The General's New Car-- Chevy Cruze
- Thread starter The Critic
- Start date
- Status
What's the point of having two different engines with nearly the same output?? Should keep the 1.8 and then have a 1.8 turbo.
Originally Posted By: donz26
What's the point of having two different engines with nearly the same output?? Should keep the 1.8 and then have a 1.8 turbo.
Because cars don't drive down the road on numbers.
Having driven both versions of the car, the 1.8L drives a lot like the old Astra. It feels like it is always out of breath. The 1.4L is just the opposite. Maximum thrust is a downshift away.
Why? Power under the curve. With the 1.8L, max torque is a peak and your always either trying to get to it... Or revving past it. The 1.4L being a turbo, has a nice flat torque plateau, with max torque available from 2000 to over 4000 RPM. Even if the max power and torque is the same when comparing the two engines, the 1.4's flat torque curve and ample power under the curve make for a much more lively and enjoyable car. Plus, it gets better fuel economy.
What's the point of having two different engines with nearly the same output?? Should keep the 1.8 and then have a 1.8 turbo.
Because cars don't drive down the road on numbers.
Having driven both versions of the car, the 1.8L drives a lot like the old Astra. It feels like it is always out of breath. The 1.4L is just the opposite. Maximum thrust is a downshift away.
Why? Power under the curve. With the 1.8L, max torque is a peak and your always either trying to get to it... Or revving past it. The 1.4L being a turbo, has a nice flat torque plateau, with max torque available from 2000 to over 4000 RPM. Even if the max power and torque is the same when comparing the two engines, the 1.4's flat torque curve and ample power under the curve make for a much more lively and enjoyable car. Plus, it gets better fuel economy.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
I did not know Cruze is being built in the US.
If you don't know, then quit speaking like you are the authority.
That does not give you my permission to type the sentence above.This is not grade school, get some manners.
Production in the US started last month, till then it was a Daewoo/Opel.Still is elsewhere.
It does not come close to Corolla/Civic sales globally, it is never going to capture market from these two in the US.It will die the death of Cavalier and Cobalt in 5 years max.
Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
I did not know Cruze is being built in the US.
If you don't know, then quit speaking like you are the authority.
That does not give you my permission to type the sentence above.This is not grade school, get some manners.
Production in the US started last month, till then it was a Daewoo/Opel.Still is elsewhere.
It does not come close to Corolla/Civic sales globally, it is never going to capture market from these two in the US.It will die the death of Cavalier and Cobalt in 5 years max.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
I did not know Cruze is being built in the US.
If you don't know, then quit speaking like you are the authority.
That does not give you my permission to type the sentence above.This is not grade school, get some manners.
Production in the US started last month, till then it was a Daewoo/Opel.Still is elsewhere.
It does not come close to Corolla/Civic sales globally, it is never going to capture market from these two in the US.It will die the death of Cavalier and Cobalt in 5 years max.
the cobalt is actually a very well selling car. It's not a great car, but it sells VERY well. Also, I'm pretty sure people said the same thing about the Focus.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
I did not know Cruze is being built in the US.
If you don't know, then quit speaking like you are the authority.
That does not give you my permission to type the sentence above.This is not grade school, get some manners.
Production in the US started last month, till then it was a Daewoo/Opel.Still is elsewhere.
It does not come close to Corolla/Civic sales globally, it is never going to capture market from these two in the US.It will die the death of Cavalier and Cobalt in 5 years max.
the cobalt is actually a very well selling car. It's not a great car, but it sells VERY well. Also, I'm pretty sure people said the same thing about the Focus.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2025
Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
I did not know Cruze is being built in the US.
If you don't know, then quit speaking like you are the authority.
That does not give you my permission to type the sentence above.This is not grade school, get some manners.
Production in the US started last month, till then it was a Daewoo/Opel.Still is elsewhere.
It does not come close to Corolla/Civic sales globally, it is never going to capture market from these two in the US.It will die the death of Cavalier and Cobalt in 5 years max.
You know this becuase you have actually driven one? Dang thing has not even hit the streets yet for the US market.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
I did not know Cruze is being built in the US.
If you don't know, then quit speaking like you are the authority.
That does not give you my permission to type the sentence above.This is not grade school, get some manners.
Production in the US started last month, till then it was a Daewoo/Opel.Still is elsewhere.
It does not come close to Corolla/Civic sales globally, it is never going to capture market from these two in the US.It will die the death of Cavalier and Cobalt in 5 years max.
You know this becuase you have actually driven one? Dang thing has not even hit the streets yet for the US market.
Originally Posted By: Nick R
the cobalt is actually a very well selling car. It's not a great car, but it sells VERY well. Also, I'm pretty sure people said the same thing about the Focus.
I don't think there is anything "great" in this segment. I had an 05 Cobalt that I thought was fine. Other than the rear seat being a little tight on leg room, there was nothing wrong with it for an economy car. The seats were comfy, the dash was laid out logically. It had plenty of power and a bulletproof drivetrain. The arm rest and console were cheap, and there were a couple of hard plastic areas on the dash, but for the money it was a nice car. Had a nice stereo, trip computer and some other nice touchs that other economy cars in 2005 didn't have.
the cobalt is actually a very well selling car. It's not a great car, but it sells VERY well. Also, I'm pretty sure people said the same thing about the Focus.
I don't think there is anything "great" in this segment. I had an 05 Cobalt that I thought was fine. Other than the rear seat being a little tight on leg room, there was nothing wrong with it for an economy car. The seats were comfy, the dash was laid out logically. It had plenty of power and a bulletproof drivetrain. The arm rest and console were cheap, and there were a couple of hard plastic areas on the dash, but for the money it was a nice car. Had a nice stereo, trip computer and some other nice touchs that other economy cars in 2005 didn't have.
Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
Nick D, that is why the new Fords are preferable.During the last decade Ford dumbed down its offerings for the US customers, apparently this is changing with the new Focus and Fiesta.
I did not know Cruze is being built in the US.
You say Cavalier and Cobalt sold a lot.I see them a lot on the roads too.My brother in law has a 2006 Cobalt SS.He got the transmission,axles etc. replaced recently.
If Cavalier and Cobalt were loved, why do you think GM felt the need to cease their production?
Hah, I didn't say the Cavalier and cobalt were good, but they get the job done. So if something sells good, you don't upgrade it, or replace it? So with that in mind all automakers shouldn't have progressed past the mid 50s, those cars worked fine, and I'm sure their owners loved them. Progress must progress for it's own sake, or we'd still be driving Model Ts. The Cavalier was mostly unchanged from the 96 model year (redesign) to when it ended production in 2005. Time to move on. Why did Honda remake the Civic instead of still making this today?
Sad thing is, Honda SHOULD have continued making the original Civic, or something close to it.
They even 'admit' this - they made the Fit, which is what many say the Civc should be!
Civic has gotten WAY to big, and is NOT the car it is supposed to be - but the FIT is.
Originally Posted By: Geo_Prizm
Nick D, that is why the new Fords are preferable.During the last decade Ford dumbed down its offerings for the US customers, apparently this is changing with the new Focus and Fiesta.
I did not know Cruze is being built in the US.
You say Cavalier and Cobalt sold a lot.I see them a lot on the roads too.My brother in law has a 2006 Cobalt SS.He got the transmission,axles etc. replaced recently.
If Cavalier and Cobalt were loved, why do you think GM felt the need to cease their production?
Hah, I didn't say the Cavalier and cobalt were good, but they get the job done. So if something sells good, you don't upgrade it, or replace it? So with that in mind all automakers shouldn't have progressed past the mid 50s, those cars worked fine, and I'm sure their owners loved them. Progress must progress for it's own sake, or we'd still be driving Model Ts. The Cavalier was mostly unchanged from the 96 model year (redesign) to when it ended production in 2005. Time to move on. Why did Honda remake the Civic instead of still making this today?
Sad thing is, Honda SHOULD have continued making the original Civic, or something close to it.
They even 'admit' this - they made the Fit, which is what many say the Civc should be!
Civic has gotten WAY to big, and is NOT the car it is supposed to be - but the FIT is.
Originally Posted By: addyguy
Sad thing is, Honda SHOULD have continued making the original Civic, or something close to it.
They even 'admit' this - they made the Fit, which is what many say the Civc should be!
Civic has gotten WAY to big, and is NOT the car it is supposed to be - but the FIT is.
Actually I finally like the Honda Civic...My neighbor bought a 2010 Civic 2 door coupe..It looks awesome compared to the older ones....Even the 4 door Civic looks alot better now...I rode in his 2 door coupe a few weeks ago and the ride was better then any Cavalier or Cobalt that I have been in...I would not buy a Civic but it's alot better now then it used to be...That's just IMHO.
Sad thing is, Honda SHOULD have continued making the original Civic, or something close to it.
They even 'admit' this - they made the Fit, which is what many say the Civc should be!
Civic has gotten WAY to big, and is NOT the car it is supposed to be - but the FIT is.
Actually I finally like the Honda Civic...My neighbor bought a 2010 Civic 2 door coupe..It looks awesome compared to the older ones....Even the 4 door Civic looks alot better now...I rode in his 2 door coupe a few weeks ago and the ride was better then any Cavalier or Cobalt that I have been in...I would not buy a Civic but it's alot better now then it used to be...That's just IMHO.
My neighbor has a 2006 Cobalt. I rode in it recently and was less than impressed with the road noise but the ride was OK and he says it's been very reliable (about 60,000 miles on it). GM can do better...let's hope the Cruze is a worthy replacement.
I think this car has a lot of potential to win over customers.
I do not think that it will be a runaway hit. Here's why:
The word is that ride quality and handling are sufficient and the interior is far better than anything else in the compact segment and much of the midsize segment. That's great--it has the potential to attract people who drive midsizers not because of size but because they hate chintzy cars (like basically all compacts available in North America). Some pundits have been predicting that new offerings will cause compacts to overtake midsizers as the largest piece of the US market share pie.
But one dealbreaker remains with the Cruze. It is slow, even with the tiny turbo. Some midsize 4 cyl cars can pull 0-60 times in the 8 s neighborhood, while the Cruze barely sneaks into the 9s with the turbo. People like fast cars, and they're not going to be inclined to trade down to something significantly slower.
For this car to reach its sales potential, it needs to be offered with a respectable engine. I nominate the LNF.
And one more pitch: I might consider the Cruze if they offer a station wagon. With the LNF.
I do not think that it will be a runaway hit. Here's why:
The word is that ride quality and handling are sufficient and the interior is far better than anything else in the compact segment and much of the midsize segment. That's great--it has the potential to attract people who drive midsizers not because of size but because they hate chintzy cars (like basically all compacts available in North America). Some pundits have been predicting that new offerings will cause compacts to overtake midsizers as the largest piece of the US market share pie.
But one dealbreaker remains with the Cruze. It is slow, even with the tiny turbo. Some midsize 4 cyl cars can pull 0-60 times in the 8 s neighborhood, while the Cruze barely sneaks into the 9s with the turbo. People like fast cars, and they're not going to be inclined to trade down to something significantly slower.
For this car to reach its sales potential, it needs to be offered with a respectable engine. I nominate the LNF.
And one more pitch: I might consider the Cruze if they offer a station wagon. With the LNF.
I think GM should offer the 2.4L Ecotec as an upgrade option. With something like 175HP it would give it a bit of kick for those who want it. The 1.8L should be the base engine, with the 1.4T available as an "upgrade" as the "XFE" model.
Originally Posted By: SLCraig
Why did they have to off the Saturn S-Series? The best small car GM has ever made for sure.
WHAT????
Why did they have to off the Saturn S-Series? The best small car GM has ever made for sure.
WHAT????
Originally Posted By: Stu_Rock
I think this car has a lot of potential to win over customers.
I do not think that it will be a runaway hit. Here's why:
The word is that ride quality and handling are sufficient and the interior is far better than anything else in the compact segment and much of the midsize segment. That's great--it has the potential to attract people who drive midsizers not because of size but because they hate chintzy cars (like basically all compacts available in North America). Some pundits have been predicting that new offerings will cause compacts to overtake midsizers as the largest piece of the US market share pie.
But one dealbreaker remains with the Cruze. It is slow, even with the tiny turbo. Some midsize 4 cyl cars can pull 0-60 times in the 8 s neighborhood, while the Cruze barely sneaks into the 9s with the turbo. People like fast cars, and they're not going to be inclined to trade down to something significantly slower.
For this car to reach its sales potential, it needs to be offered with a respectable engine. I nominate the LNF.
And one more pitch: I might consider the Cruze if they offer a station wagon. With the LNF.
In the small car market a 9 second 0-60 is competitive. The Fit/Yaris/Accent/Versa/Fiesta aren't any quicker and I imagine the torque curve makes it more responsive in regular driving. With nearly 150ft/lbs at 1850 rpm it must be a tire shredder with the TC off just punching it from idle. They do need a wagon though, it would make a good commuter/utility car for me.
Also the 1.8L is the base engine, the 1.4L is optional.
I think this car has a lot of potential to win over customers.
I do not think that it will be a runaway hit. Here's why:
The word is that ride quality and handling are sufficient and the interior is far better than anything else in the compact segment and much of the midsize segment. That's great--it has the potential to attract people who drive midsizers not because of size but because they hate chintzy cars (like basically all compacts available in North America). Some pundits have been predicting that new offerings will cause compacts to overtake midsizers as the largest piece of the US market share pie.
But one dealbreaker remains with the Cruze. It is slow, even with the tiny turbo. Some midsize 4 cyl cars can pull 0-60 times in the 8 s neighborhood, while the Cruze barely sneaks into the 9s with the turbo. People like fast cars, and they're not going to be inclined to trade down to something significantly slower.
For this car to reach its sales potential, it needs to be offered with a respectable engine. I nominate the LNF.
And one more pitch: I might consider the Cruze if they offer a station wagon. With the LNF.
In the small car market a 9 second 0-60 is competitive. The Fit/Yaris/Accent/Versa/Fiesta aren't any quicker and I imagine the torque curve makes it more responsive in regular driving. With nearly 150ft/lbs at 1850 rpm it must be a tire shredder with the TC off just punching it from idle. They do need a wagon though, it would make a good commuter/utility car for me.
Also the 1.8L is the base engine, the 1.4L is optional.
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
In the small car market a 9 second 0-60 is competitive.
I completely agree, but without something better under the hood, the Cruze is not going to bring new customers to the segment. It will need that pull to be a runaway hit.
In the small car market a 9 second 0-60 is competitive.
I completely agree, but without something better under the hood, the Cruze is not going to bring new customers to the segment. It will need that pull to be a runaway hit.
- Status
