Wow, WRONG AGAIN! These same mods netted a 12.86@110mph for Rob. You continue to make yourself look more and more "uneducated" with each post. There's probably 5 or 6 guys on this board that have the same setup trapping almost 110mph, with a couple in the 12's, and you're going to say "it's not going to happen". Keep going on and on about what the 2.4 "will supposedly do when it's finally turboed", while we continue to have more and more of us in the 12's.....

 

And where are your time slips? Till you have some to show for yourself, don't put down anyone else on the site.

 

I didn't say I ran 12's, I said it's capable. You'll get to see the slips when Rob gets finished with my car. Considering you're friends with Dan, you should know what these cars are capable of with the mods in my signature. Don't be dumb Even the timeslips I do have are far more than you 2.4 guys have done. My first time to the track with an old setup was a 13.35, only 4 tenths from a 12. I'm not putting anyone "down", if you think that-it's because you have a low reading comprehension. All I did was say he was wrong. Atleast I'm not sitting around like most of you 2.4 guys saying "my car SHOULD dyno this when I get a turbo kit, a 2.4 SHOULD be able to do this" blah blah blah. You guys will sit around and argue all night about what you think the 2.4 will do turbo'd, and then call bs on stuff the 2.0's have already been doing!! Don't tell me to put up timeslips and stop putting people down when I'm not. Sorry, but someone who's not even out of the 15's needs to worry about making their car faster, not asking me to prove how fast mine is.

 

Let me clarify somthing. I have nothing agains the 2.4 at all. My intentions were never to come in and down you guys. You guys are so worried about making yourselves feel better for getting a 2.4 that you claim all of this bs about it being better than the 2.0. It's stupid. I get sick of all this crap too. The truth is NOBODY KNOWS WHAT A 2.4 SS WILL DO! Sitting around speculation all the time is pointless. Who cares anyway! I've said it time and time again, I WANT to see you 2.4 guys get fast. I WANT to see the 2.2 guys get fast too. But you guys need to get your heads out your a**es and quit spitting out bs.

 

If you really could care less then why do you post repeatedly on the 2.0 vs. 2.4 discussions. I agree about growing tired of all the speculation, but come on man. You jump on these threads. I also agree that people on here call b.s. too frequently- especially if people can back it up. i.e.- SS/SC's numbers. I just find it funny how you seem so disenchanted by these threads but post ad nauseum. Just my opinion.

 

I see your point. I try not to get involved. But when you see statements like "the 2.4 is stronger than the 2.0" is just irritates me. How do you think you guys would respond if the 2.2 guys came in saying the 2.2 is stronger than the 2.4, and will make more power than the 2.4, etc. You guys would respond the same way I did.I really don't care anymore. I look forward to seeing what the 2.4 can do with a turbo kit and bolt ons. Good luck guys.

 

well when i see an accurate quarter mile slip ill believe it..theres no way that ur runnin an accurate time---thats a corvettes quarter timeu claim u can run modded like that with a 400hp c6...i dunno bout that...more and more uneducated huh...maybe...ok well see what it can do when its turboed.....

 

Bad06ss, has made some very valid and unbiased points My take on some of these 2.4 discussions,Is that really guys are probaly impatient or excited for the turbos comming out. Two: I dont know which engine is stronger, all I know is that the 2.4 is an more advanced engine than the 2.0 and the 2.0 is a faster powerplant than the 2.4.Three: the soltice 2.4 turbo might be doing 320hp but its rear wheel drive, maybe on the 2.4 cobalt/pursuit it might only be 260 to 280 when it finally hits the market,sure you can upgrade your turbo but i have to say those numbers from hahn should hopefully keep us content enough.

 

HERE:
https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/drag-racing-52/intense-cobalt-hits-12s-16730/

That's when Rob first ran a 12 a few months ago. With less mods than we have now.

Here's when he first ran a 110mph trap. The mods he ran these times with are the same that I have now-I think I might even have a little more.

https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/drag-racing-52/another-pb-110mph-20999/

Now that you've seen an "accurate" 1/4 mile slip of a Cobalt running 12-what do you have to say? Those times are pre-water injection, so who know's what we'll run after that.

 

next to our drivetrain cons considering added power...go over to the solstice forum and youl see what our engines can do....were not saying "i i think ti will do this".....bitch im sayin "i know it will do this"......well if i have t get my head of my ass then maybe u should should take your own advice and do the same....i never said the 2.4 was better....i was simply stating pros/cons of each one...and trust me do they each have em....we get sick of hearin your crap also...hence the statement 2.4 FORUMS so if you dont want to hear it then dont come n hear sayin **** in return...everyone gets carried away with what they say.....ill believe a 12 sec. quarter time when you and a vette line up and you beat him dwn the strip......... ....ad lastly.....hav a nice day

 

thats good....now lets see your slip....dont forget above sea level calcs. and all that good stuff...then well see what hes runnin...and if we had FI plus all the bells and whistles your engines got....which we will before long.....well be runnin right beside you....if not faster....

 

GM's been racing a 500+ horsepower ecotec for years. EVERYONE already know's the ECOTEC'S can be built to handle that. But a RWD car with a different trans/drivetrain setup doesn't count. You're saying you "know" what it will do? Obviously since it HASN'T BEEN DONE IN A COBALT, YOU DON'T KNOW. For a 12 sec. timeslip, see above. I could beat a vette and run 13's! That statement is real dumb. There's stock C6 corvettes that don't run 12's. Also, learn how to spell. Take care.

 

Oh, so now that you've seen that we've ran 12's, you're going to throw the FI excuse?! You don't have to apologize, but atleast be a man and admit that you just got proven wrong.

 

kiss my ass its the laptop im using...its got that softkey ****...if you even take your head out of your ass to realize new technology....and no **** i said i spite o the drivetrain(translates to the type of wd car----f or r---and the clutch setup.....god damn ure ard headed....BITCH I DO KNOW....you just dont want to admi that whn that kit hits the street ...you will no longer be the fastest cobalt out there.... .....and as for the vette statement if the c6 is runni above 13 sec on a quater he doesnt know what hes doin......well its been fn but i have o take my head out of my ass and get back to life....we shall resume this little convo tomorrow night when i get off from work....i cant stay on th internet and TALK about what my car can run quarter mil wise all night so.....YOU TAKE CARE...

 

1) I do know what your car is capable of. Don't insult my intelligence, and do not call me dumb.
2) No one ever said that there is a 2.4 that's faster than a 2.0 right now. I'm pretty sure they were trying to guess at what the 2.4 can do after it's successfully been turbocharged. Don't be dumb.


Hmm... a contradicting statement in one sentence.... sweet. You made this one easy for me.


Ummm... does this sound familiar: Sounds like you were telling us what you think your car will be capable of... just like 2.4 guys were trying to guess what their cars were capable of. Again... you made it easy for me.


Dan and I are turbocharging my 2.4. That's hardly sitting around. And I have yet to say anything in these threads about how fast my car will be when it's done. I can't guess, and I'm keeping quiet until I see. I beg you to show me where I called bs on the 2.0. I simply gave you your own advice about not saying what your car SHOULD do.


You need to worry about not being an *******. If I really wanted to be that fast, I would've just bought a fast car, not a Cobalt. Again, I only gave you your own advice.

Now I agree with you on one thing... I'm sick of hearing about how the 2.4L will be the fastest car in the world once a turbo is on it. I have yet to talk about how fast I think the 2.4 will be when we get a turbo on it... and I'm one of the few who are actually putting the cash, time, and effort into actually doing it.

And yes, we all know that the 2.0 is a better car from the factory. But as far as which is better modified... when the turbo is on the 2.4, who knows. Have you seen a 2.4 with a turbo dyno? I haven't. Therefore I can't say which will be better in the long run. Who knows how long the 2.4's internals will last. Who knows how long the tranny will last, or if it can even handle the power from a turbocharged 2.4L LE5.

Until it's done, I'm not saying **** about how fast it will be. I'm also not saying **** about how fast it won't be either. I suggest you all follow that lead and do the same. I'm sick of ******* hypothetical racing.

 

Yes, I did say my car is "capable" of 12's. But I've got timeslips showing a trap speed capable of it, and a friend who's done it with the same setup. What do you 2.4 guys have to be speculating off of? That's what I thought.

 

Oh and for what it's worth? My 13.35 translates to a 12.9 @107mph altitude corrected.

 

Show me where I speculated what I'd have.... please. That's what I thought.

Look... I have nothing against you. Don't start a fight over nothing. I simply said until you had slips of YOUR car, don't bash the 2.4 guys. I agree with you, most of them are dumb. I've seen 2.0's run fast with just bolt-ons. I know how strong of a motor the 2.0 is. You don't have to prove it in here.

 

I'm one of the faster lsj's...I paid 18k for my redline...we are turboing ppazz's 2.4...it will be quick im speculating low 14s high 13s...It will definately be a fun car to drive.

Now I really jsut need to decide twincharged or more boltons.

 

How come I keep getting left outta this turbo equation??? Do I need to submit a resume'?
I am estimating if Dano's car can handle 10 psi safely it run 13s. No probs.

 

My Ecotec is only moderately reinforced, and it handles 17-20.5 psi just fine, but thats probably because Saab partially helped engineer it to cope with that....

 

I said we...

grand am dude...what manifold are u running? what turbo?

 

Probably a Saab rendition. I was under my block yesterday looking for oil feeds and oil return taps.

Gran Am guy...where did you t-off for an oil feed and return.?

 

Wow this thread is garbage.

 

I think there is a spot ready to tap for our return. I have no idea about the feed though. I'll have to crawl under mine later tonight and take a few pictures.