turbo vs super
 

Spec ordered 06 LT1 w/2.4 auto w/clean/bare exterior,recd 11/05, have enjoyed 34k happy, carefree miles. Intend to order an 08, considered SS, but don,t like the plumbing & heat. My wonder for the day is why the cobalt superchg pkg was never offered on "our" wheels. It woulda been a nobrainer.

I maybe wrong, but the supercharger takes up a bit of room @ the front of the engine,which would be a tight squeeze between the radiator and the 2.4.

I think the reason GM did not make the supercharger like they did for cobalt was that the HHR is more for fuel economy than performance/tuner car. I do wish someone would make one specific to the HHR.

I thought the SC was discontinued even for the Cobalt.

Cobalt underpinnings are same as HHR & the blower only fits the 2.2 just like turbo

ur prolly right , but they,re still in the mix.talked to a Cobalt SS at a show last week. He just did a tour in germany (chopper W/O) & left behind an Opel ecotec SS, first thing home was the cobalt , said it was close to the opel. naturally, since ecotec was born there.

I dunno, I'm not that versed in turbos vs. s/c but maybe they didn't offer it b/c the 'charger makes what 205HP? Perhaps Lutz was thinking all along, "let's give the HHR some guts, let's give it 260HP." If you listen to him talk in the vids, he sounds like he wanted to give it some serious power from the get-go. A real "SS." If the HHR is heavier than the Cobalt (I have no idea), this makes even more sense.

The supercharged Ecotec couldn't meet the new emissions requirements as it was not an LEV engine. The new DI Turbo is a very different engine, indeed.

I agree. The supercharged Ecotec was an "old" engine which would have trouble with newer emissions and fuel economy. Look at the Pontiac Solstice forum and you can get a preview of what the 2.0 DI Turbo engine is like. In the Solstice, the turbo engine gets much better fuel economy (thanks to the DI) than the 2.4L NA engine.

Steve