Cobalt SS vs. WRX?? Which one to buy

TH0001 said:
Does the fact that the Cobalt SS is faster, handles better, has a better warrenty, and costs less factor in at all in your statement that the WRX is a 'way' better car?
Click to expand...



Not at all, because that is only true of stock vs. stock. I am only speaking from quality of the build, reliability, motor strength, and overall awesomeness of the engineering of the WRX vs the chevrolet. In my experience, my 2002 WRX cost me $6000, I initially drove it nearly stock for a few months before investing nearly another 3800$ into the engine resulting in 380 all wheel hp. A set of coilovers and some sticky tires later, and my little WReX was not necessarily the fastest car on the road, but I would like to bet that it pulled my detailing trailer faster than any other rig on this board. My trailer withstood a speed test of around 140. Sold it for 12,500 a couple months ago, and that has easily been the worst decision I have ever made. I have personally never had a car that was even close to as good of a car as that. So, no, I did not factor in any of that because my cheap suby would roast any cobalt and still be way better of a car any day, and look better in my opinion. Either way I think you'll be happy with a turbo car. Nothing beats the lag while you're hearing it spool up, and then it shoving you into the back of your seat and having all four tires screaming. Cobalts were the least of my worries, my suby never lost to any Corvette including 2 C6 Z06's. So, I hope this helps you out. I don't want to seem biased because I had quite a bit done to mine, but I want you to know that the quality of a Subaru WRX is on a whole other level compared to a Cobalt. If you buy one of these two cars, you will realize one is junk, and that the other is simply incredible and that you will likely fall in love with it. I have yet to find a WRX owner that wasn't completely blown away by the incredible quality of these cars. I'm gonna shut up now
 
finalfinish said:
Not at all, because that is only true of stock vs. stock. I am only speaking from quality of the build, reliability, motor strength, and overall awesomeness of the engineering of the WRX vs the chevrolet. In my experience, my 2002 WRX cost me $6000, I initially drove it nearly stock for a few months before investing nearly another 3800$ into the engine resulting in 380 all wheel hp. A set of coilovers and some sticky tires later, and my little WReX was not necessarily the fastest car on the road, but I would like to bet that it pulled my detailing trailer faster than any other rig on this board. My trailer withstood a speed test of around 140. Sold it for 12,500 a couple months ago, and that has easily been the worst decision I have ever made. I have personally never had a car that was even close to as good of a car as that. So, no, I did not factor in any of that because my cheap suby would roast any cobalt and still be way better of a car any day, and look better in my opinion. Either way I think you'll be happy with a turbo car. Nothing beats the lag while you're hearing it spool up, and then it shoving you into the back of your seat and having all four tires screaming. Cobalts were the least of my worries, my suby never lost to any Corvette including 2 C6 Z06's. So, I hope this helps you out. I don't want to seem biased because I had quite a bit done to mine, but I want you to know that the quality of a Subaru WRX is on a whole other level compared to a Cobalt. If you buy one of these two cars, you will realize one is junk, and that the other is simply incredible and that you will likely fall in love with it. I have yet to find a WRX owner that wasn't completely blown away by the incredible quality of these cars. I'm gonna shut up now
Click to expand...





Cool. Can you give us some of the details of your cobalt ownership? Maybe some examples of how the motor blew up on you as soon as you tried to race a kid on a bicycle, or how it would leave you stranded on the side of the road in the middle of the pouring rain? Or maybe "your buddy" owned one, and "it was always in the shop, and the interior plastic felt hard". Or maybe, just maybe, you never owned a cobalt SS, and you are speaking from a completely incorrect, non fact-based point of view that "all american cars are crappy" because you or someone in your family had an american car in 1983 that had a bad transmission or something, and therefore you'll never buy one again....
 
Ok maybe it's not junk, I think that came out wrong. I just meant that in my opinion a Cobalt would feel like a tremendous step down from a WRX. I don't have a clue about Cobalt ownership, but from my experiences with Chevrolet, I would imagine it would be great. I'm just saying it is not even close to a WRX, IMO.
 
TH0001- I followed your test-drive report with interest. I'm looking forward to what you think of the other cars in that range.



I wonder if you simply aren't gonna find something you'll really love, at least not something you'll love right away, but maybe find something that'll be so easy/pleasant to live with that you *end up* really appreciating it (for what it is) because of how well it fills a certain niche. I had that happen with a VW ('87 Quantum AWD wagon)...after a few years of treating it like a throw-away beater I realized that I truly *loved* the thing far more than I ever expected to.



finalfinish said:
... I have yet to find a WRX owner that wasn't completely blown away by the incredible quality of these cars...
Click to expand...



Here's one :D I'm an ex-WRX owner who wasn't the least bit blown away by any aspect of the car and I'm genuinely stumped by the reference to "incredible quality"...if *I* said that, I'd mean it as sarcasm. Guess different people see things differently, and I'm open to the possibility that they've really improved them since mine ('02).



Sheesh, are my wife and I the only people who were disappointed by their Subarus?!? It's not like we don't appreciate a good, inexpensive car...
 
TH0001 said:
A little update...



I test drove both models and here are my limited thoughts...



Driving experience- The Cobalt has a better steering feel and seems to respond 'quicker' to changes in direction. The Subaru doesn't respond slowly, it just seems slightly dead on center compared to the Cobalt. Both cars beg to be driven aggressively, but neither are "fast". Quick is more like it, that said the Cobalt feels more powerful everywhere, and feel like a larger engine at low RPM. Very tracable at low RPM. By comparision the Subaru feels more like a turbo engine with (VERY slight) lag you can feel it really pick up as the RPM climb.



I thought the interior on both was equally cheap on both sides, but the Subies is a nicer, more livable cheap.



I had a chance to punch both of them from a stop. Both lauch pretty quick but the Subie is defiently quicker off the line because of the traction advantage. The Cobalt SS I drove had the limited slip differental, and in combination with the lauch control system on, left quickly with little drama (though a little bit of torque steer). The Subie had a slightly better shifter and was easier to power **** by a slight amount (I never missed a gear in the Cobalt, just felt a little looser). While neither is fast, the Cobalt feels more powerful and feels quicker. Around town this is more apparent as the engine feels torqueir.



After driving both the truth is that I didn't fall in love with either, so I am going to look at the Mazda Speed (which I doubt I'll like) and the Mitsu...
Click to expand...



Interesting. I'm going to guess you won't love the MS3; if you felt like the WRX was dead on center or felt at all sluggish, the MS3 is going to feel really big I think.



Having driven them both do you have a list of priorities? Like are you after more responsiveness? More speed? Better interior? Better suspension? Can you live with FWD? I'm just trying to decide whether you're after more sport or more comfort. What do you think?
 
finalfinish said:
I have yet to find a WRX owner that wasn't completely blown away by the incredible quality of these cars.
Click to expand...



Well, I'm a current '08 owner and while I do like my car, its quality is sadly below that of my $12k Ford Focus I bought 8 years earlier... Don't get me wrong, but for 25k, I was expecting the experience to be a lot better then it has been.
 
finalfinish said:
Not at all, because that is only true of stock vs. stock. I am only speaking from quality of the build, reliability, motor strength, and overall awesomeness of the engineering of the WRX vs the chevrolet. In my experience, my 2002 WRX cost me $6000, I initially drove it nearly stock for a few months before investing nearly another 3800$ into the engine resulting in 380 all wheel hp. A set of coilovers and some sticky tires later, and my little WReX was not necessarily the fastest car on the road, but I would like to bet that it pulled my detailing trailer faster than any other rig on this board. My trailer withstood a speed test of around 140. Sold it for 12,500 a couple months ago, and that has easily been the worst decision I have ever made. I have personally never had a car that was even close to as good of a car as that. So, no, I did not factor in any of that because my cheap suby would roast any cobalt and still be way better of a car any day, and look better in my opinion. Either way I think you'll be happy with a turbo car. Nothing beats the lag while you're hearing it spool up, and then it shoving you into the back of your seat and having all four tires screaming. Cobalts were the least of my worries, my suby never lost to any Corvette including 2 C6 Z06's. So, I hope this helps you out. I don't want to seem biased because I had quite a bit done to mine, but I want you to know that the quality of a Subaru WRX is on a whole other level compared to a Cobalt. If you buy one of these two cars, you will realize one is junk, and that the other is simply incredible and that you will likely fall in love with it. I have yet to find a WRX owner that wasn't completely blown away by the incredible quality of these cars. I'm gonna shut up now
Click to expand...



380 AWHP Ran quicker than a C6 ZO6?
 
Autofan said:
380 AWHP Ran quicker than a C6 ZO6?
Click to expand...





Yes, at my local autocross. A nearly 400 pound advantage and all wheel drive on a tuned Subaru or EVO for that matter makes the Corvette seem like a joke. C6 Z06's produce around 410 WHP from the factory, not the 505 advertised. After a decent exhaust, 420 can be pulled from one on the dyno. Both are awesome cars.
 
My 30 hp kart will destroy anything at almost any autocross (yes, even the A-Mod cars, except at longer courses). That doesn't make it a better quality vehicle than something else, just makes it faster on an autocross course ;)
 
finalfinish said:
Yes, at my local autocross. A nearly 400 pound advantage and all wheel drive on a tuned Subaru or EVO for that matter makes the Corvette seem like a joke. C6 Z06's produce around 410 WHP from the factory, not the 505 advertised. After a decent exhaust, 420 can be pulled from one on the dyno. Both are awesome cars.
Click to expand...



G.M. Never claimed 505 at the wheels.



I like the WRX but comparing it to a vette is......



My dad had a 600HP Stang that would knock out Ferraris and other Exotics. But at the end of the day he still understood that his car was modified.



You are also most likely a pretty skilled driver and these Z06 cars have not been out for all that long. Experience must have played a role here..no?
 
Autofan said:
G.M. Never claimed 505 at the wheels.



I like the WRX but comparing it to a vette is......



My dad had a 600HP Stang that would knock out Ferraris and other Exotics. But at the end of the day he still understood that his car was modified.



You are also most likely a pretty skilled driver and these Z06 cars have not been out for all that long. Experience must have played a role here..no?
Click to expand...





I though 505 hp was on the z06 badge?
 
Horse power ratings from manufacturers are almost always to the crank. Most of them use the new SAE standard so they're *reasonably* reliable. The real variable is drive train loss. I think the generally agreed on number is 15%. 15% of 505 ~75hp, so the Z06 should have ~425 to the wheels. I believe most dyno's of stock Z06's are in that range. Of course that's not true for all cars, but some manufacturers are very conservative with their hp ratings.
 
NCZ13 said:
I though 505 hp was on the z06 badge?
Click to expand...



It is on the badge but again this is crank HP as stated above.



The WRX has something in the area of 227hp take away 15-20% of that and that is about what it will put down.
 
Autofan said:
It is on the badge but again this is crank HP as stated above.



The WRX has something in the area of 227hp take away 15-20% of that and that is about what it will put down.
Click to expand...



The '09 WRX is rated for 265hp.



The '08's were rated for less, but the consensus is they put out more then Subaru claim as people were dynoing at 95% of rated.
 
askjeffro said:
The '09 WRX is rated for 265hp.



The '08's were rated for less, but the consensus is they put out more then Subaru claim as people were dynoing at 95% of rated.
Click to expand...



I was referring to his 2002 WRX vs the current C6 Z06.
 
My 02 WRX put 383 down to all four wheels. This was after under $3800 in parts, another $2000 can result in 450 at the wheels, but isn't nearly as reliable as what I did. My WRX also weighed in at about 2810 lbs with about a quarter of a tank with no driver. I wasn't intending to say that a WRX is comparable to a Corvette, it's just easy to make faster than one. It's quite funny to see a four door Subaru beating new Z06's.
 
Autofan said:
It is on the badge but again this is crank HP as stated above.



The WRX has something in the area of 227hp take away 15-20% of that and that is about what it will put down.
Click to expand...



i know what drivetrain loss is. But someone said that GM never claimed 505hp (be it bhp or whp) but i was pretty sure theres a 505hp on the z06 badge.



i think the wrx has a little bit more drivetrain loss because of the awd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top