Chevy Cruze Diesel a direct competitor to the Jetta TDI

Just so everyone knows, cars that use urea (otherwise known as SCR, Selective Catalyst Reduction) get better fuel economy not so much because of less post-combustion fuel injection, but because SCR is a NOx-scrubbing system. Since they can rely on SCR to mitigate NOx, they can run the engine LEANER and use less EGR. The DPF will also be called into regen less, since, again, the engine is running leaner more often.

SCR is a GOOD thing, it really is.

This engine has already been launched in other markets, correct? Or are we getting something different than is selling in Australia, for example? If not, this drivetrain has gotten lukewarm reviews. NVH isn't great, neither is torque.

IndigoBlueWagon said:

This engine has already been launched in other markets, correct? Or are we getting something different than is selling in Australia, for example? If not, this drivetrain has gotten lukewarm reviews. NVH isn't great, neither is torque.

Click to expand...

Yeah Opel Astras

scurvy said:

All TDIs have only ever been allowed to use B05 by VW, however plenty of CRs are out there running B20 with no issues at all.

Click to expand...

And plenty of PDs as well for what it's worth (with generally many more miles on the engines than the CRs). Never been clear to me why VW has been so coy with certifying the TDI for B20. If there are any real issues - address them. Other manufacturer's TDIs seem to perform just fine with B20.

Our problem with the Cruze is this; It is not cheap. Unoptioned, it starts at $25,695, or only slightly more than a mid-range Jetta TDI (a basic, entry level TDI can be had for $23,055, though). But the Cruze is going to be parked in the showroom next to a car that looks identical, returns the same 42-mpg highway number, and has a starting price of just $20,490 (that’d be the Cruze Eco, for people still guessing). Importantly, the cost of diesel is generally higher in the US than gas. Pair that with the extra $5000 that the Diesel demands and the fact that it’s no more efficient than the Cruze Eco, and we’re starting to wonder how Chevy dealers are going to move this oil-burning sedan.

Click to expand...

http://www.windingroad.com/articles/news/update-2014-chevrolet-cruze-diesel-unveiled/

I agree.

The 4.5L Duramax engine is fully developed and ready to go... If only they would pull the trigger and put it into production!!! I would think they would sell great in the 1/2-ton and even 3/4-ton and 1-ton trucks as the base model diesel engine, then the 6.6L Duramax would be the High Output optional engine for the 3/4-ton and 1-ton trucks!!! The specs on the 4.5L were as good or better than the 01-03 LB7 Duramax 6.6L so we know it will be OK in a big truck, and for the guys that really tow and haul a lot the 6.6L is the way to go.

If they put the 4.5L Duramax in the 1/2-ton pickups they would instantly be #1 is all performance categories: Power, torque, fuel mileage, range, towing capacity!!! All the things that Ford lays claim to with their F150... I really do not understand why GM does not put the engine into production and market the crap out of it and sell them like hotcakes!!!

The 4.5L Duramax engine is fully developed and ready to go... If only they would pull the trigger and put it into production!!! I would think they would sell great in the 1/2-ton and even 3/4-ton and 1-ton trucks as the base model diesel engine, then the 6.6L Duramax would be the High Output optional engine for the 3/4-ton and 1-ton trucks!!! The specs on the 4.5L were as good or better than the 01-03 LB7 Duramax 6.6L so we know it will be OK in a big truck, and for the guys that really tow and haul a lot the 6.6L is the way to go.

If they put the 4.5L Duramax in the 1/2-ton pickups they would instantly be #1 is all performance categories: Power, torque, fuel mileage, range, towing capacity!!! All the things that Ford lays claim to with their F150... I really do not understand why GM does not put the engine into production and market the crap out of it and sell them like hotcakes!!!

Ah that's right! I had forgotten about the less EGR business.

Chris,

I think you're bang on the money with that post!

VeeDubTDI said:

I'm sure it's a conventional auto with torque converter. The question is whether or not it's like the Mazda Skyactiv D transmission that is locked up 90% of the time.

Click to expand...

In the quest for better effeciency most newer automatic transmissions seem to try to keep the converter locked as much as possible...

Chris Tobin said:

The 4.5L Duramax engine is fully developed and ready to go... If only they would pull the trigger and put it into production!!! I would think they would sell great in the 1/2-ton and even 3/4-ton and 1-ton trucks as the base model diesel engine, then the 6.6L Duramax would be the High Output optional engine for the 3/4-ton and 1-ton trucks!!! The specs on the 4.5L were as good or better than the 01-03 LB7 Duramax 6.6L so we know it will be OK in a big truck, and for the guys that really tow and haul a lot the 6.6L is the way to go.

If they put the 4.5L Duramax in the 1/2-ton pickups they would instantly be #1 is all performance categories: Power, torque, fuel mileage, range, towing capacity!!! All the things that Ford lays claim to with their F150... I really do not understand why GM does not put the engine into production and market the crap out of it and sell them like hotcakes!!!

Click to expand...

4.5L is not only developed, tooling was purchased to be installed at Tonawanda Engine and at least a portion of the tooling is in storage and available.

GM, Ford, Dodge, Toyota and Nissan all have engines available for 1/2 ton trucks. GM, Ford, Dodge and Toyota have engines from internal programs. Nissan was going to use Navistar supplied diesel. Dodge has both an internal engine from FIAT tie up and a Cummins engine option.

...Back to regularly scheduled program about the Cruze Diesel. GM really missed their opportunity. If Cruze has poor reception other programs at GM will be canceled and all the nay sayer automotive execs will say I told you so and diesel enthusiasts will pay the price in fewer market offerings.

Mazda really needs to have success with diesel Mazda6 to build some diesel good will beyond the German marques.

Not to mention, 42 MPG on RUG is actually MORE efficient than 42 MPG on diesel. (Yes, I know, real world for diesels tends to be better.)

42 MPG on RUG is equivalent energy usage to 47.7 MPG on D2. Or, 42 MPG on D2 is 37 MPG on RUG.

Dooglas said:

And plenty of PDs as well for what it's worth (with generally many more miles on the engines than the CRs). Never been clear to me why VW has been so coy with certifying the TDI for B20. If there are any real issues - address them. Other manufacturer's TDIs seem to perform just fine with B20.

Click to expand...

If there were only commercial grade bio to deal with they probably would. When you have everyone trying to make it themselves from whatever process and chemicals and tools and oil at hand it becomes a liability.

Several thousand more then the Jetta, GM built and only comes in an autotragic, yeah, not interested ....

an excerpt from one shill / article:
....That urea fluid, which helps put the clean in clean diesel, will need to be refilled at least every 10,000 miles.

and one from another:
.....An approximately 4.5-gallon (17 liters) tank in the Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel holds enough diesel emissions fluid to provide at least 10,000 miles (16,000 km) of driving between refills.

The words are similar but the effect is quite different.
The first quote implies that it will require at least one refill before each 10,000 milles, the second not even once until after 10,000 miles.

And then there was this:

• Ceramic glow plugs, ....

Click to expand...

Still don't know which engine it is.

> Never been clear to me why VW has been so coy with certifying the TDI for B20.

Oil dilution was the initial concern.
Of course we now now that CR's aren't that reliable on US "B0".

Anyhow, I take today's news on Cruze-D & B20 to mean that the Cruze-D pump is not the same time bomb that VW uses.

And the lack of a wagon (in the US market - they do make one) means Cruze-D is no-sale for me.

It also just has no style, class, or presence. Call me a girl for saying those things, but yes, at least to me, when it comes to such an investment those things matter in addition to performance.

Blackheart said:

What HPFP does it use?

Click to expand...

Gonna go out on a limb here and predict it uses the Bosch cp4.1.....

Several have alluded to the one glaring issue... It won't be like the VW, German engineered driving experience. Enough said...

The cost is bad news. I would rather spend a little more money and get a larger sedan.
The Passat! They need to offer this in a Malibu or even the Impala! The Passat is the smallest VW I can ride in. I compared the new jetta to the new Passat and the Passat wins. GM is trying to get into the market with a sub compact. I don't care for an automatic any way. I need the comfort. It's just cause I'm an old fart. He He He

It's also has an oil pan heater and a water separator for the fuel. This is the engine used in Europe, just adapted to meet our emissions regs. The engineer I talked to wouldn't come out and say there was a manual in the pipeline, but he specifically refused to say there would not be one, so it sounds like they have one planned.

Chris Tobin said:

The 4.5L Duramax engine is fully developed and ready to go... If only they would pull the trigger and put it into production!!! I would think they would sell great in the 1/2-ton and even 3/4-ton and 1-ton trucks as the base model diesel engine, then the 6.6L Duramax would be the High Output optional engine for the 3/4-ton and 1-ton trucks!!! The specs on the 4.5L were as good or better than the 01-03 LB7 Duramax 6.6L so we know it will be OK in a big truck, and for the guys that really tow and haul a lot the 6.6L is the way to go.

If they put the 4.5L Duramax in the 1/2-ton pickups they would instantly be #1 is all performance categories: Power, torque, fuel mileage, range, towing capacity!!! All the things that Ford lays claim to with their F150... I really do not understand why GM does not put the engine into production and market the crap out of it and sell them like hotcakes!!!

Click to expand...

Although I don't need the full sized truck, I would considerate if it got better mileage than my canyon. A 7 foot bed would also be better for hauling my kayaks.

Oberkanone said:

http://www.windingroad.com/articles/news/update-2014-chevrolet-cruze-diesel-unveiled/

I agree.

Click to expand...

Except you get an Auto and SIGNIFICANTLY more power.

I wouldn't be surprised to see this replace the Eco in time, if it's even remotely successful.

Here's to a future Diesel Verano and that supposed Diesel ATS.

bhtooefr said:

Not to mention, 42 MPG on RUG is actually MORE efficient than 42 MPG on diesel. (Yes, I know, real world for diesels tends to be better.)

42 MPG on RUG is equivalent energy usage to 47.7 MPG on D2. Or, 42 MPG on D2 is 37 MPG on RUG.

Click to expand...

I'd like to see your theory/math here.

Not doubting you, just not following.

Also, I'm sure the Cruze will push 50MPG like our Jettas no sweat.

Also, just to be fair to Chevy. The Jetta starts at $23,055, but add $1000 for the DSG (with admittedly will be a better transmission), probably another $1000 if you want 17" wheels, and $2000 if you want a fascia package like the one on the Chevy. In reality, at the most basic level, you're only $2000 more than the VW, but you gain a 5yr/100k powertrain warranty, B20 compatibility, and 280lb-ft torque overboost. Might even lack a DPF.

We also really don't know what kind of electronics or lighting the Chevy will have, which I'm hoping is excellent considering it's priced above the LTZ.

I'm willing to give it a fair chance. I want to see more diesel options in this country, it benefits everyone.

EDIT: You'll also have Nav and OnStar, something the Jetta does not.



Standard on Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel, Chevrolet's MyLink infotainment system includes Bluetooth streaming audio for music; voice recognition for phone, music and radio; Pandora, Stitcher, Gracenote (album art) smartphone compatibility; and, auto system with GPS-enabled navigation on a seven-inch-diagonal color touch-screen.

thebigarniedog said:

Several thousand more then the Jetta, GM built and only comes in an autotragic, yeah, not interested ....

Click to expand...

To be fair to Chevy. The Jetta starts at $23,055, but add $1000 for the DSG (with admittedly will be a better transmission), probably another $1000 if you want 17" wheels, and $2000 if you want a fascia package like the one on the Chevy. In reality, at the most basic level, you're only $2000 more than the VW, but you gain a 5yr/100k powertrain warranty, B20 compatibility, and 280lb-ft torque overboost.

We also really don't know what kind of electronics or lighting the Chevy will have, which I'm hoping is excellent considering it's priced above the LTZ.

I'm willing to give it a fair chance. I want to see more diesel options in this country, it benefits everyone. Plus, dismissing a product just because it's "GM" is pretty pathetic.

EDIT: You'll also have Nav and OnStar, something the Jetta does not have at that price.



Standard on Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel, Chevrolet's MyLink infotainment system includes Bluetooth streaming audio for music; voice recognition for phone, music and radio; Pandora, Stitcher, Gracenote (album art) smartphone compatibility; and, auto system with GPS-enabled navigation on a seven-inch-diagonal color touch-screen.

Delete

JM Popaleetus said:

Also, just to be fair to Chevy. The Jetta starts at $23,055, but add $1000 for the DSG (with admittedly will be a better transmission), probably another $1000 if you want 17" wheels, and $2000 if you want a fascia package like the one on the Chevy. In reality, at the most basic level, you're only $2000 more than the VW, but you gain a 5yr/100k powertrain warranty, B20 compatibility, and 280lb-ft torque overboost. Might even lack a DPF.

We also really don't know what kind of electronics or lighting the Chevy will have, which I'm hoping is excellent considering it's priced above the LTZ.

I'm willing to give it a fair chance. I want to see more diesel options in this country, it benefits everyone.

EDIT: You'll also have Nav and OnStar, something the Jetta does not.



Standard on Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel, Chevrolet's MyLink infotainment system includes Bluetooth streaming audio for music; voice recognition for phone, music and radio; Pandora, Stitcher, Gracenote (album art) smartphone compatibility; and, auto system with GPS-enabled navigation on a seven-inch-diagonal color touch-screen.

Click to expand...

I'll be fair to Chevy when Chevy is fair to me.

Nav, 17" wheels, leather interior, automatic transmission, Onstar, fascia pkg. are all items not needed and not wanted. Not fair for Chevy to force them on me.

If this Cruze is a sales flop it will hurt future diesel choices.

In light of all this, it seems that the Cruze Diesel is facing a dim future of slow sales and plenty of cash on the hood to help move them.

Click to expand...

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/20...spare-the-chevrolet-cruze-diesel-makes-sense/

Oberkanone said:

Nav, 17" wheels, leather interior, automatic transmission, Onstar, fascia pkg. are all items not needed and not wanted. Not fair for Chevy to force them on me

Click to expand...

Cool, good for you, I'm glad. This car is obviously not a car for you. But, how is Chevy themselves being unfair? They're not forcing you to buy their car, and my point was that the price of the Cruze isn't unreasonable as it cannot be compared to a base Jetta.

Furthermore, all that stuff you don't want, IS stuff that I want in a car...especially one $23k+. In fact, it's why I got the 2010 Jetta, as it did have 17" alloys, leather, DSG, etc. The 2010 Jetta was also the same MSRP then as this new Cruze will be.

If you want a decontented car with a sloppy interior for cheap, the new Jetta is great (I say that as a person looking forward for the upcoming refresh). Otherwise, Chevy is offering another option to choose from at a slightly higher price spec-for-spec. Which I'm sure incentives and 0% financing will help with.

JM Popaleetus said:

I'd like to see your theory/math here.
Not doubting you, just not following.
Also, I'm sure the Cruze will push 50MPG like our Jettas no sweat.

Click to expand...

A gallon of diesel has more energy content (BTU) than a gallon of gas, making a diesel less energy efficient in a 1:1 fuel volume comparison.

VeeDubTDI said:

A gallon of diesel has more energy content (BTU) than a gallon of gas, making a diesel less energy efficient in a 1:1 fuel volume comparison.

Click to expand...

Ah, I see now.

Well hopefully, like the Jetta, the C-TD does much better than the sticker all while being over 100lb-ft more powerful .

http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/chevy-cruze-diesel-tests-american-demand-140108500.html


Whoopsie daisy, it looks like Edmunds.com jumped the gun a tad and released the specs on the rumored, though still unconfirmed 2013 Chevrolet Cruze featuring a diesel engine for the U.S. market. All we’re missing is the total fuel economy range, and the price.

Basically, the diesel Cruze is identical to the current unleaded models, with the obvious difference being the engine — of which Edmunds lists as a 2.0L four-cylinder diesel engine rated at 147 horsepower and 235 pounds-feet of torque. While this is slightly lower than what we see in the European and Australian markets, the diesel model will be mated to a six-speed automatic transmission. What’s more, we may see a combined fuel economy rating as high as 42 MPG, based on the performance of the diesel Cruze for sale in other countries.

So if you want one go to your dealer, call GM and make noise you want one. The 2.0L and Six Speed Auto sounds familiar? The 42 max seems very reasonable claim..... I guess the next step is a diesel hybrid? I rented a Cruze gas'er on a bizz trip... it was fine but booooooring, no feel steering.