it has rear side windows and sloping rear glass. strictly speaking, its not a coupe. I would call it either a 2 door sedan or a fastback, but it isn't a coupe.

NOTE: I know a lot of people think that 2 door and coupe are interchangeable. but, they're not.

 

Lay the crack pipe down. Why would Chevy label it as a coupe? I don't get it.

 

sloping rear glass has nothing to do with the technical defination of a coupe. Neither does the rear side windows

"Definition: A closed car with two side doors and less than 33 cubic feet of rear interior volume, according to measurements based on SAE Standard J1100. A two-door car is therefore not necessarily a coupe".

I have zero idea of the rear seat volume but its not much

Most people don't follow that old defintion anyhow---it should be scapped. I have a 2dr coupe.

 

the old definition make more sense

 

ya this is the website i used http://www.modulardepot.com/density.php and i used the website on the bottom of the page in order to find out the other things needed.

 

Well, as a matter of fact, i think that mine will be in the 14's easily, considering i have the one and only "so far" hahn racecraft turbo prototype! check out my thread about it!

 

^^he wins

 

You dont count You probaly have the fastest cobalt on this page period

 

I doubt that. He may have the fastest 2.4 on this page, but without dr's, and practice, he's not the fastest "cobalt" on this page. With that being said, he needs to get that thing to the track!!

 

No! but he does have the hahn turbo, If you read the hp ratings on is 260WHP I have a feelin he would spank your sc version

 

Actually, hahns dyno results show 240/241, NOT 260. Sorry, but you think a mid 15 second car stock is going to beat a low 13 second S/C SS with just the turbo kit? Not likely. I've posted slips of a 13.3, let's see him get to the track and even get some baselines before we start thinking he can run 12's.

 

Me bad me wrong You are runnin awsome times, do not forget this is between a stage 1 and 2 turbo, they are runnin another one on the 2.4 soltice forums that is stage 3 and 290

 

I know, but again-that's on a rwd car. The most they've gotten out of the 2.4 cobalt is the 240/241. Not that they won't get more in the future, just not yet. I'm hoping once the heat goes away that I can post up some 12 second timeslips. The cars making the power for it.

 

10,36 @ 71 MPH on the 1/8 at a shitty track. bone stock, manual tranny.

 

Wow! I just noticed your sig, you done alot,congrats, how much have you spent on her after purchase,if you dont' mind?

 

PM sent.

 

why are you guys doing ricer math; figuring your corrected times? That's BS....hardly anyone ever races in perfect conditions... so why would you figure what your times "would be" if in perfect conditions?

 

Ya maybe we all need an indoor track But your all invited to Mission raceway and we all know what a difference you Alberta boys would get on your times out at our track

 

why not? im not sayin i ran a 15.9 because it was too hot out. im jus curious what that time would have been in better conditions. is there something wrong with that? im pretty sure i would have had a faster time if it waesnt 102degrees out. im proud of my 15.9, but im jus curious what that time would be in "perfect conditions".

hey seth how much did your DVD headunit cost you? im lookin at doin a setup similar to that.

 

I don't correct my times, but you guys can't accurately compare timeslips from two different cars on two different days, from two different tracks. I think it's more accurate to compare corrected to corrected. I don't usually go by that, but just a thought.

 

Who has a 14.7 2.2L name says flash gordon

 

I know for a fact though guys will come to Mission Raceway here to get better times

 

corrected numbers are just as big a joke as dyno numbers. if you didnt run it you didnt run it. no matter what the temps were, its just something to make you feel better. esp for FI cars at higher altitudes because they dont lose as much power as na ones do. hell corrected you could run a 9.0 if your correction was a big block v-8 with slicks

 

I don't get people like you. By correcting I can compare my times to guys at sea-level. But in your world this is some how "wrong"/ NHRA, IHRA and car magazines are all cheats, liars and are wrong eh?


Its a scietific formula that is accurate and provable. I suppose you don't beleive in KGs converted to lbs or mph to km/h---cause they are corrcted too. Must be BS!!!

I have raced an 88 Camaro in Calgary--it ran 16,7--I drove it to St Thomas in Ontario (770ft) it droped 0.8 of a sec and added 6 mph! Now I did not keep track of temps back then and did not know how to correct.

But that run in Calgary was probably on a real good night for air--so the density alt was not the ususal 5000ft--hence why I did not drop 1 full second but was close.

Watch for my thread in a few weeks when I run at Mission in BC (sea-level)--I will run a 15.0 (possible 14.9) exactly what my Calgary numbers are when corrected. And be prepared to wipe some egg off your face, be a man and say you were wrong--I will if I am (which I won't be)

Look at my sig--a few months ago the temp wqas low--the pressure was high--3490 density altitude for Calgary (physical elevation of about 3300ft) I did nothing to my car! It ran 0.3 faster and 4mph!!! Those are uncorrected.
Witness the power that elevation chamges makes

Do we have a deal????

You just need all the weather data to be accurate--and use the formula. It works kiddies

 

Hey guys! PM me a copy of your fastest timeslips, so I can get you guys on the 1/4 mile list! There's a link in my sig.