Saturn Ion (redline) VS SRT4 VS Cobalt SS
#31
04-27-2005, 10:05 PM
Legend
RE: Saturn Ion (redline) VS SRT4 VS Cobalt SS
That magazine is known for being highly biased as I mentioned. They also suprised me by saying how the SRT-4 they used in this test was actually too new and wasn't broke in yet, they also mentioned that it was by far the slowest SRT-4 they have ever tested because of this. If they would have used one that had been broke in like the ones they've previously tested, then the laps around the track would have been the other way around.
The SS has it's strong points and it is far better than what was expected, but most will simply see it as a supercharged Cavalier. The Cobalt is the Cavaliers replacement and it is simply the new Cavalier. This is no different than the Neon which is on it's last year, next year it will be a completely different car frame and all, but since it is the Neons replacement it is simply the new Neon even though it will have a different name and everything else. Since both of these cars fill in the same place in the market that the Cavalier and Neon were in just about everyone is simply going to see them as just the new Cavalier and Neon even though they are actually completely different than their predecessors in every way possible except their targeted market place.
The SS has it's strong points and it is far better than what was expected, but most will simply see it as a supercharged Cavalier. The Cobalt is the Cavaliers replacement and it is simply the new Cavalier. This is no different than the Neon which is on it's last year, next year it will be a completely different car frame and all, but since it is the Neons replacement it is simply the new Neon even though it will have a different name and everything else. Since both of these cars fill in the same place in the market that the Cavalier and Neon were in just about everyone is simply going to see them as just the new Cavalier and Neon even though they are actually completely different than their predecessors in every way possible except their targeted market place.
#32
04-27-2005, 10:10 PM
RE: Saturn Ion (redline) VS SRT4 VS Cobalt SS
ORIGINAL: 71RoadRunner
That magazine is known for being highly biased as I mentioned. They also suprised me by saying how the SRT-4 they used in this test was actually too new and wasn't broke in yet, they also mentioned that it was by far the slowest SRT-4 they have ever tested because of this. If they would have used one that had been broke in like the ones they've previously tested, then the laps around the track would have been the other way around.
The SS has it's strong points and it is far better than what was expected, but most will simply see it as a supercharged Cavalier. The Cobalt is the Cavaliers replacement and it is simply the new Cavalier. This is no different than the Neon which is on it's last year, next year it will be a completely different car frame and all, but since it is the Neons replacement it is simply the new Neon even though it will have a different name and everything else. Since both of these cars fill in the same place in the market that the Cavalier and Neon were in just about everyone is simply going to see them as just the new Cavalier and Neon even though they are actually completely different than their predecessors in every way possible except their targeted market place.
That magazine is known for being highly biased as I mentioned. They also suprised me by saying how the SRT-4 they used in this test was actually too new and wasn't broke in yet, they also mentioned that it was by far the slowest SRT-4 they have ever tested because of this. If they would have used one that had been broke in like the ones they've previously tested, then the laps around the track would have been the other way around.
The SS has it's strong points and it is far better than what was expected, but most will simply see it as a supercharged Cavalier. The Cobalt is the Cavaliers replacement and it is simply the new Cavalier. This is no different than the Neon which is on it's last year, next year it will be a completely different car frame and all, but since it is the Neons replacement it is simply the new Neon even though it will have a different name and everything else. Since both of these cars fill in the same place in the market that the Cavalier and Neon were in just about everyone is simply going to see them as just the new Cavalier and Neon even though they are actually completely different than their predecessors in every way possible except their targeted market place.
#33
04-29-2005, 06:48 AM
Legend
RE: Saturn Ion (redline) VS SRT4 VS Cobalt SS
I too hate misinformation which is something you will notice if you check out my posts. Misinfomation and lying are two of the biggest things I cannot stand, not to mention the obvious stuff like flaming. I too like the SRT-4, alot, especially mine.
I get everything I see on the SRT-4 and the most recent was a magazine called mph and they have the SRT-4 ACR vs. the BMW M3 Competition Package. The SRT-4 ACR seemed to have the usual traction problems launching even though it has more rubber on the ground than the regular SRT-4, it ran 0-60 MPH in 5.7 sec. and the 1/4 mile in 13.9 @ 105 MPH. The M3 Comp. didn't have traction problems, it ran 0-60 MPH in 5.1 sec. and the 1/4 mile in 13.4 @ 107 MPH. I forget what road track they were at, but the extra $33,000+ that the M3 Comp. costs over the SRT-4 ACR isn't worth it, the best the M3 Comp. could do was .15 seconds quicker and averaged only .12 seconds quicker around the course than the SRT-4 ACR. They drooled all over the M3 Comp. and couldn't praise it more while they berated and belittled the SRT-4 ACR even though it was barely more than a tenth of a second behind. It's almost as if they didn't have a clue that they were comparing it to a car that's two and a half times more expensive and they seemed to expect the same ultra high level of fit and refinement out of it even though it's just over $23,000. But all their obvious favoritism cannot change the facts, and the fact is that the SRT-4 ACR will run a road course door to door with the heavily priced M3 Competition Package.
I get everything I see on the SRT-4 and the most recent was a magazine called mph and they have the SRT-4 ACR vs. the BMW M3 Competition Package. The SRT-4 ACR seemed to have the usual traction problems launching even though it has more rubber on the ground than the regular SRT-4, it ran 0-60 MPH in 5.7 sec. and the 1/4 mile in 13.9 @ 105 MPH. The M3 Comp. didn't have traction problems, it ran 0-60 MPH in 5.1 sec. and the 1/4 mile in 13.4 @ 107 MPH. I forget what road track they were at, but the extra $33,000+ that the M3 Comp. costs over the SRT-4 ACR isn't worth it, the best the M3 Comp. could do was .15 seconds quicker and averaged only .12 seconds quicker around the course than the SRT-4 ACR. They drooled all over the M3 Comp. and couldn't praise it more while they berated and belittled the SRT-4 ACR even though it was barely more than a tenth of a second behind. It's almost as if they didn't have a clue that they were comparing it to a car that's two and a half times more expensive and they seemed to expect the same ultra high level of fit and refinement out of it even though it's just over $23,000. But all their obvious favoritism cannot change the facts, and the fact is that the SRT-4 ACR will run a road course door to door with the heavily priced M3 Competition Package.
#34
05-01-2005, 05:49 AM
Record Breaker
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sterling Hts, MI
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Saturn Ion (redline) VS SRT4 VS Cobalt SS
ORIGINAL: haunter
277whp when a car is rated at 285 hp IS underrating, if its a manual factor 15% drivetrain loss and you have ~30 more hp at teh wheels than you should.
so......they drove a different SRT4 on a different day in different conditions and the time changed, yeah wow thas wierd
Don't mention that the cobalt beat the SRT-4 around a tracks.
A few facts for you guys, feel free to doublcheck them anywhere
The IonRL and teh Cobalt SS are NOT a cavalier, its a brand new platform called delta that saturn satrted using in 03 or 04 I beleive.
Then engine is NOT a honda motor, the VUE Redline uses a honda 3.0L v6, the delta cars use the LSJ, its a 2.0L all aluminum ecotec with aan eaton M62 roots blower and an air to water intercooler.
The average dyno #'s a re generally between 200 and 210 whp, we know this is fact because a large # of redline forums has dyno'd stock, and its easy to still be stock when the only aftermarket at the time was K&N panel filters and DIY stuff.
They run mid 14's in the quarter mile, not as fast as teh SRT-4, but they drive nicer, i have driven both, a good friend has an 04 SRT4 and my dad daily drives a Redline when he isnt driving his 99 Camaro SS. T
he 05 models have LSD as an option. A member witha DIY intake and exhuast ran a 13.9 and is the fastest 1320' time to date on the board, and is the most modded one that I know of right now, minus PSI-Fi's test car
ORIGINAL: bigddy9
Underrated?? I might be the biggest GM supporter on this board, and even I won't say GM underrates their motors. At the Detroit Auto Show this past January, there was a GM dyno booth and they had a 5.3 with no restrictions on a dyno that said it was at 277 HP. They are rated at 285 stock......sounds overrated to me. Anyway, I've driven the Cobalt SS and my SRT-4 is faster. I will say that the 6-speed tranny is slick, and the power delivery is very linear, but it's not faster than an SRT-4. As far as interior goes, GM nailed it with the SS. Way better than the Dodge. Had the SS been out when I bought my car, I would have given it serious consideration.
Underrated?? I might be the biggest GM supporter on this board, and even I won't say GM underrates their motors. At the Detroit Auto Show this past January, there was a GM dyno booth and they had a 5.3 with no restrictions on a dyno that said it was at 277 HP. They are rated at 285 stock......sounds overrated to me. Anyway, I've driven the Cobalt SS and my SRT-4 is faster. I will say that the 6-speed tranny is slick, and the power delivery is very linear, but it's not faster than an SRT-4. As far as interior goes, GM nailed it with the SS. Way better than the Dodge. Had the SS been out when I bought my car, I would have given it serious consideration.
277whp when a car is rated at 285 hp IS underrating, if its a manual factor 15% drivetrain loss and you have ~30 more hp at teh wheels than you should.
They show them tied in the 1/4 mile at 14.4 seconds in their comparison article, but if you look back in the back of the same issue in their test results section you get a completely different story with the SRT-4 at 13.9 seconds in the 1/4 mile and the SS at 14.5 seconds, talk about contradiction. This just goes to prove and support what I already knew about MT.
Don't mention that the cobalt beat the SRT-4 around a tracks.A few facts for you guys, feel free to doublcheck them anywhere
The IonRL and teh Cobalt SS are NOT a cavalier, its a brand new platform called delta that saturn satrted using in 03 or 04 I beleive.
Then engine is NOT a honda motor, the VUE Redline uses a honda 3.0L v6, the delta cars use the LSJ, its a 2.0L all aluminum ecotec with aan eaton M62 roots blower and an air to water intercooler.
The average dyno #'s a re generally between 200 and 210 whp, we know this is fact because a large # of redline forums has dyno'd stock, and its easy to still be stock when the only aftermarket at the time was K&N panel filters and DIY stuff.
They run mid 14's in the quarter mile, not as fast as teh SRT-4, but they drive nicer, i have driven both, a good friend has an 04 SRT4 and my dad daily drives a Redline when he isnt driving his 99 Camaro SS. T
he 05 models have LSD as an option. A member witha DIY intake and exhuast ran a 13.9 and is the fastest 1320' time to date on the board, and is the most modded one that I know of right now, minus PSI-Fi's test car
Read the post. I said no restrictions. Just an engine on a stand, hooked up to a dyno. It wasn't in a truck. The dyno said 277, but it's rated from teh factory at 285.
Danny
#35
05-01-2005, 08:11 AM
Legend
RE: Saturn Ion (redline) VS SRT4 VS Cobalt SS
That can be where it all comes down to the testing methods used by the manufacturer. There are so many variables like temperature, build, engine wear and the dyno used each time. For the price of todays cars I think every engine should be dyno tested to put out no less than the manufacturers rating.
#36
06-23-2005, 08:51 PM
RE: Saturn Ion (redline) VS SRT4 VS Cobalt SS
I have a '04 RL and it has 212 HP and 193 FPT AT THE WHEELS WITHOUTH ANY MODS WHAT SO EVER. I have also ran a 14.3 at the track. I have never raced a SRT-4, but everyone seems to be talking like you would walk a RL in any manageable race. Albeit, Skittles are fast, but they are not stock for stock, that much faster. Now with the support you guys have, there is no contest. All I have to say is, for the money, they are both pretty nice rides. I say again for the people that make up crap and don't know what they are talking about, 212 and 193 AT THE WHEELS.
#39
06-24-2005, 12:53 AM
RE: Saturn Ion (redline) VS SRT4 VS Cobalt SS
2004 Acrua RL
Standard Engine 3.5L 225 hp V6
Horsepower 225 @ 5200 RPM
Torque (lb-ft) 231 @ 2800 RPM
4-Speed Automatic Overdrive
Original Retail Price (MSRP) $45,600
seems like a perfectly fine match up...
SRT-4 20,900 vs 45,600
i cant find a listed weight, but id like to see some slips because 14.3 seems very fast with an automatic. the 2004 TL has 270hp, and only runs a 14.4, so i would wonder how your car with less power could outrun it, because i dont think the RL is that much lighter than the TL, if at all. also, how do you know your wheel hp and torque?
#40
06-24-2005, 01:02 AM