Howdy, Stranger!

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





Chevrolet Cruze

12324252628

Comments

  • brueggiebrueggie Posts: 46
    edited March 2012
    The design engineers eliminated something like 200+ items to reduce weight in the ECO from a regular model Cruze. I can't miss them if I never had them!

    Took $40 to fill the tank @ $3.46/gallon here in Dallas which is the most a tank has cost me thus far. Saw this morning that it has jumped to $3.69 so that will add another $3-$4 next time.
  • Karen_CMKaren_CM Posts: 5,027
    A reporter is looking to hear from a driver of a Ford Focus, Ford Fiesta, Chevy Cruze or Chevy Sonic who previously drove a compact from a Japanese automaker, such as the Toyota Corolla or Honda Civic. If you currently drive a Focus, Fiesta, Cruze or Sonic, and are willing to share your story with a reporter, please email PR@edmunds.com no later than the end of business Tuesday, March 6, 2012 with your daytime contact information.

    Community Manager If you have any questions or concerns about the Forums, send me an email, karen@edmunds.com, or click on my screen name to send a personal message.

  • lexan1965lexan1965 Posts: 118
    I've had my Cruze 2LT w turbo for about 16 months now and have 34K miles on it. Can't be more happy and satisfied with this vehicle. I drive 70% highway, 30% city to and from work and I am a bit heavy on the gas. I'm getting an average 33.5 MPG and I calculate this manually as the DIC reports are about 1.5 MPG off. The car is fun to drive and I have had no issues at all with the car.
    Does anyone know what the differences are on the ECO model? I know about the shutters and tires...just curious! :shades:
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,394
    From other posts about it, I believe they use a smaller gas tank to save weight and make other weight-saving changes from the standard model.
  • gparagpara Posts: 23
    Hi, I put together a program on the eco package for a dealer, lower ride height by 1 inch, liter tires and ultra low rolling resistance goodyears, taller final overdrive ratios, liter body and less welds and metal, no spare tire, functional rear spoiler,full underpaning to break turbulance, not sure if all cruzes have this but, RVC, regulated voltage control, drops charge to 12 volts when battery is full instead of 14v normal system
  • gparagpara Posts: 23
    The fuel tank is the same part number from GM, it will hold 15+ gallons if you have time to fill. The vent system on the cruze eco is supposed to limit the fill to around 12 gallons. Had my tank off and modified to fill past 9 gallons, I was having trouble filling past that. The vents hang down about 4 inches into the tank and there are 3 different level vents, non removable.
  • eliaselias Posts: 1,938
    wow that is interesting about the vented fuel tank situation. almost similar to 2-generations-ago VW TDIs, except with cruze there's no way to remove the capacity-impeding-vent/vanes.

    gpara it is seriously that is wild and cool how you are ultra-eco-ing your cruze.
    how much does underpan weigh? running at 12V instead of 13.8V is also very interesting. Eco gearing is already taller/wider and you made it taller yet? gearing doesn't necessarily do what one wants- results dependent on power & torque curve ! ?
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,322
    A reporter is looking for a car shopper who thinks 40 MPG is a requisite before they buy. If you have recently shopped for a car, and you have only considered cars that get 40 MPG, and you are willing to share your story with a reporter, please contact pr@edmunds.com with your daytime contact information no later than Tuesday, April 24, 2012 at noon Pacific/3 p.m. Eastern.

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • sajayrasajayra Posts: 1
    Ive seen alot of questions on forums asking how to hook up a amp to the stock radio. Here's a video for anyone who needs help. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-y8hgSNtos
  • eliaselias Posts: 1,938
    First 500 mile I-95 roundtrip, with 1.8LS stickshift: 36mpg, about 3 mpg better than commuting. Go-pedal was floored approximately 974 times each way in order to keep up with traffic/conditions. Just a couple doofi drivers were encountered, and only one drunk. Traffic is FAST out there people. With this car semi-loaded with 1.8 engine and automatic transmission, it would be *impossible* to "lead" the especially concious/big-dog drivers on I-95. but it's totally doable with the stickshift, thank you.
    20k miles on it so far, zero dealer visits, just the one oil change and now time for #2 (synthetic).
    home-run, GM: An actual 4.3 (A+) should go to the team that conceived/designed/built Cruze.
  • winter2winter2 Posts: 1,799
    Recently, GM quietly announced that the Cruze will be sold here with a diesel and a six speed manual (no automatic) in model year 2013. The engine is being co-developed by GM and an Italian company partially owned by GM called V.M. Motori. FIAT owns the rest of V.M. Motori who has been making diesels since 1947.

    I bring this up because of an issue I have had with V.M. Motori diesels. Chrysler in Europe has been using this company for some years now and in 2005 and 2006 used one of their engines in the Jeep Liberty. I had a 2005 Liberty with one of these engines and it did not hold up. It threw a rod at 77,594 miles without warning and destroyed the engine in short order in spite of getting very good care. If you look on the forum here on Edmunds at the Jeep Liberty diesel you will see that there have been numerous issues.

    I am not trying to dissuade anyone from buying a diesel, but engines from this company leave something to be desired. I wonder why GM did not use one of their Opel diesels instead?
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    This is interesting to learn, winter. I almost bought a Liberty because it offered the diesel. I loved the torque and the way the engine ran, although for its 2.7 litre size (if I recall) certainly wasn't the smoothest of inline 4's, it was smooth enough.

    The deal breaker for me, was the auto transmission. While I prefer a stick (and that engine was well suited to utilizing the most efficiency out of a stick with so much torque down low in the rpm range) I was still considering a purchase with the only trans available, being the corporate Chrysler 5 speed auto. But it shifted so badly, that I lost total interest after driving a second demo at a different dealer. The two trans shifted a bit differently from each other (even that was curious) but they both were busy shifters when they needn't have been, and lazy when they needed to be responsive. Just terrible software communicative management with the engine. A total deal-breaker. And wouldn't you know it, years later we learn that that trans did in fact have a very troublesome torque-converter. Little did I know at the time that Chrysler's sourced engine emission systems would also cause a myriad of issues down the road that can't really be blamed on VM.

    But, your crank issue (and I have heard of other mechanical issues also) can't be blamed on emission devices or Chrysler; or at least I surely don't think they can. But what can be blamed on Chrysler is how poorly they handled their customers who got saddled with this troublesome, expensive power train. And for that I have a memory like an elephant and feel relieved that the auto trans was such a disaster on my demo drives because if it hadn't, I too would be experiencing the premature and even fatal issues you guys who bought one, have. I feel badly for you. And I thank you for your info post about the Cruze VM diesel. Had I not known this, I probably would have stilled passed if the auto was not available, but only because of some health complications that make shifting a stick a problem for me in my years now.

    I am extremely impressed with the mileage that Cruze owners are getting in real world driving, with both engines and trans combos. I have personally driven the turbo with 6 auto and the 1.8 with 6 stick and was very impressed with both. The 1.8 with the stick left me suspecting that given the weight of car and the 1.8 with auto would make it not too swift for pickup, and if driven hard in stick or auto would be harder on gas than the turbo driven normally. But I also believe the great mileage owners like alias are getting with the 1.8 stick if driven not too aggressively. Now that I know about where GM is foolishly sourcing their diesel (instead of using the Holden?/Opel) and not offering the auto, my choice would be the turbo with auto when I am in the market again. Of course the bar is constantly being raised so who knows. And we also won't know if GM does a better job than Chrysler, of making emission systems more compatible with VM's diesel, but also offer longevity. Visions of crank failures on a cared-for engine is hard to forgive though.
  • winter2winter2 Posts: 1,799
    edited June 2012
    The issues with the powertrain in the Jeep Liberty were multiple and if you were not aware of some of the quirks, it would cost you.

    If this VM/GM hybrid engine is more VM than GM then expect issues, especially with emissions and mechanical issues. The EGR valve on the CRD was a nightmare. It was not properly designed to handle the soot in the exhaust stream and from time to time you had to "blow out" the soot from the EGR which left clouds of soot behind you when you did it. Another quirk was the intake manifold pressure sensor. It needed cleaning with every oil change and of course the location left something to be desired. Forget to clean this sensor and you would blow a hose from the turbo to the intercooler. Then we come to the variable geometry turbo, made by Garrett. Only lasted about 80K miles before you had to repair it or replace it. I wish Chrysler had used a twin-scroll turbo, yes more money, a little harder to package, but in reality simpler and more rugged. The Cruze diesel will have a DPF and potentially urea (DEF) spray into the exhaust stream for emissions. This should prove interesting.

    As to the trans, you must have driven an early model in 2005. The trans in my CRD always shifted smoothly in fact almost too smoothly. When Chrysler recalled the CRD to modify the engine torque and replace parts in the trans including the torque converter (F37 recall) the vehicle acted very much the same except that power delivery was not quite as potent. I was into my third torque converter at the time my engine threw a rod and I had read of other Jeep CRD owners having even more torque converters installed than I did.

    Now back to the Cruze diesel. If GM has more say than VM, I am not sure what to expect. I still remember the 5.7L V-8 diesel nightmare from the late 70's to early 80's. GM gave diesel a bad name and an undeserved bad reputation with that engine.

    Frankly, I am intrigued by this development but I am very scared of anything associated with VM Motori or GM.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,759
    I just took a Cruze rental (1LT I think) on a 370-mile two day trip. It had just over 12k miles when I picked it up. The outbound trip was in the evening and temps 70-80, so no AC and average speed was 64 mph--never had the cruise control over 67. Almost all highway. On that leg I got 42.7 mpg per the trip computer. Then I drove around town today and headed back to town. It was about 80 and I was dressed up so had the AC on. Still was doing well, at about 42 mpg overall, until I-94 was blocked by a bad accident. I sat for a long time, with AC on (1/2 mile for over an hour). Finally got to turn around and drove on side roads around the accident. But with all that I still averaged 40.2 mpg for the trip, which I think is really good given the near-zero mpg I got for over an hour (which dropped the overall mph to just over 50). Also, my butt and back weren't too much the worse for wear sitting in the car for nearly 4 hours w/o a break.
  • gparagpara Posts: 23
    Great job on the mileage, if you are that good now look at the ECO model and be ready for 50+mpg under the same situations.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,759
    Based on recent reviews from C/D and CR on the Eco, I doubt I'll see 50+ mpg under those conditions. Maybe 50 mpg with the stick when cruising on the highway.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,907
    A reporter is interested in talking to any car shoppers who are thinking about buying any one of the following small cars: Chevy Cruze, Ford Focus, Hyundai Elantra, Honda Civic or Dodge Dart. Please send a brief description of your shopping experience and your preferred contact information to PR@edmunds.com by Monday, June 18th

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • bradley2bradley2 Posts: 11
    Sorry to say but after attempting to be a patriot & GM/Chevy man with strong multi-generational family ties to the company this Chevy Cruze recall for stupid under-carriage fire hazard is the last straw that broke this camel's back. In addition to that my Cruze (2011 LT) had bad hood paint job/crease out the gate, lousy fit & finish and additional recalls/service advisories including a failed thermostat, etc. and a wicked rattle from driver side pillar among other things. Also my 2010 Chev Equinox had multiple problems with less than 50k miles including a passenger rear window motor failure, a lumbar driver seat automatic motor failure, rattles galore, speakers that hum and moan, and more. That on top of prior Malibu gasket failures and yada yada yada have given me no choice. Bye bye GM, have a nice life. PS the dealers were great but the design, engineeering and manufacturing flaws doom them too, I fear and no marketing gimics can overcome that. I am a patriot and a loyalist, but I am not stupid. Watch for my next posting about a FORD or heaven forbid, an import. PS my 2006 KIA Spectra 5 now "owned" by my daughter with 150k+ miles and no coin invested other than brakes, tires, oil changes and timing belt runs like a top. Go figure.
  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaPosts: 2,149
    Don't let the door hit you on the way out. Cruze has been very well received and has had both good reviews and a good track record. All cars have recalls and this one is pretty minor.

    2014 Cadillac ATS4 2.0T, 1968 Oldsmobile Cutlass S Holiday Coupe

  • jamtracyjamtracy Posts: 74
    X2.....
    I've had mine for 6 months now. I drive it everyday and have had zero problems or complaints with it.
  • jpfjpf Posts: 496
    45% market share in 1980 and 15% in 2012. Soon there may be no more customers to hit on the way out the door.
  • eliaselias Posts: 1,938
    there are so many awesome GM cars now! I regret that I only have one butt to put in the drivers seat of a GM car at a time, including my gas-only Volt (aka Cruze).
    in Cruze news, my 2011 M6 had the two safety recall/inspections done yesterday. It took less than an hour.
    The car did need the shield thing for engine/clutch.
    It did not need the disassembly/welding/re-assembly procedure - a 24 page process - would have required two techs.
  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaPosts: 2,149
    Perfectly sensible response, since we all know the same people who designed & built the Citation also did the Cruze. :confuse:

    2014 Cadillac ATS4 2.0T, 1968 Oldsmobile Cutlass S Holiday Coupe

  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,759
    Not quite. The Cruze's design comes from Europe and Korea.
  • The V.M. Motori engine in the liberty was an over bored 425 series with extra cylinders unit first used in 1998 in europe it was a disaster when overstretched . the engine used in the cruze is the ra420 first introduced in 2006 and is very reliable I am curently running an antara with the same engine and 6 speed manual box it has been extreamly reliable.
  • jpfjpf Posts: 496
    No, different engineers but same corporate philosophy. GM hasn't learned much in the past 30 years.
  • Upon changing my oil one day last month i noticed a pink drip coming from around the seal bearing area where the drive shaft and transmission connect. Immediately called the dealer as I had an extended warranty, thank God! My 2011 Cruze has 56K on it by the way...
    After showing the technician the trouble area I was given a loaner vehicle and told they would call me as soon as they inspected it further. I recieved a call later in the day and was told the water pump has a bad leak...r u kidding me?!?! 56K miles and the water pump goes bad! Anyway, while they were replacing it they replaced the thermostat and also found a cracked engine mount which was also replaced. Never owned a vehicle that had less than 100K on it and had issues of this sort. All together I paid nothing for the repairs and I am still happy with my Cruze. I would still buy another one if I had my choice. ;)
  • averaging 33.5 city/hwy and 36mpg on hwy 2011 Cruze 2LT 1.4L turbo
  • gmcustsvcgmcustsvc Posts: 4,139
    We're glad to hear that everything has been resolved on your Cruze, lexan1965! We wish you many more happy miles, and if there is every anything you would like for us to check into, please contact us via email at socialmedia@gm.com (include your name, contact information, and the last 8 digits of your VIN with your inquiry).

    Sarah, GM Customer Service
  • sandman_6472sandman_6472 Coral Springs, FLPosts: 2,704
    Must be something going around I guess...the wife's Mazda3 needs 2 engine mounts...granted her ride has 113k and is an '05 model. Luckily you have the extended warranty...we opted to forgo one. Luckily, there's money in the car fund and since we've never kept a ride over 80k before, don't really feel that bad. Guess we're gonna fix it and try to get this puppy to 150k.

    Good luck with your Cruze!

    The Sandman :) :sick: :shades:

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

Sign In or Register to comment.