Chevy Cruze Eco MPG

[freakwithracket]

I saw a commericial yesterday for a Chevy Cruze Eco that gets 28 city and 42 hwy. That is very close to the 30/42 that the 2011 Jetta TDI is posting. At about $8,000 less than the TDI, along with the lower cost of gas vs diesel, combined with the natural "issues" that come with owning a euro diesel (labor and parts costs, reduced number of diesel stations, winter cold starts, etc. etc.) all I can say is that VW better get the Polo TDI here ASAP, because although it is still better in my opinion, it is quickly becoming less and less practical to buy the TDI.

[cmitchell]

I've owned only one GM vehicle, and it was two cars in one ... my first and my last GM.

[freakwithracket]

I hear that. Its worth noting however that the cars made by the Big 3 are notably better after 2009 than before. I'm not even saying the TDI's are worse, they are better. You, I, and everyone on this site knows it...but if VW wants people to go diesel they need to offer up something more than 2mpg city in exchange for $8000 higher price tag and a higher cost of fuel. 2mpg + $8000 +higher fuel cost + higher repair cost vs. Same gas millage, lower fuel costs, lower repair costs...even with the argument of the diesel lasting longer, most people aren't looking to run their car into the ground. After about 150,000 miles or so people start looking to upgrade to something newer. I bet 90% of people will go for the Chevy in a side by side choice. And considering that most people have bad perceptions about diesels and many don't even know that a diesel car is an option in the States, that number could be higher.

[MrMopar]

With the Cruze ECO, I hope you don't mind not having a spare tire . . .

Cruze MSRP = $19,175 (auto transmission is $925 extra)
Jetta MSRP = $23,765 (DSG transmission is $1,100 extra)
Both those prices include delivery. That's a price spread of $4,590, not $8,000.

The price on the Cruze is higher than what most people expect to pay for a compact car. At any rate the 42 mpg in the Cruze comes with having a gasser engine featuring less torque. The driving experience of a TDI is more relaxing and satisfying than the Cruze gasoline engine due to the torque output of the engine. Cruze = 138 hp, 150 lb-ft; TDI = 140 hp, 236 lb-ft. Compare both of those cars and you get almost twice the torque with the Jetta as you do with the Cruze.

You also have to deal with EPA mileage figures that are sometimes hard to attain. The Cruze will probably only see 40+ MPG under ideal conditions but lots of people with diesel engines will easily meet or surpass the fuel economy figures once their engine is broken in well.

[MrMopar]

Originally Posted by freakwithracket

IAfter about 150,000 miles or so people start looking to upgrade to something newer.

And smart buyers, similar to buying a house, look at potential residual value. In the past TDI cars have held much higher resale values at any mileage over their gasoline counterparts.

[freakwithracket]

My mistake with the $8000. Go Google "Chevy Cruze Eco" and you the first thing that comes up is "2011 Chevy Cruze ECO"...but that link does not take you to the ECO page..I assumed it had. MrMopar, I'm all with you. Understand that my point is not that the TDI is not better, but the average consumer will not look at ft. lbs. of torque when shopping...hell there is even a phrase to go along with that "people buy HP but drive torque". With the resale value of the car, they have indeed held up higher than the gassers, but how much of that has to do with the huge difference in MPG. I mean the MKIVs, like mine, get 50+mpg whereas a 2003 grand-am gets like 28....huge difference. Huge. I'm not all too confidant that a TDI will be worth so much more in resale if it gets 2mpg city better...remember for many people buying a used car, cost is an issue (not for all, some people just don't like buying a new car because they get a better deal with a slightly used but depreciated car). Either way my point remains the same, VW needs to get the Polo over here because as nice as it is that the Jetta gets twice as many lbs of torque, the average consumer does not care. And the big selling point in any car today is MPG.

[Oberkanone]

http://rumors.automobilemag.com/brit...ion-51907.html

GM says "No diesel for U.S."!

It is a darn shame that we won't buy hatch or diesel.

[BretAZ]

The real world difference in price is even less. My neighbor just paid full MSRP for a Cruz Eco, nobody would deal. My Jetta was $23,765 and I picked it up for $21,990. He paid somewhere just shy of $20,000. In my opinion, the only two things these cars had in common was MPG. The Jetta is bigger, more confortable, and more features for only a little more money. In terms of reliability and service, they both are probably comparable. But the edge for me went to the TDI.

The biggest reason to not buy the Cruze for me was I would get tired of friends asking me why I was driving a rental car.

I actually like the Cruze, just not $20,000 worth.

[Powder Hound]

Originally Posted by Oberkanone

...It is a darn shame that we won't buy hatch or diesel.

Which is why over the last 15 years or so, Jettas have outsold Golfs by 9 or 10 to 1 in this country.

[aja8888]

Originally Posted by Powder Hound

Which is why over the last 15 years or so, Jettas have outsold Golfs by 9 or 10 to 1 in this country.

I've had a 2001 Jetta and a 2002 Golf. The Jetta's trunk was huge! The Golf hatch with the rear seat up is not very big.

[MrMopar]

Originally Posted by BretAZ

I actually like the Cruze, just not $20,000 worth.

See, I have the same opinion.

Call me a typical American but I have been conditioned by a decade of domestic car manufacturers rolling out giant rebates, financing and good discounts off MSRP to keep people buying American cars. Selling me a $20,000 Chevy sedan? It better come with a $4,000 rebate and 0.9% financing if you expect me to pick that over a Honda Accord.

Chevy had the Cobalt as the American-built small car that was "better" than the Cavalier it replaced. The pre-production models shown off to Motor Trend and C&D years ago had GM practically begging them to publish good things about the cars with a promise that they were tweaking things and this time the cars were going to be really good and not designed solely by cost-cutting bean counters. Well, they constantly finished at the bottom of comparisons.

Now they're selling the same thing with the Cruze. This time it is getting good reviews but both MT and C&D are saying "What is up with the $20,000 price?" The Cruze is a Honda Civic analog - a small car that's supposed to be efficient and reliable. Well, GM had a lot of years of cars being unreliable and it will take a serious effort over the next decade to convince the American buying public that their cars are reliable over the long term. Until then they should expect to compete on price and what remaining "Buy American" sentiment they have left.

[GoFaster]

I'd take a Focus (hatch!) over a Cruze any day of the week ...

[schwarze Käfer]

And GM (government motors) backs a plan to add $1/gal fuel tax? Why? To sell more Cruzes/Volts? Reason enough NOT to buy anything GM.

x2 Brian - Ford anytime!

[MonsterTDI09]

Does the Chevy Cruze need Hi octane fuel, to get that mileage

[tdi90hp]

Originally Posted by GoFaster

I'd take a Focus (hatch!) over a Cruze any day of the week ...

I drove a 6 speed ECO a few weeks ago for 30 miles or so....the car is flat out amazing....quiet, quiet, quiet, well built, shifts nice and revs super low on hwy....not as much torque in tall gears but dont discount this car and feels very well screwed together.......sorry the 5 speed base focus for 2-3 K less does not compare...real basic. still think the Golf Highline feels like a lot more car but we paid almost 7K more in Canada than a Cruze...although our car has a lot more equipment...I like GMs warranty as well....100,000 miles on powertrain is nothing to sneeze at.