2.4 Vs. 2.2

10-25-2005, 02:32 PM

im sure this has been brought up many many times, but i havent found it yet, the 2.4 alero vs. the 2.2 alero, which is faster, i know some one with the 2.2 and i have the 2.4 and they think they can smoke me, only diff in the car is i have a seystem and steel wheel opposed to the stock 2.2 which has alloys. jw?

johny_boy32 · 10-25-2005, 03:01 PM

I'm not sure which one is better stock but the 2.2 has a lot more aftermarket support than the 2.4 does. So the 2.2 could be better if it isnt already.

ptrudel · 10-25-2005, 03:03 PM

depends...if he's got a factory freak like MikeSS did, he'll beat ya...if not, i THINK it'd be close...but as johnny said, WAY more aftermarket for the 2.2

Vtolds · 10-25-2005, 03:04 PM

I liked my 2.4 would have been better if I had a 5 speed instead of a auto But in a Race and 2.4 Alero should beat a 2.2 Alero.

cherrington17 · 10-25-2005, 03:10 PM

i'd try to keep this as far from "racing" as you can. if you cross the line into "we tried going stop light to stop light..." this thread will be closed.

but strictly on a perfomance level you should be ok.

(i however, have no idea...) lol

ptrudel · 10-25-2005, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vtolds@Oct 25 2005, 03:04 PM
I liked my 2.4 would have been better if I had a 5 speed instead of a auto But in a Race and 2.4 Alero should beat a 2.2 Alero.

Quoted post

there again it depends on alot of things..driver skill for one, auto or manual, mileage on cars maybe, traction...lots falls into play.

for example...take track times for me(2.4L) and MikeSS'(2.2L) same mods(intake, exhaust) both 5spd, and he'd be runnin i think a 15.2ish, and i was runnin 16's...

Vtolds · 10-25-2005, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 2000_olds_alero+Oct 25 2005, 03:19 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(2000_olds_alero @ Oct 25 2005, 03:19 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Vtolds@Oct 25 2005, 03:04 PM
I liked my 2.4 would have been better if I had a 5 speed instead of a auto But in a Race and 2.4 Alero should beat a 2.2 Alero.

Quoted post

there again it depends on alot of things..driver skill for one, auto or manual, mileage on cars maybe, traction...lots falls into play.

for example...take track times for me(2.4L) and MikeSS'(2.2L) same mods(intake, exhaust) both 5spd, and he'd be runnin i think a 15.2ish, and i was runnin 16's...

Quoted post

[/b][/quote]

is that his 2.2 Cobalt SS or did he have a 2.2 Alero that ran 15.2? Cobalt SS ecotec has 30 more HP than the Alero Ecotec had.

10-25-2005, 10:30 PM

i personally think that the 2.4 would be faster. not because i have 1 but because base on hp. the 2.4 packs 150 hp and the 2.2 has 140. but 10 hp isnt much when talkin about a 3000 poumd vehicle, i have an intake and a rebuild motor, but based on factors like how ur transmission takes and puts power to the ground, if they were the same car with just a motor swap same gear ratios and all that good stuff i think a 2.4 would take it
as for mikes, what makes his so special

doubleN0alero · 10-25-2005, 10:37 PM

yeah, lets assume that you're going to take your buddy to the track for the sake of this thread. the basic point is that they are so close that neither one is faster than the other...they're both slow..well hell, all 3 motors they put in are slow; but the 2.2 and the 2.4 are equally slow. If you were planning on doing engine work, the 2.2 is the way to go, otherwise the 3.4 is the best route because you get a little more power and not any less gas milage...at least i haven't..mine went out from my 2.4.

pawzbear · 10-25-2005, 11:40 PM

slow?
they are very quick compared to other stock 4 cyls in their class.

wtf.
I hate when people call them "slow" =/

annnnd yeh 2.2L manual is nice..since it has way more aftermarket and potential, i guess, but then your still stuck with a high hp low torque engine, which is still gay. The hp numbers may be high, but thats it. =/ Its not going to be insanely fast.. and better engines built to have the same hp stock would own it. soooo yeh its just kinda bragging rights that cant always be backed up well...

sorry kinda hard to explain since i dont know too much about it myself.. but that is from what i have gathered =/

ptrudel · 10-26-2005, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vtolds+Oct 25 2005, 05:14 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Vtolds @ Oct 25 2005, 05:14 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>

Quote:

Originally posted by 2000_olds_alero@Oct 25 2005, 03:19 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Vtolds

Quote:

@Oct 25 2005, 03:04 PM
I liked my 2.4 would have been better if I had a 5 speed instead of a auto But in a Race and 2.4 Alero should beat a 2.2 Alero.

Quoted post

there again it depends on alot of things..driver skill for one, auto or manual, mileage on cars maybe, traction...lots falls into play.

for example...take track times for me(2.4L) and MikeSS'(2.2L) same mods(intake, exhaust) both 5spd, and he'd be runnin i think a 15.2ish, and i was runnin 16's...

Quoted post

is that his 2.2 Cobalt SS or did he have a 2.2 Alero that ran 15.2? Cobalt SS ecotec has 30 more HP than the Alero Ecotec had.

Quoted post

[/b][/quote]

he had an ecotec alero...and he was runnin 15.2's fairly consistently

10-26-2005, 11:25 AM

theres no way that was stock, what mods he have? cause thats damn good

b-spot · 10-26-2005, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vtolds@Oct 25 2005, 03:14 PM

is that his 2.2 Cobalt SS or did he have a 2.2 Alero that ran 15.2? Cobalt SS ecotec has 30 more HP than the Alero Ecotec had.

Quoted post

Time to kick the blind puppy...

There is no 2.2 Cobalt SS. There is a 2.0 or a 2.4. The 2.2 in Cobalts have 5 more hp than an alero. The 2.4 has 30, and the 2.0 has 65.

One thing to keep in mind is the 2.2 is an aluminum block, dropping the weight of the car a bit.

ptrudel · 10-26-2005, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by keepitsimple@Oct 26 2005, 11:25 AM
theres no way that was stock, what mods he have? cause thats damn good

Quoted post

intake and exhaust, which were the same as mine...and he was 1 full second quicker

10-26-2005, 01:51 PM

thats insane, i have an intake, with all stock exhaust and run 16.7 auto i think i can do better, i honestly the track is different than a road, my car seems to pick up so much better on street than at the track, u guys race at the same track cause that might make a difference?

ptrudel · 10-26-2005, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by keepitsimple@Oct 26 2005, 01:51 PM
thats insane, i have an intake, with all stock exhaust and run 16.7 auto i think i can do better, i honestly the track is different than a road, my car seems to pick up so much better on street than at the track, u guys race at the same track cause that might make a difference?

Quoted post

it is different tracks, but same elevation or very damn close...

10-26-2005, 02:08 PM

but traction wise, there is different rubber srayed on the track n stuff like the track i went to my tires would barely spin which is good, but i think the thickness in rubber slowed me down off the launch, but ya what do u think an exaust does time wise?

ptrudel · 10-26-2005, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by keepitsimple@Oct 26 2005, 02:08 PM
but traction wise, there is different rubber srayed on the track n stuff like the track i went to my tires would barely spin which is good, but i think the thickness in rubber slowed me down off the launch, but ya what do u think an exaust does time wise?

Quoted post

a good exhaust, maybe 0.1 seconds if you're lucky...without major mods, a exhaust and intake dont do too much...