Rep Power: 287

Road & Track Acura RSX Type-S / Chevy Cobalt SS comparo

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....&page_number=1

Quote:
Lack of low-end torque (143 lb.-ft. at 7000 rpm) hurts the Type-S compared with the supercharged Cobalt SS (200 lb.-ft. at 4400 rpm), but once the i-VTEC kicks in above 6400 rpm, the Acura pulls at least as hard if not harder than the Chevy. Zero to 60 mph takes 6.7 seconds, five-tenths off the much torquier Cobalt. This high-strung, high-revving performance, however, does come at a cost, in the form of increased interior buzziness and the need for constant shifting to keep the engine singing. VTEC fans probably won't mind the extra work, but low-revving torque junkies will likely prefer the less stratospheric SS.

Quote:

Think we're blowing smoke? Check out our test numbers. The new 205-bhp Cobalt SS eats the 210-bhp RSX at the dragstrip, using the better low-end torque to hit 60 mph a half-second quicker than the RSX (6.2 sec. vs. 6.7). And in the quarter mile, the Acura exploits its high-rpm VTEC power to make the gap closer, but it's still two-tenths behind the Cobalt SS, which powers down the strip at a fleet 14.8 sec. at 96.8 mph.


Quote:
But the Cobalt SS does come very close, as the tight fight in our Final Ratings box indicates. For starters, the SS has very tight body panel gaps and it's much quieter inside, thanks to Chevy's extensive use of laminated Quiet Steel in the firewall, which keeps out any potential whine from the Roots-type blower and makes it much easier to hear the XM satellite radio and just enough throaty exhaust to know you're driving something special. The Recaro seats are excellent, and the leather-covered steering wheel, with a minimum of neatly integrated controls, has a reassuringly sturdy feel. No creaks are to be heard in the Cobalt SS, and the handsomely styled center console is complemented by SS-specific analog gauges and an Autometer boost gauge on the A-pillar that gives it a decidedly aftermarket import tuner look.




Final Score: Acura - 199.3 Points; Chevy - 200 points

 
Rep Power: 0

would still rather have an rsx type s....and Car and driver tested the type s, wrx, cobalt ss, srt4, and ion red line and rsx type s placed first

 
Rep Power: 0

My Vote: Type-S

more redefined, sure it isn't as quick as the CSS, but it does everthing else better IMO. Plus, chicks dig the acura, harry men on bikes and in trucks dig the chevy!

 
Rep Power: 0

^ lol
yea i read that too.

c'mon...
are you really gonna consider getting a cobalt???
i havent seen one one on the road yet ever since it came out.

 
Rep Power: 0

ill take the acura thank you very much

 
Rep Power: 266

type-s: reliability, super-refined, brand name, ivtec

 
Rep Power: 280

Technology always wins.
..."no replacement for dispacement".. is so 20th century, 1 RSX-S please and fries with that too.
8000 + rpm in 2.0L = no replacement for rpm.
Welcome to the 21st century America!

 
Rep Power: 0

well actually the ss is fastter so you're post doesn't make sense

 
Rep Power: 280

Right,

I know, car and driver test drove RSX-S about a year ago and got 0-60 in 6.2.
I just like the fact thet Honda refuses to produce turbo/sc factory engines...
thets why technology rules..

 
Rep Power: 0

wait... they said the cobalt is faster, has a better/quieter interior, and has better seats... all for less money... but the RSX is more refined? lol fanboy

 
Rep Power: 0

Uh huh, and who is to say they couldn’t get a better time out of the cobalt? EXACTLY. Don’t be a ricer and quit magazine racing. The cobalt has a better power to weight ratio, has a bigger and fatter power band, makes a butt load of torque and has better traction (available LSD).

Sorry, but the Chevy wins.

GM has been around longer then Honda... and dont even get started on how long its been around VS Hondas Acura division.

That being said... brand name?

BTW can you tell me what the winning lotto tickets will be? it must be nice knowing the future. Its awesome that you know how reliable the brand new Cobalt will be.

 
Rep Power: 266

so i'm guessing you're a chevy fanboy?? last time i checked consumer report's listing for the top reliable automaker's; acura/honda, toyota/lexus, were on top; GM was nowhere to be found near the top of the list. Even if GM/chevy/saturn/etc. was third, acura would still be above it. booya! that's it i'm going to bed... o yea and http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/list/...8/article.html how many times does chevy come in for the worst resale values??? Ha!

 
Rep Power: 294

Interesting article. I'd still get the type though...

 
Rep Power: 0

I don't care if the Cobalt had 150 more Hp...It's still a redesigned Cavalier...Go ahead, get one and see how long a Cobalt SS last before going to crap..

 
Rep Power: 320

The length of time that a brand has been around has no bearing on a cars reliability. Its been proven overall, honda cars tend to be more reliable then gm cars. There various reasons for that, you can find it if you search.

I agree no one can know about how reliable the cobalt is, but based on GM's past history, then no it won't be as reliable as a rsx.

The colbalt SS has a pretty good price to performance ratio and is faster on the drag. On the track i think edge goes to the rsx.

overall if you want reliabilty and resale value....Honda > GM

Speed and price....GM > Honda

 
Rep Power: 318

In the areas of: Interior styling, Seats, Ergonomics/controls the RSX-s scored higher, hence it is more refined. Ever set in both of these cars and go for a long drive? I have the cobalt has some just annoying features, the RSX-s is simple yet functional.

Yes the Cobalt SS is faster, but sometimes there is more than straight line speed when driving. Personally I dislike the Cobalts styling and it lacks a level of refinement found on the RSX-s. Comparing these two cars is like comparing a Camaro SS to Benz 300SL (just example cars), they might have similiar numbers, but the targeted crowds are different.

Agian, I say the Cobalt SS is faster, but to say it is a nicer car is up to the indivual.

 
Rep Power: 0

My best friend has a new cobalt...NOT the SS
It might be a bit faster then my 03 civic sport
But inside it feels like my sisters cavalier, the materials are cheap, fit and finish is crap, the cd player buttons stick....The panels are hard plastic...
We took it out all day about a week ago, and the seats get VERY uncomfortable after long rides.
I love chevy, actually...this civic is the first import we've bought...Excluding BMW...which we didnt have much luck with.
If the SS is ANYTHING like the standard cobalt....it needs some work

ps - check out any review on the base cobalt, its lacking in every department

 
Rep Power: 272

my vote goes to the type s

 
Rep Power: 0

the type S has +5hp and is still N/A....id stick my money in with acura if i had the choice...the only chevy id buy is a camaro, vette or truck

 
Rep Power: 0

Blah blah blah. WHy do these always come up. Any thing boosted already has an advantage(i.e. the ult replacement for displacement). All you would need to do is pulley change on a sc and boom more boost. Yes chevy has been around longer. But they have no I dea what it takes to build a good reliable 4cyl. And thats what honda does best. So honda has been building 4cyl way longer than chevy. Besides which companies have this employee pricing? Only the ones that are close to bankruptcy and honda is not one of them for a reason. Quality/relaibilty/technology etc etc!!!

And hell yea I would own an rsx any day over any american wanna be fwd.

 
Rep Power: 319

According to the new SEA test standards the S has 201 HP at the engine. The cobal on the other hand has been dynoed up to 212 HP to the wheels.

 
Rep Power: 318

Chevy was building 4 cylinder engines way before Honda even started building car. Reliablity is a different issue. Chevy was also building highout put 4 bangers before Honda, see Cosworth Vega, not high performance for today, but back in the 70's it was great.

 
Rep Power: 0

Vote: type s, but c'mon kids lets stop making irrational arguments and post the facts about the two. Either way, we're all honda so no matter which is better, I can speak on our behalf and safely say the type s.

 
Rep Power: 289

It will be fun to see how the redesigned 2007 RSX will perform.

 
Rep Power: 0

One the vega was a mess. It was one of the biggest piles evar. Some smart guy decided to put aluminum cyl's and pistons together. This is how we now know that when like metals friction together the weld them selves. But if you want to say the vega 4 was good then you must like driving less than 50k miles cuase thats when it would fail. As for cosworth they are a britsh company and have worked with ford too. I am saying factory to facory usdm. Chevy does not byuild good 4cyl and honda started its history that way and never budged and only got better and more reliable. In the 70's americans where all about bigger better until it was too late the japan market had alhold of there area 4cyl and compact cars. Fact 2 friends of mine had s10's(new ones) both where 4cyl one friend threw a rod at 13k miles and the other went through 3 engines(warranty) before selling it. Gm does not venture too far off what got them where they are at hence the fact that they still have not gone ohc yet. And ford is having huge success with the ohc mod motor. Who is to say that the cobalt engine is not chevy's try at a decent power plant. Only time will tell. I am for one not going to be a test dummy for a failing company. When I could buy some thing reliable and holds its value. Yea it may not have as much power but really what do you want for a daily driver a race car or some thing reliable. Besides I have other cars for going fast I just want to look good in my dd.

 
Rep Power: 318

d00d, read the second sentance of the statement you qouted, I NEVER said reilable.

You said Honda made 4 cylynder engines before Chevy, I was simply saying that is not true, never said chevy made a more reilable 4 cylinder Honda.

But give chevy a little credit, after all they invented VTEC and sold it to Honda. Chevy tried to apply VTEC to their long stroke small bore torque 4 cyliders and it just didn't work. Honda who built motorcyles long before cars, put their knowledge of short stroke and huge bores to use to give a bigger engine the abilty to breath at higher RPM's. So GM had a good idea, just couldn't apply it.

 
Rep Power: 0

There isn't going to be one

 
Rep Power: 289

Got proof?

 
Rep Power: 0

My neighbor had a 1997 Chevy Cavalier with over 100,000 miles on it. She babied it all along and was the sole owner. It started getting unreliable so (things breaking that shouldn't) she decided to go get a Cobalt (she's a chevy person and thinks that the car lasted as long as it should at 100k...She was able to get $1000 for the car. sold it to a friend instead of letting the dealer have it for 1k.

She's had her colbalt less than a month and it's left her stranded 3 times. It's been towed back to the seller each time with a "known defect" they supposedly resolved each time. The car sputters, stalls, and stops, or when turned off won't start again.

Okay, it's NOT an SS, but guess what...you buy a chevy you deserve what you get. She's now sorry she didn't go see the Honda dealer like I told her. 2 more tows and it qualifies for a return under the lemon laws I'm told.

Great numbers on the track are fine, but reliability and resale value are just as important...and chevy has neither.

My Civic is my first non-american car and thanks to it I won't be buying any more fords, chevys, or chrysters...

 
Rep Power: 0

Jrfish- I should have been more clear. I am trying to say good built 4cyl.
Old- Well said. My first car was a datsun truck and I drove it hard so hard. It still ran great had 195k on it when I sold it. I have been hooked on imports ever since. I do like my domestics too but its like they have there own place along with all the others.