NewCobalt06

I think that the 2.2L motor in the next year or 2 will have more popularity and upgrades than most GM models. I honestly feel for the 2.4L guys. I am just waiting like the rest.

sshaner

i hope your right

NewCobalt06

Now I will eat my own words win it does comes to the 2.0L ss/sc because of the kits

avro206

your funny

savior

2.2 will not have a bigger market then the 2.0 or 2.4

halfj99

though the 2.2 is a larger market overall...so just maybe

NJHK

I'm sorry but I have to agree with savior...

I've never heard of a base model getting more support than an upgraded model. That's like saying that companies are going to support the V6 Camaro more than the Z28...it's not gonna happen. Will there be support, yes, eventually.

06Pursuit

iTrader: (1)

oh common. the 2.2 is a way better motor. theres a drag cobalt pulling 9's? (correct me if im wrong) and it's a 2.2

bluechevyss05

This Argument Has Been Made Numerous Times Already, Who Gives A **** Just Wait And See

NJHK

You guys are missing the point...

All the motors are generally the same, especially the 2.0 and 2.2

What GM puts in them from stock is one thing but you can make big power out of them.

Also, to correct you, GM Drag Cars are all 2.0s. I believe in the beginning, they just destroked the 2.2 instead of having an actual production 2.0 motor.

specvgini

they are all variations of the same thing. the 2.2 is the first and it's kinda entry level, the 2.4 has vvt and it more tords NA power for average gains with bolt ons, the 2.0 is boost ready for the supercharger. if you ask me the 2.2 would be good though if your looking to turbo. you can't turbo the 2.0 cause its already supercharged and you'd have to reconfigure the entire engine, the 2.4 wouldn't be bad but the vvt is a pain when it comes to tuning. the 2.2 is like a blank canvice. if i'm not mistaken it's a crate engine offered by gm aswell. i don't get why some don't like it. 145hp dohc engine is a good thing. look at the honda guys doing the engine swaps half the time they swap in worse engines with way less power. it's surprising and rewarding that its a base level engine offered now. them foreign guys still have sohc 100hp engines in base models. do u know how annoying it is to drive a sohc 90-110 hp car. you couldn't pass your self in traffic.

specvgini

in my opinion i rather have a light weight cobalt ls cause they are cheap, have the ecotec dohc engine, and are light cause they are optionless. then i'd turbo it after some boltons. i'd buy my own racing seats. better then those cheap looking recaros. i'd buy my own light weight wheels, not the wanna be dubs that weight 60lbs each lol and i would boost more then that blower would ever dream of. and not only that the power band would be 10 times better. you can make all that for a fraction of the cost of a stock ss/sc. for some ppl they just wanna pay extra cash and have something everyone else has and be mildly entertained. me i rather spend the money wisley and get more for it and have something cooler that not many have.

NJHK

I understand what you're trying to say but why would you have to re-configure the whole engine. The engine is fine for forced induction period...9.5:1 compression and a shorter stroke for more reliable high revving.

05YELLOWSS

so let's think about this...with the only difference in 2.0 and 2.2 being stroke...why don't us ss guys just build a "stroker" and use a forged 2.2 crank...sounds like a good deal to me, i'm gonna do some more research and make some phone calls...

chipsgt

This could get ugly really quick.
This has been discussed many times before.

No one is saying that the 2.2L engine isnt a great engine. It IS!
But it is not built for boost.

I am pretty sure it has even been shown that in order to make a base model a comprable car in all aspects to the SS/SC, it would eventually cost MORE than the price of it right out of the box.

I dont want to fan any flames, or re-light the debate of which is better.
It has been beaten to death. But understand that to make a comparable car, its not just as simple as bolting on a turbo kit and going.

2.2 + 2.4 +2.0 =

Cirrus

No way dude. It equals the new Ecotec 6.6L engine!

chipsgt

LMFAO!

MoMo789

I like the way your thinking

g5mike

The 2.4 motor is more advanced(vvt) then the 2.2 there is a reason it cost more

Stealth06LT

HELL YEA to the Cobalt community uniting as one! lol Lets stop the fighting and realize that our only real enemies are everything without an ECOTEC! lol.

RuSSo-29

hahaha awesome.

Actually, the Fastest Cobalt with 1,400hp is a 2.2

They got to like 1,200, and upped the dicplacment to a 2.2 and made it to 1,400. How ever, I'm more of a GM fan in general, so I SAY!

Give the 2.2 VVT and Direct inject, = More HP and a lil better gas #'s. i.e 160hp

Give the 2.4 Direct inject and make it like 190hp N/A + a lil better gas #'s

And Make the 2.0 DI + VVT, and Supercharged from the Factory, with an Optional Z24 pkg or sumin with a Turbo. (Replacing the Supercharger) and making an intercooler an option for it from GM PERFORMANCE PARTS!

IonNinja

thats if you go out and try to purchase everything that the SS/SC has...but truth is you don't need everything the SS/SC has to go fast.

and if you go out and spend the money to beef up the tranny, suspension, brakes u may go passed the cost of upgrading to an SS/SC but in the end you'd actually have something not equal to an SS/SC but better performing.

they're all great cars though, I'm a big fan of the 2.4 myself...I wish I would have started with that platform.

g5mike

God point Russo,why does the 2.2 not have vvt,say a base civic( around the same price) does it not have vvt?

RuSSo-29

I think the BASE BASE Civic dosn't have the V-tec

But from what I hard herd, it wasn't that umuch more $$ for GM to make the 2.4 and then give it VVT! So if it was added to the 2.2, we'd really be on our way!

PenguinPIE

iTrader: (5)

you are rite ....its the orange base model ...but its not 9 sec.....its 8 sec