[TXRLU]

I was wondering if anyone else noticed this on the Article done a few months ago (possibly April or May) regarding the Cobalt SS Vs. the Neon SRT-4. The test times for both cars were rather close, but if you look at the whole data specs for both cars, it appears that the good folks at Motor Trend decided to use Premium fuel on the SRT-4 while using only regular unleaded fuel on the SS based on the "fuel recommendations" at the bottom. Not to say that they DID actually use regular unleaded in the SS, but do you think that if they DID use regular unleaded for testing, what difference performance wise do you suspect they would've found if they had used Premium unleaded as what's REALLY recommended for the 2.0 ecotec? At this point this is mainly speculation, but I'm sure this will get the SRT-4 folks we have on here chiming in with some "insight".......

 

[urbanmonkeygod04]

I didn't notice that, and it makes me wonder. Another thing that makes me wonder is, why do some car magazines get 5.3 seconds 0-60 for the SRT (Car and Driver) and others (Road and Track & Motor Trend) get 5.9. No comprendo . . . Oh well.

 

[crzyprazer316]

i'd say thats who is driving the car.

 

[brk_05]

Thats a pretty big difference for different drivers though. I believe the SRT-4s have an extra shift to get to 60 than we do. They need 3rd gear.

 

[TXRLU]

Thats a pretty big difference for different drivers though. I believe the SRT-4s have an extra shift to get to 60 than we do. They need 3rd gear.

I don't think I've been able to muster 60 MPH in 2nd gear myself, its right there where you can either crash into the limiter or shift. I don't really like the way it feels when I crash into the limiter so I shift about 500-800 RPM before it redlines. I know the tach doesn't report the exact RPMs of the motor either so that makes it ever so much more tricky.

Another thing that makes me wonder is, why do some car magazines get 5.3 seconds 0-60 for the SRT (Car and Driver) and others (Road and Track & Motor Trend) get 5.9. No comprendo . . . Oh well.

I've also wondered why the latest batch of SRT-4s being tested test slower than the ones I've seen testing 0-60 in 5.3s. Makes you wonder if Dodge is throwing in a few ringers (which not like it hasn't been done before). Also makes you wonder if the test done on GM cars (cobalt/Ion) had all the little quirks fixed i.e. intercooler wire's wired correctly, ECM updates.

 

[jpapa]

If they did use 87 octane in the SS, then they would have probably felt a difference. I say this mainly because in these tests, they like to go all out on the cars, and when you're pushing these cars to their limits, thats when the computer controlled sparks from the octane levels will start being more noticeable than regular street non race driving. With the times they got out of the SS, I think that it's safe to assume they were using at least 91. This is all just my IMO though, could be wrong about it all.

TXRLU, I've ran into that limiter a few times and am now pretty cautious about it. But our gearing allows us to get a few mph over 60 safely before having to shift into 3rd before the limiter. I think I've hit 65mph when the limiter hit before, not sure though.

In regards to the SRT4s, if they do have to shift into 3rd to hit 60, then yea, that will affect their times there. I do believe that they can hit 60 in 2nd gear (stock), I'm not for certain on that though. Another thing that could affect the 0-60 runs for the SRT4 are the options that are on the car they test. If it comes with their subwoofer stereo option, that will add at least a good 50 lbs, which can potentially give slower times. The different drivers each magazine has will also give the varying times. This is a good reason why magazine racing is FAY. Just look at their 1/4 mile times, trap speeds, and 0-100mph times in that article...they don't make sense...