What do i have to do to match the SS/SC stock HP
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-06
Posts: 12,764
Likes: 1
From: here
I could have afforded a Corvette but it wouldn't met my needs for my family. Don't like the Malibu, the Impala is a barge, the Monte Carlo isn't RWD is it ain't **** in my book! The Cobalt SS sedan fit my needs nicly thats why I bought mine.
Senior Member
Joined: 05-26-05
Posts: 6,375
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
well i would have to say if the ss/sc came in automatic i would have thought long and hard between the 2.4 and 2.0 but it still wouldnt have been an easy choice, the 2.4 once boosted does have the edge against the 2.0 but the 2.0 has all the guesswork done as far as boosting goes. pros and cons is all. price was never considered i could have afforded either. i still think i would have went 2.4 though.
Senior Member
Joined: 05-17-06
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
From: Missouri
Banned
Joined: 01-12-07
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
From: Elyria/Ohio
2.4 all the way
i love my 2.4 i got on just an intake i can definatly feel alittle more power. im sure i can feel even more power next week when i do full exhaust install. then that weekend injector swap and good tune. itl be runnin good then. and if i had 5k id slap a huge a** turbo on there and blow a sc outta the water. so if i actually had another 7k id invest that into the 2.4 and get around mid to high 200 hp to the road or so. and if i really wanted to get crazy i could rebuild the whole engine and see exactly how much power i can squeeze outta it. changin internals and everything i think i could make my 2.4 get about 300 hp easy if done right.
ryan.
ryan.
Senior Member
Joined: 07-09-06
Posts: 7,451
Likes: 0
From: PA
I was going to say turbo! Since your auto though I would invest in a SS/SC if you really like the balts. I'm glad I got the SS/SC and G85 package. Good luck man.
Why did it make me post 3 times ^?
Why did it make me post 3 times ^?
Last edited by R&C_rallySS; Apr 18, 2007 at 12:22 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Banned
Joined: 01-12-07
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
From: Elyria/Ohio
dude you have 3 posts of the same thing lol.........DELETE anywhos why not just turbo it and sc it then you could have both power hoggers at your disposal i would twin charge it to see if itd actually work i know hahn has one like that i think it would be super fast then.
ryan.
Senior Member
Joined: 06-28-06
Posts: 12,577
Likes: 2
From: Canada
Banned
Joined: 01-12-07
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
From: Elyria/Ohio
yeah i dont think nitrous is the way to go itl burn that engine up after a few uses. anywhos it would be cool to get nitrous does anyone know how much to get a small shot of nitrous and install it on my 2.4 or will it not work....
ryan.
ryan.
Senior Member
Joined: 04-07-05
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Syracuse, NY
I'm all for seeing a 2.4 be competitive with the SS/SC (hell, I even look forward to the 2.2 guys getting their tuning issues figured out and whooping some ass), but I just wanted to comment on a few things:
SS/SC's put out more than 205hp, everyone has to think of the whp that both the SS and SS/SC put down. You are actually looking around a 60-70whp difference, stock to stock. Difficult? No, not really. But it isn't as easy as some people make it out to be. (P.S. I'm jealous of your white SS.)
I wouldn't try to add horsepower based on mods like that. You may be dissapointed. Also, as noted above, it is better to try to compare whp as the SS/SC is underated and the SS 2.4 does not appear to be. It isn't actually a 34hp difference you have to make up; more like a 60-70whp difference.
Again, I'm not trying to 'flame' or start a 'my car is better than yours' argument. I really do look forward to all Cobalts whooping on the imports.
Cheers!
I'd be willing to bet that once I get my #34 injectors + HP Tuners via Doc + my current setup (ARK N2 cat-back, XTC 2.5" de-cat downpipe, CA header, AEM cai), i'd have at least what the SS/SC's have to the flywheel (205hp). But then all an SS/SC has to do is throw an intake/exhaust on, and i'm already down, lol.
i have a 2.4vvt ss with some mods and according to the numbers posted by their corresponding sites... i should be able to hang with an ss/sc
injen cai (5-8 increase??)
CA 4-1 header (12 increase)
XTC dp with cat (8-10 increase)
gmpp performance exhaust (12 increase)
since the 2.4 is rated 171 stock, according to the rated increase from each item, you should be up there with the ss/sc. now put ss/sc injectors and get a tune and you should be able to smoke a stock ss/sc.
of course... that assuming that the websites that post these numbers are correct
injen cai (5-8 increase??)
CA 4-1 header (12 increase)
XTC dp with cat (8-10 increase)
gmpp performance exhaust (12 increase)
since the 2.4 is rated 171 stock, according to the rated increase from each item, you should be up there with the ss/sc. now put ss/sc injectors and get a tune and you should be able to smoke a stock ss/sc.
of course... that assuming that the websites that post these numbers are correct
Again, I'm not trying to 'flame' or start a 'my car is better than yours' argument. I really do look forward to all Cobalts whooping on the imports.
Cheers!
the difference between the ss, and ss/sc WHP is about 50 hp (170hp x 12% drive train loss)
MOST ss/scs come stock with 205hp to the wheels where as MOST ss's come with about 155 WHP you won't be exactly at 205 but you should be able to get pretty close
the ss should put down about:
155WHP+15(full exhaust)+5(intake)+injector swap and tune ( which has been rumored to free up 15 HP or so)=190WHP
and i'm not basing my numbers on the declared numbers, i'm basing it on what i've here people get. so you might get more from the full exhaust or something but i was being safe.
lol hell if you "magazine dyno" and do the equation this way
injen cai (5-8 increase??)
CA 4-1 header (12 increase)
XTC dp with cat (8-10 increase)
gmpp performance exhaust (12 increase)
155whp+6.5hp(intake)+12hp(header)+9hp(dp with cat)+12hp gmpp exhaust+10HP( tune)=205 WHP
so if those numbers are actually correct you will have about the same hp as a STOCK ss/sc, but because your car would be n/a you would have more torque.
it's actually not as hard as people think to match the stock ss/sc hp or at least come remotely close to it as long as you have a good tune.
honestly I'm just happy there are so many more sport compacts now that can destroy the 285whp 146tq hondas and other imports out there ( and yes those are real numbers from the honda on bull run
) just it seems that some people don't have any faith in the 2.4, but they do in the 2.2 which is funny because the 2.2s don't have the ability to do a proper tune. also because the 2.4 shares many of the internals with the ss/sc, and can do a proper tune with HP tuners just like the ss/sc guys. You should be uniting and helping out the 2.4s especially because they share a similar body style I mean common you don't want people to think the ss/sc are slow do you?
I don't know why but if you compare this forum to any forum that has to do with you ion older brothers, you'll notice more helpful and encouraging responses. It seems that if anyone wants to do anything extraordinary here theres a not stop flow of just buy an ss/sc or it wont work comments..
MOST ss/scs come stock with 205hp to the wheels where as MOST ss's come with about 155 WHP you won't be exactly at 205 but you should be able to get pretty close
the ss should put down about:
155WHP+15(full exhaust)+5(intake)+injector swap and tune ( which has been rumored to free up 15 HP or so)=190WHP
and i'm not basing my numbers on the declared numbers, i'm basing it on what i've here people get. so you might get more from the full exhaust or something but i was being safe.
lol hell if you "magazine dyno" and do the equation this way
injen cai (5-8 increase??)
CA 4-1 header (12 increase)
XTC dp with cat (8-10 increase)
gmpp performance exhaust (12 increase)
155whp+6.5hp(intake)+12hp(header)+9hp(dp with cat)+12hp gmpp exhaust+10HP( tune)=205 WHP
so if those numbers are actually correct you will have about the same hp as a STOCK ss/sc, but because your car would be n/a you would have more torque.
it's actually not as hard as people think to match the stock ss/sc hp or at least come remotely close to it as long as you have a good tune.
honestly I'm just happy there are so many more sport compacts now that can destroy the 285whp 146tq hondas and other imports out there ( and yes those are real numbers from the honda on bull run
) just it seems that some people don't have any faith in the 2.4, but they do in the 2.2 which is funny because the 2.2s don't have the ability to do a proper tune. also because the 2.4 shares many of the internals with the ss/sc, and can do a proper tune with HP tuners just like the ss/sc guys. You should be uniting and helping out the 2.4s especially because they share a similar body style I mean common you don't want people to think the ss/sc are slow do you? I don't know why but if you compare this forum to any forum that has to do with you ion older brothers, you'll notice more helpful and encouraging responses. It seems that if anyone wants to do anything extraordinary here theres a not stop flow of just buy an ss/sc or it wont work comments..
I don't think you would have more torque in a N/A package over a F/I one. Also, the SS/SC dynos anywhere from 210-230 at the wheels stock. Mine was 217/188. Thats a long ways away from 155.
I know you might've had 217 however there are some that are running at 195 it depends on the car, altitude and alot of things...
Senior Member
Joined: 06-28-06
Posts: 12,577
Likes: 2
From: Canada
true.
so be fair and do the same for the 2.4 engine.
the only number i see thrown around is 155, is that the average of dynos on the site?
or just the pure magazine stats minus drivetrain loss.
were not hating here guys. just trying to keep things honest.
theres alot of ricermath floatin around this thread.
so be fair and do the same for the 2.4 engine.
the only number i see thrown around is 155, is that the average of dynos on the site?
or just the pure magazine stats minus drivetrain loss.
were not hating here guys. just trying to keep things honest.
theres alot of ricermath floatin around this thread.
Senior Member
Joined: 04-07-05
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Syracuse, NY
true.
so be fair and do the same for the 2.4 engine.
the only number i see thrown around is 155, is that the average of dynos on the site?
or just the pure magazine stats minus drivetrain loss.
were not hating here guys. just trying to keep things honest.
theres alot of ricermath floatin around this thread.
so be fair and do the same for the 2.4 engine.
the only number i see thrown around is 155, is that the average of dynos on the site?
or just the pure magazine stats minus drivetrain loss.
were not hating here guys. just trying to keep things honest.
theres alot of ricermath floatin around this thread.
153whp/151trq: (dynojet - 5spd) https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/show...ght=stock+dyno
146whp/146trq: (mustang dyno - 5spd?) https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/show...ght=stock+dyno
147whp/136trq: (dynojet - auto) https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/show...ght=stock+dyno
Here are a few SS/SC's for comparison:
224whp/193trq (unkown dyno) https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/show...ght=stock+dyno
223whp/193trq (dynojet) https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/show...xytimmyos+dyno
232whp/198trq (dynojet) https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/show...ght=stock+dyno
Average out the dynojet #'s and it is SS/SC with 227.5whp and SS2.4 with 150whp. 77.5whp difference (about 50trq). Who cares anyways; the real question should be: what does it take to get a SS 2.4 into the low 14's in the 1/4. Dyno's are for tuning.
Again, as an0malous said, not hating at all, just want to keep things honest.
Senior Member
Joined: 06-28-06
Posts: 12,577
Likes: 2
From: Canada
1.)MARIN007,15.04@92.80 w/2.19 60',coupe, 5-speed, I/E/ST
2.)GTP,15.17@92.33mph w/2.35 60',sedan, 5-speed,I/T/ST
3.)PpAzZ1101,15.33@90.27 w/2.30 60',coupe, auto, I/E/T/CD/ST
these are the fastest 2.4s that have posted with the 1/4 mile thread.
do we have others that arent on the list? if so please add them. it helps with discussions like this.
anyway, from this we can see that I/E can get the 2.4 almost to 14s with a good driver.
so basically, what else ABOVE intake and exhaust....can knock about 0.8 seconds off.
2.)GTP,15.17@92.33mph w/2.35 60',sedan, 5-speed,I/T/ST
3.)PpAzZ1101,15.33@90.27 w/2.30 60',coupe, auto, I/E/T/CD/ST
these are the fastest 2.4s that have posted with the 1/4 mile thread.
do we have others that arent on the list? if so please add them. it helps with discussions like this.
anyway, from this we can see that I/E can get the 2.4 almost to 14s with a good driver.
so basically, what else ABOVE intake and exhaust....can knock about 0.8 seconds off.
haha true... dynos are for tuning...
LOL wow if the stock ss scs have that much HP how the hell do the redlines smoke them all the time
jk
i was somewhat magazine racing - drive train loss. but as shown with the numbers that were posted for the 2.4 they're basically around 155, considering mustang dynos are usually low for our cars i've never honestly seen to many stock ss/sc dyno numbers I was going based off the redline numbers when are usually between 200-225, and the redlines usually are slightly fast on the 1/4 miles stock...
I tried to keep the ricer math out of it... hence i "lowballed" all the gains I thought the mods should give...
wow... i didn't realize how much difference in torque you guys had... I mean for the 2.4 it's withing 10 of the HP ( i know it's not directly related but usually faster cars 1/4 wise have more torque, hence the expression it's not HP that wins races it's torque) so a difference of almost 30 seems a little much ... the stock redline has about 205WHP and 195 torque or so... from what i've seen on dynos, i'm not trying to start a flame war it just trying to keep things honest from the 2.4 end since it seems alot of people on this board bash them for not getting the ss/sc
and i was using 155 because it's easier to work with mathematically lol, and because what i've seen shows it being about 153hp so for the 1-5 hp difference the exact math would make i figured i'd just take the easy way out lol
though i'm **** i'm EXTREMELY lazy lol...
but for the record i think he should be able to put 180+ to the road seriously though with everything perfect it should be around 190 or so but it depends on your location and everything.
also if you do them mods we all stated and throw in some nitrous... well then you'll be taking out alot of cars with your car...
LOL wow if the stock ss scs have that much HP how the hell do the redlines smoke them all the time
jk i was somewhat magazine racing - drive train loss. but as shown with the numbers that were posted for the 2.4 they're basically around 155, considering mustang dynos are usually low for our cars i've never honestly seen to many stock ss/sc dyno numbers I was going based off the redline numbers when are usually between 200-225, and the redlines usually are slightly fast on the 1/4 miles stock...
I tried to keep the ricer math out of it... hence i "lowballed" all the gains I thought the mods should give...
wow... i didn't realize how much difference in torque you guys had... I mean for the 2.4 it's withing 10 of the HP ( i know it's not directly related but usually faster cars 1/4 wise have more torque, hence the expression it's not HP that wins races it's torque) so a difference of almost 30 seems a little much ... the stock redline has about 205WHP and 195 torque or so... from what i've seen on dynos, i'm not trying to start a flame war it just trying to keep things honest from the 2.4 end since it seems alot of people on this board bash them for not getting the ss/sc
and i was using 155 because it's easier to work with mathematically lol, and because what i've seen shows it being about 153hp so for the 1-5 hp difference the exact math would make i figured i'd just take the easy way out lol
though i'm **** i'm EXTREMELY lazy lol...
but for the record i think he should be able to put 180+ to the road seriously though with everything perfect it should be around 190 or so but it depends on your location and everything.
also if you do them mods we all stated and throw in some nitrous... well then you'll be taking out alot of cars with your car...
Senior Member
Joined: 06-28-06
Posts: 12,577
Likes: 2
From: Canada
I think without FI, Nitrous, or tearing down your engine its definately possible to reach 180-185 at the wheels.
stick a little 35shot in there and i think it could run very low 14s on street tires.
stick a little 35shot in there and i think it could run very low 14s on street tires.
Senior Member
Joined: 05-03-06
Posts: 4,638
Likes: 0
From: new jersey
Full bolt ons, weight reduction and a tune with ss s/c injectors
Senior Member
Joined: 04-07-05
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Syracuse, NY
HAHA alot of ion sedans have nitrous... and i mean ALOT! lol
I think the ion is like 100lbs lighter or so... but thats it, if that... who know lol.
(back on topic)
I'd say personally keep the SS.... because chances are you'll get the ss/sc and what to mod the **** outta it... so just use that money to mod the **** outta the ss hell make it push 350 HP haha
do the work we stated... and then eventually put on some F/I beef up your internals and you'll be pushing 300 probably then slap on some nos and you'll be a major force to be reckoned with.
I think the ion is like 100lbs lighter or so... but thats it, if that... who know lol.
(back on topic)
I'd say personally keep the SS.... because chances are you'll get the ss/sc and what to mod the **** outta it... so just use that money to mod the **** outta the ss
hell make it push 350 HP hahado the work we stated... and then eventually put on some F/I beef up your internals and you'll be pushing 300 probably then slap on some nos and you'll be a major force to be reckoned with.
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-06
Posts: 12,764
Likes: 1
From: here
SS Family Wagon with Steves tune ran a flat 15 at 3000 ft above sea level. I have similer mods and am here on the east coast so I'm hoping to turn a 14.99 when I get to the track.
Total cost to get me there was about $550.00. If I was so worried about running as fast as or faster then a 2.0 I'd throw in a bottle spray it and run low 14's with stickie tires I'd see high 13's on the bottle. I'm not into NOS but I know some guys are.
We'll see the 2.4 get into the high 14's with all motor and with NOS into the low 14's high 13's you all just watch. I'll be one of the first ones in the 14's all motor later this summer when I'm done modding it.
Total cost to get me there was about $550.00. If I was so worried about running as fast as or faster then a 2.0 I'd throw in a bottle spray it and run low 14's with stickie tires I'd see high 13's on the bottle. I'm not into NOS but I know some guys are.
We'll see the 2.4 get into the high 14's with all motor and with NOS into the low 14's high 13's you all just watch. I'll be one of the first ones in the 14's all motor later this summer when I'm done modding it.