Cobalt/Mustang Comparison
Former Cobalt Owner
Joined: 11-28-05
Posts: 4,382
Likes: 1
From: Charles Town, WV
Heres a quick vid of me racing a new GT on the highway....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EZxcZRCY94
He came up from behind me and i downshifted into 3rd when he came up beside me. I raced him all the way through 3rd gear before letting off of it for traffic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EZxcZRCY94
He came up from behind me and i downshifted into 3rd when he came up beside me. I raced him all the way through 3rd gear before letting off of it for traffic.
Thread Starter
New Member
Joined: 05-24-06
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
From: Houston
It looks like I made a bad purchase.
Question:
How can a stage II cobalt beat a mustang when I see 90 percent of people getting 13.7 with stage II. What is the best time for a stage II cobalt?
I have seen someone get a 13.2 in a mustang.
Question:
How can a stage II cobalt beat a mustang when I see 90 percent of people getting 13.7 with stage II. What is the best time for a stage II cobalt?
I have seen someone get a 13.2 in a mustang.
Banned
Joined: 06-11-07
Posts: 5,417
Likes: 0
From: Az
Trap speed is the true indicator to look at. Not E/T. We get shitty E/T's because we're FWD
Senior Member
Joined: 07-17-07
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
From: right behind you.
true indicator of what who is gonna win a roll race? E/T is how fast your car is. Traction is part of performance guys, don't kid yourselves. oh btw stock gt's can trap 105 and with bolt ons 108-109 is easily doable, people have trapped 111 all bolt ons.
Senior Member
Joined: 05-27-07
Posts: 1,547
Likes: 0
From: USA
Nope. You actually made a great purchase.
Because stock '05+ GT's are turning hi 13's low 14's (they weigh almost 3,600 lbs.)
Therefore, a 13.7 in a St. 2 SS/SC should take a new GT.
Then he was clearly hiding something from you.
No way a stock '05+ GT is gonna get ANYWHERE NEAR a 13.2 1/4. No freakin way.
If you don't believe me, read the 'Stang forums to see what they're running stock ...
Question:
How can a stage II cobalt beat a mustang when I see 90 percent of people getting 13.7 with stage II.
How can a stage II cobalt beat a mustang when I see 90 percent of people getting 13.7 with stage II.
Therefore, a 13.7 in a St. 2 SS/SC should take a new GT.
I have seen someone get a 13.2 in a mustang.
No way a stock '05+ GT is gonna get ANYWHERE NEAR a 13.2 1/4. No freakin way.
If you don't believe me, read the 'Stang forums to see what they're running stock ...
Banned
Joined: 06-11-07
Posts: 5,417
Likes: 0
From: Az
Senior Member
Joined: 10-31-06
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 0
From: O-town
I think people compare a lot of cars to gt's becuase they are extremely common and people just use them to see where they are at speed wise... or they are jealous.
How can you go wrong with a 26000 dollar car that can run a 13.6 bone stock?
How can you go wrong with a 26000 dollar car that can run a 13.6 bone stock?
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-06
Posts: 12,764
Likes: 1
From: here
Trap speed is an indicator of how much HP you can make but your ET shows how well you can put it to the ground.
Example, my 72 Fire Bird would turn an 11.10 to an 11.30 at 135 - 140 mph. Now my mph SCREAMS low 10 high 9 car but the fact that I couldn't hook up to save my LIFE usualy turning a 60' time in the 2.80 range prooves I had as much traction as a top fueler on ice. Now if I had a cage in the car I could have run slicks, no cage=no slicks or I'd break the car in half.
Example, my 72 Fire Bird would turn an 11.10 to an 11.30 at 135 - 140 mph. Now my mph SCREAMS low 10 high 9 car but the fact that I couldn't hook up to save my LIFE usualy turning a 60' time in the 2.80 range prooves I had as much traction as a top fueler on ice. Now if I had a cage in the car I could have run slicks, no cage=no slicks or I'd break the car in half.
Senior Member
Joined: 10-31-06
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 0
From: O-town
but a stock ss and can def beat a stock gt in the twisties , car and driver lightning lap sobalt beat out the gt .... but who cares Drive your car and race it becuase you like not because other people do...
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-06
Posts: 12,764
Likes: 1
From: here
Thats cause its lighter with a shorter wheel base. Short wheel base=fast turns, light weight=easy to handle in fast turns. Also the FWD pulls you thru the turns where as the RWD tries to push you straight.
Senior Member
Joined: 07-17-07
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
From: right behind you.
Nope. You actually made a great purchase.
Because stock '05+ GT's are turning hi 13's low 14's (they weigh almost 3,600 lbs.)
Therefore, a 13.7 in a St. 2 SS/SC should take a new GT.
Then he was clearly hiding something from you.
No way a stock '05+ GT is gonna get ANYWHERE NEAR a 13.2 1/4. No freakin way.
If you don't believe me, read the 'Stang forums to see what they're running stock ...
Because stock '05+ GT's are turning hi 13's low 14's (they weigh almost 3,600 lbs.)
Therefore, a 13.7 in a St. 2 SS/SC should take a new GT.
Then he was clearly hiding something from you.
No way a stock '05+ GT is gonna get ANYWHERE NEAR a 13.2 1/4. No freakin way.
If you don't believe me, read the 'Stang forums to see what they're running stock ...
i think its more of a weight issue that allows us to rape cars in corners
Senior Member
Joined: 09-26-06
Posts: 9,753
Likes: 0
From: Marlton, NJ
Nice write-up by the way, and glad you like your new whip man. Don't go beatin up on any Cobalts too bad now. lol
Last edited by 1gmfanatik; Aug 17, 2007 at 05:00 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Senior Member
Joined: 05-27-07
Posts: 1,547
Likes: 0
From: USA
I'm just saying we should be a 'lil more friendly on this forum, that's all bro.
Because that's what separates us from that other Cobaltss forum (where the idiot mods there actually encourage people to insult each other and act like morons). That's why their forum is dying.
Just don't want that to happen to us here on this forum.
Or a $20,000 car that can hit mid 14's bone stock like our SS/SC's .... 
Here we go ....
Ok, first off I want to say that I'm no 'Stang hater. Years ago I bought and drag raced 5 different Mustangs over a 12 year period (last one was a '95 Cobra).
That being said, try checking SVT forums buddy. Even stock Mach 1's (which weigh a bit less and have more hp) are only turning mid-high 13's stock.
And by stock, I mean STOCK (i.e., no drag radials, no intake, no NOTHING). I can't believe all the threads I've seen on different automotive forums where a guy says "I ran this stock", only to read that their cars have a bunch of mods.
Bone stock (down to the air filter and tires) an '05-07 GT WILL NOT hit 13.2's. Not ever, not on any day ...
Good question, but the problem here is that we will get into a discussion of how much hp these cars actually make versus what the manufacturer claims they make.
Most SS/SC guys will say our cars are under rated, as will the 'Stang guys too. So what hp figure do we use then when estimating the hp/weight ratio?
Without a doubt, the 'Stang GT's is gonna be a little better, but not enough to be more than a high 13 second car in "as delivered to the dealer" condition. And our SS/SC's are mid 14 second cars bone stock.
So the extra 6k that a GT costs over a SS/SC nets the GT about 1/2 a second quicker ET in the 1/4 mile. But drop the St. 2 into the SS/SC, and now we're talking the same ET's for both cars (with our cars maintaining the factory warranty) and our SC's still costs less by over $5,000.
I like that ...
Because that's what separates us from that other Cobaltss forum (where the idiot mods there actually encourage people to insult each other and act like morons). That's why their forum is dying.
Just don't want that to happen to us here on this forum.
Ok, first off I want to say that I'm no 'Stang hater. Years ago I bought and drag raced 5 different Mustangs over a 12 year period (last one was a '95 Cobra).
That being said, try checking SVT forums buddy. Even stock Mach 1's (which weigh a bit less and have more hp) are only turning mid-high 13's stock.
And by stock, I mean STOCK (i.e., no drag radials, no intake, no NOTHING). I can't believe all the threads I've seen on different automotive forums where a guy says "I ran this stock", only to read that their cars have a bunch of mods.
Bone stock (down to the air filter and tires) an '05-07 GT WILL NOT hit 13.2's. Not ever, not on any day ...
Good question, but the problem here is that we will get into a discussion of how much hp these cars actually make versus what the manufacturer claims they make.
Most SS/SC guys will say our cars are under rated, as will the 'Stang guys too. So what hp figure do we use then when estimating the hp/weight ratio?
Without a doubt, the 'Stang GT's is gonna be a little better, but not enough to be more than a high 13 second car in "as delivered to the dealer" condition. And our SS/SC's are mid 14 second cars bone stock.
So the extra 6k that a GT costs over a SS/SC nets the GT about 1/2 a second quicker ET in the 1/4 mile. But drop the St. 2 into the SS/SC, and now we're talking the same ET's for both cars (with our cars maintaining the factory warranty) and our SC's still costs less by over $5,000.
I like that ...
Last edited by firemanfrank; Aug 17, 2007 at 09:59 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: 07-17-07
Posts: 9,378
Likes: 0
From: right behind you.
I'm just saying we should be a 'lil more friendly on this forum, that's all bro.
Because that's what separates us from that other Cobaltss forum (where the idiot mods there actually encourage people to insult each other and act like morons). That's why their forum is dying.
Just don't want that to happen to us here on this forum.
Or a $20,000 car that can hit mid 14's bone stock like our SS/SC's ....
Here we go ....
Ok, first off I want to say that I'm no 'Stang hater. Years ago I bought and drag raced 5 different Mustangs over a 12 year period (last one was a '95 Cobra).
That being said, try checking SVT forums buddy. Even stock Mach 1's (which weigh a bit less and have more hp) are only turning mid-high 13's stock.
And by stock, I mean STOCK (i.e., no drag radials, no intake, no NOTHING). I can't believe all the threads I've seen on different automotive forums where a guy says "I ran this stock", only to read that their cars have a bunch of mods.
Bone stock (down to the air filter and tires) an '05-07 GT WILL NOT hit 13.2's. Not ever, not on any day ...
Good question, but the problem here is that we will get into a discussion of how much hp these cars actually make versus what the manufacturer claims they make.
Most SS/SC guys will say our cars are under rated, as will the 'Stang guys too. So what hp figure do we use then when estimating the hp/weight ratio?
Without a doubt, the 'Stang GT's is gonna be a little better, but not enough to be more than a high 13 second car in "as delivered to the dealer" condition. And our SS/SC's are mid 14 second cars bone stock.
So the extra 6k that a GT costs over a SS/SC nets the GT about 1/2 a second quicker ET in the 1/4 mile. But drop the St. 2 into the SS/SC, and now we're talking the same ET's for both cars (with our cars maintaining the factory warranty) and our SC's still costs less by over $5,000.
I like that ...
Because that's what separates us from that other Cobaltss forum (where the idiot mods there actually encourage people to insult each other and act like morons). That's why their forum is dying.
Just don't want that to happen to us here on this forum.
Or a $20,000 car that can hit mid 14's bone stock like our SS/SC's ....
Here we go ....
Ok, first off I want to say that I'm no 'Stang hater. Years ago I bought and drag raced 5 different Mustangs over a 12 year period (last one was a '95 Cobra).
That being said, try checking SVT forums buddy. Even stock Mach 1's (which weigh a bit less and have more hp) are only turning mid-high 13's stock.
And by stock, I mean STOCK (i.e., no drag radials, no intake, no NOTHING). I can't believe all the threads I've seen on different automotive forums where a guy says "I ran this stock", only to read that their cars have a bunch of mods.
Bone stock (down to the air filter and tires) an '05-07 GT WILL NOT hit 13.2's. Not ever, not on any day ...
Good question, but the problem here is that we will get into a discussion of how much hp these cars actually make versus what the manufacturer claims they make.
Most SS/SC guys will say our cars are under rated, as will the 'Stang guys too. So what hp figure do we use then when estimating the hp/weight ratio?
Without a doubt, the 'Stang GT's is gonna be a little better, but not enough to be more than a high 13 second car in "as delivered to the dealer" condition. And our SS/SC's are mid 14 second cars bone stock.
So the extra 6k that a GT costs over a SS/SC nets the GT about 1/2 a second quicker ET in the 1/4 mile. But drop the St. 2 into the SS/SC, and now we're talking the same ET's for both cars (with our cars maintaining the factory warranty) and our SC's still costs less by over $5,000.
I like that ...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post