Regular Cobalt SS a "Mistake" (article from Inside Line)
#126
Senior Member
If they made the N/A 2.4L the Sport from the beginning there would be zero issues. The N/A 2.4's def. deserve the Sport badge as they are a true upgrade from the base 2.2's in stock form. It would have been the perfect setup .... 2.2's, 2.4 Sports, 2.0 SS/SC & 2.0 SS/TC.
Edit: or an RS I think that would fit the 2.4L perfect
Last edited by riko540; 05-11-2010 at 11:20 PM.
#127
Senior Member
iTrader: (14)
i said RS a long time ago and everyone said that way gay. anyways the Z## was the RPO code number for the Option. Like Z71 was Bilstien Shocks and Skidplates on the trucks. the Z28 on the camaro was the performance package. im not sure what the RPO code was for the 2.4l package. im not sure it had a package. LE5 was the motor, but idk about the Sport or SS1 option RPO code
#129
@ EcoTecDriver
Huh??
Is somebody posting purely in hopes of getting flamed?
Crap man, although I know what you say, and in many camps it has merit, but I (like so many others here) like the SS, and am glad they revived the SS moniker to put on the Cobalt;
it eludes to more of Chevrolet's heritage of performance cars built with SS badging.
regarding the people who think (here or anywhere else) that the Cobalt should have never had an SS badge, lets look at the high watermark compact Chevrolet from the musclecar days;
1969-1970 Nova SS c/w 'L78' 396cid
To the best of my knowledge the fastest period road test peg this car at:
0-60mph = 5.9seconds
standing quarter mile = 14.5seconds
Now, lets compare that to he latest itineration of the Cobalt SS;
2008-2010 Cobalt SS
to the best of my knowledge the best magazine road test peg this car at:
0-60mph = 5.5seconds
standing quarter mile = 13.9seconds
IMHO, that clearly puts the Cobalt SS as being worthy of the badge.
Let's say you still don't agree;
fair enough.
Let's try looking at this from a different angle;
Back when musclecars were new, they were primarily marketed to a younger audience, and made affordable for that audience.
Using 1969 & 2009 as comparison because they're 30 years apart;
Q: What did the 1969 Nova with the L78 motor cost?
A: roughly $3,500
Q: What is $3,500usd worth when calculated (via inflation calculator) in 2009 dollars?
A: $19,700
Q: What can you buy for $19,700 these days that comes close to that '69 L78 nova?
A: NOTHING, if you're going to be legalistic - but if you're flexible, you should see a parallel here with the Nova's $19,700 price, and the aprox $23,000 Cobalt SS msrp.
When you stop to consider that:
1) the Nova was the compact for Chevrolet back then...
2) the performance is comparable between the two...
3) the MSRP is comparable between the two...
4) the cars were/are marketed to the exact same age group...
You should hopefully be reasonable, step back and conclude that the Cobalt SS is most certainly worthy of the "SS" badges it adorns.
Here's another thing to ponder;
IMHO, the current Camaro SS is being marketed not to the same age group as it was back in the late 1960's, but the exact same people that were going out and buying 1967-1973 Camaro's brand new...
The MSRP for an SS-2(?) Camaro in Canada is sitting at about $51k landed with dealer mark up or whatnot (or so I was told off the record from some GM-dealership employees, right after one bought one that he thought was a low option car).
Sorry, but I don't know too many twenty or thirty somethings that are able to go out and plop down over $40k on a car...
--------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the low power Z28;
That car was a sign of the times, and back then that was as good as the US gov't would allow due to engine size & emission limits.
The 3rd gen Fbody's are great cars for their time, and there really is no need to knock them here just because this isn't an F-body site.
(Essentially the same can be said about hte 200hp Corvette.)
Huh??
Is somebody posting purely in hopes of getting flamed?
Crap man, although I know what you say, and in many camps it has merit, but I (like so many others here) like the SS, and am glad they revived the SS moniker to put on the Cobalt;
it eludes to more of Chevrolet's heritage of performance cars built with SS badging.
regarding the people who think (here or anywhere else) that the Cobalt should have never had an SS badge, lets look at the high watermark compact Chevrolet from the musclecar days;
1969-1970 Nova SS c/w 'L78' 396cid
To the best of my knowledge the fastest period road test peg this car at:
0-60mph = 5.9seconds
standing quarter mile = 14.5seconds
Now, lets compare that to he latest itineration of the Cobalt SS;
2008-2010 Cobalt SS
to the best of my knowledge the best magazine road test peg this car at:
0-60mph = 5.5seconds
standing quarter mile = 13.9seconds
IMHO, that clearly puts the Cobalt SS as being worthy of the badge.
Let's say you still don't agree;
fair enough.
Let's try looking at this from a different angle;
Back when musclecars were new, they were primarily marketed to a younger audience, and made affordable for that audience.
Using 1969 & 2009 as comparison because they're 30 years apart;
Q: What did the 1969 Nova with the L78 motor cost?
A: roughly $3,500
Q: What is $3,500usd worth when calculated (via inflation calculator) in 2009 dollars?
A: $19,700
Q: What can you buy for $19,700 these days that comes close to that '69 L78 nova?
A: NOTHING, if you're going to be legalistic - but if you're flexible, you should see a parallel here with the Nova's $19,700 price, and the aprox $23,000 Cobalt SS msrp.
When you stop to consider that:
1) the Nova was the compact for Chevrolet back then...
2) the performance is comparable between the two...
3) the MSRP is comparable between the two...
4) the cars were/are marketed to the exact same age group...
You should hopefully be reasonable, step back and conclude that the Cobalt SS is most certainly worthy of the "SS" badges it adorns.
Here's another thing to ponder;
IMHO, the current Camaro SS is being marketed not to the same age group as it was back in the late 1960's, but the exact same people that were going out and buying 1967-1973 Camaro's brand new...
The MSRP for an SS-2(?) Camaro in Canada is sitting at about $51k landed with dealer mark up or whatnot (or so I was told off the record from some GM-dealership employees, right after one bought one that he thought was a low option car).
Sorry, but I don't know too many twenty or thirty somethings that are able to go out and plop down over $40k on a car...
--------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the low power Z28;
That car was a sign of the times, and back then that was as good as the US gov't would allow due to engine size & emission limits.
The 3rd gen Fbody's are great cars for their time, and there really is no need to knock them here just because this isn't an F-body site.
(Essentially the same can be said about hte 200hp Corvette.)
No homo
#133
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: 12-02-07
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 8,977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm glad they didn't call it Z24. People already call our cars Cavaliers.. 'Sport' would have been perfect. It makes soooo much sense... Sport, and then supersport for the highest model. It's a no-brainer.
#134
Senior Member
#135
Senior Member
I am not sure if that was a direct quote, or if that’s something Inside Line crafted
DETROIT — Don't expect Chevrolet in the future to put the SS moniker on every model in the same way, says General Motors new Vice President of Global Engineering Mark Reuss.
Reuss told reporters Thursday that instead of smearing the SS across Chevrolets "like peanut butter," the "new" GM will carefully consider which models get the SS designation at all, which ones will get SS as just a trim level and which ones will get the full SS treatment.
He noted that throughout Chevrolet's history, SS has been used as a sporty trim package as well as on a full-blown model with a powerful engine and all of the accompaniments. But mixing the two strategies as GM did with the Cobalt was "a mistake," he said.
"We probably didn't do a very good job on the Cobalt SS," said Reuss, who headed GM's performance operations before taking over GM's Holden operations in Australia, just prior to his newest job. "We came out with probably the best sport compact tuner with the 265-horsepower Cobalt SS. That car was an amazing track car, it was fun to drive and it was very affordable."
But then GM also put the SS label on a Cobalt as a trim package but without the engine and other performance hardware.
"That was confusing — confusing to me and confusing to the customer," said Reuss. "It's like trainspotting, figuring out which SS has the 265-horsepower engine."
Inside Line says: Chevrolet's SS label in the future will mean something. — Michelle Krebs, Senior Analyst and Editor at Large
http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/...boss-says.html
DETROIT — Don't expect Chevrolet in the future to put the SS moniker on every model in the same way, says General Motors new Vice President of Global Engineering Mark Reuss.
Reuss told reporters Thursday that instead of smearing the SS across Chevrolets "like peanut butter," the "new" GM will carefully consider which models get the SS designation at all, which ones will get SS as just a trim level and which ones will get the full SS treatment.
He noted that throughout Chevrolet's history, SS has been used as a sporty trim package as well as on a full-blown model with a powerful engine and all of the accompaniments. But mixing the two strategies as GM did with the Cobalt was "a mistake," he said.
"We probably didn't do a very good job on the Cobalt SS," said Reuss, who headed GM's performance operations before taking over GM's Holden operations in Australia, just prior to his newest job. "We came out with probably the best sport compact tuner with the 265-horsepower Cobalt SS. That car was an amazing track car, it was fun to drive and it was very affordable."
But then GM also put the SS label on a Cobalt as a trim package but without the engine and other performance hardware.
"That was confusing — confusing to me and confusing to the customer," said Reuss. "It's like trainspotting, figuring out which SS has the 265-horsepower engine."
Inside Line says: Chevrolet's SS label in the future will mean something. — Michelle Krebs, Senior Analyst and Editor at Large
http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/...boss-says.html
i for one love the fact that people think my SS/TC Sedan in an N/A all the time haha
but ya the N/A's probably should have been sport models not a true SS.
Then again consider the fact that a monte carlo SS is dog slow and it has SS badges... :/ my first car was an 88 monte carlo SS .. loved the car but far from fast..
#136
New Member
Join Date: 01-28-10
Location: westminster colorado
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think that there is no qustion that the sc/tc bolts hold true to the ss badge. i cant think of any car on the bolt platform that can compare at all and that to me is worthy of the ss badge. and i also think that unless you are a camaro or the all mighty vette you dont get the "Z"
but the ss/na should have been a rs or a sport not SS
but the ss/na should have been a rs or a sport not SS
#137
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: 06-23-09
Location: Chesterfield Missouri
Posts: 3,820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think that there is no qustion that the sc/tc bolts hold true to the ss badge. i cant think of any car on the bolt platform that can compare at all and that to me is worthy of the ss badge. and i also think that unless you are a camaro or the all mighty vette you dont get the "Z"
but the ss/na should have been a rs or a sport not SS
but the ss/na should have been a rs or a sport not SS
i for one love the fact that people think my SS/TC Sedan in an N/A all the time haha
but ya the N/A's probably should have been sport models not a true SS.
Then again consider the fact that a monte carlo SS is dog slow and it has SS badges... :/ my first car was an 88 monte carlo SS .. loved the car but far from fast..
but ya the N/A's probably should have been sport models not a true SS.
Then again consider the fact that a monte carlo SS is dog slow and it has SS badges... :/ my first car was an 88 monte carlo SS .. loved the car but far from fast..
Good thing my 08 2.4 is a sport then
#138
Senior Member
Join Date: 04-22-09
Location: Oak Hill, West Virginia
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont understand why the camaro is a ss and that the most powerfule camaro will be the z28. The ss was always the most powerful and now they just switched it around.
#139
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
original Z28's were setup to legitimize them being used in Trans Am type racing;
1967-1969 Z28 = 302
1970-1972 Z28 = 350/LT-1
original Camaro SS
1967-1972 SS: 350 standard; 396 optional
after the 1972 model year, the 396 was removed from the option list - as was the SS package.... so as I see it, the Z28 was big dog only by default as the sole performance version of the Camaro.
Since Trans Am racing does not exist like it once did, I think there should be one or the other model (SS or Z28) - not both.
#140
Senior Member
Join Date: 04-22-09
Location: Oak Hill, West Virginia
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ Yeah and with the 4th gens, the ss was top dog over the z28. It just doesnt make sense to come out with a camaro ss and then come out with the z28 which has more power and is top dog. They should have made the performance 2010 camaro a z28, then came out with the ss later as the best performance option.
#143
^ Yeah and with the 4th gens, the ss was top dog over the z28. It just doesnt make sense to come out with a camaro ss and then come out with the z28 which has more power and is top dog. They should have made the performance 2010 camaro a z28, then came out with the ss later as the best performance option.
#144
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: 12-02-07
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 8,977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 5 spd 2.4 is at the dealer getting the trans ripped out, among other things. I have an auto LT sedan for the foreseeable future. Hell they could have called the LE5 "Cobalt Jesus Christ" compared to this 2.2 with the auto. It is an absolute embarrassment of a vehicle. That's not saying 2.4 deserves an SS badge, just saying it deserves to be called something different than the 2.2.
#145
Wow I hope this wasn't a direct quote bc first off that is sad that he doesnt know he cars that GM had produced lol and second hes talking about when the cobalt ss/sc and the cobalt ss/2.4 were both out in 2005-2007. He complimented the supercharged car as a amazing car that DESERVED the "SS" emblem and how the 2.4 was not up to par and was a different sub trim.
#147
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: 07-31-10
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ive said this from the beginning. its a stupid thing i agree. they should make people with the ss badge to appreciate it. not go well i have the ss tc model and then drive up next to a na ss and go, is that turbo or sc or just na? gm should make ss a rare and special badge.
#149
Junior Member
Join Date: 05-23-07
Location: not there
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ive said this from the beginning. its a stupid thing i agree. they should make people with the ss badge to appreciate it. not go well i have the ss tc model and then drive up next to a na ss and go, is that turbo or sc or just na? gm should make ss a rare and special badge.