Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Chevrolet Cruze

1212224262729

Comments

  • sandman_6472sandman_6472 Coral Springs, FLPosts: 2,689
    Ditto. And right now, we have a longer time frame in which to purchase.

    The Sandman :) :sick: :shades:

    2014 Hyundai Tuscon SE/2005 Mazda 3s/2008 Hyundai Accent GLS/2009 Nissan Versa SL hatch

  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,746
    For that kind of family, one of the new sub-compacts e.g. Sonic, Accent, Mazda2, Rio, Versa, Yaris or the older Fit might... fit. I found the Accent for example to have as much usable leg room in back as some compacts such as Cruze and Mazda3 (but YMMV as we discussed). (Fiesta was really cramped in back for me, but I've heard it's nice otherwise.) And these are all available as a hatch too. And for less money than the compacts.
  • sandman_6472sandman_6472 Coral Springs, FLPosts: 2,689
    We both didn't like the Fiesta in that it was to close and cramped in the front seating department...and the view forward was terrible. Our current '08 Accent is such a better car in both areas, more airy and more useable space for the two front occupants. We crossed it off the list immediately and when I went back for a test drive the next day, I knew we made the correct choice. It didn't accelerate properly, made our Accent feel like a race car. The shifts were abrupt, the cloth seating surfaces were low rent...something we'd never ever consider. Our three year old Accent is such a better car hands down and from what I've read and heard, the new 2012 Accent is that much better. So my question is with what's out there, why would anyone even look at a Ford Fiesta? Would rather buy a one or two year old economy car with more room and power to boot.

    The Sonic looks like it'll be a winner for Chevy. Prefer the sedan style, looks more cohesive to my older eyes. The dash maybe a bit boy racer for my tastes, but a good effort overall. Hopefully the view forward will be more airy and the front seat occupants won't be on top of each other. Motor Week had good things to say about it which speaks volumes to me...a good show with knowledgeable folks reviewing the current crop of autos out there. I usually agree with 99% of their comments so looks like Chevy may have a hit on their hands with this one. Will definitely test drive one soon and come back and give my thoughts. Backy, would appreciate you test driving one also and giving one of your well thought out reviews as we usually come to the same conclusions.

    The Sandman :) :sick: :shades:

    2014 Hyundai Tuscon SE/2005 Mazda 3s/2008 Hyundai Accent GLS/2009 Nissan Versa SL hatch

  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,746
    I doubt I'll test a Sonic. It's not that much less money than the Cruze, and I like the interior of the Cruze a lot better. And in a hatch, I prefer the Accent over the Sonic (FE, interior, styling). So if I go Chevy it will be the Cruze, preferably the Eco 6MT but given it's price I'd have to get a good deal on it. The LT 6MT might work also.
  • garv214garv214 Posts: 162
    edited November 2011
    So if I go Chevy it will be the Cruze, preferably the Eco 6MT but given it's price I'd have to get a good deal on it.

    I test drove the Cruze, the Sonic, and the Ford Focus. I ultimately ended up purchasing the Cruze ECO with a 6MT. The Focus was ok, but the car I drove actually broke down on the test drive.. :P > The main thing I didn't like about the Focus was the interior door latches to open the doors...my god they were the cheapest flimsiest pieces of plastic I had every experienced in a car... It kinda makes you wonder if they are cutting costs in such an obvious place, where else are they cutting costs. I really wanted to like the Focus, because I love hatchbacks and the discounts on the Focus hatches finally brought them into the price range I wanted to spend on my next car...

    The Sonic was an LT with the 1.4l and 6MT. It was a fun little car that could really scoot. If I were single (or had only 2 kids), I could have really been tempted by it.

    The Cruze was my ultimate choice. The interior was much more spacious than the Sonic and it felt more "grown up" (smoother ride, quiet, upscale...). It also passed the "back seat" test. I sat in the rear seat after adjusting my front seat and I was fine in the back (5' 9" 32" inseam). The cut outs in the seat backs really help there.

    I was going to go with the LS, but I found a 2011 ECO 6MT (with fog lights, connectivity, and spare tire kit) on a dealers lot. Between some aggressive discounting, the GM $500 rebate, and my $2600 in GM bucks from my GM card, I got the ECO OTD for $17.6K ($18.9K sales price, +$1.8K TTL, -$3.1K in rebates).

    I am more of a hatchback guy myself, and I actually got to see/sit in the Cruze Hatch at the Frankfurt auto show this year. If Chevrolet offered it in the States, it would be in my driveway...

    ...I am soooo glad I didn't buy a Prius....
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,746
    Congrats on the new car, and great deal! I won't have GM card bucks, however, so I will have to hope for aggressive discounting and/or bigger rebates when it's time for me to buy, otherwise I'll probably focus elsewhere (no pun intended).

    What kind of fuel economy are you getting?
  • sandman_6472sandman_6472 Coral Springs, FLPosts: 2,689
    Yes, those interior door latches were garbage really...was a bit put off when I saw and felt them. And I thought just like you to...what else did they skimp on to say a few bucks. Gotta admit it, there's a snowball's chance in hell that she'll buy a Ford...and I've said from the start, we're just not Ford people, plain & simple.

    The Sandman :) :sick: :shades:

    2014 Hyundai Tuscon SE/2005 Mazda 3s/2008 Hyundai Accent GLS/2009 Nissan Versa SL hatch

  • eliaselias Posts: 1,934
    edited November 2011
    Nice eco-purchase, backster !
    I'd have grabbed a hatchback CRUZE MAXX if it were available. Already could have used hatchback instead of sedan Cruze: - I want to buy a 200 lb 2nd/used 34" CRT HDTV that won't load/fit/unload properly in the sedan. :shades:
  • It's important to check things like Insurance & Ad-Valorem taxes prior to purchase, DUH, but many do not check TCO [Total Cost of Ownership] on general maintenance items.

    Check the dealer for the "Flat Rate" labor cost and Parts cost for these items.

    1. The Cruze 1.4 has a Turbo Charger, on Gasoline engines these tend to wear out quickly compared to Diesel, however it has a timing Chain instead of a belt.

    2. The Cruze 1.8L does have a timing belt, and it WILL wreck the engine upon breaking !
    See Gates website-> http://www.gates.com/part_locator/index.cfm?location_id=3598

    3. The Ford Fiesta/Focus "Automatic" transmission is NOT a real auto but a electronically controlled "Dual-Clutch" 6-Speed manual tranny. *How much to replace this "dual-clutch" setup ?
    [Many complain of rough shifts which is probably good for clutch life BTW]
    [Slow shifting Automatics wear clutch discs quickly]

    Gates does NOT list a timing belt for either the Fiesta or Focus yr 2012
    *Disclaimer*
    This info is not set in concrete, check your parts dept/service dept for serious inquiries.

    Case in point, ever check the cost of a NEW! replacement LiOn or NiMH Battery Pack for the Civic or Prius Hybrid ?
    2006 Prius $3995, aftermarket price

    Other prices are "Dealer Only" or pop up a "Virus Warning" when I click them..

    Bottom Line: if the TCO exceeds the fuel savings of a particular model, perhaps a "Non-Eco" model will save money in the long run.

    Sorry for all the drivel, hope this helps
    'DrVette
  • garv214garv214 Posts: 162
    Thanks Backy!

    I have only tanked up twice so far. The first was about 75% highway and I averaged 37 mpg. My second tank was 95% city and was 29.9 mpg. Admittedly, I do drive easy (60 mph on the highway), but I am very pleased with my results so far. On the drive home from the dealership, I reset the computer just before I got on the freeway, and I had a "computer" average of 45.5 mpg by the time I got home 25 miles later.

    I had "test" driven a Prius from Hertz's rent to buy program. I averaged ~47 mpg in my daily commute which is about 10-15 mpg better than I will get with the Eco, but I love driving the Cruze...the Prius...emmmmm...not so much...
  • garv214garv214 Posts: 162
    All great and valid points to consider.

    I have owned a number of cars with Interference engines (mostly hondas). As long as you know going in that there is a belt and that it needs to be checked and replaced, then it shouldn't be a problem. Now if you are the type of owner that does not keep up on the maintenance of your car...well...getting a car with an interference engine may be an expensive decision.

    In my case, the decision to go with the Cruze ECO really was driven by financial payback as much as it was driven by a desire to get a car that delivers great fuel economy and was enjoyable to drive. My wife has a Lexus RX330 AWD, which we love but can be a bit discouraging when it comes time to tank up :surprise:

    I hope you enjoy a great Thanksgiving!
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    "The Cruze 1.4 has a Turbo Charger, on Gasoline engines these tend to wear out quickly compared to Diesel, however it has a timing Chain instead of a belt."

    While I would have agreed with that statement back in the era of conventional oil; when synthetic oil is used there is no evidence to suggest that a turbocharger will have any negative inpact on the life of a gasoline engine.
  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    edited November 2011
    Agree w/Shipo on the quality of oil used..

    Also my poor grammar indicated Engine Life problem, Sorry I should have stated "Turbocharger Life"
    As you said Engine Life is NOT the issue here.
    Also to point out again, the 1.4L Turbo engine has a Timing Chain, per Gates which will prolong maintenance intervals.
    http://www.gates.com/part_locator/index.cfm?location_id=3598

    The most common cause of Turbo failure is shutting the engine down after a run where the Turbocharger is at "High Temperature"
    The engine should be allowed to idle for several minutes to allow the oil to cool the turbo. Even water cooled turbo's need time to shake off the extreme temperatures to minimize coking.


    Failure to utilize some method of cool-down results in "oil coking".
    The oil burns and solidifies to the Turbo shaft causing abrasion to the oil seals.
    Then turbo lubrication/cooling oil pumps into the exhaust, this is obvious only on a cold engine, upon fully warmed up engines, this will Not be visible as the Catalytic Converter is "Flamed On"
    Eventually the Converter will stop up, hopefully before the engine seizes.

    Some oil additives claim the ability to ward off Oil Coking in this situation.
    Pro-Blend in South Carolina is my personal favorite additive mfg.
    I think Z-Max has this claim also.

    Also just FYI, "Mobil 1" Oil is a synthetic oil ONLY in the US.
    European Specs disallow it from claiming to be a true synthetic.

    Waaay back when it first came out, it was called a "Pseudo-Synthetic"

    As you stated, real synthetic oil will help coking problems on turbo's however MOST owners don't even change oil on suggested schedules.
  • WOW!!
    15 psi boost @ 1850 rpm !!

    Dat seems like a lot, that is good to hear though.

    DrVette
  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    edited November 2011
    Regarding your personal dislike of the Intake Roar,

    In "87 & up GM Trucks with the 350[TBI] Throttle Body engines, many customers liked the bellowing intake roar under full Tilt.

    This "moan" that was so reminiscent of a Quadrajet on a High Compression 327 Chevy that many "motorheads" found a twist of the distributor and some 93 octane allowed drag-racing Trans-Am's, Mustangs etc with success.

    Now find Crown Vic's and most vehicles with some legacy of speed to have dropped the intake noise suppression tube in favor of a muscular sound.
    IMHO, the mfg's have intentionally done this for those who enjoy this particular style of music.

    Keep in mind, this sound is ONLY made when your foot is in front of the radiator :)

    DrVette
  • Q
    The Oil Filter is on TOP of the Engine ?

    Wow, what a mess, they could have done like my "94 GMC 4X4 Jimmy and ran some lines and put the filter next to the radiator, neat and clean, no drip, no fuss, no mess.

    From your description, it's a paper element placed inside of a "non-replaceable' canister/housing, correct ?

    DrVette
  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    edited November 2011
    Obviously Hard Driving uses more fuel, here's a quip from "Top Gear"

    A while back they ran a Prius Hybrid around the track WIDE OPEN for some extended period of time.
    Following closely behind the Prius was a BMW with some massive 400~HP engine.

    After running quite a while they figured the economy of both vehicles.

    The BMW got 19+mpg
    The Prius got 17~mpg

    I'm an old wrench, in the early 70's I had a 72 Datsun 1200 that I modified it to 198# Compression[stock was 165], Carburetor Jets to match and about 34 degrees ignition advance.
    Man was it FAST !

    On the highway I could get 48mpg~
    Running hard, I have gotten as low as 14mpg

    It's all in the right foot :shades:
    DrVette
  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    edited November 2011
    oNE of my Hyper-mile tricks[on 4-lane rds] is when a light changes RED 1/8 mi. or More away, I let off the gas hoping the light is GREEN by the time I get there.
    Some guys FLY by, SLAM on the brakes, then I PASS them while I hear their engine turning 4200 rpm at WOT trying to get back up to speed.

    On multi-lane roads where traffic lights are a mile or two apart, it does absolutely NO good to run 128 mph between lights. 65-70 in a 55 works just fine.

    I only Hyper-mile when I do not Pizz off folks behind me, on multi-lane roads with light traffic,, PASS Me if I'm going too Slow

    Speaking of driving FAST, I go from Atlanta to Denver pretty often.
    It's like 1500 miles, more or less.

    If I drive "Breakneck Speeds" like 20 -40 over, I can do it in like 22 hrs.
    Driving 10-25 over, it takes 24 hrs~

    Is it worth it ?
    To save a couple of hours, burn LOTS more fuel, not to mention the very good odds of making NEW Friends with Badges :shades:

    On shorter drives, like 20~miles or less, do the MATH, driving like an idiot saves just a couple of minutes, wears out your brakes early and makes you generally bitc*y

    DrVette
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,017
    edited November 2011
    If I drive "Breakneck Speeds" like 20 -40 over, I can do it in like 22 hrs.
    Driving 10-25 over, it takes 24 hrs~


    I find it interesting and slightly contradictory that you will go to the extreme of coasting for great lengths to catch a green light but consider your "normal" highway driving to be say 75-90mph. 90 mph is not only dangerous but is obviously terrible on the mpg.
  • gparagpara Posts: 23
    Boys you are forgetting one thing, turbo is "COOLED" buy water on this engine, your heat buildup should not be a factor and coking should not happen because of this. I would run synthetic oil anyway just to be sure the turbo and engine has the best lubrication it can. Mobile-1 is dexos certified and I have used it for yours in my Grand National Turbo.The wait time for the turbo to spool down usually is not a factor, you would have to be running high boost and pull off the highway and shutdown immediately to see any spool effect and if you are running synthetic you are protected. Yes the turbo will put in 15+ lbs of boost at load but it drops back to about 12 after the initial surge. In order to hypermile I try and stay out of the turbo boost buy holding engine vacuum at"0" in the tallest gear that allows some speed increase, but it is sure nice when you need power, the turbo works well and should last many years with the new materials for seals, bearing.
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    edited November 2011
    Completely spot on with your comments. I've been driving turbocharged cars since the mid 1980s and never once had to A) be overly conscious about spooling down the turbocharger (except when pulling into a rest area for fuel while climbing a steep grade at altitude), or B) replace a turbocharger (even with over 100,000 miles on the clock).

    Why? Water cooled bearings and Mobil 1.
  • The 2012 ECO IS available with the Auto Tranny for about $1,100.00 more

    DrVette
  • The "Grill Shutter" is on the lower portion of the grill only..

    Also it is lowered for improved aerodynamics.

    DrVettte
  • shiposhipo Posts: 9,152
    Why on Earth would someone want a slush box ECO? :confuse:
  • IF the Diesel Cruze gets 50~mpg Hwy vs the Gas @42~mpg this makes them basically EQUAL.

    Yup, Diesel Fuel is approx 20% more than Reg Gasoline
    A 20% increase of the 2012 ECO's 42~mpg[with Stick shift] yields NO Gain.

    More initial Cost
    More upkeep
    Etc

    So What is the Real Problem Here ?

    The EPA insists that Gasoline & Diesel powered cars get the same CO2 and particulate footprint.

    This after spending $B's on BioDiesel research.

    You CANNOT run pure BioDiesel in VW's TDI or Any other Diesel Engine that uses a DPF Clean-Out shot of fuel.

    Why ?

    Modern Diesel auto engines have up to 5 Shots of fuel per power stroke.

    4 for the Power Stroke and the last shot is with the exhaust valve OPEN to Burn Off the DPF [Diesel Particulate Filter] .

    BioDiesel does NOT atomize as easily as Crude Based Diesel
    When fired for the DPF cleaning cycle, it collects on the cylinder walls and washes into the crankcase diluting the oil.

    VW will NOT warranty engines running BioDiesel stronger than B-5 [5% BioDiesel.

    B-100 does NOT require a DPF or other methods to eliminate particulates yet the EPA has seen fit to basically eliminate the modern Diesel Passenger Car from the US market,

    BTW
    Big Oil has a vested interest here.

    The cost to mfg Ethanol is 4.0 BTU's per 1.0 BTU of Product

    The cost to mfg Bio-Diesel is 0.25 BTU's per 1.0 BTU of Product


    That's right, it takes FOUR times as fuel to get each BTU of Ethanol produced
    BioDiesel has a Four Hundred Percent profit margin,, hmmm,

    I wonder just WHO would be against such a High Profit industry ?

    Keep in mind, large OTR Trucks use approx 25% of the Diesel in the US.

    Any Thoughts ?

    DrVette
  • m6userm6user Posts: 3,017
    Probably because they can't or don't want to learn to drive a stick, hate manual transmissions or like them but find them totally impractical for urban/surburban rush hour traffic. However, they still want to save on gas. There are lots of people that can drive sticks just fine but for one reason or another want to drive an auto tranny. Nothing wrong with that. That's why we have choices. I drove a lot of sticks until one blizzardy winter day many years ago in Chicagoland where it took me over 6 hours to crawl 35 miles home from work. My left leg was literally ready to fall off. That was my last stick.
  • I assume you have a 1.8L w/Automatic ?

    Still seems low to me, your terrain or traffic conditions may dictate harsher acceleration.

    DrVette
  • Read my post #760,
    I think "Politics" and "Big Oil" have more to do with the CO2 emissions particulate requirements than Clean Air !

    drvette, "Chevrolet Cruze" #760, 1 Dec 2011 10:24 am#MSG759
  • My wife and I love MT vehicles. We both commute ~45 min depending on traffic in North Dallas without freeway driving and we can't complain. When looking to replace my 05 Camry, I chose a 6-speed Fusion because Toyota didn't have any MT Camry's available. Today we both drive Cruze Eco's with MT and have never looked back!
  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    edited December 2011
    Cruze 1.4L Turbo Cost

    Checking with my dealer on the "Retail" price of the Cruze's Turbo, I was pleasantly surprised.

    Turbo - $650.00~ Retail
    Labor Time R&R - 2.0 hr~

    The Turbo comes as an "assembly" including the exhaust manifold, plumbing for oil etc.

    It has a "Core-Charge" so obviously they rebuild them, which usually only involves seals & bearings and tolerance inspection..

    Shocking this was, after checking the "Other" brand turbo offering some 20+years ago at a outrageous $2500.00~

    If owners of the 1.4L Turbo engine will observe common and simple operator usage instructions, they should last a very long time..

    Typically, owners should note driving/operating situation just prior to stopping the vehicle.

    If High-Engine-Speeds, High Ambient Temps, High Engine Temps or any combination of operation variables that result in ;;

    1. High Turbocharger Temps
    2. High Turbocharger RPM's
    3. High Engine Coolant/Oil Temps

    You should IDLE the engine for several minutes to allow the oil in the Turbocharger Lines to Cool Off and the Turbo allowed to cool down so that the oil does not solidify [Coke] onto the shaft of the Turbo which will destroy the seals.

    Sorry for the lengthy posting
    DrVette
Sign In or Register to comment.