not lighter, but much stronger..... parts can be lighter bacause smaller peices can be used, with the same strength. They're much stronger though, because of the grain of the metal after the process.

 

No one has one yet because they're not out yet, the guys at GM are having a problem with the sheet metal which is total bullshit and they should've gotten their heads outta their asses and looked at that before starting the cobalt commercials, say, at least 3 months before even one of them was available. I think they're idiots for putting out 3 commercials before the actual car was ready to be sold. But on a lighter note, saw my first cobalt on the road today, was an LS i believe, looked nice except the moron was sitting at a green light lol.

 

no way is a shorter stroke of 0.2L going to make a vehicle way 130 lbs less, the redline wehighs in at 2931lbs, that is what the cobalt will weight also, maybe more( 6 speaker pioneer w/ sub). And have you ever picked up a SC + piping + intercooler... go do that then come back and tell me if you still feel the same.

 

you do the same....... that isn't a large, front mounted bar and plate intercooler, it's a relatively small, air to water unit. And I never claimed the engine is the only thing reducing the cobalt's weight; I simply said the 2.0 s/c could be lighter than the n/a 2.2 eco. and yes, reducing the stroke by enough to make up 200cc's does make a significant difference in weight, the crank, connecting rods, timing chain, even the block are all shorter; that's alot of metal shaved off.

I'm currently a student studying to become a mechanical engineer; before that I completed a course in aircraft structural repair(but could not find work); believe me, I know a thing or two about weight....... did you ever wonder why aircraft have flanged holes in nearly all their structural members?? cut a 2 inch hole in .040" aluminum a couple hundred, or thousand times, and you've saved enough weight to carry another passenger. moral of the story? There are many ways to reduce weight.

 

and for the record, the intercooler is the only piping involved with a roots blower; other than that, you have the air intake piping, which is on any engine, s/c or not.

 

I don't mean to be argumentative..... for all I know, they shoved a short stroke crank in the same block and the engine is a good bit heavier; all I am saying is the engine is potentially as light or lighter than the 2.2. In either case, it's the same engine ther edline uses, so the car could indeed be lighter by the use of better materials(the aluminum control arms are an example). Bottom line? the car isn't out yet, don't say what it will weigh untill you know.

 

i just noticed something that im not going to like...its got a FREAKING antenna...

why can they have integrated it into the rear glass like even my friggin 94 accord has...geez, its 2004...argh...

 

Black colour is hot, it stands out. You could see the rear lights a lot brighter and all the exterior accessories. But since I like white, white is the one for me.

 

The engine is lighter in the SS than the 2.2's. Its aluminum cast, all of it (cept for the iron rods), much of the 2.2's components are cast iron, some a heavier aluminum (foam-based) .Also the bore helps in this, I mean .2 liters IS .2liters

 

the bore remains the same; it's the stroke that makes up the difference.

a smaller bore doesn't make much difference in weight, but stroke does.

 

If it's the same 50' high antenna used on the J-Bodies, then I can get a short rubber "euro style" direct replacement at Canadian Tire for $10. I've seen people on e-Bay selling them for a lot more than that

 

50' is really tall!!! That's like 4 stories high!!!!

j/k I know you meant 50" I want to convert mine to power if there's room

 

Ahh alright, thanks for the clarification

 

Better yet, just shave it off

 

I just ordered a Black Cobalt SS, my dad wouldn't get the supercharged. How fast does a regular SS go from 0-60??

 

topping 6 month old threads rules.