08-10 SS Turbocharged General Discussion Discuss the 2008 - 2009 Chevy Cobalt SS Turbocharged. On sale since the second quarter of 2008.

Why can't people believe an ss/tc runs 13.5 stock?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 11:50 AM
  #26  
bootymac's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: 10-11-08
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
From: San Jose, California
Originally Posted by euthanasia
No, most dyno 230whp or more.
they have 230 crank dude.......
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 11:56 AM
  #27  
euthanasia's Avatar
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 04-06-06
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
From: Oxnard, CA
Originally Posted by bootymac
they have 230 crank dude.......
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:07 PM
  #28  
bootymac's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: 10-11-08
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
From: San Jose, California
Originally Posted by euthanasia


2003-2005 Dodge Neon SRT-4


Created by Dodge's PVO team, the SRT-4 powered by a 2.4L turbo engine. The engine, underrated at 215 hp in 2003, is now rated at 230 hp and comes standard with an LSD for 2004. Numerous Mopar upgrades are also available.

Base price : $18,970

Engine : 4 cylinder, turbocharged, DOHC, front engine FWD
Displacement : 2,429 cc
Valve : 16 valves, 4 valves per cylinder
Transmission : 5-spd manual
Fuel economy : city - 22 mpg
highway - 30 mpg

Suspension : F - Independent MacPherson strut
R - Independent multilink
Brakes : F - Vented discs
R - Solid discs

Horsepower : 230 crank hp @ 5300 rpm
Torque : 250 crank lb-ft @ 2200 rpm
Redline : 6750 rpm

Top speed : 153 mph
0-60 mph : 5.6 sec.
0-ź mile : 14.2 sec @ 102.0 mph
60-0 braking distance : 120 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.85 g

Curb Weight : 2970 lbs
Overall length : 175.7 in.
Wheelbase : 105.0 in.
Overall Width : 67.4 in.
Height : 56.5 in.



........maybe your confusing WTQ with WHP??? idk.



look it up for yourself


http://www.modernracer.com/dodgeneonsrt4.html
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:11 PM
  #29  
USMCFieldMP's Avatar
Rattlesnake Race Shop
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 06-08-06
Posts: 15,725
Likes: 410
From: Fort Worth, TX
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:12 PM
  #30  
Terminator2's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-25-08
Posts: 12,450
Likes: 6
From: Florida
Originally Posted by euthanasia
No, most dyno 230whp or more.
Some do, but not all those people are quoting their corrected numbers. My TC made 253 whp stock but most make 240-245 so what.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:13 PM
  #31  
1bdstlLSJ's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 08-14-08
Posts: 951
Likes: 0
From: st.louis
Actually the 04-05 SRT-4's were making 240whp stock if memory serves me correct...Also nobody believes the mids 13's cause only 2 guys have pulled it off, just like a few SRT-4 guys ran mid 13's as well. Most ss/tc owners run mid 14's all day long and thats what people see out there. In all honesty i think some of these TC's are freaks, cause i put an ass whippin on everyone of them i run into, i would like to race one that actually seems quick. I love the car but i just dont think its anything without a bigger turbo on there.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:17 PM
  #32  
euthanasia's Avatar
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 04-06-06
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
From: Oxnard, CA
Originally Posted by bootymac


2003-2005 Dodge Neon SRT-4


Created by Dodge's PVO team, the SRT-4 powered by a 2.4L turbo engine. The engine, underrated at 215 hp in 2003, is now rated at 230 hp and comes standard with an LSD for 2004. Numerous Mopar upgrades are also available.

Base price : $18,970

Engine : 4 cylinder, turbocharged, DOHC, front engine FWD
Displacement : 2,429 cc
Valve : 16 valves, 4 valves per cylinder
Transmission : 5-spd manual
Fuel economy : city - 22 mpg
highway - 30 mpg

Suspension : F - Independent MacPherson strut
R - Independent multilink
Brakes : F - Vented discs
R - Solid discs

Horsepower : 230 crank hp @ 5300 rpm
Torque : 250 crank lb-ft @ 2200 rpm
Redline : 6750 rpm

Top speed : 153 mph
0-60 mph : 5.6 sec.
0-ź mile : 14.2 sec @ 102.0 mph
60-0 braking distance : 120 ft
200 ft skidpad : 0.85 g

Curb Weight : 2970 lbs
Overall length : 175.7 in.
Wheelbase : 105.0 in.
Overall Width : 67.4 in.
Height : 56.5 in.



........maybe your confusing WTQ with WHP??? idk.



look it up for yourself


http://www.modernracer.com/dodgeneonsrt4.html
DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH!!!!

http://forums.beyond.ca/showthread/t-73841.html

Now stop being dumb.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:20 PM
  #33  
revhigh18's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 08-15-08
Posts: 2,878
Likes: 0
From: Lee's Summit MO
its just a fast car with light moding you can be in the 12's that is unheard of for 4 cylinders
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:21 PM
  #34  
04redline0124's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-10-07
Posts: 3,166
Likes: 0
From: West Palm Beach
Its a thread like this that people make fun of you guys. And I cant believe everyone in here thinks they are fast. Fast today is 10's. No one is fast in here.

And to the comment about the evo. The New ones are fail, until a two step is put on, and it is chipped. Then bye-bye cobalt.

Trap speed is for ricers to compare.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:21 PM
  #35  
USMCFieldMP's Avatar
Rattlesnake Race Shop
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 06-08-06
Posts: 15,725
Likes: 410
From: Fort Worth, TX
Originally Posted by revhigh18
its just a fast car with light moding you can be in the 12's that is unheard of for 4 cylinders
No... no its not unheard of for 4cyl. There have been 4cyl cars doing it for almost 20 years now.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:28 PM
  #36  
Terminator2's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-25-08
Posts: 12,450
Likes: 6
From: Florida
Originally Posted by 04redline0124
Its a thread like this that people make fun of you guys. And I cant believe everyone in here thinks they are fast. Fast today is 10's. No one is fast in here.

And to the comment about the evo. The New ones are fail, until a two step is put on, and it is chipped. Then bye-bye cobalt.

Trap speed is for ricers to compare.
Trap speed is a good way to tell how much power a car has independent of how well it gets traction off the line. The EVO shave traditionally trapped around 97-101 mphbut in the 13s ET that tells you that the cars come off the line really hard but falls on its face up high.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:30 PM
  #37  
cobaltR's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 01-25-06
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
From: Jaffrey, NH
I'm on the thread that slowstang is talking about...their argument is that the fastest srt4 times were offically documented and the ss/tc fastest time hasnt...blah blah blah...then magazine times were brought in..........so to them....srt=fastest fwd car ever produced...end of story
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:34 PM
  #38  
04redline0124's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-10-07
Posts: 3,166
Likes: 0
From: West Palm Beach
Originally Posted by Terminator2
Trap speed is a good way to tell how much power a car has independent of how well it gets traction off the line. The EVO shave traditionally trapped around 97-101 mphbut in the 13s ET that tells you that the cars come off the line really hard but falls on its face up high.
no its because more traction=less trap speed. It means jack **** man. Just for people that run shitty times at the track, because hten they can tall all there little friends that they trapped 1XX.

And are you talking about the evo 9 or X? because the X is working wonders right now. Wit ha chip tune, makin low to mid 300 whp and mid 300 tq
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:40 PM
  #39  
revhigh18's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 08-15-08
Posts: 2,878
Likes: 0
From: Lee's Summit MO
Originally Posted by USMCFieldMP
No... no its not unheard of for 4cyl. There have been 4cyl cars doing it for almost 20 years now.
a brand new stock one you ***
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:42 PM
  #40  
Terminator2's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-25-08
Posts: 12,450
Likes: 6
From: Florida
Originally Posted by 04redline0124
no its because more traction=less trap speed. It means jack **** man. Just for people that run shitty times at the track, because hten they can tall all there little friends that they trapped 1XX.

And are you talking about the evo 9 or X? because the X is working wonders right now. Wit ha chip tune, makin low to mid 300 whp and mid 300 tq
For 36K plus those parts. I am not impressed at all with those cars. I made 307 whp and 330 wtrq with just a tune. So for 24K I have 300+ whp whats you point? More traction = less trap speed. Not true at all if I spin most of the way down the track you can bet the car will not trap as high as if I were to get good traction. AWD sucks as far as efficiency at putting the engines power down, more drivetrain loss period that is why they die off up high.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:42 PM
  #41  
USMCFieldMP's Avatar
Rattlesnake Race Shop
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 06-08-06
Posts: 15,725
Likes: 410
From: Fort Worth, TX
Originally Posted by revhigh18
its just a fast car with light moding you can be in the 12's that is unheard of for 4 cylinders
Originally Posted by revhigh18
a brand new stock one you ***
1.) Why are you calling me a ***? Is that really necessary?

2.) You said in your original post, "light moding you can be in the 12's"... there have been light modded 4 cylinder cars doing that for 20 years now. DSM's being the main ones.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 12:45 PM
  #42  
cobaltR's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 01-25-06
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
From: Jaffrey, NH
Originally Posted by revhigh18
a brand new stock one you ***
wow...you lnf guys need to settle down
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 01:20 PM
  #43  
mrsilent13's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 11-16-07
Posts: 6,232
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, Ca
i for see a locked thread in the near future....lol
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 01:37 PM
  #44  
euthanasia's Avatar
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 04-06-06
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
From: Oxnard, CA
Originally Posted by revhigh18
a brand new stock one you ***
Caliber, STI, Evo, MS3... So much hostility for such a ******* comment made by YOU.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 07:33 PM
  #45  
04redline0124's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-10-07
Posts: 3,166
Likes: 0
From: West Palm Beach
Originally Posted by Terminator2
For 36K plus those parts. I am not impressed at all with those cars. I made 307 whp and 330 wtrq with just a tune. So for 24K I have 300+ whp whats you point? More traction = less trap speed. Not true at all if I spin most of the way down the track you can bet the car will not trap as high as if I were to get good traction. AWD sucks as far as efficiency at putting the engines power down, more drivetrain loss period that is why they die off up high.
Did you really just say this?

You obviously dont know what your talking about. Your right though, what happens again when you put drag radials or slicks on the car?? What happens to the trap??
Adn why do you always compare **** to money?? Look at how the cars are made. The build quality in the new evo pwns the new cobalt, that is why it cost more. Wow a new cobalt could be faster then a rolls royce, but id rather have the royce. Dont compare **** to money because that is just childish. I could buy a honda put a 200 shot on it and beat every damn car around, but that doesnt mean ****.

And did you really just say AWD sucks? BAHAHA
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 08:13 PM
  #46  
NarutoDF's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 06-11-08
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
From: Buffalo NY
yeah i take a bunch of crap from guys at work saying i could have got a mustang for the same price and im like first of all the V6 sucks i beat that with my G5 GT and the Mustang GT i beleive has already been beaten by the Turbo Cobalt as well. Im unsure if it can beet the 5.7L Hemi charger on a 1/4 stock anyways. I think its just jelousy and the fact that people get pissed when a 4 banger beats a motor thats twice the cylenders lol. I mean of coarse V8 cars are great but they need time to get movin since most of those cars are at least 1000lbs heavier then ours. Obviously the cobalt is gonna take it off the line.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 08:15 PM
  #47  
04redline0124's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-10-07
Posts: 3,166
Likes: 0
From: West Palm Beach
Originally Posted by NarutoDF
yeah i take a bunch of crap from guys at work saying i could have got a mustang for the same price and im like first of all the V6 sucks i beat that with my G5 GT and the Mustang GT i beleive has already been beaten by the Turbo Cobalt as well. Im unsure if it can beet the 5.7L Hemi charger on a 1/4 stock anyways. I think its just jelousy and the fact that people get pissed when a 4 banger beats a motor thats twice the cylenders lol. I mean of coarse V8 cars are great but they need time to get movin since most of those cars are at least 1000lbs heavier then ours. Obviously the cobalt is gonna take it off the line.


no if the v8 is properly driven, then the cobalt will be playing good ole fashion catchup
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 08:21 PM
  #48  
hungryhip-ccp's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: 05-31-07
Posts: 4,339
Likes: 0
From: SoCal, Lancaster
Originally Posted by Rodimus_Prime
I love that reputation
i couldent agree more!
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 08:49 PM
  #49  
1bdstlLSJ's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 08-14-08
Posts: 951
Likes: 0
From: st.louis
Ohhh my, most of the LNF guys have no clue about their cars what so ever.......haha 300whp on a tune, just wait till that POS k04 takes a crap on ya after 10-20 thousand miles. Ya lets see these cars make some good'ol reliable power. SRT-4's have a stronger motor and tranny can make 500+whp on stock internals and has been proven time and time again, also can be much much faster, an intake and Diablo tune for an srt-4 neon is close to 300whp, the LNF is not the only car producing big tune numbers. This just shows alot of the LNF guys are new to the whole car scene in general cause they dont know jack ****.
Old Feb 28, 2009 | 08:49 PM
  #50  
revhigh18's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 08-15-08
Posts: 2,878
Likes: 0
From: Lee's Summit MO
i know i just wanted to be an ass hole hahaha i just wanted an arguement



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:15 PM.