Pict of the SS/TC
Member
Joined: 03-27-07
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: Maryland
not really, it will end up being what a little more then a 20 hp difference? frankly if they built a turbo motor with only 260 they wasted thier time. turbos are free hp and are way more reliable then sc's so you can pound out more hp safely on the same motor as a sc. in any case, we are arguing about something that has not and may not take place
Senior Member
Joined: 12-01-06
Posts: 803
Likes: 0
From: Leavittsburg, Ohio
I'm staying neutral in this, just wanted to list some engine facts, people can draw their own conclusions from them.
GM rated the LSJ at 205HP, 200lb/ft. We all know that those ratings are low.
GM rates the LNF at 260HP, 260lb/ft. I don't know if those are low ratings or not.
That works out to 27% more HP, 30% more torque at GMs' ratings.
When you compare the dyno charts for the LNF and stage 2 LSJ, the turbo motor has much more torque from beginning to end, as well as more HP up top. GM uses a twin-scroll turbo that gives more boost down low than the Eaton SC does.
The LNF also uses VVT that probably gives it some of that low-mid torque gain over the LSJ.
Adam told me that he's ridden in a Solstice GXP and the torque pushes you back in the seat, hard. And with numbers like that it should.
The LNF will also get better gas mileage because of the direct injection, which is also why it meets the new emissions requirements when the LSJ couldn't.
Guys with Stage2+ LSJs may have as much or more power than the LNF.
If they make the car it will be a helluva machine!
GM rated the LSJ at 205HP, 200lb/ft. We all know that those ratings are low.
GM rates the LNF at 260HP, 260lb/ft. I don't know if those are low ratings or not.
That works out to 27% more HP, 30% more torque at GMs' ratings.
When you compare the dyno charts for the LNF and stage 2 LSJ, the turbo motor has much more torque from beginning to end, as well as more HP up top. GM uses a twin-scroll turbo that gives more boost down low than the Eaton SC does.
The LNF also uses VVT that probably gives it some of that low-mid torque gain over the LSJ.
Adam told me that he's ridden in a Solstice GXP and the torque pushes you back in the seat, hard. And with numbers like that it should.
The LNF will also get better gas mileage because of the direct injection, which is also why it meets the new emissions requirements when the LSJ couldn't.
Guys with Stage2+ LSJs may have as much or more power than the LNF.
If they make the car it will be a helluva machine!
Senior Member
Joined: 10-25-05
Posts: 4,359
Likes: 3
From: Saginaw/Fort Worth, Texas
I'm staying neutral in this, just wanted to list some engine facts, people can draw their own conclusions from them.
GM rated the LSJ at 205HP, 200lb/ft. We all know that those ratings are low.
GM rates the LNF at 260HP, 260lb/ft. I don't know if those are low ratings or not.
That works out to 27% more HP, 30% more torque at GMs' ratings.
When you compare the dyno charts for the LNF and stage 2 LSJ, the turbo motor has much more torque from beginning to end, as well as more HP up top. GM uses a twin-scroll turbo that gives more boost down low than the Eaton SC does.
The LNF also uses VVT that probably gives it some of that low-mid torque gain over the LSJ.
Adam told me that he's ridden in a Solstice GXP and the torque pushes you back in the seat, hard. And with numbers like that it should.
The LNF will also get better gas mileage because of the direct injection, which is also why it meets the new emissions requirements when the LSJ couldn't.
Guys with Stage2+ LSJs may have as much or more power than the LNF.
If they make the car it will be a helluva machine!
GM rated the LSJ at 205HP, 200lb/ft. We all know that those ratings are low.
GM rates the LNF at 260HP, 260lb/ft. I don't know if those are low ratings or not.
That works out to 27% more HP, 30% more torque at GMs' ratings.
When you compare the dyno charts for the LNF and stage 2 LSJ, the turbo motor has much more torque from beginning to end, as well as more HP up top. GM uses a twin-scroll turbo that gives more boost down low than the Eaton SC does.
The LNF also uses VVT that probably gives it some of that low-mid torque gain over the LSJ.
Adam told me that he's ridden in a Solstice GXP and the torque pushes you back in the seat, hard. And with numbers like that it should.
The LNF will also get better gas mileage because of the direct injection, which is also why it meets the new emissions requirements when the LSJ couldn't.
Guys with Stage2+ LSJs may have as much or more power than the LNF.
If they make the car it will be a helluva machine!
+ rep for the input. I choose to stay in the middle aswell. If it does it does if it doesn't it doesn't. I am not going to loose sleep over it or waste time arguing on the internet on who has the best inside info or predictions.
Senior Member
Joined: 07-10-05
Posts: 3,482
Likes: 0
From: Douglasville, Georgia
I will be at Nopi Nats in a few weeks. There is a GM Tour booth there with some high end guys. I will ask them about the rumors. Last year i spoke with a guy in the Marketing Dept. He said they would do away with the SS/SC and more than likely go Turbo.
Senior Member
Joined: 12-01-06
Posts: 803
Likes: 0
From: Leavittsburg, Ohio
+ rep back at ya
Senior Member
Joined: 05-22-07
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
From: Winder, GA
.....not ripping , just making a comment .there is nothing visually different except the rims though, you would think that after 5 or 6 years there would be a slight change in the way they look, i dont think gm would just slap a different motor and different wheels on and be like ss/t.. but there is a badging underneath the ss that would probably tell you what type of f/i it is if only someone could zoom in and clarify like on csi haha
i am NOT wrong lol, they're mesh, new rims, new grills, PROBABLY new or different interior...seems like a change to me
Last edited by cobalt9123; Sep 6, 2007 at 10:10 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Senior Member
Joined: 06-10-07
Posts: 707
Likes: 0
From: Reynoldsburg, OH
the 08 brochures came in at our dealership not to long ago and there was nothing about a ss/tc cobalt, but in the hhr brochure it mentioned the 2.0 turbo hhr ss coming out in late fall. so no cobalt turbo in 08....09 maybe?
Senior Member
Joined: 06-25-07
Posts: 6,003
Likes: 0
From: Kissimmee, Fl
funny how stupid some people are, i was reading the threads posted on page one i think, the one that shows the pics of the "turbo ss" did you guys actually read what they were saying? superchargers more reliable then turbos? make more power with superchargers? all kinds of back asswards totally incoorect info. i wanted to register just to correct them, but i refrained from it
Also why does everything turn into an argument people? Lets just have a normal discussion/debate w/o any of this bickering some of us have been doing.
Wow, nice rims. What brand?
Last edited by G85 SS; Sep 6, 2007 at 11:57 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Senior Member
Joined: 06-10-07
Posts: 707
Likes: 0
From: Reynoldsburg, OH
konig...im the only cobalt i have seen with them.
Senior Member
Joined: 07-03-05
Posts: 4,272
Likes: 0
From: South Bend , Indiana
Come this spring , I guess there will be alot of poeple saying ....he's not a loon afterall , lol
.....maybe sooner than that .
Senior Member
Joined: 06-25-07
Posts: 6,003
Likes: 0
From: Kissimmee, Fl
Banned
Joined: 09-17-06
Posts: 6,266
Likes: 1
From: between heaven and hell
Member
Joined: 05-31-07
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
From: Lakeland
Well, its a motor thats currently in production... doesnt seem to take up too much more space. Whether or not chevy does use this motor... doesnt seem like it would cost too much money. Honestly curious why they didnt use it to begin with.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
camaromanss1992
Parts
3
Oct 1, 2015 10:51 PM
