GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 20 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,830 Posts
what an amazing car, I love marveling at it!:)

CobaltSS

Second youngest market demographic in the entire country=Cobalt SS haters need to stop before they send would be Chevrolet buyers to Honda VW Subaru Dodge and Mazda.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
604 Posts
It's gotta be fun to have one of those and blow the doors off of unsuspecting, Mustangs, Camaros, etc. (or at least putting up a good fight depending on the model/year)

If I had a long commute to work, that would be the car for me. But I don't, so it's not...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
$22,995....well thats gonna end up being close to $30,000 here in Canada then if its in line with the HHR, what a shame.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,506 Posts
Nice review. I thought it was interesting that it has the youngest demographic next to the Scion tC. That's good news for Chevrolet.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,692 Posts
The Cobalt has been a car that I've really wanted to like, but I just can't get past the 1999 Civic styling. A few more angles here and there - a few less 1990's curves - and I might have been a big fan. The headlights are probably the most yawn inspiring styling aspect, and GM hasn't even tried to improve on that.

As far as the actual car under the skin goes I'm much more positive, and I think the Cobalt's good performance in the SCCA has forever banished the "ancient J-body" stigma that GM compact cars used to have with the tuner community -- so mechanically I think they are getting it right. Now they just need a look that inspires more than rental companies and guys with big aftermarket accessory budgets (that like a blank slate) to want to own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,419 Posts
Gee, great affordable small car draws in young people. They will get older and eventually want bigger more expensive toys. Since they enjoyed their small cars days, they will consider you for more expensive purchases in the future. What a concept.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,808 Posts
The optional, massive wing on the car actually does something, providing 23 pounds of downforce at 70 mph and 115 pounds at 155 mph. Top speed of this car (with the standard, smaller wing) is 160 mph! You wouldn't want to do that with a plain-vanilla Cavalier.
It probably provides 23 pounds of downforce at ZERO miles per hour because it probably weighs 23 pounds by itself. Sorry had to laugh at that one. And secondly why do you want excessive downforce on the rear of a FRONT wheel drive car?

Now guys, I'm not making fun of the Cobalt SS, I'm making fun at the writer coming up with this. It looks like a fun little car for the money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,034 Posts
It probably provides 23 pounds of downforce at ZERO miles per hour because it probably weighs 23 pounds by itself. Sorry had to laugh at that one. And secondly why do you want excessive downforce on the rear of a FRONT wheel drive car?

Now guys, I'm not making fun of the Cobalt SS, I'm making fun at the writer coming up with this. It looks like a fun little car for the money.
It's not excessive, but you'd want it on the rear of a FWD car for the same reason you'd want it on a RWD car; to keep the butt planted firmly to the ground.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
I'm sure that Chevrolet means well when they make a performance edition of a vehicle with insignificant interior room and with body panels with assembly gaps rivaling the Grand Canyon. I guess if it is just one person who has no pride but wants to go fast, the Cobore SS is just the ticket. If you are a thinking person, there are far better vehicles in this class that won't insult you every time you look at it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,808 Posts
It's what I kind of figured anyway. But you could get 23 pounds of downforce by putting 23 pounds of dead weight in the trunk. He should have stated aerodynamic downforce. I understand the comment of the author but they way it is put is like that 23 extra pounds at 70 mph is some sort of breakthrough in aerodynamic science.

I'm sure the Cobalt is front weight biased anyway, probably 60/40 or somthing like that. Anyone have the actual weight bias percentages?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
767 Posts
It's what I kind of figured anyway. But you could get 23 pounds of downforce by putting 23 pounds of dead weight in the trunk. He should have stated aerodynamic downforce. I understand the comment of the author but they way it is put is like that 23 extra pounds at 70 mph is some sort of breakthrough in aerodynamic science.

I'm sure the Cobalt is front weight biased anyway, probably 60/40 or somthing like that. Anyone have the actual weight bias percentages?
And the GTO is 50/50 right?
 
1 - 20 of 44 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top