Oh, I took it as you were correcting me saying that the VVT doesn't help gas mileage only the direct injection will.

VVT isn't just about cams

 

Sounds good, I won't hold mine either.

 

Well I read in car and driver that the new SS line was to include 3 versons of the Coblat. 1 2.4 N/A 2 2.0 SC and 3 was TBA. So it is posable that the turbo motor will see the Cobalt as a Limited option.
After all the new dodge thing that is going to replace the neon is going to have an SRT4 verson and dodge has just shown the 2.4 turbo motor for it rated at 255hp.

Later

 

AWD will never be in the Cobalt . The WRX and STI are not the Cobalts competiton . GM has a whole new line of crossover's coming out that will be AWD compatible .

This 2.0 engine or a variation ( lower power output ) WILL be coming to the Cobalt though . The LSJ engine is just simply not gonna cut it from and emissions and fuel economy standpoint in the 3-5 years from now and GM did not just invest all that money in that dual scroll turbo system for just the Kappa twins . It is where all perfomance Ecotec engines are headed . Direct injection with that SUPER effcient dual scroll turbo is how GM is gonna beable to offer these high output 4 bangers under stricter guidlines in the coming years . FWIW - GM's own stage 2 kit would not make the grade even now in production 2006 Cobalt SS for fuel economy or emissions .

 

I would definitely for whatever wierd have to agree with him i mean why would GM give it the title SS Supercharged and then make a SS model thats obviously not the same as the supercharged one. I mean i think i could see them makin one with the title of SS turbocharged since they already make the one with that super long S/C title why not just put that turbocharger on it and give it another model with another long title. and I also thought i heard that kind of news about a third option somewhere too but i cant remember where.

But i do think that the turbocharged motor could end up being an option along them still selling a supercharged cobalt.

Im out Later

 

The 2.0 T woulnt be above , it will eventually replace the SC . Considering a fully loaded 2006 SS tops $26K , do you really think GM has a $28-30K Cobalt model planned ? Like it was said before in this topic , the LSJ engine WAS an interim powerplant . Lori Queen said it herself back in 2004 before the Cobalt was even released . With this being the last year for the Ion , after the 2006 model year the Cobalt SS will be the only car in GM's global lineup using the LSJ .

 

I don't know if there would be enough room to stuff a twin scroll in our engine bay.(plus it is plumbed for the engine being longetudinal, not transverse) It would be killer especially with the VVT and Direct Injection, but as some of you pointed out, there is not much market for a $30,000 Cobalt.

I'll stick with my S/C. It will be dissapointing to have an obscure limited availability engine, but might raise the rarity. Plus they would have to do something about getting that power to the ground.

It is a nice thought though. Look at the Turbo MR2s. They also had a twin scroll and nice low end torque. I know someone rebuilding one. He is not using the twin scroll, because it is too expensive to work on. (I think he said $1,200 just to rebuild it). They are expensive and not all that common. To bring down cost they might start putting them in everything, but I doubt it.

 

I think the Solstice will do well and the turbo set up is the way of the future if GM wants to remain competitive in the performance segment.

2.0L Turbo will get better fuel economy or at least the same as the SS S/C.

If I hadn't already started buying parts for my Cobalt and investing a lot of money, I would be getting a Solstice GXP for sure. Deff gonna test drive one (if they let me anyways).

 

1) Convertables are the most unaerodynamic cars. If they are so good why didn't Chevy make the Z06 a convertable??? Oh, yeah they choose the much more aerodynamic coupe. There is no way in hell that the SS S/C is less aerodynamic than the Solstice roadster. If you knew the smallest bit about aerodynamics you wouldn't be arguing your ridiculuois argument. Plus adding larger tires and wheels will also make it less aerodynamic than the 2.4L Solstice.

2) Yes it is a 2.0L NOT a 2.4L going into the car. That said I was merely pointing out that putting the same engine (2.4L VVT) in the SS and Solstice yielded poorer mileage than the same engine in the Cobalt 2.4L SS. Thus, it is perfectly reasonable to assume that putting a 2.0L Turbocharged engine making a whopping 260 HP would have worse fuel economy than the 2.0L supercharged Cobalt engine making only 205HP. Factor in the fact that it makes more power, and is in a less aerodynamic car means worse fuel economy. The VVT is not going to make that much of a difference in lowering fuel economy. I'll prove you wrong when the numbers are released!

It's not rocket science, just automotive fact. Don't spew out what you know nothing about please!

 

Very true, however you need to think of it from a marketing standpoint.

1)Why would you just now release staged upgrade kits for an engine that will be discontinued in 6 months? It doesn't make financial sense. Why release a kit only a few people will buy who have '05 or '06 SS S/C.

2) GM is not going to make a Cobalt go nearly as fast as the Solstice GXP. They wan't you to buy the roadster if you need to go that fast. Thats why Cobalts are way slower than Corvettes. A models performance must be reflected in its price. There are heirachys in GM that prevent them from making cheap cars really fast. It's like the older days in the 60's where Gm would limit the engine size that could be put in a particular car. The Corvette always had the biggest, fastest engine. ' 69 Camaros only got 396 ci engines from the factory (with some notable exeption; the 2 ZL-1's, and the COPO cars).

3) As already mentioned in my earlier posts, the SS S/C already puts down very good power numbers compared to its competition: RSX Type S 210HP, Civic Si 197HP, and Caliber SRT-4 235 HP. Gm did not make the Cobalt with the intention of being the fastest, most powerful sport compact. They wanted a well balanced, capable performer.

I really don't see the Turbo being part of the Cobalt SS. I think the Superhcarger will stay, and the 2.0L VVT Turbo will be exclusive to the Sky and Solstice models.

 

You cant compare the 2.4L Solstice to the SS/SC. The SS/SC has the added weight of larger tires, the supercharger, and the associated electronics. The Solstice GXP will also have the weight of the Turbo and associated electronics, plus the larger wheels and tires, and thus will be at least 100-200 lbs heavier than the 2.4L Solstice, which already was heaveir than the comparable 2.4L SS.

Think about what you are saying. COnvertables are always heavier cars. The C6 Convertable ways more than the C6 Coupe. Hell, the F430 is 300+ lbs hevier in convertable form than in coupe form. Convertables have weaker structures due to their lack of a solid roof. Thus, normally there is additional chassis bracing and strengthening to compensate for this. It is certainly possible that the Solstice GXP will add some extra bracing due to it's more performance oriented nature.

Anyhow, the GXP will be heavier than the Cobalt SS/SC without a doubt. Wait and see the numbers when they are released if you don't believe me!

 

GM's aftermarket support of the current engine has 0 to do with the Cobalts future powertrain . Think of GM accessories as a business within a business . The Supercharged engine would be around until the Cobalt refresh scheduled in 2008 . So almost 2 more full model years for the LSJ .

The Corvette type rule has been abandoned when Ron Zarella parted with GM . Ever raced a more expensive G6 GTP or a much more expensive 04 GTP supercharged GP with your Cobalt SS . Both cars easily get wasted . Same would apply to the $28-31K 06 supercharged Grand Prix GT .

But proggressive power increases are natural in a performace model . "IF" the LSJ engine was rated using the new SAE standard like the 2.0T ( which is not underrated ) power would likely be rated at a more accurate 225-230 brake hp . So a bump to 250 actual rated brake hp , that wasnt underrated , would not make the Cobalt SS to much faster than it is now .

Gm is not gonna develop a engine as advanced as that for one VERY low volume car line ( carline= all Kappa Soltice , Sky and Lightning ) . The 2.0T layed out how GM is going to offer powerful 4cyl engines , that will beable meet both fuel economy and emissions standards that will become stricter thru the end of the decade for ALL GMNA and GM Europe makes that are using a performance ecotec engine .

I will absolutely eat my words if GM announced the LSJ SC engine would be recieving the technologies of the 2.0T engine like VVT and Direct injection . I completely doubt that is gonna happen though . Still stand by my word ....LSJ engine remains unchanged thru the 07 model year and will be suceeded by a version of the 2.0T for 2008 .

 

1) You keep making these ASSumptions not me. Where is YOUR proof that the Solstice is less aerodynamic then the Cobalt????? BTW weight effects gas mileage more then aerodynamics.

2) Both 2.4s are not the same genius. One is linked to FWD transaxle and the other to a RWD transmission. VVT and direct injection will vastly improve the fuel economy. Do you have proof the Solstice GXP will weigh more? You sure don't... so please do not spew out crap that you know nothing about. In case you didn't catch it weight effects gas more then aerodynamics. Especially in city driving.

 

You know nothing about cars, do you?

You are making an insanely stupid arguments. Yes, the 2.4L VVT in the Cobalt is FWD, while it is RWD in the Solstice. The engine internals (the parts that make up an engine: block, crankshaft, pistons, etc.) are the same! It still wieghs more than the Cobalt. What do you not understand about that fact? It also gets worse fuel economy than the exact same VVT 2.4L engine in the Cobalt!

The 2.4L solstice is heavier and has worse fuel economy than the same engine in the Cobalt SS 2.4L. The same will be true of the GXP with the 2.0L turbo as compared to the 2.0L supercharged in the Cobalt SS Supercharged coupe. It will be heavier and will certainly have worse gas mileage. That is a fact. The Z06 Corvette is lighter than the C6 Coupe! Which do you think gets better gas milieage????

There is no way in hell that the Solstice GXP with its 2.0L VVT 260 HP Turbocharged engine will weigh less or get better fuel economy than a Cobalt SS S/C.



Oh, by the way, here is proof of the greater weight:

Solstice GXP : 2947.6 lbs / 1337 kilos
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/frame...hp&carnum=2633

Cobalt SS Supercharged: 2925 lbs / 1327 kilos
http://www.gmcanada.com/english/vehi...specifications

So, I guess if weight affects gas mileage more than aerodynamics (especially in the city) as you so eloquently puy it, the GXP should have worse mileage, right???? Thought so....

You should read this about aerodynamics to educate yourself by the way: http://www.solsticeforum.com/forum/a...hp/t-2253.html

Th GXP will be worse due to larger tires and wheels.


The solstice GXP has an engine producing 260 HP! Despite it being a 2.0L and having VVT, it will get less fuel efficiency due the costs of producing 55 more horsepwoer, having a slightly greater weight, and less aerodynamic shape (all convertables do compared to a coupe). FACT, not assumption.

I will admit that if you were able to compare the 2.0L supercharged and 2.0L turbo in the Cobalt SS, it is possible that the 2.0L turbo may get comparable mileage. Not in a convertable though!

Have a nice day!

 

Any proof they are the same? Or are you ASSuming things again? Also RWD and gearing effect gas mileage.

The solstice's 2.4 produces more power that is probably another reason why besides the RWD and gearing it gets less gas mileage...right?. The Zo6 has a MUCH bigger motor ...*see below though.

THEY WEIGH THE SAME AMOUNT! What are you babbling about? There are also a lot of sites that weighed the SS/SC at 2991lbs. Either way the direct injection AND vvt that the supercharged motor lacks will vastly increase the gas mileage in the new motor. Do you know how much direct injection helps?

*Since you brought up the vettes... The Z06 makes 100 more horsepower and only gets 2miles less per gallon then the c6 coupe and 1 less mpg then the convertable. That should be impossible by your logic. YOU have still not proved that the SS/SC is more aerodynamic. You are going to tell me a Elise is less aerodynamic then a GTO??? Also all the numbers that guy used were not correct nor were his calculations. A lot more goes into calculating cD then he makes it out to be.

 

I'm not wasting any more time arguing with you. You are irrational and quite frankly an idiot if you don't think the Cobalt coupe is more aerodynamic than the solstice convertable.

Yes gearing has an effect too on fuel economy, but the solstice will still have worse fuel economy.

The elise is a coupe with a removable hardtop, so it is not a soft-top convertable. But yes, an elise is probably more aerodynamic than a GTO, but you have to remember it is half the freaking size of a GTO.

As far as the vette, my point is making power is contrary to good fuel economy.

I will prove you wrong when GM releases the mileage figures for the Solstice GXP. I will have worse gas mileage than the SS S/C.

Don't even reply to this please! I am going to get sick if I read a post of yours again.

 

True, but my main reason in believing this is that changing an engine is expensive. GM is in serious financial sh%t now, and the last thing they need to do is mess with a car that is already selling well. Also, it is fairly rare for GM to change a production engine in a car. The Cavalier changed form the Quad 4 after the first year to the 2.4L, then to the ECOTEC 2.2 near its end. But otherwise, the 3.8L in one form or another powered most of the other vehicles. The corvette did not have a new engine in the pervious generation with the exception of the LS6 in the Z06 (despite internal changes between 2001/2002). So I just don't see it happening.

As the old addage goes, if it ain't broken, don't fix it.


But yes, I agree anything is possible for the powertrain in the future. I simply do not agree that the LSJ will be replaced with the solstice's 2.0L turbo, as all of my automotive sources claim the Cobalt line is only recieving a cosmetic makeover in 2008, much like the Cavalier got in 2000.

So, we'll have to see what happens in 2008. But I agree, I suppose it is possible, I just personally feel that this won't happen.

Obviously I also agree that if this engine does make its way into the Cobalt, it will be making less than 260HP. I just think that Gm is not interested in making that powerful of a FWD car. 205HP is already a lot of power for a front drive. I can't imagine what 241 HP would be like in that car with the stage 2 kit, let alone a 260 HP engine.


Also look how much power has risen in cars in the last 5 years. How many 400 HP or 500 HP vehicles are on the market now? Last time this happened in the late 60's early 70's we had a huge oil crisis that ended all performance vehicles. It is interesting to note that this past year oil prisies rose significantly to a new all time high, and prices have remained quite high all over North America for fuel. It is possible (albeit, remotely) that the same thing may happen and by 2008 performance oriented cars ranging from the the SS S/C to Z06 may be ancient history. I realize this is unlikely, but 2008 is a long time away and anything can happen.

You could be right, but I just don't see the that engine replacing it. The LSJ isn't that old, and I would expect that the Turbo would remain exclusive to the Solstice and Sky. Then again, the Cadillac CTS-V and Pontiac GTO use the Corvettes LS2, with virtually the exact same power output, so it would certainly be something GM would do.

 

Agreed. Solstice is definately a true sports car. I think it is fantastic, and that the engine's output even with a turbo is impressive for GM. I also think it is a great looking car (except in the yellow, that is ugly on this car). Too bad I can't afford one! Two seat, RWD, roadster. That is the classic definition of a sports car. The Cobalt SS on the other hand may have a tough time being accpeted by some as a sports car.

If GM smartens up and builds way more of these, they could really start making some money, instead of loosing it. The first year run of the solstice sold out very quickly. They recieved more orders than the entire 2006 production run.

As for the HHR, if you can sell it, build it. GM is out to make money from the masses. They aren't Ferrari producing hardcore, high end sports cars for the financial elite of the world.

And with their current financial troubles, they need to sell anything, even if half the population loathes it and the other half loves it.

 

I will find out saturday or sunday.

 

Ok,

Solstice GTP, GXP whatever - 260HP which is most likely BHP

Cobalt SS/SC - 205HP under-rated so more like 240BHP

With that being said both cars will be very close in performance.

Who cares about fuel economy my LS1 Camaro at a steady 70mph will see 29mpg

The Solstice G?? isn't going to be a street legal missle.

 

GXP, confirmed GXP. Going based off the 0-60 times, weight, and horsepower it should see mid 13s alllll day. We get it Cody, you don't care about fuel economy, but most people do.

 

Ya, I think somewhere in the 13 second range for quarter is possible. At just under 3000 lbs it is pretty light, and the powerband should be pretty good on the car.

I think I read that GM says it does about 5.5 sec 0-60 which sounds about right (maybe a little conservative). It should be able to pull high 13's at least in stock form.

 

Just was thinking about this again. If they are going to introduce the Turbo 2.0L in the car I think it would be for the 2007 model year.

My thinking is this:

Someone said (if I am not mistaken) that 2006 is the last model year of the Ion Redline. Now, supposedly the HHR is going to get our 2.0L Supercharged engine for 2007 in a performance version to rival the GT cruiser (which has the 2.4L Turbo from the Neon SRT-4).

So, with the HHR and Cobalt SS/SC possibly being the only two cars left using the 2.0L Supercharged, wouldn't it make sense to switch both to the 2.0L Turbo come the 2007 model year? Just a though, anyone else is welcome to take a swing at my theory.

I still think that the 2.0L Supercharged will be used in the SS/SC and HHR, and the Turbo will be exclusive to the Solstice and Sky. It would still be viable to make the 2.0L Sup. if it is being used in two vehicles. But, who knows....

I'm just glad I am getting the Supercharger, because I like them better than Turbo's.

 

Nobody knows what GM is doing or will do, even them.

 

actually the pt crusier had the turbo before the neon did , chrysler did it because of all the complaints about lack power (from what ive heard)

i do know the pt had the turbo first