Chevy has released one official photo of the upcoming Chevy Cobalt SS Sedan.
The Cobalt SS Sedan is essentially the same as its coupe counterpart, but with two additional doors. It features the same 260 horsepower 2.0L turbocharged engine as the coupe, Chevy HHR SS, Pontiac Solstice GXP and Saturn Sky Red Line. The coupe reaches 0-60mph in 5.7 seconds and has a starting price of $23K. Expect the sedan to be similar.
The sedan will be on sale later this year.
Related Stories:
2008 Chevy Cobalt SS Coupe With 260 Horsepower Starts at $22,995
Cobalt SS Coupe:
Comments (26)
Looks cheap blah blah blah...
The [insert non-american brand here] as the [insert model here] is a much better option and blah blah...
The [insert automobile producing country here] make better engines with more DonkeyPower for that displacement...
and blah blah blah....
Posted by America-Obsessed | April 6, 2008 4:19 PM
Posted on April 6, 2008 16:19
PS - American cars make me sick so i will go watch "Bowling for Columbine" for the 98740598275203610874th time to cure the depression american cars give me...
Posted by America-Obsessed | April 6, 2008 4:23 PM
Posted on April 6, 2008 16:23
Looks like a nice sleeper, I actually like the 4 door better then the 2dr version.
Posted by fragger | April 6, 2008 5:16 PM
Posted on April 6, 2008 17:16
I really want them to bring back the Saturn Ion Quad Coupe Redline. It looks better than the cars listed above and I just prefer a supercharged engine.
Posted by 09 | April 6, 2008 6:24 PM
Posted on April 6, 2008 18:24
Nice sleeper car, especially for the price.
Posted by longdxcommuter | April 6, 2008 8:14 PM
Posted on April 6, 2008 20:14
I agree on the sleeper part, I can see some Civic SI sedans getting embarresd at the local stop lights. They may also get embarresed at the local Auto X too if the Cobat Coupe's suspesion makes it into this car. I personally wouldn't drive one but it's got some potential. I really think the Pontiac G5 looks twice as good as the Cobalt but for some reason they don't have a performance version of it...
Posted by Gary | April 6, 2008 8:31 PM
Posted on April 6, 2008 20:31
Got to agree this will definitely be a sleeper. The styling isn't to bad either, I'd drive it.
Posted by Skyline GT-R R-32 | April 6, 2008 9:54 PM
Posted on April 6, 2008 21:54
Can't tell the diff between this version and the regular version.
Posted by SteelCity1981 | April 6, 2008 11:02 PM
Posted on April 6, 2008 23:02
This car is such a sleeper it's going to sleep GM with the fishes.
Posted by booyah | April 7, 2008 2:49 AM
Posted on April 7, 2008 02:49
That's the car Chevy should have had for it's mainstay for the last 40 years. A modern 4 banger with practicality.
Duh, can we cram a pushrod V-8 in there somehow? I might want to tow a boat.
Posted by Bill O | April 7, 2008 10:50 AM
Posted on April 7, 2008 10:50
Sandpaper on the top of the dashboard?
Ugly as hell. Reminds me of Europe's Opel, which are so ugly it hurts.
But 260 Hp? WTF?
Posted by Sphere | April 7, 2008 11:56 AM
Posted on April 7, 2008 11:56
Looks cheap blah blah blah...
The [Mitsubishi] as the [EVO] is a much better option and cooler...
[Mitsubishi] make better engines with more HorsePower for that displacement...
there is no way this chevy will be a hit. i swear if chevy has the car of the year with this offering i will move to iceland and use dogsleds for the rest of my natural life....
Posted by dennisil | April 7, 2008 3:06 PM
Posted on April 7, 2008 15:06
Yes, the car will haul ass, no one is debating that.
BUT, it's just like the old F-Body's...horrid interior, dated exterior and atrocious resale value.
Most people dropping $20-25k on a car aren't people with a lot of money and it comes down to resale value and a quality car (interior, exterior, fit and finish).
If I wanted a performance car for $25k or less it would be the new baby EVO Lancer Ralliart (2.0T/AWD) or Hyundai Genesis 2.0T coupe that actually has the same 4B11 engine as the EVO = tons of mods and reliability at 20lbs of boost.
Posted by Noya | April 8, 2008 1:14 AM
Posted on April 8, 2008 01:14
this thing is such a sleeper it actually is putting me to sleep as we speak
Posted by dennisil | April 8, 2008 11:22 AM
Posted on April 8, 2008 11:22
This car is a very nice sleeper car...
Posted by paul | April 8, 2008 11:33 AM
Posted on April 8, 2008 11:33
"or Hyundai Genesis 2.0T coupe that actually has the same 4B11 engine as the EVO = tons of mods and reliability at 20lbs of boost."
/agree. That is the path I will likely take, so far.
It is a good 4-door commuter sleeper though. It would be great for slicing and dicing in rush hour, and you can pick up the kids too. I can't help but to like cheap, fast cars, even if they have some faults :P
Posted by Kell | April 9, 2008 1:04 PM
Posted on April 9, 2008 13:04
@Noya: "Hyundai Genesis 2.0T coupe that actually has the same 4B11 engine as the EVO"
The Genesis does not have the same engine as the Evo. Never will. The Genesis has 2 V6s options or a V8.
Posted by 09 | April 9, 2008 2:44 PM
Posted on April 9, 2008 14:44
Bored already. 260hp from a turbo four that might make it to 75,000 miles, and what, 150 lb ft torque? Piece of crap.
Hey, Bob Lutz, why make ugly uglier? Is there really that big of a market for shitty little econo cars like this outside of Avis and Hertz? Honda Civic - yes. Toyota Corolla - yes. Hyundai Accent - sort of. Ford Focus - sort of. Chevy Caval-- er Cobalt - doubtful.
Posted by Rich | April 9, 2008 7:33 PM
Posted on April 9, 2008 19:33
I wouldn't say the interior on this car is F-Body/Cavy-bad rather more mazadaspeed3esk...
$23k for a family hauler with the same DNA (as the '08 SS Coupe) that supposedly ran a 8:22 on the Nordschleife?...That ain't bad.
Oh and few other notables for the nurburgring:
8:22 Nissan Skyline GT-R R32
8:24 Subaru Impreza WRX STI
8:25 Porsche Cayman S
8:26 Nissan 350Z
As far as the Genisis goes...Kudos to Hyundai that isn't your grandma's Elantra. Im just wondering why they went with the thirsty 3.8 V6 from the Eclipse. Wouldn't a uprated version of the 4B11 make way more sense?
Posted by Brian | April 10, 2008 9:15 AM
Posted on April 10, 2008 09:15
I wouldn't say the interior on this car is F-Body/Cavy-bad rather more mazadaspeed3esk...
$23k for a family hauler with the same DNA (as the '08 SS Coupe) that supposedly ran a 8:22 on the Nordschleife?...That ain't bad.
Oh and few other notables for the nurburgring:
8:22 Nissan Skyline GT-R R32
8:24 Subaru Impreza WRX STI
8:25 Porsche Cayman S
8:26 Nissan 350Z
As far as the Genisis goes...Kudos to Hyundai that isn't your grandma's Elantra. Im just wondering why they went with the thirsty 3.8 V6 from the Eclipse. Wouldn't a uprated version of the 4B11 make way more sense?
Posted by Brian | April 10, 2008 9:15 AM
Posted on April 10, 2008 09:15
The Genesis, sedan at least, is targeting more luxury then performance. The 4B11 starts making it's power at around 3K, as oppose to around 2K that the N/A engines will do. The other thing is the turbo will be nosier then an N/A engine, and noise is very luxury. It is also going to weigh between 3700-4000 lbs, which the higher power band of the turbo engine would mean it would need to be revving higher constantly to get the car moving. The Evo X weighs 3400 lbs, quite a bit less. Any gas mileage gains would go out the window when you constantly have to rev the engine to get moving, Evo X is prime example of this at 16/22.
Posted by Avatar | April 10, 2008 11:45 AM
Posted on April 10, 2008 11:45
Add a 'not' in between 'noise' and 'very' in the third sentence. Really should proof read before hitting post, lol.
Posted by Avatar | April 10, 2008 11:48 AM
Posted on April 10, 2008 11:48
Just to be clear, there is a Genesis sedan and a coupe. Two different cars.
Posted by Kell | April 11, 2008 3:13 PM
Posted on April 11, 2008 15:13
The sedan doesn't have the turbo 4, the coupe does. The mention of v6s meant sedan and lack of turbo 4 meant sedan model.
Posted by Avatar | April 12, 2008 12:09 AM
Posted on April 12, 2008 00:09
I don't really understand why Chevy has to "SS" almost every model to make it cool. It's like if you can't afford a base plain Jane Malibu, just get the "SS" in the next lower model and you become hip. We are a Chevy family through and through, but I find it funny when I see stuff like this and wonder who would actually buy it? I might be wrong and this things a hit, if so, I can't wait to put my order in for the Aveo "SS" edition. This way when I pull up to race an import, the "SS" equipment will make 'em shiver and quiver in my...............Aveo. I mean Aveo "SS" !
Posted by Steve | April 13, 2008 5:00 PM
Posted on April 13, 2008 17:00
"I just prefer a supercharged engine."
Why? The supercharged ecotec was decent, but this one is way better, in every regard. Off the line, at redline, and everywhere in between it spanks it. Modern engines can be tuned so well that there's really almost no drawbacks to a turbo anymore, if the engine is built for it. Reliability of SC vs TC is no longer a valid argument.
"I don't really understand why Chevy has to "SS" almost every model to make it cool. It's like if you can't afford a base plain Jane Malibu, just get the "SS" in the next lower model and you become hip."
Sorry, but that's not the point of an SS model. What you're doing is questioning the existence of performance derivatives of production cars. A Cobalt SS is not in the same category as a Malibu. You don't buy a Cobalt SS because you can't afford a Malibu (especially since a Cobalt SS is more expensive than base model Malibu, and for good reason). You buy it because it is a performance vehicle that will trash the Malibu in every *performance* aspect.
The Malibu on the other hand is bigger, roomier, prettier, a more comfortable ride, etc. Different breeds. It's the same thing with pretty much all the SS models - they're a faster, better handling version of a particular model. How is this different from most other automakers, really? Do people buy an SRT-4 because they can't get a basic model Charger? Is a Civic Si taking sales from a 4-cyl entry level Accord? Not so much.
"Bored already. 260hp from a turbo four that might make it to 75,000 miles, and what, 150 lb ft torque? Piece of crap."
You clearly demonstrate your ignorance, as well as your bias. Not only does it produce 260HP, it produces 260 ft-lbs of torque. Furthermore, it produces maximum torque from 2500-5300 RPM. That's an extremely flat and broad torque curve that even a lot of pushrod V8s would be jealous of.
Posted by Alexvrb | April 14, 2008 7:13 PM
Posted on April 14, 2008 19:13