Differenc between sport and ss?
Banned
Joined: 04-08-08
Posts: 7,576
Likes: 0
From: Thurmont, MD
Just out of curiousity. What cars could my sport beat in just simple racing. (streets/highway). I haven't modded it yet but want to get it supercharged eventually. This is my first car so i am rather clueless in terms of pretty much everything. All i know is that I can run civics into the ground.
go try the war stories section
Senior Member
Joined: 08-27-08
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 1
From: Beiseker AB Canada
no he means from the 05-07 NA SS...
bob lutz made sure in 08 that all the SS badged cars actually meant that. the cobalt SS NA 2.4l honestly was not a SS model. I'm glad they changed it to sport as it really wasnt a super sport. So yes your cars history was a SS model from 05-07.
bob lutz made sure in 08 that all the SS badged cars actually meant that. the cobalt SS NA 2.4l honestly was not a SS model. I'm glad they changed it to sport as it really wasnt a super sport. So yes your cars history was a SS model from 05-07.
Best solution would have been to badge the 2.4 cars as Cobalt RS right from day one. Would set them apart from the LS/LT without diluting the SS's image.
Yeeesh, with all the "Sport Appearance Packages" you can't tell what the heck is in the next lane anymore
Senior Member
Joined: 03-31-07
Posts: 724
Likes: 2
From: Edmonton, AB
Also it should be noted that the 2.4L Cobalts did differ from the 2.0L SC and TC in other ways. The manual transmission was not the same between these cars. The 2.4L uses the same transmission as the 2.2L Cobalts. Also, the suspension, while better than the standard 2.2L suspension, is not the same as the SC/TC suspensions.
I honestly think that the original plan was to eventually move the Cobalt's up to the 2.4L as the standard engine and then with all of the changes due to GM's instability and the Obama government, they decided to opt for the 2.2L. It's currently a lot smarter and easier to sell a car with really good fuel economy and lower horsepower than it is to sell a car with good fuel economy and a few more ponies.
At the end of the day, it really seems like GM was confused with it's priorities with the Cobalt...
I agree, they should have been RS's from the factory.
I honestly think that the original plan was to eventually move the Cobalt's up to the 2.4L as the standard engine and then with all of the changes due to GM's instability and the Obama government, they decided to opt for the 2.2L. It's currently a lot smarter and easier to sell a car with really good fuel economy and lower horsepower than it is to sell a car with good fuel economy and a few more ponies.
At the end of the day, it really seems like GM was confused with it's priorities with the Cobalt...
Smart move but waaaay too late - I mean, why change it for 1 year then drop the 2.4 from the lineup?
Best solution would have been to badge the 2.4 cars as Cobalt RS right from day one. Would set them apart from the LS/LT without diluting the SS's image.
Yeeesh, with all the "Sport Appearance Packages" you can't tell what the heck is in the next lane anymore
Best solution would have been to badge the 2.4 cars as Cobalt RS right from day one. Would set them apart from the LS/LT without diluting the SS's image.
Yeeesh, with all the "Sport Appearance Packages" you can't tell what the heck is in the next lane anymore
Last edited by Routs; Aug 28, 2009 at 01:42 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DANRICKARD
Problems/Service/Maintenance
8
Oct 1, 2015 12:08 AM
Macgyver2484
Parts
0
Sep 23, 2015 11:36 PM