bout time .. 1 SS thx much

 

compared to other cars at the time, the model t was a deal.

and as far as camaros, as i recall, and i'm no camaro expert (i'm neither a woman or a redneck) something like 1/20 first year camaros had a V8.

 

Might have been "a deal", but it was not cheap and DEFINENTLY not everyone could afford one.

What does that "fact" pertain to???

 

Part of this is tradition. The SS started with 2 engines (hot and hotter) and even the most iconic of all SS cars, the 70-71 Chevelle SS 454 had 2 engines, the LS5 and the LS6. I don't feen that offering 2 engines is inconsistent with the SS badge. As for the Malibu, I again think it's tradition and Chevy was trying to capitalize on one of the better SS cars, the '65-66 Malibu that was the first big block small car. The problem with the modern Malibu SS is that they didn't offer a performance engine (the 3.9 V6 isn't bad, but it is de-rated in the Malibu as opposted to the 255 HP in the Impala LTZ).

I draw the line at the pick-ups and sport-utes. That just doesn't fit the branding. As for 4-doors, I have a SS-NA 4-door and bought it in part because it was an SS. However, had they offered the SS/SC with an auto in the 2-door I probably would have bought it.

 

don't forget the 396 SS too! Of course some on here wouldn't consider them a "real" SS

 

way off--1 in 20 is a pipe dream. Not sure where you get this idea that so few V8s were made. That was the engine of choice back then.

Let me set the record straight, here are the real numbers.

220,906 made in 67

162,908 of these were V8s

 

DUH. Im mean really, they never should have made 2 SS versions of the Cobalt. We should just have to say we have the cobalt SS and people should know that its the SUPERCHARGED VERSION!!! I should Not have to specify. and the 175 grandpa version should have been called the "G" model or SPORT. ha

 

There's a winner.

 

Ha ha yourself. You realize that if they never made the 2.4 SS's, the only thing SS/SC guys would have to complain about would be how the mean old V8 guys bash them for having four-cylinder SS's. Oh the horror! A thread such as this one on the Camaro boards would have about 15 pages of posts like "See they are over-using the SS name - they should have never put it on a 4-cyl. car".

Can't we all get along?

 

I don't feel like there is anything wrong with Chevy affixing an SS to two different engines in the same car. THe 2.4l is DEFINITELY at a different performance level than the 2.2m plus they come with added performance suspension, performance tires and rims, more torque on the transmission, etc blah blah. The fact is the 2.4l was made and outfitted FOR significant additional performance capabilities. That's the whole idea behind calling it an SS model.
I'm not saying that the 2.0 SC aren't better engines, but I think some of your guys are getting a tad defensive about your precious SS badges. (Hell half the the guys who own them constantly talk about DEBADGING them.) I think the SS should be reserved for a model of car that has "significant" performance over the standard model.

that being said I DO agree that GM should work out a formula to determine how much better a car needs to be over standard to earn and SS badge. Something like; 30% more HP at the wheels, or 1.5 seconds faster to 60 mph, some crap like that. And it should NOTbe available for every car model. Malibu SS's just doesn't seem right. ( I honestly did not know there was a Malibu SS, I've never seen one) That's a family sedan, it doesn't make sense.
A silverado is a work vehicle, there's no need to put an SS on it.
ANY type of suv should'nt get an SS. Super Sport doesn't apply to that type of vehicle. Another nomiker like EXT, or some crap makes more sense.
GM has been a little frivolous with the SS as of late.
I guess my lowly 2.4l will actually be a novelty if they do remove them in 08' That would be cool

 

Don't understand why most of the SS/SC guys get a kick out of bashing on the 2.4. If it wasn't for the SC they have on their cars, they wouln't be able to bash on anything!

 

I think I'll go make a new thread about 2.4L SS vs. 2.0L SS. I haven't seen one of those in a while.

 

I don't own a Cobalt SS of any variety. The 2.4L engine is a definite step up from my 2.2L, but I don't think that it's worthy of the SS name. If you think about it, 2/3 of the engines are badged SS which means that 2/3 of the models are special. It takes the special meaning out of SS if most engines have SS badges. I think that only one engine should have the SS badge associated with it at any time. Yes—I realize that other cars have had multiple engines with that type of badging in the past, but I don't think that is an excuse to continue throwing around what has become a less meaningful logo.

When I hear about some Civic beating a Cobalt SS, I don't want to hear the excuse that it wasn't supercharged. I want SS to mean the best from the factory in performance. With that in mind, I would rebadge the 2.4L engine RS. I don't hate the car. I just want SS to mean something other than "not base."

 

i completely agree there should only be one...i don't even know what chevy was thinkin...theres only one king of the hill and thats the ss/sc..no doubt.

 

Exactly! All you people are so protective of the SS name and then you just peel the badges off.

Don't bother; this thread has turned into one.

As much as I like my car, maybe its time to start hanging out on the Camaro or Corvette boards. I've never seen any discussions over there where certain members claim that other guy's cars shouldn't be wearing the actual name that's right there on the top of the forum page. Pretty dumb if you ask me.

 

I think where chevy has been screwing up for years is putting original muscle car names onto new sedans that aren't even close to their rear wheel drive mean streak predacessors. Putting the SS label on those cars was adding insult to injury. Pulling back the SS label is probably the best thing they could do. The SS label is a badge of respect. The SS cobalt may deserve it for the fact that they have built a high performance small size car with the design for being upgraded and its ability for high horsepower and way above average handling. Its an SS for the new generation of street racers. But the SS needs to stick with the coupes not the sedans.

 

There is alot of animosity at this site. Why are we all talking about which Cobalt is better than whose and how the 2.2l aren't as good as the 2.4l but with the right mods they could beat a 2.0l and how the 2.0l isn't good without stage 2 you suck blah blah...

We should all be in here, swapping tips on how to smoke every other comparable car on the road, REGARDLESS of what engine is in there.
I'd like to see more 2.0l supercharged telling a 2.4l "how much potential that engine has, here's how I modded a 2.4l in the past and it gave me twenty extra WHP, you should drop in a turbocharger too and that engine would rock ass."
or a 2.2l owner tell a 2.4l that "your car rocks man, are you planning on selling that high profile spoiler, I really like the look." "Sure man, I am planning on swapping trunk lids and going without. I see you modded with a catback exhaust and new intake, what're your 1/4 times now?"

2.0l SS/SC cobalts rock ass! You've got one of the most powerful engines available that are easily upgraded to be competition class. And everyone's car looks like a million bucks!
2.4l SS cobalts rock ass! The 2.4l Ecotech has been repeatedly referred to as Chevy's most advanced engine out of the bunch. Plus it's cheaper on most insurances, dealer tags, and typically comes fully loaded. the potential on this engine has barely been scratched
2.2l Cobalts rock ass! You guys probably spent 14g on an awesome car that runs the most popular tuner racing engine in existence. The majority of the available market mods are for that size engine. Plus you probably got more choices on what you wanted in the car than anyone else.

Stop the hatin...unless it's on other cars

 

Sounds good to me......

 

I disagree and heres why;

Nowadays, the amount of doors on (and the shape of) a vehicle are becoming less and less relevant. Take for instance, STI, EVO, SRT4, 300C,etc. All these cars have 4 doors yet i don't think anyone would say they arent worthy performers.

I would like to reiterate the suggestion of having an acceleration requirement. I mean heck, if you suggested the idea of a trailblazer SS three years ago, you would of been called an idiot. But in realilty, those things are amazing performers despite there weight of well over 2 tons.

Any vehicle can be made fast if the engineers put the proper time and money into it.

 

I LIVE IN BINGHAMTON NY area and the other day on my way up to Cuse. I saw a Aveo with a SS badge on it lol i laughed my ass off to bad its an aftermarket badge lol if i wasnt on my azr i would have snaped a picture and posted it

 

long as the price doesn;t go through the roof. And leather is OPTIONAL--not a bad post

 

I don't care what kind of car gets the SS as long as it is made to race. Hell, even trucks can have it if they are made specifically for sport. Super Sport denotes competition.

 

what do you mean by made to race?

 

Monte Carlos, as ugly as they my be, are performance vehicles. Minivans are not. When a car is made to perform on a track, whether it be a quarter mile or a dirt one, it can earn the SS emblem. As an exception, the Corvette should not get the SS emblem because it is Chevrolet's premier vehicle and may be "above" the SS badge, according to many Chevy enthusiasts.

Some would argue that no Cobalt deserves the SS badge based on my argument, so before anyone disagrees, the Cobalt SS has competition in its class that does have special badging. The GTI, SI, and SRT-4 are good examples of performance economy cars. The SS competes with these and was designed for performance competition in the 4-cylinder compact economy class. Thus, the Cobalt SS needs the badge in order to compete with other cars in the market. Besides the simple need to compete, the Cobalt SS definitely has performance above the Cobalt LS. While the supercharged version is a far stronger candidate for the SS badging, both have shown better trims, interiors, and performance. All of this is necessary to earn the badge in the first place.

Basically, the SS badge is what it says: "Super Sport," which makes it more sporty than any other version of the same car. If the car isn't sporty in the first place, then it shouldn't get the SS badge.

 

I agree with the above

I also understand the argument with only at SS/SC having the SS badge, it makes sense to me, I just happen to disagree with with most of these guys underlying logic. They want the SS only on the 2.0l because it makes THEIR car even more special because it's the only SS cobalt. As I ( and quoite a few others) have said before, Chey needs to come up with a specific formula for determining what qualifies a trim for SS. (Like .3 more WHP per overall HP of the stock model [I say that because 370 HP isn't that much performance difference than 340hp, but 173hp IS a difference over 140hp], or specific higher acceleration ratio. Whatever GM comes up with, but they should stick to it)
If the 2.4l doesn't make the cut, so be it. MY Coby SS isn't really an SS, I'll live.