The ecotec isnt an old design and even in base form it providesmore power than most of its competitors. The '06 cobalt will offer the 2.4L version and that will have more power than the top model Focus and Mazda3.
In my opinion, based on the many Ecotec powered vehicles Ive driven, this is one of the few positives GM has in its product lineup. The engine is strong, fairly refined, and fuel efficient. I do not like it as well as the Toyota 2.4L or the Honda 2.4L engines, but it is definitely on par in refinement, and even power for its size, compared to Nissan's 2.5L (which is my daily driver). The Ford 2.3 seems like a good engine, I dont have very much exposure to it though. It seems to be spread a bit more thin... in too many applications... Escape to Focus.. than it should be.
Okay, fine. I just compared. Reliability of the VW engines is not anywhere near as good. I couldn't care less how refined a derned engine is when it won't start!
Agreed... using junk VW as an example, not the best idea.
I've driven a 2.2 LT sedan, a very nice car... but I'll be waiting for the 2.4 SS coupe. My wife doesn't do manuals, but even with the auto I'm expecting it to be a pretty hot sport-compact.
I would take any Ecotec over any 4-cylinder engine that VW makes. Refinement is not winning the game in the sports compact category. The RSX and Si sell poorly, VW is practically leaving the country, and a turbo-charged dodge is king. Neither Mini engine is that refined. Refinement alone means nothing for sporty cars.
"I've driven a 2.2 LT sedan, a very nice car... but I'll be waiting for the 2.4 SS coupe. My wife doesn't do manuals, but even with the auto I'm expecting it to be a pretty hot sport-compact. "
Well then you'll be waiting forever, because the SS coupe is going to be a manual transmission car only, the way it should be. "Sports coupe" and "automatic transmission" don't go together. Instead of saying your wife "doesn't do manuals" why don't you take a Saturday and teach her how, just like I did. My wife won't ever go back to an automatic again, with any luck you'll have the same results.
I read the review of the SS coupe in the new Motor Trend yesterday and that car is the new benchmark in the under $25K class. The SRT-4 may be faster in a straight line, but that's it. The skidpad, slalom, and braking numbers are phenomenal, and they blow away all comers, including the RSX-S which would get smoked on a race course. I think it pulled over .90 g's. The car looks great too, although I'm not fond of big wings that are all the rage with the kids these days. But, I guess that's exactly who they're marketing the car to.
After a couple of years when Chevy has worked all of the bugs out of that car, this "36-year-old" kid is going to seriously take a look at the SS as an early mid-life crisis car. For now, I'm still waiting for my damn 2005 Ford Focus ZX5 SES I special orderd six weeks ago.
Cobalt SS is available as a four-door sedan or two-door coupe. It has a 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine that makes 170 horsepower, 30 more than the 2.2-liter of base, LS, and LT models. Available transmissions in the SS are standard 5-speed manual or optional 4-speed automatic. Also included in the SS are sport-tuned suspension; disc instead of drum rear brakes; 17-inch alloy wheels; and unique trim.
"Sports coupe" and "automatic transmission" don't go together."
Well, I guess the Vette's right out then.
"Instead of saying your wife "doesn't do manuals" why don't you take a Saturday and teach her how, just like I did."
Because she has no interest in learning how and it would be her car. And now that we all know that there will be a 2.4 SS with an automatic, it's no problem.
And MOST young people have NO interest in a manual at any price. True of those of us who live or often drive in highly urban areas, as well. Not everyone wants to or even can drive a u-shift-it.
Re-read your post. You're talking about the SS, not the SS supercharged coupe. I got confused. The supercharged coupe will be a manual transmission only. Sorry about that.
Yes, your wife will be able to get her SS with an auto sludgebox after all.
Where is this car? GM's been raving about it for months now. None of the Chevy dealers in my area even carry this car on their lots yet, and I've yet to see one on the road.
the problem GM is having these days and why they are losing market share. They get a winner car, and can't get it to market. The ones they do get to market quickly, are dissapointments. No way should it take this long to get this car to market in my opinion.
The Cobal just started production in October I think. Its gonna take a little time to saturate the country with them. The two dealers in my area (Arlington, VA) both have some Sedans but no coupes.
Still... they've been touting this car for a couple of years while the Cav gets older and cheaper. Honda can turn over the Civic every 5 years while the Cav is a dozen years old.
I had a couple of Cav rental cars last year and they were ridiculously dated cars. Even for the price, no way. Completely not acceptable in the year 2004. They've been talking about the Cobalt for two years like it's some kind of savior and it looks exactly like a Cavalier???? Now I know why all of the commercials for the Cobalt show the Vette more than the car it is supposed to be advertising.
The Cobalt "looks exactly like a Cavalier"? You sure you're looking at the same car I am?
Local dealers only have Sedans. For some reason there is a delay on the coupes. That's too bad, because I like the look of the coupe more. The coupe also has more head/legroom in the front, and (oddly enough) more cabin space than the sedan.
I'm completely serious. With the horrible reputation of the Cav, GM needed a complete departure with the Cobalt lookswise. The new car has practically the same exact dimensions and configurations. Look how well Mazda is doing with the 3. That car stands out and looks like a 2005 model. The Cobalt is same old.
You obviously have not seen or driven one. There is nothing carried over from the Cavalier aside from the 2.2L Ecotec. This is all new and thoroughly competitive.
The latest issue has a preview of the Cobalt SS Supercharged. They gave it a good review. Some of the comments about the Cobalt line up: "its astoundingly good-an Olympic long jump for GM, from dead last to the head of the class, right up front with the Toyota Corolla and Honda Civic." They went as far as saying the interior trim mimics a Volkswagen's. Most auto publications give Volkswagens high marks for their interior attention to detail. Their test car was victory red like the one in the TV commercials and it looks good. It in no way looks like a Cavalier.
I have seen it in C&D and one or two on the street, but not yet driven one. I am completely aware that there aren't any carry over parts from the Cav. The same old comment refers to:
- The dimensions, stances, and sillouhettes of the Cobalt are the same as the Cav, therefore they look alike (in the front more than the back)
- The configurations available are the same as the Cav. By only offering a couple and sedan, GM missed an opportunity to distinguish the car as something truly "new". With the increasing popularity of wagons and 5 doors, Chevy could have made a bigger splash by offering other body styles
- Ford did the same thing with the Freestar. It's all new but looks exactly like the Windstar.
- It's a typical GM rollout with the cars being hyped for too long and then trickling onto lots with limited models and overpriced. By the time they get their act together, the model will be devalued and the incentives will be kicking in. They did the same thing with the G6. The run all these commercials like it's world class and then they put it out there with an old pushrod 6 making 210hp and a $28k sticker.
btw: that 2.2 L Ecotec that I had in two rental 03 Cavs was about the thrashiest thing that I've felt since I stopped buying 70s cars. The 1.6 in my 99 Civic was just as powerful and far more refined.
You can accuse me of hating, but just maybe I'm hearing from GM loyalists who want to love everything that they put out. I wish that I could get behind this company, but they just don't get it.
As I explained above, I didn't imply that it was a carryover, just a reflection of GM's inability to break the mold and produce designs that don't "feel" recycled. I'll allow that they tried that once with the Aztec and failed miserably, but that's no reason not to try again.
The Civic is no longer with me but dare I suggest that you drive them side by side. The General can claim that the Cobalt has whatever horsepower they want. Maybe the Cav was rated higher, but the power wasn't making it to the pavement. The Civic was rated at 127 horse, but with the stick, it felt quicker than either Cav that I had the poor fortune to rent.
gsemike-Its hardly a valid comparison to take a Civic EX 5 speed and compare to a Cavalier with an automatic. But thats besides the point- the vehicle in question here isnt the Cavalier, its the Cobalt, which looks to be an extremely capable small car. I, for one, am very happy about the positive reviews in MT and C/D this month, and I hope GM has finally gotten it right. The car is attractive, has strong and refined motors with very good fuel economy given the power/torque, good fit and finish, and a comprehensive model line-up. If the ride handling compromise is competitive and reliability holds, I dont see any reason why this one shouldnt be a winner.
Also, the Ford Freestar remake is actually very closely related to the Ford Windstar, so your analogy doesnt hold very strongly. The Cav and the Cobalt are on completely different platformns. Not so the Freestar and Windstar.
It was C&D that said that the Freestar is a completely new van that just looks exactly like the Windstar, not me.
I've driven both 5 sp and auto Civics, and in either case, the refinement was not in the same universe as the thrashy ecotec. I'm the only import buyer in a family of domestic loyalists and I was raised on GM iron. To this day, my favorite car that I'll ever own was my 1970 Chevelle. However, after my 85 Regal and 89 Camaro, I was turned off. However, since them I have had a great deal of experience driving GM products owned by family members.
When I last bought a car in 2003, I was very careful to cross shop domestics and imports, and I ended up with the Altima (which is 100% US content).
Again, I would like to get behind this company, but they consistently shoot for the middle.
I guess we will agree to disagree. But the Ecotecs Ive driven have not sounded harsh to me, and they were torquey and fuel efficient. With respect to the Freestar, Ford indeed touted it as all-new, but it was not. The Cobalt is truly a completely different entity from any Cavalier architecture.
I understand where you are coming from with the GM "shooting for the middle" comment- but this Cobalt seems more fully realized than any of GM other recent offerings, save the Cadillacs, which have done very well at turning that company's image and profitability around.
~alpha
PS- Which Altima do you drive? The VQ is excellent, but the 2.5L is not a refinement leader, and I'd put it on the same level as the GM Ecotec motor. Neither come close to the Toyota and Honda 2.4L mills.
"The Cobalt is truly a completely different entity from any Cavalier architecture". I've read that and believe it completely, but my point is that the Cobalt LOOKS like a refreshened Cavalier.
If GM wants to add value to the nameplate, they should have offered some new configuations such as a 5 door to make it seem "new" in the minds of consumers. By sticking with just a coupe and sedan with almost identical silohhettes as the old car, it's going to just seem like the new Cavalier. It also shows typical lack of forward thinking.
My Alt is the 2.5. It is less refined than the Honda and Toyota powerplants, but in return I get 175 hp and a timing chain instead of a belt. When I drove the Alt, Camry and Accord all of the same day, the Alt did seems less refined but clearly quicker and sportier. That's what I went for. The engine is far superior in refinement and power to the ecotec however.
My Nissan is also powered by the 2.5L, and while more powerful than GM's Ecotecs, I don't think its that much more refined. Also, FWIW, Toyota's 2.4L DEFINITELY uses a timing chain, and I believe Honda's does as well, though about that Im not certain.
Can't compare a standard to an auto, of course the auto will feel slow. In every respect the Ecotec is more powerful. The 2.4L Ectotc upgrade is also coming and the 2.0L turbo is available on the SS.
Like I said with the style, if you don't like it that's fine. Just don't translate that to the car being old fashioned or a carry over mechanically.
"Just don't translate that to the car being old fashioned or a carry over mechanically." I never did, but rather expressed the Chevy didn't break the mold from the old car, so it is not going to be perceived as a real step forward by most consumers. If it looks like a refreshed Cavalier, most people will think that's what it is.
Alpha, if memory serves from two years ago, I believe that the Camry has a chain but I am sure that the Accord has a belt just like my 99 Civic and 89 Accord. I can't stand belts.
GM always seems to take a great looking Opel design and water it down for the USA. I understand that most people that buy these cars could care less what it could have been. It's better than what it replaces and that is all that matters to them. When I heard that they were going to use the Astra as a base I got excited... then I saw the actual car...what a let down. The front three quarter view of the sedan looks good...but get around to the back..Damn they did it again...looks very bland...IMO...lost total interest.
Actually most of the reviews I have read seem to be very positive on the Cobalts looks. You are actually the only poster I have seen that dislikes it. I'm not saying it's the best, but it certainly isn't as bad or bland as you make it out to be.
I'd agree with you Vanman. I didn't like the Cobalt very much because I thought it looked too much like a Cavalier. But when I saw it in person last week at the Washington Auto Show I was very impressed with the vehicle. Is it just me or does the Coblat look to be wider than that Cavalier? I didn't get to sit in one as it was up on a platform but thought it was very nice when I saw it.
The best FWD I have seen lately is the Mazda3. I doubt that the Chevy can top it. That said both are wrong wheel driven, as in not RWD. Too bad Chevy is wasting all the time making the same ol' stuff. Looks like a Civic to me from the pictures.
I have seen them both. Not sure about handing but better power is there both standard and optional, interior quality is there (much classier a la Jetta). Style is more conservative which is probably a good thing as I know people who are turned off by the Mazda 3 styling and durability should be as good if not better judging by JD Power and other outlets comparisons of Mazda vs GM. The ION has also been relatively trouble free and it has the same platform and power.
Well I take Cobalt is better previous attempts to win over people from Japanese products. Time will tell as to quality and value. Personally my best cars so far have been those of Japan, so I have some doubts. All the domestic cars I have owned pretty much were not in the best of shape after 3 to 5 years. I may try a V8, like a Mustang, or even give the GM 3800 engine a try again some day. As for the 4 cylinder engines in US models, I did like the test drive in the PT Cruiser. I had an Olds 98 with the 3800 engine, and it would have been OK, but it would cut out when it decided to do so. The 1987 Olds ended up with three parts changed, and couple other tries to get things straight, then the tranny fell out at 62,000 and the paint went bad. I finally gave up on her. I guess the finest ride from USA I can think of was dad's '72 Olds Supreme or the '61 Buick LeSabre. The most reliable car I owned was the Datsun 510, and my current Corolla. My Miata has been pretty bulletproof too. I think I will buy RWD from here on out, but I do like some of the USA auto efforts, like the PT. Looks like some excitement out there with the new Chrysler 300. The Ford Mustang is OK looks wise and is much improved in many an other way. Pretty good effort, though a little too much in retro look, and a little fat - still like it overall. As for GM, Chevy hit the mark in 1968 - 69, but current cars don't have the slick lines, or the RWD -- too bad. I like Chevy racing, and the 'Vettes, but for now, that is where it ends. The new Solstice looks promising indeed. Looks like Saturn, after a long sleep, is finally waking up to a brand new day. Anyway, I do hope Chevy does return to its former glory. Loved the Camaro, and Malibu of days-gone-bye.
Well, Mazda has a far from stellar record and it is controlled by Ford so it's almost a domestic anyway. My last 3 vehicles have been all have been excellent. My 5 year old Intrigue is running smoother than the day I bought it.
Ecotec is a solid power plant, I have little doubt the Cobalt will be a strong entry.
Yesterday on the parking lot I saw a Japanese car with Chevy badge. I scratched my head for some time until it dawned upon me that it was a new Chevy Cobalt!
Someone wanted new Opel Astra - wait for the new Saturn instead. Saturn will be an American Opel for you. If you compare new Astra and Saturn Aura concept - they look very similar with same headlights and grille but with different badges.
Mazda3 rated the best in Consumer Reports latest mag.
Cobalt looks like it would be a good little car. So if ya like it, buy it and have fun. It is one to consider in it's class. The tC Scion is also good in the sub $17k bracket. So far, my pick is still Mazda3, if going with a FWD. My next car may be another RWD one.
Did you say OPEL.... I owned a 1973 Opel Manta Rallye. It was my first new car. The engine was pretty much history by 18k miles or so. I may have driven it to 30k or more, but I don't recall. Anyway, it was a fun car, looked great, but I just got a bad one, engine wise. The Catera did not go over to well. Are you sure they are trying to sell another Opel in USA?
This one isn't quite as glowing as the MotorTrend review. I guess a little balance is good. I'll just have to drive it for myself if they ever show up in dealerships. I called one yesterday and they weren't expecting their first coupe (not an SS) until mid-February.
WRX or Cobalt SS? WRX or Cobalt SS?
If the Cobalt isn't available to test drive by tax refund time, I guess it becomes a one-horse race.
Comments
That black coupe with the chrome wheels is a sharp looker.
The Malibu is much bigger and heavier than the Focus, of course it is slower.
The new Cobalt will probably be "a rocket" compared to the 160hp 2.3liter Focus, with its 2.4 liter 170 horsepower engine.
This ecotec is the top 4-cylinder pro drag racing engine, and holds the 4-cylinder bonneville record. What more do you want?
~alpha
But still, Opel soursed engines are not refined enough. They could definitely do better. Compare with engines made by VW e.g.
I couldn't care less how refined a derned engine is when it won't start!
Your turn...
I've driven a 2.2 LT sedan, a very nice car... but I'll be waiting for the 2.4 SS coupe. My wife doesn't do manuals, but even with the auto I'm expecting it to be a pretty hot sport-compact.
Well then you'll be waiting forever, because the SS coupe is going to be a manual transmission car only, the way it should be. "Sports coupe" and "automatic transmission" don't go together. Instead of saying your wife "doesn't do manuals" why don't you take a Saturday and teach her how, just like I did. My wife won't ever go back to an automatic again, with any luck you'll have the same results.
I read the review of the SS coupe in the new Motor Trend yesterday and that car is the new benchmark in the under $25K class. The SRT-4 may be faster in a straight line, but that's it. The skidpad, slalom, and braking numbers are phenomenal, and they blow away all comers, including the RSX-S which would get smoked on a race course. I think it pulled over .90 g's. The car looks great too, although I'm not fond of big wings that are all the rage with the kids these days. But, I guess that's exactly who they're marketing the car to.
After a couple of years when Chevy has worked all of the bugs out of that car, this "36-year-old" kid is going to seriously take a look at the SS as an early mid-life crisis car. For now, I'm still waiting for my damn 2005 Ford Focus ZX5 SES I special orderd six weeks ago.
Sigh.
Wrong-O!!!
http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/articles/cobalt_ss_preview.asp
Quote from the article:
Cobalt SS is available as a four-door sedan or two-door coupe. It has a 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine that makes 170 horsepower, 30 more than the 2.2-liter of base, LS, and LT models. Available transmissions in the SS are standard 5-speed manual or optional 4-speed automatic. Also included in the SS are sport-tuned suspension; disc instead of drum rear brakes; 17-inch alloy wheels; and unique trim.
"Sports coupe" and "automatic transmission" don't go together."
Well, I guess the Vette's right out then.
"Instead of saying your wife "doesn't do manuals" why don't you take a Saturday and teach her how, just like I did."
Because she has no interest in learning how and it would be her car. And now that we all know that there will be a 2.4 SS with an automatic, it's no problem.
Yes, your wife will be able to get her SS with an auto sludgebox after all.
The car does exist, because I drove one a couple of weeks ago. Don't think there are any coupes yet, only sedans.
I had a couple of Cav rental cars last year and they were ridiculously dated cars. Even for the price, no way. Completely not acceptable in the year 2004. They've been talking about the Cobalt for two years like it's some kind of savior and it looks exactly like a Cavalier???? Now I know why all of the commercials for the Cobalt show the Vette more than the car it is supposed to be advertising.
Local dealers only have Sedans. For some reason there is a delay on the coupes. That's too bad, because I like the look of the coupe more. The coupe also has more head/legroom in the front, and (oddly enough) more cabin space than the sedan.
You obviously have not seen or driven one. There is nothing carried over from the Cavalier aside from the 2.2L Ecotec. This is all new and thoroughly competitive.
People, drive the car then decide for yourself. It's your money. Spend it as you see fit!
The fact of the matter is, objectively looked at, this car is miles from being a Cavalier. What you want? I have no idea. Only you can know that.
- The dimensions, stances, and sillouhettes of the Cobalt are the same as the Cav, therefore they look alike (in the front more than the back)
- The configurations available are the same as the Cav. By only offering a couple and sedan, GM missed an opportunity to distinguish the car as something truly "new". With the increasing popularity of wagons and 5 doors, Chevy could have made a bigger splash by offering other body styles
- Ford did the same thing with the Freestar. It's all new but looks exactly like the Windstar.
- It's a typical GM rollout with the cars being hyped for too long and then trickling onto lots with limited models and overpriced. By the time they get their act together, the model will be devalued and the incentives will be kicking in. They did the same thing with the G6. The run all these commercials like it's world class and then they put it out there with an old pushrod 6 making 210hp and a $28k sticker.
btw: that 2.2 L Ecotec that I had in two rental 03 Cavs was about the thrashiest thing that I've felt since I stopped buying 70s cars. The 1.6 in my 99 Civic was just as powerful and far more refined.
You can accuse me of hating, but just maybe I'm hearing from GM loyalists who want to love everything that they put out. I wish that I could get behind this company, but they just don't get it.
Before you pre-judge, go actually sit in on and dare I suggest drive one.
Looks are subjective and if you don't like them and that's your reason for not liking the car, fine. Just don't imply it's a carry over.
p.s. If your Civic is "just as powerful" it must be modified cause it has no where near the hp or torque of a Cobalt.
The Civic is no longer with me but dare I suggest that you drive them side by side. The General can claim that the Cobalt has whatever horsepower they want. Maybe the Cav was rated higher, but the power wasn't making it to the pavement. The Civic was rated at 127 horse, but with the stick, it felt quicker than either Cav that I had the poor fortune to rent.
Also, the Ford Freestar remake is actually very closely related to the Ford Windstar, so your analogy doesnt hold very strongly. The Cav and the Cobalt are on completely different platformns. Not so the Freestar and Windstar.
~alpha
I've driven both 5 sp and auto Civics, and in either case, the refinement was not in the same universe as the thrashy ecotec. I'm the only import buyer in a family of domestic loyalists and I was raised on GM iron. To this day, my favorite car that I'll ever own was my 1970 Chevelle. However, after my 85 Regal and 89 Camaro, I was turned off. However, since them I have had a great deal of experience driving GM products owned by family members.
When I last bought a car in 2003, I was very careful to cross shop domestics and imports, and I ended up with the Altima (which is 100% US content).
Again, I would like to get behind this company, but they consistently shoot for the middle.
I understand where you are coming from with the GM "shooting for the middle" comment- but this Cobalt seems more fully realized than any of GM other recent offerings, save the Cadillacs, which have done very well at turning that company's image and profitability around.
~alpha
PS- Which Altima do you drive? The VQ is excellent, but the 2.5L is not a refinement leader, and I'd put it on the same level as the GM Ecotec motor. Neither come close to the Toyota and Honda 2.4L mills.
If GM wants to add value to the nameplate, they should have offered some new configuations such as a 5 door to make it seem "new" in the minds of consumers. By sticking with just a coupe and sedan with almost identical silohhettes as the old car, it's going to just seem like the new Cavalier. It also shows typical lack of forward thinking.
My Alt is the 2.5. It is less refined than the Honda and Toyota powerplants, but in return I get 175 hp and a timing chain instead of a belt. When I drove the Alt, Camry and Accord all of the same day, the Alt did seems less refined but clearly quicker and sportier. That's what I went for. The engine is far superior in refinement and power to the ecotec however.
~alpha
Like I said with the style, if you don't like it that's fine. Just don't translate that to the car being old fashioned or a carry over mechanically.
Alpha, if memory serves from two years ago, I believe that the Camry has a chain but I am sure that the Accord has a belt just like my 99 Civic and 89 Accord. I can't stand belts.
Ecotec is a solid power plant, I have little doubt the Cobalt will be a strong entry.
Someone wanted new Opel Astra - wait for the new Saturn instead. Saturn will be an American Opel for you. If you compare new Astra and Saturn Aura concept - they look very similar with same headlights and grille but with different badges.
Cobalt looks like it would be a good little car. So if ya like it, buy it and have fun. It is one to consider in it's class. The tC Scion is also good in the sub $17k bracket. So far, my pick is still Mazda3, if going with a FWD. My next car may be another RWD one.
Look at "Prices paid and Buying exp"...3 entries.
My last issue of Car and Driver had three pages of Cobalt ads. Maybe Chevy should just sell ads.
WRX or Cobalt SS? WRX or Cobalt SS?
If the Cobalt isn't available to test drive by tax refund time, I guess it becomes a one-horse race.