Green Car Congress reports that GM will offer two new engines in 2009, based on its global Ecotec four-cylinder architecture. The 1.4-liter direct-injection turbocharged four-banger and 1.6-liter Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) turbocharged four-cylinder will debut in "Europe and other regions." The Euro 5 compliant 1.4-liter four will offer between 120 and 140 hp and eight percent better fuel consumption than a higher displacement naturally-aspirated engine with similar output. Direct injection and independently-variable camshafts account for much of the improved efficiency, and provide a platform onto which GM's HCCI technology can be transferred. The 1.6-liter CNG mill should pump out about 150 hp and 155 lb/ft of torque. This announcement cements the trend towards smaller engines with forced induction, as championed by Ford's forthcoming Ecoboost line of turbocharged mills. Although we're not holding our breath to see GM launch a sub-two liter engine in the U.S., the 1.4-liter engine would likely make the Cobalt or the Aveo a force to be reckoned with– at least in terms of fuel economy.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
The Cobalt is already a force to be reckoned with in terms of fuel economy. In the non-hybrid compact class the Cobalt XFE ties with the Civic.
Oldsmoboi,
XFE treatment is only available on Cobalts with a stickshift. Automatic Cobalts still get poor fuel economy for that class.
And I understand the stick is being phased out of the sedan cobalt, too. So, all Cobalt sedans will get poor fuel economy and automatic coupes will get poor fuel economy. “Good” fuel economy in a Cobalt will be limited to coupes with sticks. What percentage of Cobalts will that be? 25%? Less?
I also figure that the Honda has a better chance of delivering the goods to real owners under a wide variety of circumstances. Cobalt owners will only get something like the EPA numbers if they spend their days re-creating the EPA test cycle.
You can’t escape physics, the Cobalt weighs more and will take more energy to move.
>Although we’re not holding our breath to see GM launch a sub-two liter engine in the U.S…
Granted it’s a niche player right now, but the Astra launched with a 1.8L Ecotec.
That seems to be the natural destination for this 1.4L engine, moving the Astra up in powertrain quality and mileage.
The Cobalt regularly beats it’s EPA numbers in both automatic and manual trim with 36-37mpg highway being frequently reported.
How is this “poor” mileage?
I’m not sure how you come to the conclusion that Honda will be better at delivering EPA rating than Chevy. Historically, the opposite has been true.
It’s good to see GM putting some effort into their Ecotec. Even when it doesn’t get the headlines and hype that the Volt does.
I heard that GM is going to put this 1.4 turbo gas direct injection engine into the US MALIBU to replace the 2.4 engine.
Slap a 6 speed automatic on the end of it (which it’ll absolutely need – since the power band will be too small/suck) and it’d probably be okay.
Man, the 1.6lt CNG powerplant is specially interesting. Do you have more information on it?
I agree, if installed in the Cobalt and Aveo they will be a fuel economy force.
Now I just imagine what can be expected on those puppies with a reflash, CAI, downpipe and maybe some cams. This engines will be the performance bargain of the decade… or not
And comparing a 1.7-1.8lts car against a 2.2-2.4 lts car in terms of fuel economy is to me like comparing apples to pears. It’s obvious the bigger engine will take more fuel.
But believe it or not, a bigger engine actually uses less fuel than a smaller one in a similar weight car: higher torque helps to use less throttle to get the vehicle moving, or to keep it moving
I’m not sure how you come to the conclusion that Honda will be better at delivering EPA rating than Chevy. Historically, the opposite has been true.
Not sure where you’ve seen this, but I’ve been first/third-hand witness to Hondas beating their EPA ratings (I’ve had 3 that all went beyond their ratings regularly, with a young right foot driving them).
But I will say, Honda drivers are usually more willing to use their full RPM band than other economy car drivers :)
So GM is developing nicer, small-displacement gas engines with turbos. And HCCI. And “Belt-assist” hybrids. And “two-mode” hybrids. And plug-in hybrids. And a small(er) diesel engine…
For f***’s sake, GM, pick one thing and throw your massive weight into it!
To save itself, GM needs something world-changing and unique, something the rest of the market can’t beat. High-quality, peppy, domestic compacts with tiny turbo-blown gas engines would kill in the NA market right now. HCCI has all the benefits of diesel with very few of the drawbacks. If GM corners and perfects this tech, it would also be a game changer.
But they don’t have the time and resources to do it all. If I were in charge, I’d bet the company on HCCI, because, quite frankly, the company’s not going to be around in another 5 years if someone doesn’t start taking big risks.
I drove a rental Cobalt from West of Dayton, OH to Cleveland and back with just a couple of miles of that in Cleveland; 99%+ on the interstate. The speed limit is 65, so I tried to keep it at 68. I got 33mpg as measured by miles on the odometer and fuel from the pump. The onboard readout was 37. I’d see no reason to buy a Cobalt compared to a Civic with better airbag configuration and much better trade in value and maybe better mpg.
Oldsmoboi, Perhaps mel23 explains why people report good fuel economy with their Cobalts; the computer is lying to them.
“I’d see no reason to buy a Cobalt compared to a Civic with better airbag configuration and much better trade in value and maybe better mpg.”
I do… to the tune of $3,000 less in price.
“
Oldsmoboi, Perhaps mel23 explains why people report good fuel economy with their Cobalts; the computer is lying to them.”
A single tank of gas isn’t a good indicator… especially in a rental when one has no idea how much the tank was topped off.
Cobalt owners will only get something like the EPA numbers if they spend their days re-creating the EPA test cycle.
You can’t escape physics, the Cobalt weighs more and will take more energy to move.
Kix,
There is a very good reason for the increased mass. It’s called “structure.” You know, (Or apparently don’t),things like thicker sheet metal and increased chassis stiffness. The Cobalt does have a higher overall frequency than the Honda. Other things like thicker carpet and seat foam ware really overlooked in favor of a Japanese manufacturer. But really, you KNOW you’re in a Japanese car by the feel of the seats and the way the paper carpet wrinkles under your feet.
And I believe ABS is standard in the GM.
But hey! It’s got your approval right?
Anyone got the crash ratings on those Honda cars vs. the Cobalt?
I do know that most Japanese cars, even the Acura are just clipped in a body shop. Nothing left to straighten out after a collision. Chop it off and weld on a new half. I see alot more repairs on Merican cars.
Yes. Cobalt computers lie about the gas mileage. Hondas never lie!
Oldsmoboi: A single tank of gas isn’t a good indicator… especially in a rental when one has no idea how much the tank was topped off.
Thinking about this, the mileage of Oldsmoboi’s rental may very well have been more than 33 mpg. Hear me out.
Let’s say that Oldsmoboi received his rental with somewhere near a full tank of gas, he drives it for some while, then decides to fill it up and top it off.
A: If the car was given to him topped off, then the refueling of the car brings it back to the top-off level and his calculation of 33 mpg is pretty much on the mark.
B: If the car was not topped off when he received it, but he topped it off later, then his calculations will be off due to the fact that the car actually went the distance with less fuel than he thought he had to begin with.
He can only run his calculations with the amount of fuel he adds himself, so he could be just right, or the car actually has better mileage than he thought. This scenario fails, however, if he decides to not top off the tank when refueling, as that’s one variable too many to be sure.
I’ve noticed that anyone who claims that the Cobalt is “junk” or a “POS” has generally only rented one for a day or weekend or has never actually been inside one.
There’s only one set of numbers that can be used to compare different vehicles-that’s the official EPA ones. Your mileage may vary; so telling us that your mileage varied is not really useful.
davey49 : Few people will call their own cars “junk” because they don’t have the luxury of returning to another car after whatever period of time. I had a rental cobalt for two weeks and the general feeling of the car was that GM created a facsimile, bad pixellation and all, of a ’99 Jetta. It had less than 10,000 miles and some of the trim was already falling apart. The turn signal stalk was splitting apart horizontally and the numbers rubbing off.
Was it an okay car? Absolutely. Would I want one? No.
I rented a Cobalt on a recent trip. Based on the constant bashing it receives, I had pretty low expectations for it. Was it better than I expected? Yes, it was much better based on that relative scale. Even compared to other cars in its class it really was not a bad car at all. However, it still is on the lower side of the scale relative to most of its competition. All that said, it certainly was not a “POS” but there are better choices when it comes to purchase. I understand a really hot version is on its way…that might change the dynamics a bit…
The 1.6 CNG engine could allow GM to sell CARS in CA for the 1st time in Decades. CNG gets you diamond lane privileges in the great Peoples Republic of Kalifornia.
When I drive around Sacramento and other parts of Northern CA it is almost noteworthy when I see a big 2.8 car than is not a rental or fleet vehicle.
I’ve owned a Cobalt sedan since 2005. 43,000 miles. No problems. Great gas mileage. What’s all the hub ub?
For people with Cobalts suggest you check Consumer Reports for their reliability, its just average over the last few years!
“Average” in CR today would probably be a “much better than average” rating 6 years ago by the relative scale CR uses. I, for one, think the peanut butter and toaster testers are out of their league when it comes to what is important in a car, at least as far as enthusiasts go…if a car is a Maytag appliance to you, well I guess CR has some value, then.