rambo

Also to add they look at cost to repair, prolly most important.

CobaltSonOfS.A.M.

But this is the only case where an engine was a larger displacement than advertised.

06black

fella's....

I love my SC and i for one will not go away from that. I will however go to a biger blower and work it from there.

as for the turbo VS Sc debate that this willmost likly turn into...heres my thoughts.

first VVT on our motor its not needed...there very little if any benifit to cam phaseing(VVT) on blown aplications.

so to who ever said that "the power differance between the 2.0T over the 2.0SC is found in VVT and Direct injection" you are mostly wrong.

the direct injection in its self makes no power differance at all its the fact that it will allow more precise fuel control and the ability to run higher CR's that make the power...VVT is a very small part of that.

also in the end of the "big power" wars a turbo will always make more top end power...its as plane as the eff% of each power adder the turbo is usealy aobut 12%+ more eff.

but i love the INSTANT TQ and power from the SC...the wine is a plus.

a BOV would be cool but i can atest that ya'll will most likly be unimpressed with the sky turbo's and such 2.0T cars...at least in factory trim.

from past exsperances and waching people race while I was chillin at woodward I've seen this "superior" engine fall to the hands of a farily stock SS/SC...i have raped one.

all and all its a simple fact of "to each there own" some will love and want the turbo while a few of us will contine to push the m62 and what ever blower comes next to the limits...and i'm sure in the comeing years there will be plenty of of "kills" and "killed" between the 2.0T cars and the 2.0SC cars.

how ever i do not think that the high performace aftermarket will catch up to the 2.0T engine for a few years...performance tuning on a DI(direct injection) car is much more complicated then our set up...a simple flow rate conversion and differant injecters can solve many of our fuel issues how ever on a DI set up its not quite that easy.

normaly injecters cant and dont need to be swaped due to there HUGE fuel pressure abilitys but theres much tuneing to be done on such a fuel system becasue not only to do have to control flow rates you must also command diferant fuel pressures at the same time...and this must stay consistant and flaw-less in the entire rev range.

thats what i think.

CobaltSonOfS.A.M.

So insuance companies wouldn't look at a, oh factory 290hp Aevo SS? Hint hint GM!

tube

Yeah, except, no.

I snapped two half shafts, on two separate occasions in my G85 Cobalt.

You sir, need to quit pulling things out of your, ahem, behind.

Cobalt_Supercharged

The only one that can even be spoken for is the Neon SRT-4, and it didn't make 250 lb-ft @ 1,500. It did it at 2,200 and still had some troubles launching despite haveing a cast iron 2.4L motor over the drive wheels. The LNF is all aluminum and will weigh half as much as a cast iron block adding to the traction issues.

Yes and no. Originally the Grand National was insured as a Regal until the insurance companies found out what they really were. My dad was gonna buy one, but our insurance agent told him the funny story of them having to hike up peoples' rates after the main office got the notice as to what a GN was. Needless to say my dad couldn't afford the insurance.

8cd03gro

first of all there was no 2002 gtr, it stopped production in 2001 and it actually had around 320 hp at the flywheel stock. if it put down 350awhp stock it would be a low 12 second car stock.

8cd03gro

so if gm built a super safe, 300hp 2000lb monster with the best anti-theft system there is, it would cost 5 bucks a month? I don't think so.

mi6_

I said most, NOT all! Never denied there were G85 cars that broke an axle.

I should have said it helps save axles in certain situations.