That is f@#king great! ^^^

 

why'd you bring me up? i'm not the one that started this thread.

 

Looks like your on a roll to see how fast you can get banned

First of all, your original post was retarded. Not only do I not believe that the guy in the SS S/C was a "ricer", but I also don't believe that you beat him. If he got the jump in 1st and 2nd and pulled ahead, then you would have been all done. You could have hit all the VTEC you wanted, and you still would have got owned. So cut the BS.

Second of all Calling the Cobalt a "Cavalier" is ignorant and proves you to be a complete *******. Its not a Cavalier, its a completely different car. If the Cobalt was a Cavalier, then the RSX would be a Del Sol

Third of all - the HP/L agruement is the gheyest thing ever. Only ricers use this comparision as if it were actually ligitimate, and you appear to be one. Nobody cares how much HP/L your Hon-duh makes, because in the end you still lose when you get smoked by an SRT-4 or Cobalt SS S/C.

Why don't you come back on here and agrue when your Acura actually makes more torque than my bicycle. Stupid ricer.

 

The_Ghost writes :i meant naturally aspirated and if you can find a an american car that has the same or more hp per liter stock, n/a, you get a cookie!

Two words for you, Quad 4

Engine Description (LGO) Quad4 2.3L L4 H.O
Horsepower (HP@RPM) 190@6200
Torque (ft-lbs@RPM) 170@5200
Block Cast Iron
Heads Aluminum
Valves 16
Displacement 2.3L (2246cc, 138ci)
Cylinders 4, inline
Bore 92mm (3.62")
Stroke 85mm (3.35")
Compression Ratio 10.0:1
Fuel Management PFI (Port Fuel Injection)
VIN code A
Usage Various
Type DOHC 16v Quad4

Maybe not the most reliable motor in the world but can put some serious horsepower down with basic bolt on's without touching the motor and it's not powered by vtec

Most common with Beretta GTU's, Z26's & Some Oldsmobiles, Grand Prixs (Early 90's) Even the Cavailer (3rd gen) got the Quad 4. Mostly on W Bodys.

How about the SVT Contour? 200HP :/

I don't get your thinking... many N/A american cars that put out good #'s on such small displacement.

 

SVT Contour is a 2.5L V6..not 4 banger.

 

Not bad BUT:

GTU had the 2.8L V6 only

GTZ had the Qaud 4 ((you could also get a 3.1L auto)
Hardly in any W-bodies--most had the V6.

First gen Ford Taurs SHO was good---although it was a Yamaha engine! 220hp, 3L V6.

 

Aren't you supposed to say " nana nana boo boo " after that ?

 

Almost every import/domestic argument comes down to this... specific output, and the imports just pretend like this is their wild card. Once you say... "I have better hp/L", they act like they OWNED you and the argument is over.

Sorry, buddy. It's unfortunate that your car is slower than everything else in it's price class and even a few BELOW your price class... but no one FORCED you to buy an N/A 2L. The K20 IS a great engine, but it's just a power turd compared to the other cars near it in price. It's just too dang expensive to develop and build engines that make so much hp/L N/A. Is it cool? Yeah, but despite the engine being efficient, its not FINANCIALLY effecient.

You may have better hp/L, but the domestics (SRT, SS, Mustang GT) and even cars like the new Eclipse have much better HP/$.

You can bring up hp/L all that you want, but at the track and on the street, it's "run what ya brung" and compared to the other "performance oriented" cars near you in price, you're bringing a knife to a gun fight.

 

I had a 3rd gen SHO and it was a fast ass car, 3.4L 32 valve v8, lots of valve train problems, big class action law suit against ford/yamaha for the cam gear walking. www.v8sho.com has lots of info if you care. I had a Beretta GT with the multi port 3.1 with a chip, real duals and a cai and a centerforce dual friction clutch, I LOVED that car. Pin came out of one of the gears and caught the speedo pickup and made three separate baseball sized holes in the tranny so I lost that baby too

The SHO was one of the ballsiest cars I've ever drove, except the ATX sucked Handled like a **** on snow tires tho lol

Now I love my base cobalt! First 4 banger I've ever owned and I love it.

I still have a 90 GMC Sierra 1500, regular cab short stepside bed, 4/6 belltech drop, 350 stroked to 355, aluminum edelbrok heads, holley stealth tunnel ram mpfi, hedmen headers, 3" duals with racing mufflers, all MSD electronics chip, coil pack, ignition, billet distributer. TCI saturday night special converter with a streetfighter 700r4 tranny, eliminated the a/c, billet electric water pump and electric power steering pump. Electric fuel pump in the bed with the fuel cell, eliminated the gas tank. Fastest best handling full size EVER!

 

The Tarus SHO with the V8 was a very interesting car and was sort of quick (no match for a Grand Prix GTP 3800 S/C) BUT was slower then previous generations SHO with the 3.0L V6.

Your 90 GMC sounds nice! No 1/4 mile times??

 

I got to remember that one


Well, I finally got done reading the entire thread and all I have to say is that we here at CobaltSS.net are a tightly knit family. Mess with one and you mess with all of us. Any everyone I know here is realistic. If someone noob comes on here and starts posting b.s., you're gonna know about. Cobalt owners know what cars they can beat, which ones they can hang with, and which ones that should kick their *but*

 

I think this post was cool for the most part. I also think that an RST type s is a good car and as it seems might have more topend power. This is helped by the higher end revs and VTEC. Guys hear is some basics about HP / tork and how a car preformance is realted. More HP and you can go faster. you will need around 600 HP to reach 200HP in most cars given air drag and HP to weight ratios. The more turch you have then the faster you can get up to speed. This also helps you go up hills and and such. So in theroy if a car has a better HP to weight ratio then a nother car then it will go faster. If a car has same HP but one has more tork then it will get up to speed faster to a point were it changes to all HP and tork will not help much unless going up hill. So the gost could be right in that the top end (past 130) the RSX-s is faster but in the 1/4 the cobalt ss/sc will eat an RSX-s. I think road and track publisd the fact that the RSX- was catching up to the Cobalt at the tail end.

Car and driver reviews specs:
RSX-s
Zero to 60 mph: 6.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.6 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.9 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.9 sec @ 95 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 136 mph

Cobalt SS/SCZero to 60 mph: 5.9 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 14.4 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 29.8 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 14.4 sec @ 100 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 145 mph


The disproving point is that the cobalt ss /sc has a higher drag limit speed so it will go faster. Also the cars are vary close in 1/4 times so it could realy be up to the drivers.

More to the point that this guy was throughing stones at us for some kid that did a fly by. So we throu stones back at him. I think there is some lagitamcy in his story but it was not realy substanicated and he called the cobalt a cav. Not a good thang on this site. But he also came up with the batman and robin saying of employ discount statment. I gave it some cuckles and read on. This is a nother one of thoes fun formas were we can talk poo.

I would like to see if a cobalt with intake and headders would do to the RSX-s and what about the upcomming stage 2 from GM.

We have not hear anymore from GOST so was with that any way.

Any way gust babbling and getting tiered of this post.

 

Given that the whole "tq is good for hills" thing and the "if cars have equal hp, the one w/ more tq will win" thing are not inherently true and are overgeneralizations, I think I'll post this again.

In addition to this. Top End has nothing inherently to do with how high you rev or anything like that. It has everything to do with hp, weight, and gearing... just like every other form of racing... aero has a greater effect than normal, of course though.

 

"torque" not tork. and i-vtec kicks in at 5800rpms stock not 6500rpms. if you have hondata #4 it kicks in at 5200rpms.

 

Personally I like the RSX-S better. The cobalt SS/SC seems kinda like a school kids car, with the goofy steering wheel and the colored inserts. The RSX-S has a much more grown up appearance. As far as performance, they are so close it could go either way with mods.

 

wow, guys, calm down. this is a pretty heated discussion for a stupiud race. Ok, the guy driving the cobalt ss that the acura beat was probly a douche bag that couldn't drive. And yes, i beleive you and your witness that you cleaned his clock in the race. But really, calling it a cavi was not the smartest move. Im not bashing you or anything, but you should know better than to come on a Cobalt ss forum and bash it and call it a cavi and say the owners are retarted and whatnot. ANd judging by it being your 1st post, it does kinda seem your just looking for trouble. However, just appologise for your comments and it will all be cool. Many guys here including me respect other brands of car, were not all focused 100% on chevy beeing the best and baddest out there. But show some respect man, like they are some wicked little cars. anwyays thats what i think, no more fighting lol

 

i agree. pinto fo lyfe.

 

Damn guys, I can't believe you all wasted so many key strokes on this troll. Rest assured, if he "beat" an SS/SC, the SS had a plug wire missing. If he races any more SS's, his story will change IF he even owns an RSX, which I highly doubt.

While I do own an Type S (bought it before the dawn of SS), I didn't buy it because it was the fastest car around. It is a fun car to drive and does possesses pretty good reliability.

Just give this kid his dues....he's an idiot.

 

Well,


I had a hard time reading through this post to be honest. It reads like a Trainwreck... However, I think I have a solution to solve all problems. Why dont you all be your own judge? Thats what I just did. I went out and test drove the Rsx Type S and the CObalt SS 2.0 within hours of each other.

I can tell you, from my experience, that the rsx type s is an amazing car, hands down. Its responsive and tight, but it is not faster than the SS Cobalt thats for sure. No way, jose. Heres what to do. Go for a test drive in the SS 2.0, and pull a few green lights, get on and off the freeway and dont be shy.

Then tell the salesperson thanks (this wont be hard, and you wont be faking) your checking out some other options and will be in touch.

Head over to Honda (which I think produce some great vehicles, and lawn mowers) and get out in an RSX. Pull the RSX for some greens. You'll think it was a manumatic.. The difference in torque is unreal. If you can find a way to get over that, I couldn't, you will notice an amazing car ready to rumble.

Now you rsx fans go do the same and see. Be your own boss and drive what you wanna drive.

As mentioned in my first post, it was no contest. When I get mine, I will be track bound after I break in. I will gladly run a stock rsx type s. BYOFC (bring your own fart can).



Both cars are amazing works of art, and have become the responses to all our feedback to manufactures over the years. We have to thank ALL of us cruisers out there for that. We all are forcing manufacturers to design cars like this together. JUst smoke a peace pipe and lets be friends. If we were hanging at a cruise night we would be jammin' hehe. We would also be able to settle this right here, right now j/k


EDIT: Even with those mods, your gains at the the wheels would not be enough to pull a SS 2.0. The RSX Type-S was quick, but no where close the SS 2.0 Not unless a shift was missed etc. This is being proven quite a bit. What I think is going on here, aside from a load of malarky, is we have our first case of a mis judged SS. If you pulled an SS like you said, it was the auto. Go drive them both, you'll feel it for yourself.

 

"The Ghost" check your PM please.