redline vs civic si ss cobalt

[jsip]

Got this from edmunds,

Is this quote correct?

"All this, along with the six-speed manual transmission's fairly aggressive 1st and 2nd gears, is enough to get the Si to 60 mph in 7.2 seconds, though Honda claims a 6.7 is possible. We've timed Chevrolet's Cobalt SS coupe at 7 flat and the Saturn Ion Red Line at 6.7. Although we hate the way the engine holds onto revs artificially when you lift off the throttle, Honda has geared the six-speed perfectly to keep the tach above 6,000 rpm during acceleration runs. With a 15.1 at 93.8-mph run, the Si does beat the supercharged Cobalt in the quarter-mile, but the blown Ion's 14.6 quarter tops them both"

Pretty interesting!

[LSJ PUP]

Originally Posted by jsip

Got this from edmunds,

Is this quote correct?

"All this, along with the six-speed manual transmission's fairly aggressive 1st and 2nd gears, is enough to get the Si to 60 mph in 7.2 seconds, though Honda claims a 6.7 is possible. We've timed Chevrolet's Cobalt SS coupe at 7 flat and the Saturn Ion Red Line at 6.7. Although we hate the way the engine holds onto revs artificially when you lift off the throttle, Honda has geared the six-speed perfectly to keep the tach above 6,000 rpm during acceleration runs. With a 15.1 at 93.8-mph run, the Si does beat the supercharged Cobalt in the quarter-mile, but the blown Ion's 14.6 quarter tops them both"

Pretty interesting!

That's a bunch of bullshit. I love how some websites think they know what they are talking about. If I loose to a stock 06 Si, I'm trading in my car for a one. lol. What a bunch of retards.

[sheek360]

Originally Posted by LSJ PUP

That's a bunch of bullshit. I love how some websites think they know what they are talking about. If I loose to a stock 06 Si, I'm trading in my car for a one. lol. What a bunch of retards.

Im with you dude. They are so horribly inacurate, I wonder if they ever drive them themselves?

[NoRemorse]

Originally Posted by jsip

Got this from edmunds,

Is this quote correct?

"All this, along with the six-speed manual transmission's fairly aggressive 1st and 2nd gears, is enough to get the Si to 60 mph in 7.2 seconds, though Honda claims a 6.7 is possible. We've timed Chevrolet's Cobalt SS coupe at 7 flat and the Saturn Ion Red Line at 6.7. Although we hate the way the engine holds onto revs artificially when you lift off the throttle, Honda has geared the six-speed perfectly to keep the tach above 6,000 rpm during acceleration runs. With a 15.1 at 93.8-mph run, the Si does beat the supercharged Cobalt in the quarter-mile, but the blown Ion's 14.6 quarter tops them both"

Pretty interesting!

No way in hell!! we have stock like 250hp at the crank (hell, I got near 265) and they have what? like 190? yea freaking right. Bring it on honda ricer boys

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by NoRemorse

No way in hell!! we have stock like 250hp at the crank (hell, I got near 265) and they have what? like 190? yea freaking right. Bring it on honda ricer boys

ok man, saying we have 250 hp at the crank stock is as bad as saying a SI is going to beat us stock :P And I REALLY REALL REALLY doubt that you HONESTLY have 265 at the crank stock. Maybe that's what the run said, but I;d bet there's an innaccuracy there somewhere, but I don't believe that you could be putting down 230-240 at the wheels in stock form

first off the average person is only dynoing about 230 at the crank, maybe a little more, not 250 :P.
and second off, remember guys the article DID say that the RL would beat the SI, what's with allt he ripping on the article for that reason.


plus everyone needs to remember, ********when they run these cars******* these drivers probably put less than a 100 miles on them. You're telling me you mastered the launching of the RL in under 100 miles? bullshit. The SI is an easier car to launch, and so is going to be running closer times with an inexperienced driver. Period. They're not bullshitting you. They're not making shit up. They're not doign imaginary math. They are racing the cars, with only a few miles under their belts. yes you can say 'they favor imports', whatever, it still boils down to the fact that a FWD car with a lot of torque takes quite a few miles to master the launch. And these guys don't get quite a few miles to test the cars with.

Rip on the articles as much as you want, they're giving the truth as they see it. THIS IS WHY YOU CAN'T BE A MAGAZINE RICER.

[NoRemorse]

Originally Posted by Freakazoid

ok man, saying we have 250 hp at the crank stock is as bad as saying a SI is going to beat us stock :P And I REALLY REALL REALLY doubt that you HONESTLY have 265 at the crank stock. Maybe that's what the run said, but I;d bet there's an innaccuracy there somewhere, but I don't believe that you could be putting down 240 at the wheels in stock form

first off the average person is only dynoing about 230 at the crank, maybe a little more, not 250 :P.
and second off, remember guys the article DID say that the RL would beat the SI, what's with allt he ripping on the article for that reason.


plus everyone needs to remember, ********when they run these cars******* these drivers probably put less than a 100 miles on them. You're telling me you mastered the launching of the RL in under 100 miles? bullshit. The SI is an easier car to launch, and so is going to be running closer times with an inexperienced driver. Period. They're not bullshitting you. They're not making shit up. They're not doign imaginary math. They are racing the cars, with only a few miles under their belts. yes you can say 'they favor imports', whatever, it still boils down to the fact that a FWD car with a lot of torque takes quite a few miles to master the launch. And these guys don't get quite a few miles to test the cars with.

Rip on the articles as much as you want, they're giving the truth as they see it. THIS IS WHY YOU CAN'T BE A MAGAZINE RICER.

How is that a bad assumption?? I dyno's 223whp ~ 262hp @ crank.

250 at the crank is only 212ish at the wheels. A LOT, if not most people dyno that. Well, at least cobalts do, I have never seen many stock RL dyno's. Hell, I have seen at least 4 SS's put down around 230whp stock, all at different dyno's

EDIT: But I fully agree that you can't be a magazine racer, for the same reasons you listed.

[sheek360]

Ive driven the new SI and it is a breeze to launch <maybe the lack of TQ?>. Shifting that car is quite smooth too, and the clutch feels light and smooth. The beast that is the RL, I got over 3k miles and Im still trying to launch right, and get out of first before I bounce off the rev limiter.

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by sheek360

Ive driven the new SI and it is a breeze to launch <maybe the lack of TQ?>. Shifting that car is quite smooth too, and the clutch feels light and smooth. The beast that is the RL, I got over 3k miles and Im still trying to launch right, and get out of first before I bounce off the rev limiter.

EXACTLY.

This is why the SI magazine times are that of the RL, because the SI is just an easier car to launch (and yes it is very largely based on the lack of torque)

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by NoRemorse

How is that a bad assumption?? I dyno's 223whp ~ 262hp @ crank.

250 at the crank is only 212ish at the wheels. A LOT, if not most people dyno that. Well, at least cobalts do, I have never seen many stock RL dyno's. Hell, I have seen at least 4 SS's put down around 230whp stock, all at different dyno's

EDIT: But I fully agree that you can't be a magazine racer, for the same reasons you listed.

Main reason I say that is I personally will associate that with dyno operator error until people start running numbers to back up those dynos, or have multiple dyno places match it up (and not using dynojet either...., those just have a tendency of inflating too much).

If you're putting down just shy of 280 crank, stock, you should be able to run an even 14 pretty damn easily. And the fastest stock RL/SS runs I've seen are low 14's with the lucky ones, and the lowest being I think about a 14.2

that's my 2 cents.

[INNOVA]

Originally Posted by NoRemorse

How is that a bad assumption?? I dyno's 223whp ~ 262hp @ crank.

250 at the crank is only 212ish at the wheels. A LOT, if not most people dyno that. Well, at least cobalts do, I have never seen many stock RL dyno's. Hell, I have seen at least 4 SS's put down around 230whp stock, all at different dyno's

EDIT: But I fully agree that you can't be a magazine racer, for the same reasons you listed.

That dyno probably reads high.