REVIEW: 2007 Cobalt SS Supercharged...

[Eye of the Tiger]

Move flames onto the broken window!

Or how about I put a window there instead so it will pass inspection

[TheIntrepid]

Or how about I put a window there instead so it will pass inspection

Mine will fail inspection because of the lack of DRLs.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Mine will fail inspection because of the lack of DRLs.

The Escort's inspection expired in June. Needs window NOW.

[SVT666]

Never mind. I knew the Caliber's available with AWD... I would have assumed that something with friggin 300hp would have it at least OPTIONAL.

Where have you been?  It's 280 hp.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Where have you been?  It's 280 hp.

285 bhp @ 5700rpm if you want to be picky.

[Raza]

Torque-steer was virtually non-existent which was the complete opposite of the Mazda3 I drove this summer.  The Cobalt SS spins it's tires fairly easily though and you do have to be gentle with the pedal.  I agree though that 260 hp would be too much.  If I had one of these I might swap out the pulley for a smaller one but only to see how it handle the extra power because I really don't think the car needs it.  If it was RWD I would push the power to the limit.

Yeah, but if you floor the thing in first gear, you'll stand still.  I can't imagine it with 260bhp.  The most powerful FWD car I've driven had 260 (TL) and the torque steer was awful.

[S204STi]

I'm not sure why the SS Supercharged got discontinued, but I seem to remember some rumors about a turbocharged Cobalt floating around. There may have been pictures, too.

No, that was the HHR you were thinking of.  The tall bread-box gets the 260hp turbo, and the nimble coupe gets a wimpy 2.4 n/a.  Go figure.

[FordSVT]

Yeah, but if you floor the thing in first gear, you'll stand still.  I can't imagine it with 260bhp.  The most powerful FWD car I've driven had 260 (TL) and the torque steer was awful.

Since when was the fastest way to launch in any high-powered fwd or rwd car to floor it in first gear? If I dropped the clutch and floored my mustang in 1st gear from a dead stop it would roast the tires off, why would you expect a 260 hp fwd car to behave differently without electronic intervention?

[Raza]

Since when was the fastest way to launch in any high-powered fwd or rwd car to floor it in first gear? If I dropped the clutch and floored my mustang in 1st gear from a dead stop it would roast the tires off, why would you expect a 260 hp fwd car to behave differently without electronic intervention?

When did I say anything about dumping the clutch? 

[FordSVT]

When did I say anything about dumping the clutch? 

Well, because in order spin the tires badly enough to "stand still" as you put it, you would have to be some damn aggressive with the clutch. I've driven A Cobalt SS and it wasn't THAT powerful. With a quick launch the tires spin a couple of feet and then grab and hang on through first and second gear.

I'm not going to disagree with the assertion that fwd cars don't put power to the ground as well as rwd or awd cars, that would be silly. But 200-220 hp is definitely on the safe side of overkill in a properly set up, 3000 lb car.

Same with the MPS3. It gets a lot of slack for being hard to handle in first gear, and for coming loose easily on a hard launch, but to get it to come loose to the point where the tires simply spin and don't hook up for 100 ft you've got to be trying to do so.

Hyperbole doesn't win arguments is all.

[Raza]

Well, because in order spin the tires badly enough to "stand still" as you put it, you would have to be some damn aggressive with the clutch. I've driven A Cobalt SS and it wasn't THAT powerful. With a quick launch the tires spin a couple of feet and then grab and hang on through first and second gear.

I'm not going to disagree with the assertion that fwd cars don't put power to the ground as well as rwd or awd cars, that would be silly. But 200-220 hp is definitely on the safe side of overkill in a properly set up, 3000 lb car.

Same with the MPS3. It gets a lot of slack for being hard to handle in first gear, and for coming loose easily on a hard launch, but to get it to come loose to the point where the tires simply spin and don't hook up for 100 ft you've got to be trying to do so.

Hyperbole doesn't win arguments is all.

Well, when I drove the Cobalt SS/SC, an easy launch and flooring it in first gear caused the front wheels to light up. 

[MX793]

With only 160 hp and 150 lb-ft (peak), my car is right at the brink of losing traction if you romp on it in 1st from a slow roll.  And I don't even try to be the least bit agressive when the road is wet or all I get is front end wander and a general loss of steering.  I was driving in the rain a few weeks ago and I took off a bit briskly from a traffic light, hit a set of railroad tracks while accelerating (I was in 2nd gear at that point going maybe 20 mph) and the whole damn front end stepped to the left as the front wheels lost traction on the metal.  I don't think I was giving it more than half throttle either, certainly not pedal to the floor.  And I couldn't do much to correct it because once the fronts let go, you can't steer.  Just have to let off the throttle and wait for them to find grip again.

[FordSVT]

Well, when I drove the Cobalt SS/SC, an easy launch and flooring it in first gear caused the front wheels to light up. 

Slick road? Worn out tires? Did it not have the limited slip option? Is your definition of "easy", "letting the clutch out quickly at 3000 rpms"?

I've driven two of them, both with the limited slip and the wheel spin was easily managed at WOT in first gear from a rolling start or a "normal" green light take-off.

[The Pirate]

Question for you m/t Mazda3 drivers:  In top gear traveling 70 mph (112 km/h), what does your car rev at?  My car (Protege) revs at 3300 rpm, which seems unnecessarily high.  I've always wondered if they fixed changed that for the 3.

[SVT666]

Slick road? Worn out tires? Did it not have the limited slip option? Is your definition of "easy", "letting the clutch out quickly at 3000 rpms"?

I've driven two of them, both with the limited slip and the wheel spin was easily managed at WOT in first gear from a rolling start or a "normal" green light take-off.

Were you driving an SS or an SS Supercharged?  The regular SS is not that powerful but the SS Supercharged has got a lot of oomph.  Like I said in my review, a 3000 rpm clutch drop resulted in severe axle hop so I don't recommend it anyway.  The nice thing about the SS Supercharged was the lack of torque-steer which not something I could say for even the ost basic Mazda3 with 144 hp.  Even with only 5 or 10 degrees of steering input, the car tried to rip the steering wheel out of my hands with 3/4 throttle input.  The way these cars are setup makes all the difference.  The SS Supercharged could probably handle 20 or so more ponies, but it would make first gear pretty touchy.

[SVT666]

[FordSVT]

Question for you m/t Mazda3 drivers:  In top gear traveling 70 mph (112 km/h), what does your car rev at?  My car (Protege) revs at 3300 rpm, which seems unnecessarily high.  I've always wondered if they fixed changed that for the 3.

I think just under 3000 in the 2.3 L but I'll remember to check later today and post the number and fuel economy at that speed. The 3 is still geared rather short in 5th though, at 120 kph in 5th if you step on the gas the car accelerates quicker than most 4 cyl cars I've driven in.

[The Pirate]

I think just under 3000 in the 2.3 L but I'll remember to check later today and post the number and fuel economy at that speed. The 3 is still geared rather short in 5th though, at 120 kph in 5th if you step on the gas the car accelerates quicker than most 4 cyl cars I've driven in.

Cool, thanks.  The 2.0L in my car is fairly torquey and definitely has the suds to pull some taller gearing.  I think the car would be perfect if every gear was just a bit taller.

[The Pirate]

Damn, that's a good looking car, Hemi!  Good looking interior, and those seats look pretty comfy as well.  Again, I think that's the color to get in that car too.

[SVT666]

Damn, that's a good looking car, Hemi!  Good looking interior, and those seats look pretty comfy as well.  Again, I think that's the color to get in that car too.

If I bought one, it's the only colour I would look at.

[FordSVT]

Were you driving an SS or an SS Supercharged?  The regular SS is not that powerful but the SS Supercharged has got a lot of oomph.  Like I said in my review, a 3000 rpm clutch drop resulted in severe axle hop so I don't recommend it anyway.  The nice thing about the SS Supercharged was the lack of torque-steer which not something I could say for even the ost basic Mazda3 with 144 hp.  Even with only 5 or 10 degrees of steering input, the car tried to rip the steering wheel out of my hands with 3/4 throttle input.  The way these cars are setup makes all the difference.  The SS Supercharged could probably handle 20 or so more ponies, but it would make first gear pretty touchy.

It was supercharged and had a limited slip. It pulled straight at WOT, I'm just saying it wasn't so touchy you were smoking the tires all of the time and could easily handle more power. We agree with each other.

My Mazda torque steers a bit but if you feel the steering wheel is tugging hard enough to come out of your hands you need to start working out. 

[Eye of the Tiger]

Fun Fact: the Est33m torque steers worse than the SRT-4

[TheIntrepid]

Fun Fact: the Est33m torque steers worse than the SRT-4

The SRT-4 was designed to be fast in a straight line. The Esteem was designed to be an economy wagon.

[The Pirate]

The SRT-4 was designed to be fast in a straight line. The Esteem was designed to be an economy wagon.

Fun fact:  Both are FWD, and the SRT-4 has ~2.5 times the power of the Esteem.  In actuality, the SRT-4 was made with equal length axles to help eliminate torque steer.  But, not knowing this, one would assume an SRT-4 would have more torque steer than an Esteem wagon.  My 130hp Mazda has torque steer as well.

It's just a quirky fact that goes against what one would assume.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Fun fact:  Both are FWD, and the SRT-4 has ~2.5 times the power of the Esteem.  In actuality, the SRT-4 was made with equal length axles to help eliminate torque steer.  But, not knowing this, one would assume an SRT-4 would have more torque steer than an Esteem wagon.  My 130hp Mazda has torque steer as well.

It's just a quirky fact that goes against what one would assume.

SRT-4 also had a nice LSD.

[TheIntrepid]

Thank god you blurred out the plates.

Also, more pics of that sexy Montana!

[CALL_911]

The SRT-4 was designed to be fast in a straight line. The Esteem was designed to be an economy wagon.

The SRT-4 is a sport compact. It's not really a one-trick pony.

[TheIntrepid]

The SRT-4 is a sport compact. It's not really a one-trick pony.

That's also an argument one can use to explain deficiencies to women.

[CALL_911]

That's also an argument one can use to explain deficiencies to women.

?

[SVT666]

Thank god you blurred out the plates.

I'm not a paranoid schizophrenic.

Also, more pics of that sexy Montana!

You have problems.