2.4L LE5 Performance Tech 16 valve 171 hp EcoTec with 163 lb-ft of torque

Why 2.4 instead of SS/SC

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-24-2007 | 05:50 PM
  #26  
an0malous's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-28-06
Posts: 12,577
Likes: 2
From: Canada
good for you for being a mature 17 year old.

When you get a few more years of driving and credit rating under your belt youll look back and see it was the smart choice.
and youll probably be drivin something faster with your better credit....and doing it safely cuz your a better driver!


+rep

2.4s are great little cars....but im not sure on the MPG thing though
when you keep this out of boost and gently cruise...its basically a 2.0L N/A
which would actually increase mileage due to lower displacement

With the cruise set at 100km/h i can run 35mpg easily.
Old 07-24-2007 | 05:54 PM
  #27  
Projekt's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-03-07
Posts: 24,280
Likes: 1
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Originally Posted by an0malous
good for you for being a mature 17 year old.

When you get a few more years of driving and credit rating under your belt youll look back and see it was the smart choice.
and youll probably be drivin something faster with your better credit....and doing it safely cuz your a better driver!


+rep

2.4s are great little cars....but im not sure on the MPG thing though
when you keep this out of boost and gently cruise...its basically a 2.0L N/A
which would actually increase mileage due to lower displacement

With the cruise set at 100km/h i can run 35mpg easily.
thanks man, i apperciate the good words.
as for the MPG my friend who owns a ss/sc gets WAY better Litres/KM then i do, i get about 12.5 where she gets 9.0.
I always thought the ss/sc gets better gas mileage b/c of the lower displacement..
Old 07-24-2007 | 05:57 PM
  #28  
an0malous's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-28-06
Posts: 12,577
Likes: 2
From: Canada
yeah it has everything to do with your right foot.
but if you keep the ss/sc out of boost, and be very gentle and smooth, it gives
quite impressive MPG.

One of the reasons i bought it power on tap with good daily driver mileage.
Old 07-24-2007 | 05:59 PM
  #29  
Projekt's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-03-07
Posts: 24,280
Likes: 1
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
yeah thats what i figured, she drives really well as in acceleration and such, dont think she has ever redlined her car or even got it pasted 5k. where i tend to drive spirited..shifting at about 4-5k sometimes, also im new to standard (Only about 2 months into it) so im sure if i could shift and launch better it would save me some coin at the pumps.
Old 07-24-2007 | 06:06 PM
  #30  
NJHK's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Originally Posted by Evil C
So why don't they make the ss super charged as an auto? Most people drive auto. Its not practical to drive a manual in very urban or hilly arias. Shure driving a manual has cool points but if given the choice would i have picked the 2.4 or the 2.0 SC i woulda gotten the SC hands down if it were available in auto.
Manual transmissions is more appealing to the younger generation.

They have no control in their lives, so they at least want control over what gear they go into LOL
Old 07-24-2007 | 06:09 PM
  #31  
Projekt's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-03-07
Posts: 24,280
Likes: 1
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Originally Posted by NJHK
Manual transmissions is more appealing to the younger generation.

They have no control in their lives, so they at least want control over what gear they go into LOL
pfft i had a 87 auto celica 115 DOHC imported power!! only had 47 thousand KMS on it tho..but that thing was getting me in trouble...id put my foot down and go as fast as i wanted..residental or not..now that im driving standard i find my speed issue controled and ..i think standard has made me a more confident person and changed the way i drive (Not recklessly anymore!)
Thank you standard transmission!! you changed my life!
Old 07-24-2007 | 06:13 PM
  #32  
NJHK's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Originally Posted by ProjektCobalt
pfft i had a 87 auto celica 115 DOHC imported power!! only had 47 thousand KMS on it tho..but that thing was getting me in trouble...id put my foot down and go as fast as i wanted..residental or not..now that im driving standard i find my speed issue controled and ..i think standard has made me a more confident person and changed the way i drive (Not recklessly anymore!)
Thank you standard transmission!! you changed my life!
It might also be because you have a better car that you don't need to lay into all the time.

It's not the transmission.
Old 07-24-2007 | 06:19 PM
  #33  
AWDstylez's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 06-06-07
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: CT
I'm going to make the prediction now, that in the next few years the 2.4 will be the car to have because custom turbo 2.4's will be blowing anyway even the fastest SS/SC's.
Old 07-24-2007 | 06:23 PM
  #34  
NJHK's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Originally Posted by AWDstylez
I'm going to make the prediction now, that in the next few years the 2.4 will be the car to have because custom turbo 2.4's will be blowing anyway even the fastest SS/SC's.
I see you've been talking to Sylvia Brown lol
Old 07-24-2007 | 06:27 PM
  #35  
AWDstylez's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 06-06-07
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: CT
No actually I just thought 2.4 = 2.4, maybe it's the next LD9...
Old 07-24-2007 | 06:32 PM
  #36  
NJHK's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
LD9 wasn't all that impressive in my opinion. They were alright 4 cylinder engines.
Old 07-24-2007 | 06:38 PM
  #37  
AWDstylez's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 06-06-07
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: CT
Given GM's record, "alright" is pretty good. IMO, I'd take the 2.4 over the 2.0 as a project any day.
Old 07-24-2007 | 06:40 PM
  #38  
NJHK's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Alright
Old 07-24-2007 | 06:59 PM
  #39  
GTP's Avatar
GTP
Senior Member
 
Joined: 02-28-06
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
From: Greensburg (PA)
Originally Posted by AWDstylez
I'm going to make the prediction now, that in the next few years the 2.4 will be the car to have because custom turbo 2.4's will be blowing anyway even the fastest SS/SC's.
Hey c'mon stop that now...let everyone keep buying 2.0s. We 2.4s are SLOWWWW.
Old 07-24-2007 | 07:59 PM
  #40  
Coors's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 02-08-07
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
From: Canada
Originally Posted by GTP
Hey c'mon stop that now...let everyone keep buying 2.0s. We 2.4s are SLOWWWW.
Old 07-24-2007 | 09:12 PM
  #41  
celicacobalt's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 05-26-05
Posts: 6,375
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Originally Posted by AWDstylez
I'm going to make the prediction now, that in the next few years the 2.4 will be the car to have because custom turbo 2.4's will be blowing anyway even the fastest SS/SC's.
that gives me hope
Old 07-24-2007 | 09:18 PM
  #42  
G5GT2007's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 04-05-06
Posts: 3,519
Likes: 0
From: CT
i bought the 2.4 because my car didnt some with the sc lol. no i couldint do the payments on the ss sc and the insurance was going to be to much for me. so i got the 2.4 and i love it very nice motor and great power.
Old 07-25-2007 | 01:53 AM
  #43  
SlifoxS's Avatar
New Member
 
Joined: 07-02-07
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: IL
First of all, love my 2.4, its got some power to it, dont know why everyone's calling it slow

didnt even know that chevy made a supercharged cobalt before buying mine

oh well, this things sexy and fast, may not be able to run with the top dogs, but it's not a mile behind the SC

seriously [some] of you SSSC owners out there need to control your ego
we like your car yes, but why bash the SS "2.4L does not deserve the SS Logo"

back in the old days chevy only put SS ony the most powerful cars

chevelle SS, impala SS

cobalt really doesnt deserve the ss logo in a certain sense but then again it does, theyre fast 4 cylinders


the malibu definitely didnt deserve that SS logo though hahaha
Old 07-25-2007 | 02:15 AM
  #44  
midnitebalt's Avatar
New Member
 
Joined: 05-16-07
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
From: St Louis
bought mine for a few reasons.

1 i needed a 4 door.
2 i wanted a fully loaded car
3 ive had 36 vehicles in my life
4 im not a kid anymore and not having a midlife crisis
5 25 thousand vs 16 thousand out the door
6 And I hate the spoiler on the rear of the car its front wheel drive car after all so unneeded for any reason except for a giant "hey pull me over flag" of course

If ive offended anyone with this post I dont care. Im old after all
Old 07-25-2007 | 04:26 AM
  #45  
an0malous's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-28-06
Posts: 12,577
Likes: 2
From: Canada
where did anyone in this thread "bash" the 2.4?
Anywhere.....not 1 person mentioned whether the 2.4 should have the SS badge.
As usual [some] of us ss/sc owners get accused of **** that was never there
This thread is pretty civil so far, so lets not start things where there is no reason to.

Theres plenty of great reasons to buy a 2.4
but it should be about why the 2.4 is good for you.
not why you didnt buy the 2.0
Old 07-25-2007 | 06:10 AM
  #46  
Leafy's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 09-25-05
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 0
From: Edmonton, AB
When I first was looking at the Cobalt, I went in of the mind that I wanted a Vehicle that was just as fast as my 85 Daytona turbo Z (low 14 second car) but with the reliability tag attached.

I test drove the 2.4 First... and I was quite impressed with the smoothness, quietness, and pep of the N/A 171hp engine.

It was in Red, an awesome colour. It had the Seven Speaker Pioneer sound system, and everything else as far as options go.

I then test drove the 2.0 SC, the same one I have now, same feel, same options, just more power and more grip.

That in mind, I could have settled for the 2.4... But at only a $3000 difference between the two, I had made up my mind and went for what I originally wanted.

My good friend Matt (Cruisn) on the boards here, has a 2.4 Pursuit GT. He has beaten me more than once on the street, and on the track... (he has the driver mod, whereas I like to sleep at lights) Clearly the 2.0 has the power advantage, that said, the 2.4 is no slouch.

Here's a Video proving that: http://videos.streetfire.net/video/c...b200260001.htm

Yeah that's me getting spanked. It could happen to any unsuspecting stock SS/SC.

It doesn't happen anymore though. I either don't race him or win, no coming in second for me haha!

Anyways, the point I'm trying to make here is that the 2.4 has more than enough grunt for anyone looking at a Daily driver. The rest of us wanting that little more? SS/SC or are currently ordering the Hahn kit.
Old 07-25-2007 | 09:32 AM
  #47  
rlinden86's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 01-12-07
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
From: Elyria/Ohio
most people buy the 2.4 for gas milage. which i did. but i also bought the 2.4 becaust 1. it has the biggest out of the 3 engines. decent hp for non FI. good quick clutch, fwd, liked the spoiler and the color of the car. nice nice rims. good price for the package. and 5k more for just a few more hp supercharged not worth it. il get the turbo for 4k and save the 1k and buy a few other upgrades to coagulate with the turbo. cheaper insurance and overall i thought the car was very very fun to drive.

ryan. i still want a supercharged i shoulda got one when i had the money now i dont but ill wait.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
taintedred07
2.0L LNF Performance Tech
32
05-28-2022 03:47 AM
red9
2.4L LE5 Performance Tech
11
10-04-2017 02:23 AM
RaginChopsuey
War Stories
16
10-27-2015 01:27 PM
brandon04
Problems/Service/Maintenance
46
10-21-2015 07:04 AM
patooyee
2.4L LE5 Performance Tech
50
10-15-2015 05:11 PM



Quick Reply: Why 2.4 instead of SS/SC



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:28 AM.