The latest Road & Track had a full road test of the Saturn Sky. The hp & torque to weight numbers are almost identical to the SS 2.4 - in fact the SS has a slight edge. Going by these numbers I expect the stock SS 2.4 should do 0-60 in about 7.2 (7.1?), and do thier slalomn in around 67 mph.

It seems like most car mags have focused on the SS/SC. But based on the Sky numbers - I expect the 2.4 to be right in there with the Sky and Pontiac Solstice.

- w

 

Few variables to keep in mind:

1) The Sky is about 100 lbs lighter than the 2.4SS

2) In order to get the same times, they would have to have the EXACT same gearing and I don't believe they do.

3) Comparing rear wheel and front wheel drive isn't always a straightforward comparison, the RWD cars may be able to pull down a better time because of better traction.

 

The only difference I can think of really is that the Sky/Solstice are RWD and wear 245 tires. Traction is not an issue with them.

 

those big 18" rims will take care of their better gearing. And they weigh more...I just can't find a link where they weigh.
But it'd be a close race no doubt

 

The Solstice/Sky push about 2800-2900 lb, and the Cobalt coupes are in the same range, even though the GM website indicates more.

 

Alleycat,

1) The Sky is heavier I believe - 2975 vs. 2815

2) Yes - gearing has an effect. But I expect the SS 2.4 is taller, as the Sky seems to have worse mpg.

3) Honestly, I did not know the Sky was RWD - not sure what impact that has.

- w

 

The rear drive will give better track times

 

Sky comes with alot more standard features then the Solstice. Hence the heavier weight and higher sticker.

 

regardless the 2.4 ss is not too far behind from those times.. i say max we're about 7.5 to 60 with the auto...car and driver got a 8.4 to 60 with a cobalt sedan w/ the auto, we also have the same weight but 30 more hp so do the math.

"this 2900-pound Cobalt to 60 mph in 8.4 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 16.6 seconds at 84 mph. Those times would have beaten nine of the 10 cars in our Dreamboat comparo which was open to stick shifts only "

*Source C&D (http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...-ls-page2.html)

 

7.5 might be a tad low for the auto--at least stock anyways. But add a few mods and you would be right there or quicker.

 

One thing I have noticed on the car mags (and I get both both Road & Track, and Motor Trend) is that the 0-60, 1/4 mile times, etc., can vary between mags. I don't know if R&T knows how to launch better than, or what, but they consistently seem to post the fastest times of any of the major car mags.

Really, judging by the numbers I have been playing with, with a competent driver, and good launch, I think the SS 2.4 (stock) s/b right around 7.2-7.3 doing a 0-60 mph. The SS 2.4 hp & Torque to weight are very close to the Tiburon GT (v6). (Actually the 2.4 has a better hp ratio, and the Tiburon has slightly better Torque to weight, but they are very close.) The Tiburon is a front wheel drive also. The 0-60 times I see for the Tiburon GT are 7.1 (http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2138a.shtml) to around 7.4 (http://www.modernracer.com/hyundaitiburonv6.html). I'm pretty confident the SS 2.4 manual would be right there - probably low 7's - but not high 6's.

Here is kind of a fun 0-60 meter. I think the numbers are a bit more conservative - probably closer to real world - not track times.

0-60 calculator:

http://www.nitrousworld.com/0-60_performance.php

- W

 

Going back to your original post...I think we've established that they'll be pretty close to each other in a straight line. However the 2.4 won't come anywhere near 67mph in the slalom.

 

Well if you go by these specs the auto should be hitting abour 7.4 to sixty since a few people have done 15.8 stock in the 1/4...the numbers in the link are with the 5 speed.

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Sp...balt&trimid=-1

 

Tom,

I think the SS/SC did around 67 mph in their slalomn, so I guess I would have to drop that number a bit. That is where suspension plays a big part. So yes, it would mot be 67. Something lower than that. The slalomn is much harder to compare against.

- w