FRS/BRZ vs. Cobalt SS

[Brzetto]

Originally Posted by sho220

Did you come up with that gem all by yourself? I'm impressed. *translation* I thought I left a witty comment but ended up looking like an imbecile and accomplished nothing.

That's spot on.

[InvalidJohnny5]

I think the Focus ST looks better...

[morrisxd]

There is no doubt that stock vs stock the cobalt is a faster car. Does it make it a better car? no. Did you ever drive the cobalt? It is actually not to shabby of a cheap car. The mechanics of that thing are spot on. Its not a turd, the interior is, but the car itself isnt. Just because it was based on the cobalt platform doesnt make it a terrible vehicle. I guess since the Evo is based on a lancer its horrible? And the WRX/STi also because they were based on the impreza? You are biased and thats the end of it pretty much.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Brzetto

What I am doing is stating a fact that six gears are better than five, the first five are for accelerating up to the sixth gear that's purpose is for fuel efficient highway travel and or top speed achievement. The Cobalt was GM's pathetic answer to the sport compact market. It looks like the 86 professional racer guy is done debating with you since he already won the argument. So am I, have fun trolling. Maybe you and sho can have a tit for tat deal where you guys thank each others comments, it looks like you already have that going anyway.

explain to my why thats a fact please. also, i know how transmissions work and im aware of overdrive.

[McShibbs]

Originally Posted by Dazza

From http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/s...cobalt_ss.html

Subaru BRZ vs Chevrolet Cobalt SS
Lap Times (1)

Track BRZ Cobalt SS
Virginia International Raceway 3:18.60 3:20.60

Specs

0 - 100 kph 6.8 s 6.4 s
Power/weight ratio 162 bhp/tonne 161 bhp/tonne
Summary

Discipline
BRZ Cobalt SS
Track Performance 10 points 0 points
Straight line speed 27 points 28 points Total 3728
The verdict

Subaru BRZ is noticeably faster.

When you go and post stats you might want to be a little more careful about the information you present, you're dishing out info on the '05 Supercharged Cobalt. So yeah I would hope a 2013 BRZ is noticably faster then a car made in 2005. However, the turbo model was released in '08 and still holds a faster time then the BRZ by 2 seconds. So lemme steal one of your lines and use it more accurately.

Chevy Cobalt SS Turbocharged is noticeably faster.

Originally Posted by STV3

Also no one can deny that this car was a beast.

Originally Posted by Brzetto

Wow this Focus SVT is a hell of a lot better looking than the Cobalt ever was. Yes the Cobalt SS has 260hp but it's still just a shitty Cobalt. Horsepower in a shitty car equals still a shitty car, you can't polish a turd.

You're on crack if you're comparing one of those old POS SVT Focus to a Cobalt SS...

Some of the ignorance in forums today really makes me laugh. Did anyone stop to think of the difference in the target market for the two cars? The BRZ/FR-S was made specifically to be an all around balanced car to carry on the heritage of a world famous car model. The Cobalt SS was a cheap econo car that Chevy had that they decided to give a boosted motor, brembo brakes and a few other little bells and whistles. That being said it is still the second fastest FWD production car to ever be produced, and really Idk if you can even count the only car a head of it considering it is claimed to be a production car. No one in their right mind would want to daily Renault Mégane RS R26.R in all it's glory for it's outrageous price tag.

It's like comparing apples to oranges really IMO. I own an SS/TC personally, and with just $2k in mods I'm around 400whp/350wtq with room to grow as my car sits. I'm am however in the market for a second car once I finish school this fall and the BRZ is on the top of my list for the fact that it's the best RWD car you can get for the money exactly why I got the Cobalt because it is the same story for FWD cars.

[Brzetto]

Aha it was only a matter of time until the trolls got one of their friends to come on here and troll. The door is that way junior. Sho loses all of the arguments he starts and so will you. Bye kid.

[Dazza]

McShibbs, not my words everything I posted was from the website

When you go and post stats you might want to be a little more careful about the information you present, you're dishing out info on the '05 Supercharged Cobalt. So yeah I would hope a 2013 BRZ is noticably faster then a car made in 2005. However, the turbo model was released in '08 and still holds a faster time then the BRZ by 2 seconds. So lemme steal one of your lines and use it more accurately.

Chevy Cobalt SS Turbocharged is noticeably faster.

However you were quite right in that I wasn't careful I just went to the fastest laps website and compared the 2 cars. I wouldn't know a Cobalt if I fell over one

[wrxgoose]

Originally Posted by Brzetto

can't polish a turd.

mythbusters has proven otherwise.


What's the power/weight on the newest cobalt? and can't we just get someone to race the 2 cars around a track already? (with the same damned tires)

[Brzetto]

Originally Posted by wrxgoose

mythbusters has proven otherwise.


What's the power/weight on the newest cobalt? and can't we just get someone to race the 2 cars around a track already? (with the same damned tires)

I don't know the power to weight ratio, it's not a car I care about enough to know that info. I doubt the race will happen since the cobalt isn't relevant anymore.

[Celica00]

I can't believe out of all the cars you can debate about. The community has singled out the cobalt

[enwave]

Originally Posted by Celica00

I can't believe out of all the cars you can debate about. The community has singled out the cobalt

Hehehe. Too true. It secretly hurts my feelings that this even compares at all... but unfortunately it does.

Also, @fatoni -- I know an exhaust, tune, tires, intake don't count as stock. That's what I'm saying -- with minor modifications you can get a car that is infinitely more fun to drive with comparable power and performance. Do the same things to a Cobalt SS and you still get that funky drivetrain, awkward ride height, soft suspension, ugly styling, FWD, and -- most importantly -- Chevy logos.

The twins come with the refinement out of the box, and the SS comes with that extra power out of the box. I can always add power, but I can't as easily add that magical driver's feedback and driving experience. That's what the Cobalt really lacks, in my opinion.

Because of that, I'd take the FR-S/BRZ any day of the week. In fact, the only car I'd really consider swapping it for in a realistic price range is a used S2000 or Miata.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by enwave

Hehehe. Too true. It secretly hurts my feelings that this even compares at all... but unfortunately it does.

Also, @fatoni -- I know an exhaust, tune, tires, intake don't count as stock. That's what I'm saying -- with minor modifications you can get a car that is infinitely more fun to drive with comparable power and performance. Do the same things to a Cobalt SS and you still get that funky drivetrain, awkward ride height, soft suspension, ugly styling, FWD, and -- most importantly -- Chevy logos.

The twins come with the refinement out of the box, and the SS comes with that extra power out of the box. I can always add power, but I can't as easily add that magical driver's feedback and driving experience. That's what the Cobalt really lacks, in my opinion.

Because of that, I'd take the FR-S/BRZ any day of the week. In fact, the only car I'd really consider swapping it for in a realistic price range is a used S2000 or Miata.

i think the cobalts handling gets underrated simply because its not its not its greatest strength and people are generally uninformed. its kinda like how this forum will talk about how the rx8 sucks because its rotary doesnt make any torque despite the fact that it makes more torque than the frs. dont think that i feel that the cobalt is a more fun or better driver than the frs. i just think its worth noting that its not only fast for a fwd car but fast for a car in general.

[enwave]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i think the cobalts handling gets underrated simply because its not its not its greatest strength and people are generally uninformed. its kinda like how this forum will talk about how the rx8 sucks because its rotary doesnt make any torque despite the fact that it makes more torque than the frs. dont think that i feel that the cobalt is a more fun or better driver than the frs. i just think its worth noting that its not only fast for a fwd car but fast for a car in general.

Can't disagree there. It's definitely an underrated car, no question. And they handling certainly isn't terrible, it's just terrible compared to the twins the Cobalt reminds me a lot of the Taurus SHO in many ways, actually.

[sho220]

Originally Posted by enwave

Hehehe. Too true. It secretly hurts my feelings that this even compares at all... but unfortunately it does.

Also, @fatoni -- I know an exhaust, tune, tires, intake don't count as stock. That's what I'm saying -- with minor modifications you can get a car that is infinitely more fun to drive with comparable power and performance. Do the same things to a Cobalt SS and you still get that funky drivetrain, awkward ride height, soft suspension, ugly styling, FWD, and -- most importantly -- Chevy logos.

The twins come with the refinement out of the box, and the SS comes with that extra power out of the box. I can always add power, but I can't as easily add that magical driver's feedback and driving experience. That's what the Cobalt really lacks, in my opinion.

Because of that, I'd take the FR-S/BRZ any day of the week. In fact, the only car I'd really consider swapping it for in a realistic price range is a used S2000 or Miata.

Because when we're talking performance, nothing matters as much as the logos...