Topic: 2011 Chevrolet Cruze: More Compact Car for the Money

[rrocket]

And has a better power to weight ratio, and is slower.

Yea, I know. .5 seconds difference.

I guess it depends if you'd trade .5 seconds for better MPG....

[PJungnitsch]

Elantra CR city, EPA city 20/29 = 31% difference
Cruze CR city, EPA city 17/24 = 29% difference

Pretty much identical difference.

[Erik]

Hadn't read the CR report. Was referring to Car and Driver.

[Jaeger]

So if the Hyundai gets 32 MPG, but deviates 30% from the EPA numbers and the Cruze gets 29 MPG but only deviates 15% from the EPA numbers, the Cruze is better??   

Yes - absolutley.  Glad to see you're finally getting a handle on slappie logic. 

Jaeger

[Jaeger]

It's better than my RX-8 I'm sure.  Not everyone chooses their vehicles the same way many US ethnic ladies groups do.   

Well considering how GM had been touting the excellent mileage of the Cruze, I don't think he's out of line for pointing out it's not that great...

Thank you.  And unlike Erik, who hops from thread to thread doing a gleeful dance over the Elantra's nearly as unimpressive results, I at least point out that all the tested compacts in that comparison did poorly in observed fuel economy - not just the Cruze, not just the Elantra - all of them.  It would be absurd to single out one vehicle from the group for criticism of observed mileage - but of course, absurdity isn't much of a barrier to internet posts.  Then again, if you were to single out a single vehicle, wouldn't it make sense to target the one that had the WORST observed mileage of the group, rather than a mid-pack player?  Sure it would.

Jaeger

[Dante]

Well considering how GM had been touting the excellent mileage of the Cruze, I don't think he's out of line for pointing out it's not that great...

He's out of the line because Hyundai (and virtually any other manufacturer) did the same with similar results. Why single out one car?

I think the winner here, out of the three, is the Sonata. A mid-size with compact fuel economy. Not bad!

[Sir Osis of Liver]

The Cruze is almost a second quicker to 60 and only got 2mpg less than the Elantra in the C&D test.

Of course the Focus was quicker than both and got better mileage.

[safristi]

  Focus man FOCUS..............Cruze & Elantra....walk this way...each to his own "species"........

[Jaeger]

He's out of the line because Hyundai (and virtually any other manufacturer) did the same with similar results. Why single out one car?

I think the winner here, out of the three, is the Sonata. A mid-size with compact fuel economy. Not bad!

I'm not sure which "he" you're referring to, as I thoughht rrocket was referring to me in his post - but here's what I said about the C/D test:

Yes, none of the other cars in that test did well in observed economy - they all posted pretty poor numbers (though it must be said, none did WORSE than the Cruze) - but it has become fashionable to single out ONE participant to the exclusion of the others and deride its poor performance.  Thought I'd give that strategy a try on for size here.

My singling out the Cruze was nothing more than a tongue-in-cheek response to Erik having singled out the Elantra in multiple threads.  My overriding point is that it is ridiculous to single out any one car from this test and laugh at its observed economy.

As to the second part of your post, I quite agree. 

Jaeger

[Dante]

He's out of the line because Hyundai (and virtually any other manufacturer) did the same with similar results. Why single out one car?

I think the winner here, out of the three, is the Sonata. A mid-size with compact fuel economy. Not bad!

I'm not sure which "he" you're referring to, as I thoughht rrocket was referring to me in his post - but here's what I said about the C/D test:

Sorry for the confusion, I got mixed up between the reviews, excerpts and comments, but you got my point from the second part of my post.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

on a technical level these CD figures don't seem to add up.   a 1.8L 4 cylinder direct injection six speed getting the same mileage as a 2.5L 5 cylinder six speed?  there is something amiss there.  cars never seem to achieve the mileage stated by the manufacturer but relative to each other, they tend to be consistent as shown by the EPA numbers.   i suppose being brand new, some of the engines might be quite a bit tighter and thus under performing (ie mileage acceleration).

It's a 1.4L direct injected turbo.

The gearing is very low. Easier to keep the revs up at the expense of some fuel economy.

[Leviathan]

It's a 1.4L direct injected turbo.

It isn't direct injected in the Cruze.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

It's a 1.4L direct injected turbo.

It isn't direct injected in the Cruze.

The person responsible for the correction has been sacked.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I was wondering how long it would take for people to start tinkering. They ended up with 152hp and 193ft/lb at the wheels. Assuming a typical 15% loss, that's around 174hp and 221 ft/lb at the crank. Not bad for 1.4L.

[ajay]

I wonder if they replaced the bolts etc .

[Leviathan]

It's a 1.4L direct injected turbo.

It isn't direct injected in the Cruze.

The person responsible for the correction has been sacked.

No he hasn't 

[rrocket]

I love turbos...easily modded for more power..and still retains excellent MPG.  Win/Win.

[Ice]

It's a 1.4L direct injected turbo.

It isn't direct injected in the Cruze.

The person responsible for the correction has been sacked.

No he hasn't 

I'd like to buy an argument. No you wouldn't. Yes I would!

[CatsEye68]

I'd like to buy an argument. No you wouldn't. Yes I would!

Which one is Jaeger?

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I'd like to buy an argument. No you wouldn't. Yes I would!

Which one is Jaeger?

That's me on the right!