To clear up any roomers about the SS and not being produced yet....

[drvngstorm05]

Originally Posted by noshun

You can tell that it is an SS S/C by the 18" rims. These actually make the car although it has a small weight advantage slower than the Ion Redline! Oh Dear. Why go bling and lose acceleration! It probably drops like 8-10 hp at the wheels if not more!!! Oh Dear, Oh dear. I'd fit some 17's if i got one! (probably not) Can't have a Saturn beating me!

the 18's were for handling from what i can tell... that damn cobalt will slalom(can't spell) faster or as fast as a c6 z51

[noshun]

Originally Posted by drvngstorm05

the 18's were for handling from what i can tell... that damn cobalt will slalom(can't spell) faster or as fast as a c6 z51

on a platform such as the Delta. and 18" wheel would do nothing to improve handling, I would say that for a car of it's size and weight it would be a close race between 16 and 17s. The Ion redline mat not be as fast in the slalom (all they I have no idea) but this would be dues to the extra weight it carries! I am 100% convinced that the 18's are just for show! The car was comprimised from teh start as it was destroked and comp ration reduced to 9.5:1 to allow the car to run 87 octane. if this car was that perfromance orientated the comp ratio would be higher and it would be premium only!

[filter27e]

Originally Posted by noshun

on a platform such as the Delta. and 18" wheel would do nothing to improve handling, I would say that for a car of it's size and weight it would be a close race between 16 and 17s. The Ion redline mat not be as fast in the slalom (all they I have no idea) but this would be dues to the extra weight it carries! I am 100% convinced that the 18's are just for show! The car was comprimised from teh start as it was destroked and comp ration reduced to 9.5:1 to allow the car to run 87 octane. if this car was that perfromance orientated the comp ratio would be higher and it would be premium only!

A car of that size and weight? I'd say those cars weigh enough to make a difference.... all you're doing is decreasing sidewall height to reduce flex... that's the whole point. And I'm sorry but your bit about the compression just left me scratching my head. I don't even know where to start. OK NUMBER ONE, higher compression is good for NA cars, not for forced induction cars! If you destroked the engine and used the same pistons, it would change the compression a lot more than 0.5. To make it premium only you don't need to change the compression, you just have to change the timing. They could program it to anything they want but generally it doesn't compete with Porsches, this car is for college kids. And compromised from the start? Hmm... check on GM's Performance website they have the engine specs. Goes something like, forged crankshaft, rods, pistons, and high performance head.

There's been a few articles on this car in various magazines, the engine is built for high reving and is actually held back by the ECU if anything... put it on a standalone system and you may have a 240HP 8000RPM high octane monster.

[noshun]

Originally Posted by filter27e

A car of that size and weight? I'd say those cars weigh enough to make a difference.... all you're doing is decreasing sidewall height to reduce flex... that's the whole point. And I'm sorry but your bit about the compression just left me scratching my head. I don't even know where to start. OK NUMBER ONE, higher compression is good for NA cars, not for forced induction cars! If you destroked the engine and used the same pistons, it would change the compression a lot more than 0.5. To make it premium only you don't need to change the compression, you just have to change the timing. They could program it to anything they want but generally it doesn't compete with Porsches, this car is for college kids. And compromised from the start? Hmm... check on GM's Performance website they have the engine specs. Goes something like, forged crankshaft, rods, pistons, and high performance head.

There's been a few articles on this car in various magazines, the engine is built for high reving and is actually held back by the ECU if anything... put it on a standalone system and you may have a 240HP 8000RPM high octane monster.

a 2.2 ecotec has 10:1 compression ratio! with 12psi boost and a roots blower with 87 octane it would suffer from detonation. it was lowered so it could take 87. the forged bits are because they are needed also incase the car gets thrashed. If it was premium only then it could run the 10:1 comp ratio but it doesn't! The bigger wheel CAN IN NO WAY POSSIBLY INCREASE THE HANDLING OR PERFORMANCE look at f1 cars. they are huge but have tint wheels with huge sidewalls! so that whole thing on compression makes sense if you lower the comp ratio you lose power, you only do it in FI applications to prevent problems! Not to mention that the way the roots type blower makes boost it makes lots of boost at the engines tourqe peak when the engine if na would be sucking in the most air! this puts HUGE stress on all components and is also part of the reason for the lowered comp ratio whereas centrifugal blowers make the boost higher in the rev range when the motor would be sucking in less air. Lowered reciprocating mass will allow a motor to revs higher but the hp peak would be nowhere near 8k as the roots blower wouldn't be doing much at the point. I don't base what i know on magazine articles I base it on fact. The unsprung weight has been drastically increased with bigger and chromed wheels! it's all for show! if it wasn't it would have the turbo from the saab and run 220hp out of the box!

[89IROC&RS]

well, i agree that the 18in wheels are more likely than not for show more than handling, but when you compair the tires to those on F1 cars, you slipped a bit. There is a drastic difference between those tires and the ones on a street car, you might as well be compairing the engines of the two cars. On a street car with current tire technology a smaller sidewall does offer improoved handling and they may have used the 18in wheel to make up the difference and retain the same overall tire hight to avoid having to reprogram the speedometer for different tire speeds. As far as the car being handicapped, your right, but so are all production cars. Thats why its so easy to mod them. The Berger camaros for instance, were tuned from the dealership without modifying the internals and keeping the factory warrante, and they made 375 hp vs the rated 320hp. Production cars are made up of comprimises to account for mass production variations and to meet CAFE standards. That means just like every other car out there, to bring the cobalt to its highest potential, your gonna have to roll up your sleeves and get your hands dirty. That dosnt detract from how impressive it is for chevys first performance sport compact offering.

[noshun]

Originally Posted by 89IROC&RS

well, i agree that the 18in wheels are more likely than not for show more than handling, but when you compair the tires to those on F1 cars, you slipped a bit. There is a drastic difference between those tires and the ones on a street car, you might as well be compairing the engines of the two cars. On a street car with current tire technology a smaller sidewall does offer improoved handling and they may have used the 18in wheel to make up the difference and retain the same overall tire hight to avoid having to reprogram the speedometer for different tire speeds. As far as the car being handicapped, your right, but so are all production cars. Thats why its so easy to mod them. The Berger camaros for instance, were tuned from the dealership without modifying the internals and keeping the factory warrante, and they made 375 hp vs the rated 320hp. Production cars are made up of comprimises to account for mass production variations and to meet CAFE standards. That means just like every other car out there, to bring the cobalt to its highest potential, your gonna have to roll up your sleeves and get your hands dirty. That dosnt detract from how impressive it is for chevys first performance sport compact offering.

the tires were merely a reference point. Cavaliers are known to perform best in all areas on 16' rims and the cobalt should be much if any different! And also if the Cobalt were turbo'd as opposed to s/c'd it would be a lot easier to get it to produce power. It would just require a boost conrtoller and then you have adjustable power. there' not much in the way of gains to be had swapping out the s/c's pulley on this aplication, it wont make much more boost, possible 15 over the stock 12.

[89IROC&RS]

i dont see the comparison between the cav suspension and the cobalt one, the cobalt suspension is completely redesigned, and its on a different chassis. Why you would assume the same trends would apply has me confused.

As far as the turbo vs supercharger, i agree with you, they should have turbo'd it especially if they are targeting the import crowd. however in one of my other posts i think i addressed possible reasons for sticking with the supercharger.

[noshun]

Originally Posted by 89IROC&RS

i dont see the comparison between the cav suspension and the cobalt one, the cobalt suspension is completely redesigned, and its on a different chassis. Why you would assume the same trends would apply has me confused.

As far as the turbo vs supercharger, i agree with you, they should have turbo'd it especially if they are targeting the import crowd. however in one of my other posts i think i addressed possible reasons for sticking with the supercharger.

the wheels would be more for size of the vehicle than suspesion set up. I do know that the heavier Ion Redline is faster and the only difference is the 1" between wheel sizes

[89IROC&RS]

it is true that wheel size effects final drive ratio, the taller tires would in effect be the same as having a higher rear end ratio (lower numerically) which would cause slightly lower acceleration (dont know the difference between the cobalt and ion, im assuming its not alot) but would allow slightly lower cruising rpms, and better handling. Looking at the Cobalt as a whole, and noting how easy it is to mod up the EcoTec, i think GM was focused primaraly on sorting out the suspension of the car, and improoving handling, and was leaving the issue of power to the owners. GM is trying to market the EcoTec as the new small block chevy, it would make sense then that they would be encouraging owners to use the aftermarket to mod them the way weve been modding the small block all these years. again, simple conjecture, nothing to back it up, so take it as you will. just seems to make sense to me.