2012 Cruze 1.4T Turbo Replacement
- Thread starter The Critic
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: addyguy
These Cruze's are going to start being like mid-80's Dodge cars with the various turbo's - the 2.2 and 2.5 that were in Omni's, Shelby's..etc..great performance, but no long-term reliability on turbo components.
We aren't in the 80s anymore.
These Cruze's are going to start being like mid-80's Dodge cars with the various turbo's - the 2.2 and 2.5 that were in Omni's, Shelby's..etc..great performance, but no long-term reliability on turbo components.
We aren't in the 80s anymore.
A coworker had a Cruze of this vintage that had a turbo failure. I want to say he spent around $2500, but it was picked up by the extended warranty he purchased for about the same price. He traded the car in less than a year later so I don't know what he was... well yeah. His money.
If i see him today, Ill ask.
If i see him today, Ill ask.
Originally Posted By: DevilsRule
Originally Posted By: addyguy
These Cruze's are going to start being like mid-80's Dodge cars with the various turbo's - the 2.2 and 2.5 that were in Omni's, Shelby's..etc..great performance, but no long-term reliability on turbo components.
We aren't in the 80s anymore.
I guarantee those cars were either on strict diets of Valvoline, Pennzoil or Havoline conventional too!
Originally Posted By: addyguy
These Cruze's are going to start being like mid-80's Dodge cars with the various turbo's - the 2.2 and 2.5 that were in Omni's, Shelby's..etc..great performance, but no long-term reliability on turbo components.
We aren't in the 80s anymore.
I guarantee those cars were either on strict diets of Valvoline, Pennzoil or Havoline conventional too!
Originally Posted By: mattwithcats
Water pump is a known issue...
Make sure you use 5W-30 oil, too thick and the turbo does not get enough.
I would use a quart of Mobil 1 Advanced Fuel Economy in 0W-30, really thin -30...
Make sure you idle for 30 seconds before shutting off the engine, cool the turbo down...
I put 225/55R17 tires on, slightly larger...
If it's a water cooled turbo, you don't need to let it cool as the water will do this for you even when the engine is off. I am assuming these are? Obviously, idle won't hurt anything though..
Also, this is the first time I've heard someone go thinner on oil for a turbo'd car. I would personally want a thick Dexos 5w30.
Water pump is a known issue...
Make sure you use 5W-30 oil, too thick and the turbo does not get enough.
I would use a quart of Mobil 1 Advanced Fuel Economy in 0W-30, really thin -30...
Make sure you idle for 30 seconds before shutting off the engine, cool the turbo down...
I put 225/55R17 tires on, slightly larger...
If it's a water cooled turbo, you don't need to let it cool as the water will do this for you even when the engine is off. I am assuming these are? Obviously, idle won't hurt anything though..
Also, this is the first time I've heard someone go thinner on oil for a turbo'd car. I would personally want a thick Dexos 5w30.
I traded in my 2011 Cruze 1.4T because of coolant loss/odor issues that the dealer couldn't/wouldn't repair....(in fact they denied there was a widespread problem despite 200+ pages of complaints about it on the Cruzetalk forum).
One fix that they tried (which did nothing) was to replace the coolant expansion tank....the design of that tank/system was terrible with it depending on a rubber O-ring only to seal..(the O-ring sealed against the side of the tank rather than bottoming out on some sort of stop)... If you filled it up with coolant you had a sickening odor until it lost enough coolant....when the expansion tank read very low (barely any coolant in it) it slowed down the loss and odor. Many on the forum recommended driving around with the coolant just showing in the expansion tank (in other words reading LOW). I hope GM has fixed this TERRIBLE design flaw....I would agree that this should have been picked up during 'Long Term Testing'.
As far as turbo longevity, the first Cruzen had very optimistic OLMs which GM eventually (quietly) recalibrated to a more realistic mileage number....mine could go over 10K on the OLM (I never went over 6.5K using Mobil 1).....when coupled with the OE oil (which many dealers used in their shops) which was an ACDelco semi-synthetic...it was a recipe for future turbo problems, IMO. The whole experience soured me on GM.
One fix that they tried (which did nothing) was to replace the coolant expansion tank....the design of that tank/system was terrible with it depending on a rubber O-ring only to seal..(the O-ring sealed against the side of the tank rather than bottoming out on some sort of stop)... If you filled it up with coolant you had a sickening odor until it lost enough coolant....when the expansion tank read very low (barely any coolant in it) it slowed down the loss and odor. Many on the forum recommended driving around with the coolant just showing in the expansion tank (in other words reading LOW). I hope GM has fixed this TERRIBLE design flaw....I would agree that this should have been picked up during 'Long Term Testing'.
As far as turbo longevity, the first Cruzen had very optimistic OLMs which GM eventually (quietly) recalibrated to a more realistic mileage number....mine could go over 10K on the OLM (I never went over 6.5K using Mobil 1).....when coupled with the OE oil (which many dealers used in their shops) which was an ACDelco semi-synthetic...it was a recipe for future turbo problems, IMO. The whole experience soured me on GM.
Originally Posted By: addyguy
These Cruze's are going to start being like mid-80's Dodge cars with the various turbo's - the 2.2 and 2.5 that were in Omni's, Shelby's..etc..great performance, but no long-term reliability on turbo components.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
I don't care what the turbo is, you can't neglect or abuse it. Run it low on oil, extend the OCI to something ridiculous and it'll cost you.
This. First, GM really messed up on the OLM calibration for the '11 and '12's. It doesn't take an engineer to suppose that 10K on Dexos1 blend in a pretty high-stress, gas engine is pushing it, but the customer will still be as "thrifty" as possible and change the oil as seldom as possible, if regularly at all, and bash it to pieces when it doesn't hold up like a 90's Civic. I'm on Cruzetalk and there are plenty of members, including me, that are marching past 100K with the original turbo, and that's just because the cars aren't old enough for most of them to have 150-200K on them. Though one guy did have 467K on his '12 Eco a few months ago, still racking up the miles at that same rate with the no internal/turbo work.
These Cruze's are going to start being like mid-80's Dodge cars with the various turbo's - the 2.2 and 2.5 that were in Omni's, Shelby's..etc..great performance, but no long-term reliability on turbo components.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
I don't care what the turbo is, you can't neglect or abuse it. Run it low on oil, extend the OCI to something ridiculous and it'll cost you.
This. First, GM really messed up on the OLM calibration for the '11 and '12's. It doesn't take an engineer to suppose that 10K on Dexos1 blend in a pretty high-stress, gas engine is pushing it, but the customer will still be as "thrifty" as possible and change the oil as seldom as possible, if regularly at all, and bash it to pieces when it doesn't hold up like a 90's Civic. I'm on Cruzetalk and there are plenty of members, including me, that are marching past 100K with the original turbo, and that's just because the cars aren't old enough for most of them to have 150-200K on them. Though one guy did have 467K on his '12 Eco a few months ago, still racking up the miles at that same rate with the no internal/turbo work.
Originally Posted By: philipp10
Originally Posted By: StevieC
This is what bugs me about OEMs. They don't long-haul test things before releasing them and use the general public as the guinea pigs and then they wonder why people are slow to adopt new technology.
no.....this is what's wrong with GM...
I agree.
Kinda like the timing chains and water pumps failing on the 3.6L engines. Obviously long term testing was and is being done by the consumer.
Originally Posted By: StevieC
This is what bugs me about OEMs. They don't long-haul test things before releasing them and use the general public as the guinea pigs and then they wonder why people are slow to adopt new technology.
no.....this is what's wrong with GM...
I agree.
Kinda like the timing chains and water pumps failing on the 3.6L engines. Obviously long term testing was and is being done by the consumer.
Originally Posted By: 14Accent
Funny, you mentioned the two least reliable transmissions to ever come out of Japan. Rare miss for them.
Have you not heard about the current Jatco/Nissan CVT's? So bad that they make the DCT on the Ford Focus / Fiesta look good.
That and we still don't really know how much this is going to cost, we need the OP to give us that info instead of throwning numbers around.
Funny, you mentioned the two least reliable transmissions to ever come out of Japan. Rare miss for them.
Have you not heard about the current Jatco/Nissan CVT's? So bad that they make the DCT on the Ford Focus / Fiesta look good.
That and we still don't really know how much this is going to cost, we need the OP to give us that info instead of throwning numbers around.
Originally Posted By: DevilsRule
Originally Posted By: philipp10
Originally Posted By: StevieC
This is what bugs me about OEMs. They don't long-haul test things before releasing them and use the general public as the guinea pigs and then they wonder why people are slow to adopt new technology.
no.....this is what's wrong with GM...
You are an anti GM troll. One post about a turbo replacement and you bash a whole company. I have the same car and it has been a solid reliable car since the day I bought it.
\
yes I am a proud anti-GM troll. Been burned too many times by that company. I realize they are better now but my memory is long.
Originally Posted By: philipp10
Originally Posted By: StevieC
This is what bugs me about OEMs. They don't long-haul test things before releasing them and use the general public as the guinea pigs and then they wonder why people are slow to adopt new technology.
no.....this is what's wrong with GM...
You are an anti GM troll. One post about a turbo replacement and you bash a whole company. I have the same car and it has been a solid reliable car since the day I bought it.
\
yes I am a proud anti-GM troll. Been burned too many times by that company. I realize they are better now but my memory is long.
Originally Posted By: philipp10
yes I am a proud anti-GM troll. Been burned too many times by that company. I realize they are better now but my memory is long.
Sometimes it's best to just move on...there's some guy that has posted 100's of times about his '65 Dart that was lemon. 50 years later and he's still obsessed about it.
yes I am a proud anti-GM troll. Been burned too many times by that company. I realize they are better now but my memory is long.
Sometimes it's best to just move on...there's some guy that has posted 100's of times about his '65 Dart that was lemon. 50 years later and he's still obsessed about it.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
I had trouble with that same Dart … you could not give me a 2018 Hellcat …
190,000 on my 335's original turbos... may they never die.
There is a turbo assembly for the Cruze that doesn't take much labor to install. It includes stuff like the manifold, relief valve, etc. as one unit. Cost from www.gmpartsdirect.com is about $600.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: philipp10
yes I am a proud anti-GM troll. Been burned too many times by that company. I realize they are better now but my memory is long.
Sometimes it's best to just move on...there's some guy that has posted 100's of times about his '65 Dart that was lemon. 50 years later and he's still obsessed about it.
I had a 1987 Ford Ranger I bought new that was a total P.O.S. and I swore I would never buy another Ford ever. That truck left me in a bad financial situation as I was in my mid 20s just starting out with a new career in a new town. Now 29 years later I've bought 2 Mustangs and love them. No issues at all and I find them easy enough to work on.
Originally Posted By: philipp10
yes I am a proud anti-GM troll. Been burned too many times by that company. I realize they are better now but my memory is long.
Sometimes it's best to just move on...there's some guy that has posted 100's of times about his '65 Dart that was lemon. 50 years later and he's still obsessed about it.
I had a 1987 Ford Ranger I bought new that was a total P.O.S. and I swore I would never buy another Ford ever. That truck left me in a bad financial situation as I was in my mid 20s just starting out with a new career in a new town. Now 29 years later I've bought 2 Mustangs and love them. No issues at all and I find them easy enough to work on.
If I owned a turbocharged car and if I had to service that part, I'd make sure the inlet/outlet ducting and piping along with the flex hoses/couplings/clamps are in tip-top shape.
I'd also replace all related parts with the latest designs per GM TSBs, if customer approves of course.
I'd also replace all related parts with the latest designs per GM TSBs, if customer approves of course.
The car was dropped off tonight. Just got the turbo out.
Two things:
1) GM’s factory service manual is missing a lot of steps. A lot.
2) As someone who primarily works on Toyota and Honda, I am not particularly impressed with how this car is put together.
Two things:
1) GM’s factory service manual is missing a lot of steps. A lot.
2) As someone who primarily works on Toyota and Honda, I am not particularly impressed with how this car is put together.
- Status
Similar threads
