Cobalt SS

interesting...

Battery: Trunk-mounted, maintenance-free with rundown protection.

ok, so the SS has an msrp of 22,995, looking through a local chevy dealer inventory, they have two cobalt SS, one with a price of 23,895, the other 24,720

did notice one essential option: limited slip: $495

I haven't seen any turbocharged SS's in my area. Whenenver I do a search on chevy's website, it always brings up a bunch of the 2.4's with an automatic transmission.

skruffy wrote: Yeah, they're terrible. We bought my wife's 04 cav coupe for $5k in 05. With 22k miles on it. We only bought it because it was ridiculously cheap ... It's 4 years old now and the suspension clunks and squeaks, interior panels fall off at the silghtest touch, the dash is falling apart, etc...

Funny, my wife's 04 Cavalier is just fine. No clunks, squeaks, loose panels, dash is good. 2.2 Ecotec does its job well.

Maybe previous abuse (Clue 1: An '04 for sale in '05 for cheap.) led to some of these problems?

I'm sure the PO had something to do with how terrible her car is. It had stick on hood scoops and all sorts of rice mods. Even so, it's still uncomfortable and I hate it.

I LOVE how some people bitch and whine that their (when new) $13,000 car has crappy seats, then compare the car to their $20,000 car and tell us the $13,000 car feels cheap.

John Brown wrote: I LOVE how some people bitch and whine that their (when new) $13,000 car has crappy seats, then compare the car to their $20,000 car and tell us the $13,000 car feels cheap.

well.... it does

But the thing people forget... IT IS!

If the could get them out the door for 18k they'd have many more customers.

You could buy a slightly used 07 Mustang GT for 23k.

Or a Cooper S if you shop well, or a Mazdaspeed 3... There's a lot of good 23k cars that will be worth a lot more a couple years down the road.

Tim Baxter wrote: Or a Cooper S if you shop well, or a Mazdaspeed 3... There's a lot of good 23k cars that will be worth a lot more a couple years down the road.

If that is the case, I think that their #1 customer for the SS would be a Chevy only type person.

If many stay sitting on lots, they would sell well as year old left over models for less.

Seems like a very good contender for the FF turbo war going on. In fact Im very intrigued as I am curently shopping around for a new car and I have done some research, hope this sheds some light. It is unfortunate that this car has not seen more exposure, but I believe once it launches firlmly the performance will rave for itself. Basically, only car I see as a direct competitor is the MS3. We all know the new SRT is a joke and the Si while an excellent and potent vehicle, it is the gutless wonder and a bit out of its league performance wise. (Refinment its superir over most of these vehicles)

I do love my FR and I have been looking at the new MX5, but with basically the same price for an MS3 and the Cobalt, its getting hard to resist their better out of the box, boost-assisted track potential. Anyways:

From what I can gather, the Cobalt offers superior performace while the MS3 offers better refinment? Basically, this cobalt is hopped up, but has the bland look and el' chepo interior. While the MS3 gives up a bit in the performance but has nicer interior and exterior, plus can carry a set of track tires and tools with you. Definately gets my vote for one of the best $/practical/track car values. Also, while the MS3 has factory support and upgrades, from what I gather (based on a couple insider reviews), GM is not planning on any kits or upgrades (like mopar did for the neon). So basically it will be up to the aftermarket, and apparently the direct injection might hurt it upgrading wise (fuel upgrades might be hard to develop?), but I am sure the aftermarket will think of something if this car takes off.

Here are the #'s: -260hp, 260lb/ft @ 2000rpm! (2.0L ecotec, direct injection) -0-60 in 5.7 Sec -1/4 in 14.2? -Launch control standard (bad ass), no-lift-shift feature standard (basically lets you power shift without destroying your driveline) -0.9g (Stock!, for reference a MS3 pulls about 0.86g) -Brembo 4 piston monoblock up front (this is huge! I love good brakes, I can't believe a 23k car has these stock!) -2975lb -18x7.5 Forged, on 225/40/18 ContiSportContact 2 -Diff @ extra 495$, this is pretty much reduntant, I believe this should be mandatory

Resurection time! I know this is premature, but I'm waiting to hear if I get a F/T position at work in the next week or so. If I do, I'm thinking about a new to me car and Simmons-Rockwell happens to have an black '09 SS Sedan with 2k on it for $16k. I'm thinking pull the wing and badges, it would almost pass as a sleeper.

In reply to joshx99: There was a list of popular cars that were the most expensive to insure. And the stock, plain-jane Cobalt was in the top 5. Theft? Don't know, and was quite surprised. The SS model..call your insurance agent before buying one. Hopefully it won't be too much.

if you buy it, I will think youre awesome!

Since this thread has been resurrected:

integraguy wrote: The Cobalt SS is a niche model of a (boring) bread and butter sedan.

The EVO X is just a niche model of a boring bread and butter sedan, too. And that base model car is probably worse than a Cobalt, in almost every way.

Unlike the MazdaSpeed3, not all Cobalt SS cars have a turbo or supercharger. In my area there are a few of these SS Cobalts for sale. Unfortunately, dealers either don't know that all SS cars are NOT equal....or they think buyers are too stupid to notice that their soon to be new car is just a badge-engineered "clone" of a more powerful car.

GM screwed up at least twice with the Cobalt SS:

First, they introduced the car, and let it get any publicity it could STRICTLY through the "buff books"....that is, mags like Car and Driver.

Second, they took a page out of the book FoMoCo sometimes uses....that is, produce a performance model of a average sedan, then rob sales of the performance model by offering a "stripes and nametags" version at a bargain price.

I can find 10 year old cavs at $1000-1500 all day long.

I doubt you'll find many SELLING for that much. 95-00 cavs were pretty much complete crap. 00-up are better, ones with 2.2 ecotec are best of a bad breed.

The EVO X is just a niche model of a boring bread and butter sedan, too. And that base model car is probably worse than a Cobalt, in almost every way.

That actually sounds plausible. In other news, CVT's suck.

triumph5 wrote: In reply to joshx99: There was a list of popular cars that were the most expensive to insure. And the stock, plain-jane Cobalt was in the top 5. Theft? Don't know, and was quite surprised. The SS model..call your insurance agent before buying one. Hopefully it won't be too much.

The cavalier I mentioned early on in this thread was the most expensive car to insure, by a HUGE margin, that I've ever owned. My insurance agent explained it to me like this: Cavaliers are cars for highschool students and people who generally don't like cars. Because of that, they get wrecked a lot. Generally, the car will be totaled after any sort of accident and there's a pretty high probability that someone got seriously inured. Also, due to the sheer number of cavaliers out there the accident rate is higher. Cobalts probably fall into the same insurance category.

This is also why Corvettes and Porsches are oddly inexpensive to insure. The cars are fairly rare, are usually not daily drivers, and the owners are generally well-off and responsible adults who aren't apt to get into lots of stupid accidents.

neon4891 wrote: If I do, I'm thinking about a new to me car and Simmons-Rockwell happens to have an black '09 SS Sedan with 2k on it for $16k.

Sedan came with a 170hp 2.4L. Good motor, sure, fast? Not really. I'd rock one though, they look good and get crazy gas mileage fo 170hp!

There is some misinformation in this thread. All 2008-2009 Cobalt SS are turbo with Brembo brakes. In 09 you could get an SS sedan, I have one without sunroof, with LSD.

I didn't think cobalts were still available? Also, I see someone commented way back that the turbo cars are better than the supercharged ones, I was wondering this myself. I ocassionally see black cobalt sedans with manuals, that would be the car I would buy.

I was eying up a saturn ion redline as a replacement for my old focus svt but couldn't get over the ugly center gauge setup.

In other words, since the turbo cars are better is it worth the cost to find a supercharged earlier model and give it foced induction via a turbo?

The center gauge becomes invisible once you toss the big yellow shift light and boost gauge where the speedo SHOULD be sitting ;)

I have heard of a 2.0LSC car with a turbo manifold and turbo on it as well. I know nothing of the car personally and it could have been someone showing that it was possible. I know you were asking about swapping in a turbo in place of the SC but that's all I have.

As performance per dollar, much like the corvette I think its best in its class. In fact, it lapped Laguna Seca at the hands of Randy Pobst faster than an Evo X

Gets pretty good mileage too. A 600$ reflash will net something stupid, IIRC 80whp and even more torque...

As an overall everyday vehicle, I believe MS3 and Civic Si provide a better package...