ss/sc vs. ss
#1
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 04-20-06
Location: indiana
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ss/sc vs. ss
which one would be a better buy? i heard that the 2.4L has more potential and is an all around better car. is this true? and what are the main differences between ss/sc and the ss? thanks
#3
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 04-20-06
Location: indiana
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i am looking for a daily driver that is fun to drive stock and that i can mod to make more fun. but mainly a daily driver that still has enough power to beat the occasional ricer
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: 09-05-05
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by phenomenal_thunder
i am looking for a daily driver that is fun to drive stock and that i can mod to make more fun. but mainly a daily driver that still has enough power to beat the occasional ricer
#6
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: 01-24-06
Location: Henry county, Ga
Posts: 1,536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i agree. i would only get the 2.4 if you were planning on putting a turbo on and making some serious power. but if you just want a daily driver that has plenty of power and still keeps its warranty (GM stage 2), then you want the ss/sc. thats the main reason i got mine. its good right out of the box. no , its not the fastest, but im not going for ***** to wall performance. just an all around fun ride. hope this helps!!
#7
The 2.4L may have more potenial due to displacement but if you have a budget, you're planning on buying a Cobalt and assume you do, the 2.4L will destroy your budget if you plan to go fast! Get the the SS/SC. It has a warranty and you can go relatively fast.
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: 11-11-05
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I based mine on a fully loaded (minus leather) 2.4L = $18,500 or a the same options 2.0 = $21,000
I took the obvious smart move money wise and got the 2.4L. $5k down and I only had a $13,000 car to pay off over 5 years.
I took the obvious smart move money wise and got the 2.4L. $5k down and I only had a $13,000 car to pay off over 5 years.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-23-06
Location: Broomall, PA
Posts: 2,160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JohnyNFullEffect
I based mine on a fully loaded (minus leather) 2.4L = $18,500 or a the same options 2.0 = $21,000
I took the obvious smart move money wise and got the 2.4L. $5k down and I only had a $13,000 car to pay off over 5 years.
I took the obvious smart move money wise and got the 2.4L. $5k down and I only had a $13,000 car to pay off over 5 years.
#11
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: 04-13-04
Location: Indiana
Posts: 3,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by roccobladr
damn dude. thats cheap. around here you can barely find a base 2.4 for 18,500. i paid 19,300 before tax and tags for mine fullly loaded minus leather.
#12
Senior Member
Daaaaamn, I walked out the door with my fully loaded SS/SC (no G85 though ) for just under $20k. Gotta love the end of the model year...
EDIT: As for your decision, go based on what you need. I got the SS/SC because it has great power, you can get it up around 250 whp for less than a grand. That and the upgraded suspension on the SS/SC sold me on it.
EDIT: As for your decision, go based on what you need. I got the SS/SC because it has great power, you can get it up around 250 whp for less than a grand. That and the upgraded suspension on the SS/SC sold me on it.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: 01-23-06
Location: Grant Park, Illinois
Posts: 1,216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 2.4 is NOT a good choice if you want to actually have power... the 2.5k dfferance would not be practical to pass up. the 30 HP difference with MUCH more potential to make more power with less money is great. the turbo setup would run you a lot mroe than 2500$ and would kill your warranty. you do not want an auto if you want it to have good power. go with the SS/SC if you dont get the onstar or xm it wil cost yu about 1300$ less or something like that...
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: 09-25-05
Location: Detroit MI to San Diego
Posts: 1,967
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by chipmonk212121
the 2.4 is NOT a good choice if you want to actually have power... the 2.5k dfferance would not be practical to pass up. the 30 HP difference with MUCH more potential to make more power with less money is great. the turbo setup would run you a lot mroe than 2500$ and would kill your warranty. you do not want an auto if you want it to have good power. go with the SS/SC if you dont get the onstar or xm it wil cost yu about 1300$ less or something like that...
#18
Senior Member
get the 2.0, the 2.4 is a brand new motor and noone knows the reliability of it yet, the 2.0 has been out for a lil while now, you also want power and potential? the 2.0 and stage 2 is sufficient, want more, well empty yer pockets bro cuz anything can have potential with money, but if a couple of mods is what you want to have a quick ride, get the 2.0., stage 2 and some bolt ons, if thats not enough get a smaller pulley and a custome tune and call it a day.
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: 01-02-05
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love my car. Like as in I wanna hump it kinda love. But if I had the chance to go back in time Michael J Fox style, I would totally buy the 2.0L S/C. Don't make the same mistake I did McFly.
#20
Senior Member
Originally Posted by zomghax
I love my car. Like as in I wanna hump it kinda love. But if I had the chance to go back in time Michael J Fox style, I would totally buy the 2.0L S/C. Don't make the same mistake I did McFly.
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: 01-02-05
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by css9450
I bought the 2.4 and have NO regrets.
#24
Originally Posted by zomghax
I bought my car thinking that I wasn't going to get back into modding, which was kind of a mistake. Like I said, I really enjoy my car and I don't really regret it buying it, but if you want to modify your car and make it faster the LSJ is the better choice. It comes with a stronger tranny and if you want to get into F/I, it's just a little easier to start with a car that comes that way from the factory. The computer won't barf when it sees boost, etc. That's all I'm saying. I'll be spending a lot of money on my 2.4L that I wouldn't have had to spend on a 2.0L, and I could have gotten a S/C for around the same payment stream had I tried hard enough. My bad. Lesson learned. I'll just have to make a REALLY badass 2.4L to compensate
#25
I think the turbo 2.4's will be putting down at the tracks when the time comes, but if you want a quick car that if anyrthing happens, to, warranty is there, get the ss/sc. All around beautiful car. Its great in all areas. I don't think there would be much to complain about. I would love a quick car with XM and a sunroof and all those luxuries lol.