Calgary Alberta Canada
Originally Posted by monkeiboy
Temperature (even a few degrees)
Humidity
Track Surface (how dirty was it, had it been cleaned recently, etc)
Driver error
Driver initiative
Driver reaction time
fuel quality (yes, the quality of the fuel from pump varies)
atmospheric pressure
air quality (change of the wind coudl mean the difference between clean air and pollution and dust)
vehicle weight
Tire quality
Tire pressure

I'm not saying that you didn't get that result. All I'm saying is that you are passing judgement on the auto transmissions based SOLELY on your result, when others have done better and driven more on par with the manuals. That's all.
Of course the manuals will be faster out of the box, but nowhere NEAR a full second faster.
well weight--the door 5 speed is about 75lbs lighter---I have weighed both at a scale. So thats not equal and makes a slight difference. Point for you.

Of course the weather is not exactly the same but trust me its close.

It's not like one of the days was abnormally hot and one was really cool. We have a pretty short racing season here---and I wish there were tons of cool days--but there just not.

Big changes in atmosphereic pressure, temp and hunidity make a real differece on the time slips---but small differences make very little.

Trust me---I get all the data when I run. Then I go home and do the calculations to figure out the density altitude.

If you want my links ot play around with numbers, I will post the. Enter different data and see HOW it changes the outcome.

I don' get this part of what your saying:

Driver error---
sorry but I can't **** an automatic-its only 173hp..there is no monter tire spin...it chirps and thats it.---you just plant it and go. There is no tire spin at this altitude in the automatic. Yes I started it in L and switched to I

Driver initiative--beleive me--I was gripping the steering wheel--urging the car to go faster--it did not. I have no reason to misstate my times or sabotage runs.
Driver reaction time--this has nothing to do with 1/4 mile results. I can sit there for 10 secs and run a 10 sec run. The clock does ont start until the car breaks the beam.



I am not saying a full second faster but 0.5-0.75 or so. Can we agree on that??


Like I said---I conceed that the car might be broken in and capable of a slightly faster times. But having owned the 5 speed car for 1.5 years---it had so much more pull to it. Shifting into third at 60mph the car leaps forward.
Reply
Old Sep 6, 2007 | 09:33 PM
  #82  
IR0NS1N's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 01-18-06
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
From: Arizona
Well it all depends on the driver, stock for stock a stick should be faster due to lighter weight, less power loss in the drive train, and better gearing. However autos shift faster and more accurate then a human can. Thats why paddle shifting is making its way, quicker and easier.
Reply
Old Sep 6, 2007 | 09:52 PM
  #83  
monkeiboy's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 11-30-06
Posts: 3,505
Likes: 0
From: West Memphis, AR
Originally Posted by avro206
[


I am not saying a full second faster but 0.5-0.75 or so. Can we agree on that??

.5 seconds difference is about the most I would believe (plus I'm tired of debating this ). There is a little bit of skill still involved in racing an auto, it takes more than putting the pedal to the floor and holding on.
And I believe you that you can chirp tires between 2nd and 3rd with the manual. The engine has plenty of power. Hell I chirped between 1st and 2nd with my auto TONIGHT. Granted I've got a shiftplus strapped on there....but it's always a pleasant surprise to chirp tires between gears in an automatic.
Reply
Old Sep 7, 2007 | 01:01 AM
  #84  
Schultzay's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-25-07
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
From: Portland, OR
does anyone know for sure how much the manual tranny can hold?? has anyone even built one up enough to find out?

also my other random question is when does the next green bar come on for rep?? like 50? 100?

Last edited by Schultzay; Sep 7, 2007 at 01:24 AM.
Reply
Old Sep 7, 2007 | 01:29 AM
  #85  
Projekt's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-03-07
Posts: 24,270
Likes: 1
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
i can chirp my tires in ALL of 1st and ALL OF 2ND into 3rd if that means anything
Reply
Old Sep 7, 2007 | 01:38 AM
  #86  
Schultzay's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-25-07
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
From: Portland, OR
that is what i like to call the rain dance.... if its raining, if its not we call it smoke signals
Reply
Old Sep 11, 2007 | 03:24 PM
  #87  
sushidog's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-09-06
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
From: Abita Springs, Louisiana
Originally Posted by ProjektCobalt
i can chirp my tires in ALL of 1st and ALL OF 2ND into 3rd if that means anything
Yeah, it means you need new tires. j/k

Seriously, Monkey and Avro are right, in competent hands the manual is .5-.8 quicker.
A tranny tune will easily shave off .5 sec, however this still gives the 5spd a slight edge.

The real benefit of the auto is ease of driving in traffic, and ease of shifting for disabled people who physically have trouble shifting and/or clutching (like my wife.)

For very high power F/I applications, the auto has the edge. GM rates the auto at 325lbs output torque, which is much more than the 5spd will take.

I bought my balt as a sporty commuter car, not a racer. I have no delusions, that is all it is (without F/I.)

If you decide on the auto get a tune and a tranny cooler. That is all.
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2007 | 12:31 AM
  #88  
Evil C's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-26-07
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
From: chicago
Why isn't the 2.0 on the auto then? Its a Much larger market.
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2007 | 12:44 AM
  #89  
Projekt's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-03-07
Posts: 24,270
Likes: 1
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Originally Posted by Evil C
Why isn't the 2.0 on the auto then? Its a Much larger market.
better clutch to hold the power, thats why for a 5spd manual to go F/I (like i myself have planned) i will need to upgrade my clutch..costing a fair share of money..where a auto tranny you dont
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2007 | 11:25 AM
  #90  
celicacobalt's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 05-26-05
Posts: 6,375
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
yeah if the 2.0 would have came with an auto I would have probably bought it if the extra cost wouldnt have been more than putting the turbo on a 2.4. but im happy with the turbo 2.4. sounds great and runs great with plenty of torque.
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2007 | 12:05 PM
  #91  
Jimmys2007CobaltSS/C's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 01-30-07
Posts: 7,835
Likes: 1
From: Philadelphia, Pa
^^^im assuming ur warrenty is gone..hows inspection gonna work for u when its turbo...?? will u pass b/c it s not factory turbocharged car??
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2007 | 06:28 PM
  #92  
celicacobalt's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 05-26-05
Posts: 6,375
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
inspection will be fine, warranty on engine is gone but good on the rest of the car still.
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2007 | 07:19 PM
  #93  
silver_fox's Avatar
New Member
 
Joined: 09-11-07
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
From: california
Alright I don't know if this is a stupid question or not. But if I have the Cobalt SS N/A with an auto, can I still put an SC in it? If I can, will somebody give me a link?
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2007 | 09:12 PM
  #94  
Jimmys2007CobaltSS/C's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 01-30-07
Posts: 7,835
Likes: 1
From: Philadelphia, Pa
yes...get the the parts from the 2.0 s/c....that what im doing..the s/c kit thy have out now is the 2.0 s/c
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2007 | 11:17 PM
  #95  
nitrous818's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 03-11-07
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
From: california
hmmm should i go with sc or turbo. sc would be cheaper way to go but i dont know what would make more power. i have a 2.4 auto
Reply
Old Sep 13, 2007 | 12:54 AM
  #96  
yoppzilla's Avatar
New Member
 
Joined: 08-20-07
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
From: KENTUCKY
^^ive been here alot less time than some of you members and I dont at all know very much but alot of your recent questions can be answered by reading previouse threads about the sc and turbos in other threads, Just answering for someone who probally would say use the search button
Reply
Old Sep 13, 2007 | 01:15 AM
  #97  
Schultzay's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-25-07
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
From: Portland, OR
Originally Posted by yoppzilla
^^ive been here alot less time than some of you members and I dont at all know very much but alot of your recent questions can be answered by reading previouse threads about the sc and turbos in other threads, Just answering for someone who probally would say use the search button
hahaha he's been on here for like twenty days and you all got pwned + rep
Reply
Old Sep 13, 2007 | 03:20 AM
  #98  
silver_fox's Avatar
New Member
 
Joined: 09-11-07
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
From: california
I don't want to press the ******* search button. ADIOS TERD NUGGETS!

hahaha has anybody seen grandmas boy?
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
red9
2.4L LE5 Performance Tech
11
Oct 4, 2017 02:23 AM
TurboTechRacing
Supporting Vendor Deals & Group Purchases
11
Oct 27, 2015 07:58 AM
Highgross89
08-10 SS Turbocharged General Discussion
20
Sep 11, 2015 03:24 PM
matthewwalsh1994@gma
Drivetrain
3
Sep 10, 2015 10:48 AM
Bluelightning
War Stories
29
Sep 8, 2015 05:18 PM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:15 AM.