Ford Mustang Forum banner

1 - 20 of 66 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,840 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I got up beside a Cobalt SS at a light this evening in my 2012 v6 car. We went from a start and to my surprize that thing stayed with me up to 70 mph when we had to back off. It surprized me. My car was running great in the nice cool air and with the Bama tune and CAI is probably making around 320 or so at the flywheel. From first to second (automatic) my Mustang was pulling well and actually went sideways a bit at the shift. Again, i was surprized by the Cobalts performance. I dont know if he had anything done to it, but it was quick. Anyone else had any dealings with one ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Those cars, like the SRT4s, can be sneeky fast. Especially the newer Cobalt SS with the turbocharged motor. Depends on what the owner has done to it. To give you an example, I had a 2009 Subaru WRX with only an exhaust, intake and tune (stg 2 tune) pushing 21 psi and it was making 302 whp and 320 wtq. Enought to run high 12's in the quarter mile. The Cobalt SS can be done the same way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
939 Posts
Yeah those cars be changed easily to make even more power. A friend of mine has one and I watch him eat a lot mustangs all day long. He is also a good driver so he gets a better edge. Thats OK though I put him where he belongs... Anyway watch out for a few of those smaller cars like evos, WRX/STI, SRT-4, Cobalt SS and the occasional S2000(some have crazy turbos) fact is all cars can be fast if you have the $.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
I was even more surprised to see surprise consistently spelled with a Z. Is that a Canadian/Brit thing, like tyre?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,458 Posts
They might have played around and made it as fast as yours (at least up to 70), but at least you can rest assured no matter how much money he throws at it, it will always be substantially uglier. :laugh:

Pity too, with all the cash it took to do that he probably could have upgraded to a Mustang and had the speed without having to sit behind the wheel of Cobalt. WHOOPS. Did I type that outloud? :hihi:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
788 Posts
I got up beside a Cobalt SS at a light this evening in my 2012 v6 car. We went from a start and to my surprize that thing stayed with me up to 70 mph when we had to back off. It surprized me. My car was running great in the nice cool air and with the Bama tune and CAI is probably making around 320 or so at the flywheel. From first to second (automatic) my Mustang was pulling well and actually went sideways a bit at the shift. Again, i was surprized by the Cobalts performance. I dont know if he had anything done to it, but it was quick. Anyone else had any dealings with one ?
Hate to tell you but the cobalt ss lightly modded is faster than your v6. A close friend of mine has one and with a simple downpipe, boost controller and tune he runs low 12s at the track and beats my tuned gt.


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,037 Posts
Them Dang Chevy's! Almost won the NASCAR race yesterday too!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,104 Posts
Those cars, like the SRT4s, can be sneeky fast. Especially the newer Cobalt SS with the turbocharged motor. Depends on what the owner has done to it. To give you an example, I had a 2009 Subaru WRX with only an exhaust, intake and tune (stg 2 tune) pushing 21 psi and it was making 302 whp and 320 wtq. Enought to run high 12's in the quarter mile. The Cobalt SS can be done the same way.
Add my little HHR SS to the cars you better watch out for...Same LNF drivetrain as the Cobalt. The Cobalt has slightly lower gearing and the HHR is a wee bit heavier. I fear no V6 Mustang and will gladly race any GT at the strip other than the new 5.0...Stock v. Stock. I'd race, but if you can drive there is no doubt of the outcome. :worship

Many Cobalts came with SS badges but no blower and the early models had a supercharger. These were very limited in their HP capabilities. The later models had the turbo and are a serious threat with just a few mods. For dollars spent you will get more HP gains from a V8. There are a few HHR SS out there pushing close to 400HP+.

I've tried to trade it in on a Mustang several times but would take too much of a beating on the price. It's my DD and the utility of the station wagon styling plus it's very good at handling the twisties. It is a total blast to drive.....but it's not a Mustang.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,840 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I was even more surprised to see surprise consistently spelled with a Z. Is that a Canadian/Brit thing, like tyre?[/quote

Sorry. Can't spell or type. Im a retired teacher, what do you expect.:hihi:


The license plate on my GT says : IT GOEZ So I guess
I couldnt even spell that right. :heha:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
617 Posts
Hate to tell you but the cobalt ss lightly modded is faster than your v6. A close friend of mine has one and with a simple downpipe, boost controller and tune he runs low 12s at the track and beats my tuned gt.


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app
Down pipe, boost controller, and tune run low 12's? I don't know about that. MAYBE high 12's and low 13's but when you say low 12's I'm taking it as you are saying 12.1-12.3?? If is true, I must of been away from baltss forum in awhile LOL.

-------------------------------------
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
788 Posts
Down pipe, boost controller, and tune run low 12's? I don't know about that. MAYBE high 12's and low 13's but when you say low 12's I'm taking it as you are saying 12.1-12.3?? If is true, I must of been away from baltss forum in awhile LOL.

-------------------------------------
I don't care what the forums are saying. I helped install the parts on the car and raced against him at the track so I know what he ran.


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
Bone stock Cobalt SS's ran 13.8 sec ¼ miles. So yea, I'm not surprised at all.

Stock for stock, your V6 and that Cobalt are very closely matched.

By this time, there are probably very few completely stock Cobalt SS's out there. So don't be surprised if you get a good look at the taillights of a few of them.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
788 Posts
Bone stock Cobalt SS's ran 13.8 sec ¼ miles. So yea, I'm not surprised at all.

Stock for stock, your V6 and that Cobalt are very closely matched.

By this time, there are probably very few completely stock Cobalt SS's out there. So don't be surprised if you get a good look at the taillights of a few of them.
That isn't accurate at all. That is a magazine number and the same magazine put the 2011+ 5.0 running a 13 second quarter mile, which is crap since my 2011 gt mt82 ran a high 12 stock an there has been reported low 12s stock. There is stock cobalts running better numbers then the magazine's say and with a few basic mods they are 12 second cars, which means the chances of you beating one on the street with a v6 mustang are a coin toss.


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
That isn't accurate at all. That is a magazine number and the same magazine put the 2011+ 5.0 running a 13 second quarter mile, which is crap since my 2011 gt mt82 ran a high 12 stock an there has been reported low 12s stock. There is stock cobalts running better numbers then the magazine's say and with a few basic mods they are 12 second cars, which means the chances of you beating one on the street with a v6 mustang are a coin toss.


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app
Are you serious? Not accurate at all?

Magazine # or not, it gives you an idea of what the car can do on a given day. Stock car times are not an exact science, weather plays a role, the type of track plays a role, engine tolerances from the factory plays a role. Come on dude.

Oh the magazine said that your car would do a ¼ mile in 13 and you ran a 12.9 ? Holy ****, they were wayyy off!!! Don't trust the magazines!!!!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
788 Posts
Are you serious? Not accurate at all?

Magazine # or not, it gives you an idea of what the car can do on a given day. Stock car times are not an exact science, weather plays a role, the type of track plays a role, engine tolerances from the factory plays a role. Come on dude.

Oh the magazine said that your car would do a ¼ mile in 13 and you ran a 12.9 ? Holy ****, they were wayyy off!!! Don't trust the magazines!!!!
Ya I am serious. If your actually knew what you were talking about and not just what you read online or in a magazine you would know this.


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,448 Posts
Ya I am serious. If your actually knew what you were talking about and not just what you read online or in a magazine you would know this.


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app
Another rough day browsing on your cell phone? :nogrinner
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
Another rough day browsing on your cell phone? :nogrinner
Please check his and my previous posts. His arguments are weaker than yours. :heha:

He doesn't understand that magazine numbers aren't guaranteed.

Yes, you can achieve faster times and slower times than a magazine publishes, but it gives you a general idea of how fast a car is in its stock form.

He said that magazines are way off because one said that his car would do a ¼ mile in 13 sec, but he was able to do a ¼ mile in 12.9 sec. :kooky:
 
1 - 20 of 66 Posts
Top