Me and the local car tester go at it
01-21-2006, 07:13 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Me and the local car tester go at it
Like me, most 2.4L SS owners are awaitng some magainzine write ups on the car. I don't need them to validate the car but it'd still be nice to see.
Well the local paper has an autosection--and they tested a Pontiac Pursuit GT. AN exact mechanical close of the 2.4L SS.
Read our e-mail exhange. Its long but you might find it interesting. I made excerpts of the things I disagreeded with.
Dear Mr. Harry Pegg,
I am a regular reader of the Calgary Sun and an avid car enthusiast. I also happen to own a 2.4L Cobalt SS--the twin of the Pursuit you reviewed.
Usually I read your reviews and have to take you word for it because I have no direct experiences with the cars you write about.
But this time I do and your review is what prompted me to write.
While I agree on many points you raise (nice seats, good sound system, nice steering and handles great) I am baffled on why you
imply it is slow, has long shifter throws ect.
1. Long shifter throws:
Have you ever driven a manual trans 01-05 Honda Civic? I guarantee you that the throws are much longer. In addition that shifter is alot taller and gives the impression of driving a semi. My Dad owns an 02 Civic and he had trouble with my "short throw shifter"
2. ...."its not a power train that wants to get out there and get going"
Did you actually step on the gas? Did you redline it in the first 3 gears? I am not sure your taking into account its a 4 cly car.
Myself I find it moves along very well but to extract maximum power you must get the revs up quite high.
A Magazine test by Motor Trend of the 4 dr SS yielded a 0-60mph of 7.1 seconds. That is by no means an underachiever and beats anything in its class/price range. Mazda 3 is slower, Mitsu Lancer Ralliart is slower, Dodge 2.0 R/T is slower, Ford Focus is slower--this list goes on and on.
For a reference, my brother in law has a 2005 Acura TL with 258hp. It was only 0.2 faster in the 1/4 mile then my car. But I doubt you'd say it needs more power. Maybe your mistaking how it feels to what it actually does? Some cars feel fast but aren't and vice versa.
Is it a fast car? That depends on what your comparing it to. It's slow if you compare it to say an SRT-4 Neon but it is also more then $5K cheaper. Speed costs money, how fast do you want to go? I'd say the car is quick and beats out similarly priced completion.
3. ....."if your planning on execute a pass on the highway you'd best get down one or two gears because 5th gear is lethargic"
Umm....No kidding...5th gear is not meant for passing.
Heres my take on passing on a two lane. Since you are exposing your self directly to oncoming traffic this should be minimized and kept to as short as time as possible. In an automatic you would floor it and the transmission would gear down to get the most power and off you go.
In a manual trans you have to physically move the shifter to 3rd (or 4th). This will increase the rpms from cruising to whereas its making alot more hp. Of course if you leave it in top gear (5th in this case) it will accelerate very slowly.
So who uses 5th gear for a fast passing maneuver?? Any manual transmission car will experience the same phenomena of slow acceleration in 5th gear (at 100km/h)
Have you ever driven a 6 speed Corvette? The 6th gear ratio is 0.50 to 1! Floor that at a 100km/h and it won't be fast either.
Now if your going on a divided 4 lane highway and are taking it easy 5th gear does the job, since your not pressed for time and don't need maximum acceleration.
3. Road Hugging GT needs more power
Actually the GT is perfect for what it is.
What Pontiac needs to do is have a GXP version with the 2.0L S/C engine that's in the Cobalt SS S/C.
I am not sure your taking into consideration the price of the car in relation to its performance. For the money it offers great performance. If you need more power you have to spend more money.
4. ....you can't operate it (parking brake) without first raising the centre console rest..."
I agree the centre console is in the way and blocks most of the parking brake handle. But it does not block it completely and I can operate mine perfectly well without raising the centre console at all. I am unsure why you could not do the same.
In summary, I realize that much of your writing is based on your personal opinions and are not always agreed upon by others.
But facts do come into play and with the acceleration numbers I have posted along with the completion show that it has more then adequate power. We could argue opinions all day long but when I quote insturmented acceleration numbers, well they speak for themselves.
I offer you a challenge:
1. If you'd like me to take you for a spin in my car I will show you what it can do. We could duel at Race City perhaps.
2. When you test Hondas over-hyped 197hp Civic Si I will be more then happy to engage you in a 5th gear acceleration contest. Because I have much more torque at a lower rpm I am very sure I will beat you. Be sure to mention the lethargic 5th gear acceleration of the Si in your write up, fair is fair.
3. Publish my rebuttal
On another but similar subject--I have read about the S/C (supercharged) SS twice in the autosection. You keep calling it a 2.4L when in fact it's a 2.0
My concerns about the performance of the 2.4L Ecotec also carry over to your recent review of the Pontiac Solstice. Again, you don't seem to realize the car has a very low base price and thus does not have tire shredding power. But flog it and it will go to a degree. (Magazine tests are about 6.7 to 7.0 0-60mph) For those who want more there is the GXP version that has been expected for quite some time.
Anyhow, I don't mean to get personal or attack you for not agreeing with me. I just wanted to share my thoughts since I cannot understand where you are coming from and feel people reading you review could be mislead into thinking its slow.
Mike
Well the local paper has an autosection--and they tested a Pontiac Pursuit GT. AN exact mechanical close of the 2.4L SS.
Read our e-mail exhange. Its long but you might find it interesting. I made excerpts of the things I disagreeded with.
Dear Mr. Harry Pegg,
I am a regular reader of the Calgary Sun and an avid car enthusiast. I also happen to own a 2.4L Cobalt SS--the twin of the Pursuit you reviewed.
Usually I read your reviews and have to take you word for it because I have no direct experiences with the cars you write about.
But this time I do and your review is what prompted me to write.
While I agree on many points you raise (nice seats, good sound system, nice steering and handles great) I am baffled on why you
imply it is slow, has long shifter throws ect.
1. Long shifter throws:
Have you ever driven a manual trans 01-05 Honda Civic? I guarantee you that the throws are much longer. In addition that shifter is alot taller and gives the impression of driving a semi. My Dad owns an 02 Civic and he had trouble with my "short throw shifter"
2. ...."its not a power train that wants to get out there and get going"
Did you actually step on the gas? Did you redline it in the first 3 gears? I am not sure your taking into account its a 4 cly car.
Myself I find it moves along very well but to extract maximum power you must get the revs up quite high.
A Magazine test by Motor Trend of the 4 dr SS yielded a 0-60mph of 7.1 seconds. That is by no means an underachiever and beats anything in its class/price range. Mazda 3 is slower, Mitsu Lancer Ralliart is slower, Dodge 2.0 R/T is slower, Ford Focus is slower--this list goes on and on.
For a reference, my brother in law has a 2005 Acura TL with 258hp. It was only 0.2 faster in the 1/4 mile then my car. But I doubt you'd say it needs more power. Maybe your mistaking how it feels to what it actually does? Some cars feel fast but aren't and vice versa.
Is it a fast car? That depends on what your comparing it to. It's slow if you compare it to say an SRT-4 Neon but it is also more then $5K cheaper. Speed costs money, how fast do you want to go? I'd say the car is quick and beats out similarly priced completion.
3. ....."if your planning on execute a pass on the highway you'd best get down one or two gears because 5th gear is lethargic"
Umm....No kidding...5th gear is not meant for passing.
Heres my take on passing on a two lane. Since you are exposing your self directly to oncoming traffic this should be minimized and kept to as short as time as possible. In an automatic you would floor it and the transmission would gear down to get the most power and off you go.
In a manual trans you have to physically move the shifter to 3rd (or 4th). This will increase the rpms from cruising to whereas its making alot more hp. Of course if you leave it in top gear (5th in this case) it will accelerate very slowly.
So who uses 5th gear for a fast passing maneuver?? Any manual transmission car will experience the same phenomena of slow acceleration in 5th gear (at 100km/h)
Have you ever driven a 6 speed Corvette? The 6th gear ratio is 0.50 to 1! Floor that at a 100km/h and it won't be fast either.
Now if your going on a divided 4 lane highway and are taking it easy 5th gear does the job, since your not pressed for time and don't need maximum acceleration.
3. Road Hugging GT needs more power
Actually the GT is perfect for what it is.
What Pontiac needs to do is have a GXP version with the 2.0L S/C engine that's in the Cobalt SS S/C.
I am not sure your taking into consideration the price of the car in relation to its performance. For the money it offers great performance. If you need more power you have to spend more money.
4. ....you can't operate it (parking brake) without first raising the centre console rest..."
I agree the centre console is in the way and blocks most of the parking brake handle. But it does not block it completely and I can operate mine perfectly well without raising the centre console at all. I am unsure why you could not do the same.
In summary, I realize that much of your writing is based on your personal opinions and are not always agreed upon by others.
But facts do come into play and with the acceleration numbers I have posted along with the completion show that it has more then adequate power. We could argue opinions all day long but when I quote insturmented acceleration numbers, well they speak for themselves.
I offer you a challenge:
1. If you'd like me to take you for a spin in my car I will show you what it can do. We could duel at Race City perhaps.
2. When you test Hondas over-hyped 197hp Civic Si I will be more then happy to engage you in a 5th gear acceleration contest. Because I have much more torque at a lower rpm I am very sure I will beat you. Be sure to mention the lethargic 5th gear acceleration of the Si in your write up, fair is fair.
3. Publish my rebuttal
On another but similar subject--I have read about the S/C (supercharged) SS twice in the autosection. You keep calling it a 2.4L when in fact it's a 2.0
My concerns about the performance of the 2.4L Ecotec also carry over to your recent review of the Pontiac Solstice. Again, you don't seem to realize the car has a very low base price and thus does not have tire shredding power. But flog it and it will go to a degree. (Magazine tests are about 6.7 to 7.0 0-60mph) For those who want more there is the GXP version that has been expected for quite some time.
Anyhow, I don't mean to get personal or attack you for not agreeing with me. I just wanted to share my thoughts since I cannot understand where you are coming from and feel people reading you review could be mislead into thinking its slow.
Mike
01-21-2006, 07:15 PM
#2
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
His reply: (in bold and my counter points in regular)
Thanks for the reply Harry.
I was thinking of how the Pursuit GT stacks up on a comparison basis and you were not, I guess that is the difference in perception.
Because I did want some degree of performance when I bought my car. So I read up on all possible alternatives to the 2.4L Cobalt SS and it does come out on top. I would think most consumers do this as well, but I digress.
I'll just argue 3 of your points, since the rest are just a difference of an opinion.
1.Cobalt SS is a much better performing vehicle and is not a twin to the Pursuit, although both are built on the same architecture.
1. In my first e-mail I clearly stated I have a 2.4L Cobalt SS and it is the twin of a Pursuit GT. (I did say Pursuit and not Pursuit GT---however since you were reviewing a Pursuit GT I thought that was obvious. Maybe that's where the confusion came from??) So I'll just say 2.4L Cobalt SS = Pursuit GT and leave it at that.
Go look on the GM website if I don't seem to be knowledgeable.
Your rebuttal is based on the Cobalt SS, not the Pursuit GT...what is there to rebut???
See the above. I can rebut the lack of power because they are twins. I found it interesting that in the autosection Karl Perkons reviews a 150hp 6 speed auto and called it fun. Yet the Cobalt 2.4L SS is far faster. Different reviewers net different reviews is the lesson I realize.
(5) As for Motor Trend, it's amazing what altitude will do, or undo, on a vehicle.
I am aware of the effects that elevation on performance. A few years ago I had an 88 Camaro. It ran a best of 16.7@ 80 mph at Race City. Talk about slow for a V8! I then moved to Ontario and raced the car with no changes at St Thomas dragway, it ran a 15.9@85mph. Calgary has ha very high air density altitude. Something close to Denver, Colorado.
But all cars suffer equally the effects on altitude. So now the 2.4L Cobalt SS won't run a 7.1 0-60mph but it still beats Mazda 3 and all the rest I mentioned. Actually forced induction cars do not suffer as much.
thanks again for replying to a regular reader, I will have my day against a new Civic Si at the track this year.
Mike
Thanks for the reply Harry.
I was thinking of how the Pursuit GT stacks up on a comparison basis and you were not, I guess that is the difference in perception.
Because I did want some degree of performance when I bought my car. So I read up on all possible alternatives to the 2.4L Cobalt SS and it does come out on top. I would think most consumers do this as well, but I digress.
I'll just argue 3 of your points, since the rest are just a difference of an opinion.
1.Cobalt SS is a much better performing vehicle and is not a twin to the Pursuit, although both are built on the same architecture.
1. In my first e-mail I clearly stated I have a 2.4L Cobalt SS and it is the twin of a Pursuit GT. (I did say Pursuit and not Pursuit GT---however since you were reviewing a Pursuit GT I thought that was obvious. Maybe that's where the confusion came from??) So I'll just say 2.4L Cobalt SS = Pursuit GT and leave it at that.
Go look on the GM website if I don't seem to be knowledgeable.
Your rebuttal is based on the Cobalt SS, not the Pursuit GT...what is there to rebut???
See the above. I can rebut the lack of power because they are twins. I found it interesting that in the autosection Karl Perkons reviews a 150hp 6 speed auto and called it fun. Yet the Cobalt 2.4L SS is far faster. Different reviewers net different reviews is the lesson I realize.
(5) As for Motor Trend, it's amazing what altitude will do, or undo, on a vehicle.
I am aware of the effects that elevation on performance. A few years ago I had an 88 Camaro. It ran a best of 16.7@ 80 mph at Race City. Talk about slow for a V8! I then moved to Ontario and raced the car with no changes at St Thomas dragway, it ran a 15.9@85mph. Calgary has ha very high air density altitude. Something close to Denver, Colorado.
But all cars suffer equally the effects on altitude. So now the 2.4L Cobalt SS won't run a 7.1 0-60mph but it still beats Mazda 3 and all the rest I mentioned. Actually forced induction cars do not suffer as much.
thanks again for replying to a regular reader, I will have my day against a new Civic Si at the track this year.
Mike
01-21-2006, 07:24 PM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: 09-01-05
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,589
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice. I have driven a 2.4L SS with the 5 speed. It was brand new so I didn' run it hard at all, but I found it to be fairly peppy. I was remering that I would need to rev it much higher to see what it was capable of, so I was not dissapointed with it. The car is solid and very stable. Suspension was almost a perfect compromise between a performance and smooth ride setup. Very controlled body motions, and it rode just firm enough to feel sporty. Much better than the old Z24s that felt like they would roll when you put them through their paces. Those things also suffered from terminal understeer, something that the FE3 suspension minimizes pretty well for a FWD car.
Agree with you on the review. While the SS 2.4L is not as fast as a SS Supercharged, it is very good for its significantly lower price, especially compared to the competition.
In all honesty, I have had a tough time deciding between the 2.4L SS and the 2.0L SS. Both offer excellent performance value and features. Decided that I should spend some extra money and get the top of the line car. Still, I would be very happy to take home the 2.4L SS. I was very impressed with it. It makes the Cavalier Z24 feel like a Ford Model T!
Agree with you on the review. While the SS 2.4L is not as fast as a SS Supercharged, it is very good for its significantly lower price, especially compared to the competition.
In all honesty, I have had a tough time deciding between the 2.4L SS and the 2.0L SS. Both offer excellent performance value and features. Decided that I should spend some extra money and get the top of the line car. Still, I would be very happy to take home the 2.4L SS. I was very impressed with it. It makes the Cavalier Z24 feel like a Ford Model T!
01-22-2006, 04:07 PM
#9
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jase
I saw that article the other day too.. and the one about the SS/SC. I totally didnt agree with his write ups
whats your next move avro?
whats your next move avro?
to beat an Si at Race City! Harry Pegg thinks I can do it!! I think he has no idea what he is talking about! Read on.
Hi Mike
The SS will beat the Si in a quarter mile, I'm sure. How it would do on the road course or in solo, given equal drivers, would be interesting.
harry
If I can get a good driver, I should lose (in the 1/4 mile) Don't you think?
Be close though.
I can't help but think he beleives my car is supercharged. Although I have tried to explain it is not. Who knows what this guy thinks.
But I can't wait until he tests a Civic Si---he'll say its fast but my car needs more power
01-23-2006, 07:08 PM
#11
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jase
i think its time for me to race at racecity as well 
good! Hope to see you there. Be fun to race another Cobalt.
02-16-2006, 04:38 PM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-06-05
Location: Seneca, South Carolina
Posts: 10,944
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
very cool responses to his wright up man!!!! although i do have to correct you, the ralliart motor trend tested when it first came out with bridgestone potenzas achieved a 14.9 sec 1/4 mile and a 6.9 0-60! after the first couple of months, mitsu put goodyear eagle rs-a's on the ralliart to save money ($32 per tire). so with less traction, the car got a bit slower. but it is a bit faster than people think.
here's the link http://www.technogeeky.com/ralliart/...nd_potenza.jpg
here's the link http://www.technogeeky.com/ralliart/...nd_potenza.jpg
02-16-2006, 06:32 PM
#15
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 04-17-04
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ralliartist
very cool responses to his wright up man!!!! although i do have to correct you, the ralliart motor trend tested when it first came out with bridgestone potenzas achieved a 14.9 sec 1/4 mile and a 6.9 0-60! after the first couple of months, mitsu put goodyear eagle rs-a's on the ralliart to save money ($32 per tire). so with less traction, the car got a bit slower. but it is a bit faster than people think.
here's the link http://www.technogeeky.com/ralliart/...nd_potenza.jpg
here's the link http://www.technogeeky.com/ralliart/...nd_potenza.jpg
Best I saw was a Ralliart Sportback (the wagons) race. Now they are all autos and heavier.
It ran a somewhere in the 17's--uncorreted that is. I guess a high 16 or something. Hopefully some of these cars show up at the track. I want a competitive race!!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
NoBalt123
2.0L LSJ Performance Tech
27
09-04-2015 07:10 AM