Cobalt SS vs. SRT4
06-20-2005, 01:26 PM
#51
Senior Member
Originally Posted by ssstraub
These SS vs SRT4 threads never end well do they? 
Your telling me every thread ends up being the SS vs. something other than a god damn SRT4...its always well in that case ill have my friend race you in his STi or EVO...just keep to the thread..i think every SS owner know from a stop that they cant compete with an STi or EVO, im not saying dont race'em from a stop or a roll...hell i dont give a **** race'em in reverse going backwards but everyone pretty much know the outcome
06-20-2005, 06:50 PM
#53
New Member
Join Date: 05-28-05
Location: Windsor, ON
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow enough shitting in this thread?
What everybody is trying to say, is that an AWD transmission adds more PARASITIC LOSS than a FWD or a RWD drivetrain. A light FWD transaxle like the Cobalt's will put the most power to the ground, a RWD tranny with a heavy driveshaft will put less and an AWD tranny will of course take the most power from the engine. A FWD car typically has about 13-16% drivetrain loss where as an AWD tranny will be something like 22-25% or more drivetrain loss. A 227HP WRX will only dyno about 180HP to the wheels because of this.
There are distinct advantages to an AWD drivetrain the major one being of course is you can launch very hard and all wheels will grab and you can get on the power after a turn sooner than you can in a FWD or RWD car, all else being equal.
Thats why someone earlier in the thread was trying to say that an EVO has "nothing" after 80mph, which is a gross over-generalization, but due to the extra drivetrain loss their peak HP to the wheels is considerably less, percentage-wise, than a FWD or RWD only car.
What everybody is trying to say, is that an AWD transmission adds more PARASITIC LOSS than a FWD or a RWD drivetrain. A light FWD transaxle like the Cobalt's will put the most power to the ground, a RWD tranny with a heavy driveshaft will put less and an AWD tranny will of course take the most power from the engine. A FWD car typically has about 13-16% drivetrain loss where as an AWD tranny will be something like 22-25% or more drivetrain loss. A 227HP WRX will only dyno about 180HP to the wheels because of this.
There are distinct advantages to an AWD drivetrain the major one being of course is you can launch very hard and all wheels will grab and you can get on the power after a turn sooner than you can in a FWD or RWD car, all else being equal.
Thats why someone earlier in the thread was trying to say that an EVO has "nothing" after 80mph, which is a gross over-generalization, but due to the extra drivetrain loss their peak HP to the wheels is considerably less, percentage-wise, than a FWD or RWD only car.
06-20-2005, 08:31 PM
#56
New Member
Join Date: 06-20-05
Location: Temecula, Ca
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Got one in Cali
Originally Posted by CobaltSS132
Well it depends if u want a car with huge aftermarket options and that is a little bit faster, then get the SRT-4, u sacrifice some comfort and interior quality but u get the more performance car (for now)
On the other hand you have the SS its interior is 100X better then the SRT-4 its still fast, faster on takeoff then the SRT-4 but after around 90mph the SRT-4 takes an SS. You have a few more options on the SS. The SS is a very comfortable ride, it gets more attention on the street because its newer. But as of now you dont have many aftermarket things to add on.
As for looks the front of the SRT-4 is much better then the SS and the back of the SS is better then the SRT-4, (in my opinion)
The only problem you might have with the SS is actually getting one (at least in California) there are almost none here im not sure about Florida.
I have an SS and have had no problems with it at all, its fast comfortable and very fun to drive. Ive craven and SRT-4 but dont have one to be able to explain its better points to you, but its a great car also.
I had the same problem as you, my choice was between both cars, but in the end I picked the SS because of the looks and interior, I mean its not much slower then an SRT-4. so its up to you SRT-4 witch has the aftermarket, performance, and more people who know more about it to help you with problems, or the SS witch has the looks, interior, rarity (for now).
But the SS aftermarket will grow and a lot of people on this sight will help you with any thing you need to know about it. Just read some of the posts
On the other hand you have the SS its interior is 100X better then the SRT-4 its still fast, faster on takeoff then the SRT-4 but after around 90mph the SRT-4 takes an SS. You have a few more options on the SS. The SS is a very comfortable ride, it gets more attention on the street because its newer. But as of now you dont have many aftermarket things to add on.
As for looks the front of the SRT-4 is much better then the SS and the back of the SS is better then the SRT-4, (in my opinion)
The only problem you might have with the SS is actually getting one (at least in California) there are almost none here im not sure about Florida.
I have an SS and have had no problems with it at all, its fast comfortable and very fun to drive. Ive craven and SRT-4 but dont have one to be able to explain its better points to you, but its a great car also.
I had the same problem as you, my choice was between both cars, but in the end I picked the SS because of the looks and interior, I mean its not much slower then an SRT-4. so its up to you SRT-4 witch has the aftermarket, performance, and more people who know more about it to help you with problems, or the SS witch has the looks, interior, rarity (for now).
But the SS aftermarket will grow and a lot of people on this sight will help you with any thing you need to know about it. Just read some of the posts
I just got my SS last week here in southern Cali. They are here, but hard to come buy. If you really want one.....get one when you see one!! It won't last long. I love my new SS.
06-20-2005, 08:34 PM
#57
New Member
Join Date: 06-20-05
Location: Temecula, Ca
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CobaltSS132
Well it depends if u want a car with huge aftermarket options and that is a little bit faster, then get the SRT-4, u sacrifice some comfort and interior quality but u get the more performance car (for now)
On the other hand you have the SS its interior is 100X better then the SRT-4 its still fast, faster on takeoff then the SRT-4 but after around 90mph the SRT-4 takes an SS. You have a few more options on the SS. The SS is a very comfortable ride, it gets more attention on the street because its newer. But as of now you dont have many aftermarket things to add on.
As for looks the front of the SRT-4 is much better then the SS and the back of the SS is better then the SRT-4, (in my opinion)
The only problem you might have with the SS is actually getting one (at least in California) there are almost none here im not sure about Florida.
I have an SS and have had no problems with it at all, its fast comfortable and very fun to drive. Ive craven and SRT-4 but dont have one to be able to explain its better points to you, but its a great car also.
I had the same problem as you, my choice was between both cars, but in the end I picked the SS because of the looks and interior, I mean its not much slower then an SRT-4. so its up to you SRT-4 witch has the aftermarket, performance, and more people who know more about it to help you with problems, or the SS witch has the looks, interior, rarity (for now).
But the SS aftermarket will grow and a lot of people on this sight will help you with any thing you need to know about it. Just read some of the posts
On the other hand you have the SS its interior is 100X better then the SRT-4 its still fast, faster on takeoff then the SRT-4 but after around 90mph the SRT-4 takes an SS. You have a few more options on the SS. The SS is a very comfortable ride, it gets more attention on the street because its newer. But as of now you dont have many aftermarket things to add on.
As for looks the front of the SRT-4 is much better then the SS and the back of the SS is better then the SRT-4, (in my opinion)
The only problem you might have with the SS is actually getting one (at least in California) there are almost none here im not sure about Florida.
I have an SS and have had no problems with it at all, its fast comfortable and very fun to drive. Ive craven and SRT-4 but dont have one to be able to explain its better points to you, but its a great car also.
I had the same problem as you, my choice was between both cars, but in the end I picked the SS because of the looks and interior, I mean its not much slower then an SRT-4. so its up to you SRT-4 witch has the aftermarket, performance, and more people who know more about it to help you with problems, or the SS witch has the looks, interior, rarity (for now).
But the SS aftermarket will grow and a lot of people on this sight will help you with any thing you need to know about it. Just read some of the posts
I just got my SS last week here in southern Cali. They are here, but hard to come buy. If you really want one.....get one when you see it. They are hard to come buy. I love my new SS
06-20-2005, 10:06 PM
#59
Banned
Join Date: 12-13-04
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mchat
I'm not arguing price. I'm just saying that the Cobalt interior isn't THAT much better than the Neon interior. Everyone talks about the Cobalt interior being "100X" better than the Neon interior, when it is at best marginally better. Period.
Now if the Cobalt had the GTO's interior, then I could agree with the comments about the interior being MUCH better than the Neons. That's the point I'm trying to make.
Saying the Cobalt's interior is 100x better than the Neon's is like saying the SRT-4 is 100x quicker than the Cobalt SS's. Simply put, neither statement is true. However, replace the "100x" with the word "marginally" and now you have two true statements.
Now if the Cobalt had the GTO's interior, then I could agree with the comments about the interior being MUCH better than the Neons. That's the point I'm trying to make.
Saying the Cobalt's interior is 100x better than the Neon's is like saying the SRT-4 is 100x quicker than the Cobalt SS's. Simply put, neither statement is true. However, replace the "100x" with the word "marginally" and now you have two true statements.
Of course the Cobalt's interior isn't "100X better", but its also not a "marginal difference", as you put it - you completely downplay it, which is no better than the guy who exaggerated it in the first place
Bottom line is the Cobalt's interior is much nicer than the SRT-4's, overall. Everything from the design to the quality is just better. But that shouldn't be a surprise, considering the Neon's interior dates back to the 2000 model year and the Cobalt is brand new for '05. As for the whole "plastic" arguement, that doesn't even make sense...every modern car interior is made from plastic
Final-Reality summed up the whole AWD issue pretty well. Its only real advantage is on the lauch, after that its a handicap. Thats what makes the Evo and STi so quick in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile, the fact that they can come off the line so strong. Take a look at any magazine test numbers that have both 0-60 and 5-60 (roll) - the Evo and STi lose up to a full second or more between the two tests
, well.... maybe cuz i havnt had my car for a week and miss the living **** out of it
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post