This was supposed to be a rental racetrack review. The plan was to to challenge Watkins Glen with Daewoo GM Korea Chevrolet’s well-received not-so-compact sedan, letting the 1.4L turbo engine drag us from Turn One to the Bus Stop under full throttle before putting the brakes up on a pinball table and giving them the ol’ Jodie Foster* in preparation for the Outer Loop. This would be excellent practice for me and brother Bark as we prepared for AER’s first race at the Glen and it would also reveal quite a bit about the dynamic character of the “RS” package, which in time-honored RS fashion is entirely cosmetic in nature.
Alas, it was not to be. We’d have to be content with 1,222 miles in just 72 hours. So what’s this? Another Cruze review like this one and this one and this one? Not quite, because this time around I’d managed to rent something that wasn’t rental-spec at all.
To begin with, this Cruze had a sunroof! I can vividly remember the last time I got a rental car with an optional sunroof; it was 1996, in Los Angeles, and the car in question was an oddball Mercury Sable LS with partial-leather seats and the 24-valve Duratec. Rental agencies are so sunroof-averse that their resale operations will actually install one for you if you insist on it. I would trust an aftermarket sunroof installed by Enterprise Car Sales about as far as I would trust a Chinese condom with incomprehensible characters all over it and a weird cartoon drawing of something halfway between a sunflower and Mikhail Gorbachev’s birthmark.
No, wait, hold on, I’d trust the aftermarket sunroof less, because every aftermarket sunroof I’ve ever tried has leaked and every… you don’t want to hear about this stuff, do you? Our proven market research shows that TTAC readers mostly want to hear about small-sample reliability data extrapolated beyond any possible reason. I feel confident, therefore, in saying that because nothing went wrong with this Cruze during my seventy-two hours with the car nothing will ever go wrong with any of them, ever.
The funny thing is that I would trust a Cruze to hold up. I’ve now put about five thousand miles on at least seven different Cruzes and I’ve never seen anything that raised my eyebrows. Insofar as the manufacture and distribution of vehicles that are reliable and durable in the long term is the very thing that made Toyota’s reputation in this country, I have to wonder how many people will consider GM in the future because they’ve been exposed to a high-mileage Cruze that still looks and drives like a new-ish car.
Which this one certainly did, even with an odometer that rolled 40,000 during my trip. The interior was a significant upgrade on the poverty chic of the last high-mileage Cruze I drove, in a rather impressive combination of chocolate brown soft-touch plastic and cream leather. Between that and the full touchscreen MyLink system fitted to this example, I started to think I was in a bit of an entry-luxury car. There was no noticeable wear on any surface. The seats look like I wish the seats on my 49,000-mile Boxster S Anniversary looked — free of cracking or shiny spots — yet I’m willing to bet hard cash that, unlike my Boxster, this Cruze hasn’t been garaged indoors its entire life and lovingly treated to Lexol cleaner and conditioner every month or so.
For much of the weekend, the Cruze was asked to ferry three people plus my RainSong JM1000 in the passenger compartment, a task it accomplished without difficulty but also without much legroom. It’s not a small car in most respects but I can’t imagine that anybody in Korea actually gets chauffeured in their Lacettis; there’d be no point to the exercise. Might as well get driven around in a ’76 Celica with the seat shoved all the way back.
The upgraded front seats in this example remain short in the bolster and curiously undersized as a whole. They’re like 9/10ths scale seats, Smokey Yunick specials to make the rest of the interior feel bigger. As a result, I found myself bracing my right leg against the center console, where it rolled the temperature control to “hotter than balls” every time I shifted my knee. The sound system in this LT/RS was tinny and oddly short on bass; it also sounded noticeably worse through the AUX input than with a compact disc. Even though the compact disc in question was Mumford and Sons’ “Babel”.
“I cannot stand this,” one passenger moaned, switching the stereo back to “Aux”.
“Is this ‘Kirk Whalum Plays The Babyface Songbook’?” Bark inquired.
“Well,” I replied, “I heard you like jazz.” My previous long-distance drives in the Cruze have been in the cheapo 1.8-liter Ecotec models, but this one is the 1.4L turbo. This is what it’s good at: creating the impression of a much bigger, more powerful, smoothly confident engine at full throttle; pulling small hills without a triple downshift; returning 33.8mpg over 400 miles of freeway usage. This is what it’s not good at: full-throttle acceleration; long hills where the relatively flat torque curve cannot disguise the fact that you’re asking a 1.4L engine to motivate something about the curb weight of an old BMW 733i; making reassuring noises at idle and after shutoff instead of horrible thermal clacking and cracking.
The numbers are close between the two available Cruze engines but assuming the smaller-displacement turbo mill isn’t a hand grenade waiting to happen I’d take it every single time. Combined with the heavy but self-assured steering and dynamics that come standard in every Cruze the effect is sort of like the cheapo BMW F80 variants in many ways. It certainly feels at home on the freeway. In limited backroad driving around the Glen, the Cruze RS proved to be unenthusiastic but capable at moderate cornering speeds.
Unfortunately for me, a previous renter had already treated this Chevy’s brakes with profound disrespect, so every touch of the middle pedal resulted in the kind of shuddering that is more typically the precursor to an exploding Space Shuttle. It got to the point that I chose to use the kinda-Tiptronic as a brake on long hills, a choice neither appreciated nor endured with much grace by the slow-witted six-speed automatic.
No doubt about it, after the first day or so this review will be read mostly by potential used-Cruze buyers relying on search engines to bring them unbiased opinions on the vehicle. So to those readers, I give you a Cruze Checklist. If you want:
* High-quality materials and workmanship, with the exception of the ignition switch
* Quiet freeway ride
* Good but not spectacular fuel economy
* Reasonable front-seat comfort
* Decent trunk space
then the Cruze is for you. If you want
* Speed, power, excitement
* Maximum efficiency
* Rear seat space
* The best sound system and Bluetooth integration possible
* The smallest possible footprint for urban parking or storage
then you’ll want to avoid the Cruze, because it has none of those things.
Four years ago, I wrote of the Cruze, “It’s well-positioned against the Civic and Corolla. I believe that it beats both of those cars in significant, measurable ways.” The Civic is refreshed and the Corolla is new since then, but I remain pretty steadfast about that statement. The Cruze has a lot of the common decency that was once the particular excellence of the post-1979 GM A-body sedans. Staid-looking, over-serious, unrelentingly unsentimental about things like sportiness and space efficiency, the Cruze continues to deliver what most Americans actually want in a small sedan, as opposed to what they tell people they want.
This RS version with all the gingerbread is worth seeking out in the used market. The question is: if these cars continue to hold up and perform well, will they still be a bargain? Maybe they’d be a bargain even at a higher price, assuming they don’t have any racetrack time on them.
Which reminds me: The reason I didn’t track the Cruze was simplicity itself. During my overnight drive to the Glen, I pulled in at a truck stop to get two hours of rest. It’s rare for me to be able to sleep more than about ninety minutes in a car without cramping or experiencing pain from all the places I’ve been cut up or broken a bone in the past. Imagine my surprise when I woke five hours later, too late to catch the morning street-car practice. So that’s the Cruze: too relaxing to be thrilling. Even with an “RS” badge.
* In all good conscience, I cannot toss off a joke in reference to The Accused without including a counterpoint — JB
“Our proven market research shows that TTAC readers mostly want to hear about small-sample reliability data extrapolated beyond any possible reason.”
Bravo! I study and work with reliability on a daily basis, great point (sadly).
“They’re like 9/10ths scale seats, Smokey Yunick specials to make the rest of the interior feel bigger.”
Smokey Yunick is my hero, I appreciated this comment.
I enjoyed this review.
The Cobalts are much nicer cars than prior GM C/Ds (Cobalt, Cavilier), but no where near the handlers that the Cobalts were.
I’d recommend avoiding the early Cobalt low-spec cars as they have a net-like cover on the dash over the passenger airbag. Looks not-nice. You won’t need me to tell you this if you see it, but you need to know there are cars without it.
This RS did not have the fabric cover; the previous Cruze I rented did have it.
They should make a $22,999.99 Cadillac off of this, with leather and a heads up display, with free concierge service, and a free maintenance program with a $0 down, sign & drive, $199/month for 24 months lease.
It would become the best selling Cadillac since the 70s or even maybe all time.
It would also boost Cadillac’s customer satisfaction & reliability indexes, as it’s apparently much more durable than Cadillac’s other offerings, and people really seem to love their Cruzes, and would outsell the combined rest of the Cadillac lineup 10x.
Tell Johan to call it the CT1, and to put a giant, Transformers, melty-like, Cadillac emblem on the front grill.
In one sense, yes: this is what the Cimarron should’ve been.
In another sense, no: that’s what Buick is for.
They could call it the CMRN-4.
Cimarron? Seriously, I’d take one. Maybe two, if the front didn’t look like a jack o lantern.
Needs four on the floor, though.
And more plasti-chrome, and standard On Star.
If they dared to bring back real names they could revive the Seville via the Cruze.
DW, isn’t that what the Verano is for?
Yes, but this is GM we’re talking about, and worse yet, Cadillac.
What’s a Cadillac? (a deeply difficult question at present…all the way down the rabbit hole)
Very timely review for me. I just dropped off my car to have some rear end collision damage repaired and drove away in a Red Cruze RS. I will admit to knowing very little about the trim and even available engines in this line but a quick glance at the rental lot, the red Cruze beamed “take me” as it was one of the few cars without wheel covers and I noticed the fog lights and figured it would be reasonably well equipped. It was very clean and had only 5000 miles on it. I typically drive a 2014 Mazda6 with 6MT so that is my immediate basis of comparison.
On my 30 minute trip to work in the Cruze I noticed that the steering felt very boosted, tiny inputs resulting is seemingly dramatic course corrections so I am surprised to see you refer to the steering as heavy. Acceleration off the line is pretty decent for an economy car, but its got nothing when it comes to passing from 50-70 mph. I felt it get a touch squirelly and unstable on hard braking. The transmission seems up to task but I did hit one rather hard shift on my drive.
The dash is made of hard plastic with some sort of fabric mesh netting on the surfaces you can reach. The Chevy MyLink is similar to my wife’s Enclave with Intellilink so it was easy to operate but the screen placement is really weird, having to reach in a 3 inch or so well to touch the very bottom 1/4 inch of the screen to change the channel is rather annoying. More puzzling was the divers seat adjustment. The seat apparently has no vertical adjustment, there is electric adjustment for the seat bottom but the seat back is manual??? I have never encountered a car with that set up and I looked long and hard for another electric control for the seat back before fumbling on the manual adjuster.
In all, very pleased with this car as a rental. For $26/day, I think its tough to beat. I have no idea what is under the hood, if I had to guess I would say it was a NA engine. I will be surprised if it is a turbo. I will have to check it out later.
Just checked Chevy’s website. I have a 2LT Auto with RS package and the 1.4 turbo. I am surprised to learn that I was driving a turbo. Hmmm.
I’ve been saying this for awhile, the days of turbo lag are GONE. Most modern turbos accelerate just fine (pretty linear) when fitted with an automatic that up-shifts with fuel economy in mind. In normal driving you don’t really notice the boost. Also I assume most modern turbos (like my wife’s Volvo T5) are detuned slightly in the lower gears to remove torque steer.
I’ve also had rental Cruzes (not the RS) and found they have the nicest interior at this price point. That is a BIG deal on car from GM as historically they have had some of the worst interiors I’ve had the displeasure of dealing with.
I used to have a Mazdaspeed6. That had turbo lag pretty bad which can be annoying if you are in the wrong rev range and need it now, but there is also something to be said of a car where the boost comes on like a fire hose after a second or two of trickle. It can be a very exhilarating drive with more powerful cars.
I have a Mazdaspeed6 and a Cruze 1LT 6MT. Don’t let JMII foll you. The Cruze has terrible turbo lag. The Mazdaspeed atleast has a 2.3L mill that is decently powered enough to pull you up to 3000 rpm with some vigor. The 1.4L mill in the Cruze, off boost and low RPM is a nightmare, way too underpowered unless aided by the on-boost characteristics of a turbo. Second gear, and 10 MPH, there must be a full 3 seconds before the engine begins to hint that it is turbocharged. That is why I chose the manual transmission with the Cruze. I can anticipate and downshift faster than the GM automatic can interpret, and force a downshift. Also, the Cruze is tuned way different from the MS6. The MS6 had great low end and mid range. The Cruze only has mid-range, and there is never a “pushed back in the seat” feeling, so the power delivery is more linear than typically boosted engines of before. Great car though, if you drive it like it was designed for … a car that appeals to the masses, provides quiet, reliable transportation. Average 36 MPG lifetime (13,000 miles). The Cruze is the complete opposite of the MS6, which is why I bought it.
You seem to be saying the steering is quick, rather than light.
I just rented a dead-ringer for this car over the weekend (same trim level, color, etc.). It had 26k miles and the only sign of wear was a squeaky HVAC fan. But that’s it… everything else seemed nearly-new.
The front seats are definitely too small; even my 5’4″ wife complained about them.
If the task is a 75+ mph highway journey, I’d prefer this Cruze to almost anything else I’ve ever rented.
Assuming that highway journey is a long one, I personally put seat comfort above most other things. I don’t recall seat (dis)comfort distinctly from my test drive of a manual Cruze Eco when I was shopping, but I will say that the very fullsized seats in my Civic are a blessing on 7-10 hour hauls. Yes the sound insulation in that 2012 Civic is marginal compared to the Cruze, but I can honestly say I feel perfectly fresh and not sore after driving all day. The much heftier Cruze does have a great “German” feel to how solidly it drives, my Civic by comparison is a 2650lb featherweight. Although 80+ mph cruising and crosswinds in the Civic are very manageable and smooth.
Interestingly, I have not heard or read a single negative review of the Cruze since its introduction. Definitely a contender.
However, no matter how hard I try, I simply cannot get past that awful black plastic triangle that ruins much of the exterior appearance. Get rid of that ugly feature, and it’s a sure winner appearance-wise.
If you get a chance, drive the Orlando; it’s basically a Cruze with a raised roof and more space, especially in the rear. I’d say it resolved pretty much all the faults you note here, and the handling isn’t adversely affected because the floor is kept low.
I’m very impressed with the Orlando. Heck, it’s even possible to get one with the Cruze’s six-speed.
Jack you need to stop renting at Enterprise. I rent with National or Avis once or twice a month I think more than half the cars Ive had in the last year had Sunroofs and several were fully loaded. The two most base cars Ive had were when I was stuck with hertz and Enterprise.
As a frequent National renter, I think that used to be true, but lately I’ve been getting nothing but stripper Altima S and W-body Impala LT.
Here’s my secret for National: you don’t have to restrict yourself to the Emerald/Executive/whatever aisle. When faced with a boring selection, I head over to the compact section to see if there are ‘interesting’ small cars. That’s how I got a taste of the Fiat 500, VW Beetle, and Chevy Sonic when those cars debuted. Some National locations don’t like it when you downgrade yourself – Apparently they get a demerit when Emerald Exec customer is not upgraded.
Some notes from the owner of a 2011 Eco manual with 85K miles
-spot on regarding the seats. 9/10ths sounds about right.
-material quality is better than expected (I don’t mind the cloth on the dash)
-don’t buy a 2011! Every “first year” problem that exists has happened to mine. The upgraded replacement parts have been fine (so far)
-The manual versions are worth looking for! I routinely get over 40 mpg on the highway doing 70 to 80 mph. It dips down to 37-40 during the winter months for typical reasons
-The Eco seems to have the best balance of ride and handling and the manual trans is 100% more fun to drive than the auto.
-find one with the upgraded stereo option
I have an early-build (July 2011) 2012 Eco 6M with 45K miles and have had zero problems so far. I concur with the rest of Poncho’s comments, except for the seats – I never noticed that they were small – I found them quite comfortable for long distance driving.
Fantastic fuel mileage – my best is 48.6 MPG over 15.6 gallons of gas. I know of a few who regularly get 50+ and others have driven over 700 miles on a single tank of gas.
iPhone/iPod integration with the base radio is fine. Newer Android (4.x) phones don’t work. You can replace the PDIM with one out of a Camaro and use Bluetooth A2DP, but the interface is clunky.
Overall, I am very satisfied with the car; much more than I expected from a GM product.
I would say that my only seat complaint is that the bottom cushion can seem narrow sometimes (not all the time though).
Weird that yours is a July built 2012, mine is a July built 2011. Must have been a pretty damn narrow change over time that between model years.
I’ve been through : a water pump, pcv system, turbo, 2 steering racks (1 factory and 1 replacement) and a window regulator (more weather related than an actual defect). If it remains reliable for the next 15K miles I’ll keep it, if it goes back to the dealer one more time for a failure before the 100K warranty is up then it will get replaced (no idea with what though, maybe another Cruze Eco).
All of the above failures are supposedly known problems that were a result of a “bad batch” or replaced with redesigned parts. That’s just what I’ve heard though.
“a water pump, pcv system, turbo, 2 steering racks (1 factory and 1 replacement) and a window regulator”
Holy crap.
I really liked the Eco I test drove and the reported MPG was a big selling point, but the relative ‘untested-ness’ of the 1.4T and the rest of the car scared me off, along with the $19k sticker on the new ones I was looking at.
The one year old $15k stick shift Civic LX I ended up with has needed exactly zero dealer visits (I do my own maintenance) and gets 38-40 mpg in mixed suburban/highway commuting. 78-80 mph cruising yields about 37 mpg, the little 1.8L is revving at close to 3500 rpm at those speeds. I do like how relaxed the Cruze Eco’s 6th gear is, that excellent mileage reflects that. But for the $18-19k going rate on new ones, I’d sooner buy a 6spd manual Accord LX and enjoy a much roomier and more powerful car.
I won’t lie, it has been the least reliable GM car I’ve ever owned (I can honestly say that the last 3 before the Cruze have never gone back to the dealer for anything).
I do have a friend who bought an identical one a few months after me and has never been back to the dealer.
If I didn’t get great service, a free loaner, and the car being fixed extremely quickly every time I’m there I might feel differently about buying another one. Lemons exist from all manufacturers (I know a Honda owner and Toyota owner who have had it worse), I got one, I accept that.
Wow Poncho thats a lemon and a half for sure.
My Cruze cousin Verano has only suffered from a perpetual release bearing noise from the trans that GM either cant or wont fix (once the initial transmission issues were fixed). Other than that I think its a solid small car, and I never take “gussied up Cruze” as anything but a compliment, much to the chagrin of the commentators.
The rape joke counterpoint page provided a laugh. I clicked on the link that promised to be the most conflicted about whether or not laughing made one a bad person, only to discover, “Funny Feminist > Page not found.” No…
Most of the press would have us believe the Cruze is a terrible turkey.
akear, that is because there are better vehicles in this size/class/segment/category for less money.
Two immediately come to mind, without regard to sales numbers: The Corolla and the Civic.
highdesertcat
I know we never see eye to eye and you typically never get what I’m saying because you stick to your opinions very strongly (nothing wrong with that) but I can’t let this one pass.
” that is because there are better vehicles in this size/class/segment/category for less money.”
What exactly makes you say this? How can you not see that the Cruze has sold extremely well? Other than trying to pull off the “there’s a sucker born every minute” crap that a lot of people try to pull off?
Have you actually compared a Corolla/Civic/Cruze in similar trims? The prices are all very much in the ballpark of each other. To blindly claim there are better vehicles is a little close minded don’t you think?
PonchoIndian, you are entitled to your opinion and I respect what you believe, although I may not share it.
I never said that Cruze did not sell well. akear’s comment was “Most of the press would have us believe the Cruze is a terrible turkey”.
My guess would be that the automotive press thinks the competition is better.
I’m not in the market for such a small vehicle, but there are a number of people of my vintage who choose to buy one of these vehicles in this class as grocery-getters, based partly on comments from the automotive press.
I have had a deep and vested interest in new-car sales for more than 30 years and know what offers and retains intrinsic value in the industry. Civic and Corolla have consistently offered the better value.
Not a problem if you don’t share my perspective.
Interpretation of the same facts varies — just look at the stock market where one party interprets the facts as selling when another interprets the same facts as buying.
‘Two immediately come to mind, without regard to sales numbers: The Corolla and the Civic.’
One is better if you really hate to drive and are just waiting for the autonomous cars to come out and the other is great if you enjoy listening to an engine spinning at 3200-3500 RPMs for hour upon hour with lots of road noise added in.
Shouldn’t be hard to correlate which is which.
+1 to Chris.
highdesertcat
“The Corolla and the Civic.”
I would, very mildly, disagree. I’d rank the Cruze above almost every Civic in terms of “average consumer appeal.” The Corolla definitely has a much larger back seat, but even though it is newer I’d still give the Cruze the nod in regards to interior goodness.
The cars that the Cruze currently looses to in it’s segment (to my eyes and butt at least) are the Mazda3, Focus (hatch not sedan, so maybe unfair) and Jetta (now that 1.8T is there.) Where it lets me down compared to these cars isn’t all that market relevant I’ll admit, but the fact that it can stand tall on noise levels, interior finish and ride/handling vs. the Civic and Corolla is what it really needs to do for GM’s purposes.
What does trouble me is grumbles I’ve heard about rampant turbo failures. This may well have been a supplier issue that’s been handled for all I know, but absent some follow through I’d wait and see before recommending.
tedward, I don’t own any of those but it does make me want to ask, what are the sales numbers for each and every one of those?
In the monthlies that are published on ttac I do not remember seeing the Cruze outsell either the Corolla or the Civic.
But I could be wrong since I have been removed from the bid’ness since late 2011.
I think what’s being said is that a best selling vehicle doesn’t automatically make it the “best” vehicle.
You like Toyota trucks and I definitely wouldn’t mind a crew max Tundra but Tundra sales pale in comparison to GM, Ford, and Ram.
Does that mean those trucks are better?
I dunno, but I do know what I like and why.
Last weekend I had to return a rental Ford Fiesta due to a check engine light. The rental agency replaced it with a Cruze RS like the one Jack reviewed, which also had a sunroof. The car seemed totally solid and I even thought it had the NA engine; only when I popped the hood out of curiosity did I discover the turbo. I’m 6’1″ and didn’t notice the seats being small but maybe they would prove to be so over the long term. I thought it was a very nice car and my wife liked it too.
It was a relief to get out of the Fiesta. I know it’s a class size smaller than the Cruze, but that car is an ergonomic nightmare.
A note on the RS package’s being entirely cosmetic in nature: yes and no. On later (’13 and on?) 1LT’s, the RS package gains you the Watt’s linkage that’s missing on the basic LS’s and 1LT’s but standard on the 2LT and LTZ. Early 1LT’s (’11 and ’12?) received the Watt’s linkage whether they were RS’s or not. I don’t know if the RS package gets you firmer springs or not on the 1LT. The 2LT’s and LTZ’s sacrifice some comfort for sharpness via firmer springs and larger wheels. Personally, I’d like a Cruze with the 2LT’s suspension but the 1LT’s wheel/tire package. More sidewall is a good thing in my world.
I’ve had the Cruze thrice as a rental and liked it each time. The only wear and tear I’ve noticed amongst the three was a cheap-ish power port cover that had been snapped off by previous renter – not a quality part but also not something that would fail for most owners.
I also found the Cruze to get better mileage than have most journalists. I guess I have a lighter foot and get into the turbo less.
I had one as a rental a little while ago. Decent little car. I remember the base engine being a little loud, but is was a pretty good little car.
For the seats, I remember they were comfortable, but I had to recline them all the way to make it so. At 5’11 and 155, I’m not really a big guy either.
Daewoo deserves the credit for creating a pretty good compact car, not GM.
Daewoo is as much of a division of General Motors as Chevrolet, Opel or Holden. Not really sure why there are so many cynical remarks about it. Is it really any worse than say Fiat being part of the same group as Maserati or Dodge?
+1, PonchoIndian
Technically Opel developed the Delta II which underpins Cruze/Verano, not Daewoo. Daewoo has brought you such hits as the Chevy Aveo, Chevy Spark, Chevy Sonic, and more recently the Buick Encore.
“Delta II is General Motors’ current compact car platform, which was developed by Opel in Germany. It is the successor to the GM Delta platform. Internally it is simply known as a new Global Compact Vehicle Architecture or GCV.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Delta_platform
“While the original Gamma was developed by Opel, the Gamma II platform is under the leadership of GM Korea (formally GM Daewoo).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Gamma_platform
“The Mokka is based on the GM Gamma II platform”
“The Buick Encore version of the Mokka was unveiled at Detroit’s 2012 North American International Auto Show[15] and officially went on sale for the 2013 model year in January 2013.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel_Mokka
In the days that people buy Hondas made in the USA, Camry’s built by Subaru, Kia’s made in the USA, Porches made by the dutch and Fords built in Hungary it makes me laugh when they say something about the Cruze having some Daewoo influence in it like its not the global norm for just about every industry out there.
I will never buy a porch that isn’t made on-site custom for my house, no matter how good the Dutch are at it.
(Sorry, couldn’t resist.)
good catch Sigivald…I heard a Porch doesn’t handle nearly as well as a Porsche unless you’re having a BBQ. :)
I’ve driven the 1.4T in a manual and auto Sonic, and the manual feels much peppier. I test drove a Cruze 1.4T auto, and that transmission seemed to wring more performance out of the engine than my Sonic auto does.
Having said that, this engine could really use 20 more hp. It starts out strong but it’s all low and mid range, there’s nothing up top, really no reason to rev it above 3500 rpm. It does a great imitation of a 2.2L Ecotec.
I’m usually the first person in line for a good GM bash but they nailed this one. A compact that isn’t really a compact, at least for people 5’10 and under, cures everything wrong with the class. It rides like a real car, it has a trunk like a real car, it’s cheap to buy and cheap to fill, if not to trade in. The perfect recession car, a downsize for people who don’t want to.
The base Buick edition is even smoother and quieter, has a less craptastic powertrain, and at $21,000 or so real world is still pretty cheap by Bernanke money standards.
A bowtie for the demographic that can’t spell Cruise and a tri shield for the demographic that can, GM has got cheap commuter covered.
Having sold and delivered well over 100 Cruzes and owning two in my family, I can tell you that the Cruze is rock solid. I asked my top 4 techs in the Service area which car they saw the least trouble with and they all quickly said the Cruze, that is why I have purchased two for my family. The Cruze introduced the world to 10 air bags and a 5 Star crash rating in the compact segment, the jap crap is finally starting to catch up to the bar that the General raised.
I have integrated every type of phone known to man without a hitch in the Bluetooth system offered previously, and the new MyLink with the 8 inch touchscreen is a piece of cake with more connectivity than most. The 138 HP/138 Torque in the Turbo is adequate and there is no Turbo lag as the turbo is mounted right on the exhaust manifold and liquid cooled to give long life. A person of 6’6″ height will fit in the Driver seat of the Cruze, not at all in the Corolla or the Civic. Trunk is 15 Cubic feet with a cavernous opening.
The soft touch material on the dash(whether it be the mesh or leatherette)is a welcome relief from the hideous Borg designed interiors of the Civic or Corolla. If the Jap Crap is so damn good at reliability, then why not step up to the plate and offer a 100K Mile Powertrain Warranty that covers Engine, Tranny,Starter,Water Pump, and CV axles like the General. The Cruze brings more to the table than any of the others and please do not forget the General offers a 46 MPG Cruze Turbo Diesel making 250 lbs. of torque.
Please do not mention price ever as the Generals’ Military pricing puts you hundreds below invoice with a 75.00 Doc. If you are going to claim to take care of the soldiers that guarantee our freedom, then freaking back it up with a worthy discount. Did I mention educators pricing,Credit Union member pricing, Supplier pricing, 1,000.00 random pop up discount at the Chevy website-preesh-nobody does discounts like Chevrolet. If you walk into a Chevy Dealer and are looking at a well equipped Cruze with leather and RS package, your combined discount with Rebate and Dealer monies should br just north of 5,000.00 off. A great deal at over 20% off MSRP. Late.
“the jap crap is finally starting to catch up to the bar that the General raised.”
OMG, that is just precious. Especially when you’re basing your bombast on a Daewoo design. You’re gonna injure your bladder with all that kool-aid.
Opel, not Daewoo. Daewoo designed the lesser Geo-grade Chevrolets.
Me so confrused. I know Suzuki also partnered in that “GM-East” period and thought they did the first gen, little squarish Cruze.
Anyway, The General had to outsource the only competent small car they’ve offered since the Corvair.
If you haven’t noticed, they have been outsourcing most of the car R&D for some time.
I hadn’t noticed because GM. Someone should tell achevroletman.
@28 Cars: I wouldn’t call it outsourcing, by any means. Every car company has at least a “localization” engineering department that takes the product and prepares it for the local conditions, no matter what they are. GM, VW, Toyota, FIAT, Hyundai all have engineering departments in their satellite factories. This is just GM spreading the development work around and utilizing it’s global resources like any other global automaker would. Who says that one nation is the best at designing small cars? Could the Germans devise a crap box as awful as the Yaris? Could the Japanese make a copy of the Cobalt (Yes, they can. Look at the current Civic)? Could the Koreans develop a luxo cruiser for 1/2 the price of an Audi?
petezeiss: Yes, you so confrused. Not loving the jingoism in that comment. Ugh.
GEO was Toyota/GM joint venture on the prizm and Suzuki/GM joint venture on the Metro and Tracker, later to become Isuzu?GM joint venture. All automobiles are global platforming nowadays, but the design,engineering, and R&D final say came from GM North America. Cruze is a great compact car-admit it.
GM buyers have more tats and fat but less money than J-car buyers.
Nyah-nyah.
Inquiring minds want to know. A 1.4 litre engine with a turbo boost powering a sedan the size and weight of an old BMW 733i? Who designed the turbo and its electronic controls, and where are they manufactured? Durability seems a potential issue.
It is a Garrett turbo(Honeywell)and they also make the turbo in the Cruze clean diesel that gets 46 Hwy. and about 250 lbs. torque. Turbo failure would have shown itself by now as we started selling the Cruze in 2010.
achevroletman: That diesel Cruze sounds like a beast. Too bad I’m about three years out from needing another car… Besides, I’m waiting for Volt, Gen 2. I’m hoping for a SUV version of the Volt.
achevroletman
I have heard of repeat turbo failure, but with these things it is a hard problem to gauge. It could be climate related (humidity, same day temp swings), it could be a matter of a batch going through with a material defect or assembly error (more likely), or it could just be a few simple mistakes on the dealer level such as misdiagnosing oil/coolant line issues (most likely and would exacerbate #2).
Regardless I haven’t heard that there is an epidemic so I’m leaning towards the third cause. This is not on the level of the Subaru 2.5 or anything.
Since I grew up in the Lordstown area where the Cruze is built, I follow the news surrounding the car. It’s been a pretty decent little machine and I’m glad GM got this one off the ground. I’ve driven a 6MT Eco model pretty extensively, and I liked it a great deal. I was expecting it to be like the fuel miser econoboxes of yore, but it was very nicely equipped and actually fun to drive.
I’ve been impressed that GM has kept up with the Cruze and all of it’s variations, including finally offering the diesel in North America. It’s not inexpensive (you can get a nice Malibu for that kind of money), but it shows (to me) the level of commitment that GM seems to have to compete with all competitors.
Daewoo this and Daewoo that, but the reality is, people in the US like Korean cars, maybe even more than they like Japanese cars. In my estimation it was not a bad move to utilize GMK for the small car efforts for the US/North American market. It was an astute purchase on GM’s part. You can’t really compare the GMK cars to the previous efforts, as there is no comparison.
What I object to is US bailout tax dollars paying the salaries of Daewoo engineers.
The North American content of the Cruze is only 46%. We can then safely assume the actual US content is around 30%. That must be a all time low for an American-built GM vehicle. To help the U.S. economy why not buy either a Toyota or Honda that have far greater US content. They also happen to be better cars. From where I stand buying a Cruze is a no win situation.
To survive and thrive, GM will need to continue to consolidate platforms and leverage its resources globally. The plain truth is that GM does not engineer small cars well in the US; the Vega, Chevette, Cavalier and Cobalt are obvious signs of a lack of home grown talent. GM has great engineering talent in Korea, who specialize in smaller cars.
Do you want GM to offer a competent small car, or do you want them to engineer it in the US? You can’t have both.
I just wanted to clarify the “turbo failure issue that caused mine to get replaced.
There is a pin as part of the wastegate mechanism that wasn’t properly heat treated by the supplier. The pin wears out and the tolerances create a situation where the wastegate never fully closes. GM’s solution is to replace the whole turbo instead of just having the dealer replace the pin. Up until the wastegate no longer functioned properly (I would have to downshift to second to take hills that I normally left it in 4th for…but I was getting almost 10mpg more than normal) the turbo was fine. Still hasn’t used a drop of oil between 10K miles oil changes.
The cobalt’s delta platform was engineered in Germany.
If GM can’t cannot develop a small car as well as tiny Daewoo, maybe they should not be in the car business.
akear
Not sure what you don’t get about it, but Daewoo IS a division of General Motors.
Lets put this in perspective and change some names…
If Audi can’t design their own A3 (which is a Golf in drag and diamonds) then maybe they should be in business… Hey how about that, VW and Audi are part of the same company.
I am glad to hear that the turbo for the 1.4 was engineered and is made in the US (or, at least in some other good place). That much of the rest of the vehicle originates in Korea makes sense in today’s world. Wonderful that there have been no really big and ongoing problems with the turbo in its first three or four years.
Query. What will happen when the buzzy little rascal is eight years old with typical (actually pretty good) US maintenance? Will it tend to crater and cost more to fix/replace than the car is worth?
I ask this because I once owned a very good example of a 1974 Chevy Vega that was well constructed and didn’t leak fluids. Problem was that if the vehicle EVER seriously overheated with the aluminum engine block and its steel pistons, it was totally kaput. This meant (at the very best) its expected useful economic life was not all that long – maybe 6-7 years. How about the 1.4 turbo Cruze?
Interested in the RainSong. Been looking at the Shorty, myself.
The North American content on the current model year Cruze is at a minimum 66%. It is on the Monroney sticker on the car-check it out. As far as comparing anything from the 1970’s with current engine technology is a non starter for me, tolerances adhered to today are light years ahead of the 70’s in every aspect of research, engineering, and production. The Cruze is a great car. Visit your local Chevy dealer and drive one.
I had one while my 2008 Impala was in the body shop after a minor collision. It was a 2012 2LT without RS package but with the same interior as this test car. It had 20K miles on the clock and I had it for a week. Overall I enjoyed it for the most part. Nothing broke. Everything worked flawlessly and I was surprised how forward I was to hop in the little Chevy for lunch break, on the drive home and on the weekend. I agree the 1.4T needs a bit more power above 60 MPH and that the 6 speed automatic can be a bit slow to upshift but mileage reached a high of 38.2 on a stretch of highway. I’m looking forward to the 2016 Cruze which promises a bit more rear seat room and hopefully improved drivetrains.
Okay, mine is a ’12 but the observations should be still valid. I had a 2006 Cobalt LS 2.2L that I gave up in a divorce. Don’t miss it. My ’12 will prob be replaced by a ’15. Like it that much, yupper. Observations, I think the interior is better than anything Ive seen out of Japan IN THE PRICE CLASS. Lexus, maybe not, very nice, yes indeed. The two-tone dash looks very much above its pay grade and the controls are good. Not a fan of the monochrome n small LCD radio/climate display, only thing I’d change. I have the 17″ wheels upgraded with W-rated 225s, handles very well. Mine does have the Watts rear suspension and corners pretty well, occasionally slightly harsh but usually supple enough on our cratered MD roads. As noted, the turbo issues are mostly about the wastegate control pushrod, and yes, at 74k mine developed the same failure. Other than that, at 81.6k now, absolutely NO issues otherwise, 40k of happy motoring. My kids love it so much more than my Cooper Clubman, actually real room in the rear seats. :) I had a Camaro I built for road racing, fully mod’d tubular & urethane suspension n 275/40-17s so I know a bit about handling and these aren’t too bad.