Not sure about the HHR, but my son's 2009 Cobalt 2.2 has VVT. His girlfriend's dad's 2008 Cobalt 2.2 does not. I would think that the HP gain is attributed to this technology improvement.

I would assume that GM would parallel the Cobalt powerplants with the HHR, but this is only my assumption.

 

The only thing I really like in the newer models is the the little storage bin in the console where the window buttons used to be. Now that I could use!

 

I thought maybe they gave it the 2.4 intake, I read some guys are doing this swap. I got no need for more HP anymore, guess age got it out my system. Heck my 90 lumina V6 new was rated for 140 HP, so the 4 bangers have come a long way for sure. This is my first 4 cylinder and I got no problems keeping up with the road runners out there..

 

I'm happy with the pickup and power in my '09 2.2. It has a nice growl when I step on it for the freeway merge and I'm up to highway speed quickly. I have no problem staying in the fast lane heading up a big hill near my house. I've driven four bangers that required me to stay in the slow lane on hills to keep faster traffic out of my tail pipe.

 

I must have just gotten spoiled. I swore I would never again own a N/A 4 cyl but just fell in love with my HHR despite the power cut I took

 

Hey there was a time I wouldn't think of owning anything less than a V8..then I drew the line at a V6..now a 4 cylinder(is it a V4)? Funny how time can change you. Now I swear I'll never buy an electric car...yeah well, we'll see..

 

All I gotta say is my HHR SS is the fastest most powerful car I have owned and gets the best fuel economy. My first car was a 1985½ Buick Century T-Type with a 3.8 Turbo putting out like 245HP and that was a fast car back in its day. My Next Car was a 1988 Cavalier Z24 and with some mods in autos class got close to 200HP. The car before the HHR was not a car at all but a 1998 S10 SS with about 210HP. All those cars got less than 20mpg average and barely over that on the highway. The little HHR SS with 290HP and 2 less cylinders than all the above is averaging 24mpg and gets 31MPG or so on the highway.

So if you are all wondering why the latest gen of the 2.2 gets 12 more HP than one from a few years ago it is called advancement in technology. They took some technology in other engines that may have been more costly to make initially and now that it is more mainstream they can put it to use in the other engines. Ain't Technology great.

Oh and to the poster asking if it is V4 it is actually an I4 because most 4-cylinders are inline engines and not V's. I5 and I6 engines are also common too.

 

I have been loosing two cylinders for every car I have owned.. and I love my HHR. I got the 2.4 and the 174HP is good for me. My first truck was a 1998 chevy 3500 2wd 1 ton dually with a 454 (8 mpg) next car was a 2000 Chevy monte Carlo SS non supercharged (17mpg) and now the hhr 2.4 (23mpg)

 

They changed the coil setup after the 2006, that was the first "boost". THen they added VVT and that gave it another kick. Between those, they played around with the tune itself. I've never heard of them using the 2.4 intake, not saying they didn't, just never heard they did.

Mustang and Camaro V8's in the late 70's through mid 80's didn't have much over 140 HP, some years, even less.

Just look at the new Mustang and Camaro V6's, 305 & 304 HP. That was the Cobra HP numbers not that far back.

 

Dual Quads ......(: