SIK02SS

iTrader: (11)

"the new cobalt ss supercharged, a feel-good pill for the Camaro blues"


MY ***. so C&D is telling me this cobalt with its 205/200 power will fulfill the needs and feeling my bone stock camaro does, which dynoed at 313/326 to the wheels? give me a break, they're so genius that in the 2005 cannonball one lap of america their car is a 2005 mustang gt...and they ran out of gas in between tracks, real smart...


sorry, but reading that pissed me off

Ravenous T\A

iTrader: (12)

nuthin like C&D trying to pump sunshine into america's *** I'd rather buy a SRT-4, they mod better anyways.

Roarin_8

iTrader: (5)

Cobalt SS also weighs in at 2991. Not enough power for that weight. And no way in hell can you compare that car with a V8 camaro. Can't even put those 2 in the same sentence together.

As for a feel good pill, more like a sleeping pill.

SIK02SS

iTrader: (11)

camaro=

cobalt=

TriShield

I would argue it's a much better overall car than the Camaro ever was.

If GM bothers to make another Camaro, the interior, rear seat accomodations, handling, rigidity, and quality should all at least equal if not surpass the Cobalt.

ss rally red

iTrader: (8)

GM= big advertising buget/C & D blowing sunshine up GM's *** to get a large shot of that money.

infinitebird

iTrader: (11)

It might be a better car for people that don't know the difference between a cam and a clutch.

TriShield

Or those who appreciate that there's more to a daily commute than a quarter mile.

qwikz28

iTrader: (12)

the cobalt ss would make a nice daily driver to go ALONG with my Camaro. NOT REPLACE.

Racehead

Don't be an idiot. The modern fbody has never been a quarter mile only car. It always is assumed by people who don't know anything about it that it is because it does so well there, but with a little suspension work it's a road course terror. Your comments are mis-leading and wildly in-accurate and simply show your own ignorance to those of us who DO know.

qwikz28

iTrader: (12)

i remember a kid in my high school told me this. he was a friend of mine and he drove a road-course modified 1987 BMW and when i told him i was going to test drive a LS1, but i was worried it wouldnt handle well enough. he corrected me and thats how i learned. i bought my car soon after

UtOhCop

Stock Cobalt SS's are putting down 220 wheel horsepower and 200 wheel torque. GM's also coming out with upgrade kids to take it to 300 horsepower.

ActionJack

Torque steer with an ugly little car that is best suited for ricers IMO.

burnout04

see this is highlighting the EXACT PROBLEM with ricers. They are econo cars for people with low budgets. People who could not afford real sports cars, would try to make their econo cars i.e. civic, cobalt, corrola, etc.... faster. The problem their in lies that they are making cars go fast, or trying at least with cars that were never meant to go that fast. Not to mention, a lot of people say these days oh man sux for that ferrari i beet in a race in my turbo civic hatch or whatever they hell it is. Fact of the matter is, who gives a **** if the turbo civic hatch is faster? Its a damn ferrari, it looks 100 times cooler, has an awesome legacy and history to its name, handles better, and cost more! So even down to our level, the Camaro is a much better looking car than the cobalt or any ricer is. Ill let a srt-4 blow past me, who gives a ****, its a damn dodge neon! A neon is a neon, a cobalt is a cobalt, and a civic is a civic. All cars that were designed on the basis of getting from point A to point B. If you want a sports car, go buy a real one. Save up money that you were spending on stickers, body kits, pointless mufflers, etc, and get a real car. Rice is Rice, Muscle is Muscle. Take it or leave it, but thats my view and im stickn to it

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

Huh? I would argue that you are wrong.

In 1998, my Z28 stickered at a base price of $20,470 + destination. Or $22,271 with the Z28 preferred equipment group ($1,576) plus Z-rated tires ($225). Hell, even with adding T-tops ($995), chrome wheels ($500), traction control ($450), Monsoon premium audio ($450), and a rear window defogger ($170) the total sticker price was still only $24,836. Now I understand that is in 1998 dollars, but the way I see it, what else could you buy in ’98 for $24K with that list of options (with a base price just over $20K) that could beat a V8 Camaro dollar for dollar in all categories that one would generally look at when comparing performance passenger cars? I can’t think of anything that beats it.

Sure, some cars might do better in a specific area than Camaro, but IMO overall it was the best performance car you could get for your money in its day, from ANY manufacturer. Just because the rear seat room is extremely tight doesn’t make the car bad overall, as for the interior, I feel it is on par for its price range when new, as is handling ability. I don’t see any big issue with quality either, for the price. I’ve had 3 LS1 f-bodies now, and none have been any more problematic than other cars I’ve owned from Dodge to Toyota. As for overall power and braking, I don’t feel that anything even came close to an LS1 F-body dollar for dollar during the days they were new on the showroom floor.

I guess I could argue that my Bonneville is a better car than my Camaro. It’s got considerably more rear seat room, plenty of luggage space, nicer seating/interior all-around, smoother ride, and gets slightly better MPG under some conditions. But there is a problem with that argument; I don’t see how a Bonneville and a Camaro are comparable, just like I don’t see the direct comparison between a Camaro and a Cobalt. Just because they call it an “SS” and it has a supercharger does not put it on a level playing field with Camaro-type cars, in my mind. Perhaps this is an opinion issue though...

Furthermore, I think it to be somewhat flawed to compare a car that was just released in 2005 to one who’s last significant revision was in the 1998 model year, then ceasing to exist after 2002. I would certainly hope that any large automotive corporation would improve, to some degree, the overall quality and/or offerings of their products within 7+ years, wouldn’t you?

Keep in mind, quality is, in large part, all about perspective. I’m sure there are quite a few people that drive SL 55s that think Corvettes are cheap junk. One’s financial limits usually dictate where “junk” ends and “quality” begins.

Personally TriShield, I think you just don’t like F-bodies. You put them down often enough. That’s fine, thankfully it’s still a free country Those of us who love these cars don’t need or want your approval to like them anyway. BTW, you’ve got a beautiful GN. I hope to one day add an LC2 car to my lineup.

HemiDakota

C&D is not a good magazine period. Number skewing, biased opinnions, and lamo test drivers. Stop your subscription as I did.

Ravenous T\A

iTrader: (12)

But look how cheap the GT was and the base model GT came with PW/PL and Remote keyless entry. U had to get a base super stripped down model Z28 to be as cheap as the GT Base model for that and how many people want that? Not many. That is why U see far more GT's (even tho underpowered) on the road then you do Z28 & SS's. its simple, People want style with some pep, most people could careless if this car is the fastest on the road. Plus FORD backs there **** with a heavy aftermarket, GM doesnt. **** even MOPAR (DMChry) backs there stuff with more aftermarket then GM. Next car I buy is going to a be a Cobra or maybe the new Challenger when it comes out, I'd rather have alot of aftermarket choices then have to redo all my stock heads,intake and wait for over a year before cams come out for my GM car. Buy a 05 Mustang and you can already get different body kits for it, S/C, bolt ons, and rims all from Ford and Ford aftermaket groups like Saleen and Steeda. The 1st year of the 97 LS1 what did we have----Nothing, a Corvette was just a plain old corvette, hardly any aftermarket backing the 1st year, while Ford has a HUGE backing from tons of companies, just compare muscle mustang and fast ford to GM Hi-tech, the stang mag is over half ads of aftermarket for your stang while the High-tech mag is only a few pages. GM needs to back there **** and needs to try and get other companies to back there performance cars. ok Rant over

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

IMO, aftermarket support has no bearing on how ‘good’ or ‘bad’ a car is. Might have a bearing on whether or not you wish to buy the car, due to how well it suits your future modding plans, but I don’t think that makes the actual car good or bad.

As far as I’m concerned, the slightly lower price of a ’98 Mustang GT with full power options when new vs a ’98 Z28 with Preferred Equipment Group is not worth the tremendous loss in power. (I believe the base price of the ’98 GT was something like $20,800 vs the $22,046 for the Z28 w/ Preferred Equipment). . And if I remember correctly, things like an auto trans and ABS were extra cost options on the GT making the price even closer or possibly equal. I don’t think it’s accurate on any level to say that a ’98 Mustang GT was in any way a better ‘value’ than a ’98 Z28.

Some people feel that the seating arrangement is more accommodating in the GT. I personally do not share that opinion.

And when it comes to style/appearance, well that’s all about individual perception. I happen to like the look and feel of the F-body better, both inside and out. Some other’s might disagree. It’s a subjective opinion that is pointless to argue though.

Ravenous T\A

iTrader: (12)

Not really a pointless arguement when the proof is in the sales, Mustang Outsold the Camaro nearly ever year sometime 5 to 1 and why cause most people dont care about power, just look at how many people drive RSX's and RX8, they are sporty looking but dont pack hardly any punch near what the Camaro and TA did but they have tons of buyers for them because of looks and price, $24-26K is alot of money when you can buy a Base GT for $21K and get a auto for $22K and Leather for $23K thats not including if they had rebates, when I was lookin for a Car after my 96 TA I looked at the New GT's, price wise they were great for a new car but power wise is where they lacked, but I am not one of the majority so I bought a 98 TA, but if I was just lookin for a sporty lookin car in a decent price range with a V8 i would have bought a GT. Alot of people with sports cars dont even race, look at the old farts in Corvettes who have never even used passing gear!! I race and I race alot, but like I said most people dont and thats why there are 10 times more mustangs(V6 & GT's) on the road then Camaro's and TA's combined.

dgformula2k

iTrader: (2)

I agree. Their journalism has really sucked lately. Alot of whining and bitching and extraneous political commentary that I don't need. I want opinions on the latest cars not the war in Iraq.