Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Chevrolet Cobalt

1313234363770

Comments

  • bigdaddycoatsbigdaddycoats Posts: 1,058
    I actually have driven a Celica GT-S before. Overall, I liked it. But, as with the RSX there is not enough room inside. Even more so with the RSX. I just felt too cramped.

    As for resale, only time will tell with the SS. The Focus SVT had (has) fairly strong resale. The old style Honda Civic SI holds its value exceptionally well.
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    SS could hold very good re-sale if the quality holds up and the performance is there. May not be a Civic, but it has a lot of potential.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Posts: 865
    The Cavalier is based on an ancient design, not really a fair comparison.
  • gsemikegsemike Long Island, NYPosts: 1,788
    The question is why was the Cav allowed to linger when it was over the hill in 1995? A company the size of GM must have the resources to allocate towards updating this line more than once ever 12 year. "It's an old design" is not an acceptable excuse. Same goes for their pushrod 6.
  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    I finally dragged myelf to a Chevy dealer and looked and sat in several Cobalts (quite different from seeing one on a pedestal, locked, at a car show).

    I am very impressed with this car. Fit and finish and appeal are comparable to the current Volkswagen Golf, long acknowledged as a leader in the "premium compact" field. The difference is, there are a jillion Chevy dealers; you have greater flexibility in optioning a car; and there is a sporty (within the limits implied by a car in this category) 2 door coupe.

    Particularly appealing is the Base model, which doesn't feel cheap although of course it lacks the three big "P's" (power windows, doors, and locks). I think a Base model with side curtain air bags, ABS, and cruise, which has an MSRP $15,890 with a standard transmission would make a safe commuter car even Consumer Reports would like. Even without the three upgrades (side air bags, ABS and cruise) the Cobalt is a big step up from current small cars due to its strong body integrity (view the www.iihs.org side impact crash tests). The LS model dosn't add much in interior or exterior visual appeal over the Base model, but comes with more creature comforts; the LT with its chrome touches looks sharp. Overall, I like the styling, and think it will have "legs." It is cleaner looking than a Corolla or Mazda3, but seems to have a family resemblance. Definitely it is contemporary, and I don't think it will age like the novel Mazda3.

    I had a 2004 Cavalier for 6,000 or so miles and found the Ecotec DOHC 2.2 liter engine which is also in the Cobalt to be great, far surpassing anything available in any other small car except the 2.3 in some models of Focus (I had an early PZEV version in a 2003 Focus) for horsepower, and being near the top of the pack in fuel efficiency (I got a consistent 30 mpg with stick shift).

    When I have time to test drive a Cobalt, I look forward to finding out how it handles (magazines give it good marks) and how quiet it is. If I were in the market for a small car, this would be the one I would start with - I had 3 Focii and although they drove well, had niggling quality control issues. Also, until this year, purchasers of 4 door Focii (as opposed to the ZX3) were getting stuck with a pretty pathetic 2.0 liter SOHC (the ZX3's always had the Zetec's with 15 more horsepower). Recent runs of Cavaliers and all Cobalts (since it is new) have the very impressive Ecotoec.

    Any mileage reports from the Cobalt owners out there?

    Finally, I note that according to the specs on the chevrolet.com website, the Coupe weights 200-300 pounds or so less than the sedan.
  • gmoudygmoudy Posts: 67
    I do not know where you are getting your information from. In 1995, GM redesigned the body style on the Cavaliers. They also got rid of the V6 that was in the Z24 and put in the 2.4L. Going by what you stated, GM should not have kept the Camaro around as long as they did. By that, Ford should not keep making the Mustang.
    My opinion is, a redesign of the body style to bring it up to date is great. If a model works for the auto maker, why get rid of it.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Posts: 865
    The Cavalier was a best seller all the way up until its last year. It would have been nice for GM to replace it, but they didn't have much incentive to do so.
  • gsemikegsemike Long Island, NYPosts: 1,788
    Incentive to do so???? How about actually selling it for other reasons than because it's been reduced to $10,000? How about having an entry level product that will actually have customers coming back when it's time to step up? Slapping anew body on an old platform is like getting liposuction because you've been diagnosed with heart disease.
  • muffin_manmuffin_man Posts: 865
    First, what new body on what old platform. The Cobalt does not share a platform with the Cavalier.

    Second, when you've got one of the best selling car in the US, I can see how you might be hesitant to spend the money on something new. Believe it or not, there are a LOT of happy Cavalier owners.
  • mdaffronmdaffron Posts: 4,421
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2396-2005Apr19.html?nav=rss_topnews

    Keep in mind that after cutting production, one of the most popular methods of regaining lost funds is cost-cutting within production.

    Meade
  • gsemikegsemike Long Island, NYPosts: 1,788
    "First, what new body on what old platform."

    Muffy, I was referring to the 1995 refresh where they slapped a new body on an already outdated platform and decided that it would be sufficient for another 10 years. I do realize that the Balt is a new platform.

    While it was a best selling car, it was only that because they priced it so cheaply. They didn't make any money on those cars. They just decided to let it wallow because Chevy is the utilitarian line and they needed to be in the entry level game.

    How many people that bought Cavs when they were in college came back when it was time to move up? How many Civic buyers moved up into Accords?

    Chevy's strategy with the Cav was extremely short sighted and damaging to the nameplate. Why do you think that the response to the Cobalt has been so indifferent in the marketplace?
  • gmoudygmoudy Posts: 67
    I guess us Cav owners could ask you 'Why did so many college students buy the Cav?' To move up means to get something bigger. The reason college students bought the Cav and still do is because it was a low priced vehicle and was dependable for them to get back and forth to college. NMSU is in the city where I live and there are many college students driving the Cav.
    The Cav was and is a good little car. The response to the Cobalt is because Chevy didn't try to do the engine right like they are doing for the Cobalt. By that I mean, look at what they will offer for the Cobalt SS. Shame they didn't do that for the Z24.
  • mdaffronmdaffron Posts: 4,421
    How many college kids come back to CHEVROLET when it comes time to get rid of the Cavalier?

    He used Honda as a comparative ... asking how many Civic buyers come back and buy Accords when it's time to move up.

    In other words, Honda has a good record of keeping first-time buyers. Not so with the Cavalier and Chevy.

    P.S. My wife and I took Chevy's promises to heart back in 1995 and bought a new Cavalier, expecting a cheap car that would get us through a few lean years. Well, Chevy broke its promise. The car's head gasket blew at 28,000 miles, and Chevy covered the $700 job saying there was an extended warranty campaign (i.e. manufacturing blunder) on the head gasket. When the new head gasket went 8,000 miles later, and then the NEXT new one blew 6,000 miles after the second one, Chevy refused to cover them. After spending more than $1,400 for head gaskets in only 14,000 miles (hmmm, $10 a mile for head gaskets), and finding the THIRD one now leaking, we cut our losses on that unreliable car (with a whopping 52,000 miles on it) and bought my wife a Mazda Protege5, which currently has 48,000 completely trouble-free miles on it. Thanks to Chevy's poor engine design (it was the HEAD, not the GASKET) and refusing to stand behind its own product even when it had a known defect, we will never buy another GM product. Way to hold on to first-time customers, GM!
  • gmoudygmoudy Posts: 67
    Sorry to hear you had so many problems with your 95 Cav. I had a 95 also and had no problems. No leaks or anything. Got rid of it in 2001 when I bought a 2002 Trailblazer.
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    GM isn't going broke from 1 bad quarter. GM does need to restructure and get some concessions from the union, but it will not be going anywhere.

    Buy a Cobalt and enjoy!
  • mdaffronmdaffron Posts: 4,421
    Bought a Mazda3s wagon two weeks ago.
  • ericf1ericf1 Posts: 54
    Went down to my local Chevy dealer, test drove a coupe. Not bad, drives about as well as my current ' 95 Olds Achieva w/V6. Told him I had GM Friends and Family Discount.

    So, he said he'd sell me a base coupe, auto tranny, ABS, Side airbags, after trade in for my worthless Olds= $10k.

    What I deal! I'm having a hard time resisting. Only thing is it drives no better than my current GM car. Do I want another GM car? For that price?
  • m1miatam1miata Posts: 4,556
    They may however go bust due to all the negatives over the last thirty years. The USA needs a national health care plan soon. Concessions from the union may not be enough.
    Now GM and F could just go into bankruptcy, then let the tax payers pay the benefits owed works, but something tells me the taxpayers won't be smiling. There are sooooo many issues, where would one start. There is customer care, quality control, lack of NEW product, health care, high wages paid to even those not working... it goes on to infinity, or the sad end. The CEO of GM and F have lots of tough decisions to make, and not so many missteps are allowable at this stage of the game. Where is Lee Iaccoa? Give him a call as ask him of a possible protege. Would love to see a return to grandeur of the big three, as long as it is a well earned one. Let's lead ! :D

    Loren
  • m1miatam1miata Posts: 4,556
    " Went down to my local Chevy dealer, test drove a coupe. Not bad, drives about as well as my current ' 95 Olds Achieva w/V6. Told him I had GM Friends and Family Discount.

    So, he said he'd sell me a base coupe, auto tranny, ABS, Side airbags, after trade in for my worthless Olds= $10k.

    What I deal! I'm having a hard time resisting. Only thing is it drives no better than my current GM car. Do I want another GM car? For that price? " --end quote --

    Well, such-a-deal! Be sure they don't try adding anything to bump the price at the final sale time, like warranty, undercoats and crap. Looks pretty good! As for handling, the crazy Achieva I had would sometimes go into light steering while on the freeway. Yeap, sort of reverse of what assist should do. My Olds 98 Regency had much-much better handling than the Achieva. The Cobalt should handle better, and you can look through better tire options ( wheels too ) at the Tire Rack. I am using Dunlop A2 on the Miata and Toyo Spectrums on the Corolla, but would rather have Toyo Ultra 800 on her. Not that the lesser Toyo is a bad tire. Anyway, good deal on the base car. I got mag wheels for $75 made in Germany, so upgrades are cheap enough. Have fun with the new car.
    My Achieve '92, bought in '93, was traded in on a Corolla '98, which has been very inexpensive to own. No way could they match the $10K deal though.
    Loren
  • jscevjscev Posts: 36
    it is a fair comparison. The parts i put on the Cavy were new. Im not talking about speed or engine performance. Im talking about handling. And one can make any car handle well with the right parts. I did that to my Cavy, but the stock celica still out handled hit.
  • jscevjscev Posts: 36
    Ya i know in 95 they redisined the cavy. But they still make base models and Z24s. The base bodel was a 2.2L thats what i had. They also made 2.4L DOHC which was the Z24 model. Maybe you should research into that if you never knew. I have a friend whop has a 94 Z24 3.1 V6. I also have a friend that has a 96 Z24 2.4L DOHC. so i know what i am tlaking about.
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    Wagon? So sorry. ;-)
  • mdaffronmdaffron Posts: 4,421
    Why? It's a better car than the sedan (and I just came from a Protege sedan). I've been drooling all over my wife's Protege5 (wagon) since we bought it for her back in 2002.
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    wagon's aren't my thing. My wife drives our van.

    ;-)
  • gmoudygmoudy Posts: 67
    I do know what I am talking about when it comes to the Cavalier. I owned a 1986 RS model with the 2.0L, a 1995 with the 2.2L and now a 1998 Z24. Guess I know what I am talking about since I owned all three models!!!!!
  • avemanaveman Posts: 122
    what genuis merged the Cavalier forum with the Cobalt forum.Edmuns should fix the problem because I find it confusing.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Aveman's sarcasm notwithstanding, this is not the place to be discussing the Cavalier in such depth. Let's try to stick to the Cobalt. Everyone is welcome to continue the other line of thinking at this link: Chevrolet Cavalier.

    Thanks.
  • m1miatam1miata Posts: 4,556
    Here is a good name change for the SS.... the Kobolt Kompressor :surprise:
    Change the car to rear wheel drive, and go with double wishbone suspension,
    for $22K, and it may be a pretty good value play. Looks like th Cobalt SS at
    say $22K less the usual $2,500 or so off, offers some road fun for those with
    the need for speed, and wanting FWD for the snow country. Not sure it will do
    well against the V6 Stang though here in California. It will be a good test indeed
    between Ford and Chevy to see which has the most problems on a new car.
    Would in no way want to bet on that one. Both will have a few problem areas,
    but what is most important is what areas of the car need attention, and if any
    are major design flaws. Cobalt, as far as I know, does not have the fueling problems
    like the Mustangs, so that is a good thing.
    Loren
  • avemanaveman Posts: 122
    I am not sure which transmission optio to choose. I think I would go with the manual for improved gas mileage.Overtime the cost will be closer, because the manual will need a new clutch. Here is a link that mentions new features for the manual and automatic in the cobalt.For specs check out gm.com and look for powertrain under brands.

    http://www.j-body.org/faq/20/
Sign In or Register to comment.