Five Things We Dislike About The 2014 Chevrolet Cruze Diesel
33
As some of you already know, we provide a list of things we enjoy in vehicles we examine up close, or spend some seat-time with. And just as well, we list a few things we don’t. The 2014 Chevrolet Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel that was revealed during this week’s Chicago Auto Show is no exception. So, without further adieu, here are the five things we believe will be a challenge for the Cruze TD when it launches in a few months from now.
1. No Manual Transmission
Diesel passenger cars make up a smidgen of the overall vehicle market in the United States. So a manual diesel vehicle is especially niche. Though there is no denying the enthusiast’s preference of rowing through the gears by hand and foot, and that more often than not, it’s the stick shift that provides superior fuel economy.
2. No Basic Model To Make Things More Affordable
At a starting price of over $25,000, the Cruze TD might give potential buyers a case of the sticker shocks. Especially when looking at the Volkswagen Jetta TDI, which has a base price that’s $1,500 lower. However, the Cruze TD is generously loaded, but those who would rather simply have a frugal model with cloth seats will have to browse other Cruze models.
3. The MCE Still Eludes Us
From what’s been rumored, the all-new Chevrolet Cruze is roughly two years out, which means GM is most likely gonna be riding the current generation model out for as long as it can. In fact, it’s rather surprising we haven’t seen a mid-cycle-enhancement at all.
4. Overly Cautious Buyers May Shy Away From The DEF System
While the Volkswagen Jetta TDI was launched in North America before U.S. government regulations really started cracking down on diesel emissions, the Cruze TD is forced to comply, and thus requires an extra system to operate. GM engineers tell us that the system is good for 10,000 miles at the very least before the DEF tank needs a refill, but it could be argued that the market will need some time to warm up to this mandatory technology.
5. It Doesn’t Surpass The Cruze Eco In Estimated Fuel Economy
Yes, thanks to a larger tank than the Cruze Eco, the Cruze TD is expected to have the longest range of all variants offered in North America. Yet at an estimated 42 miles per gallon on the highway, the highway fuel economy of the Cruze TD with an automatic transmission is equal to that of the Cruze Eco with a manual transmission, while being pricier. This puts the Cruze TD in a funky spot, with buyers only being those who are willing to pay extra for a power upgrade that the diesel engine provides while retaining the same mileage as the cheaper, though less powerful, Cruze Eco. If the Cruze TD could even touch 45 miles per gallon on the highway officially, customers might find the deal to be much sweeter.
Maybe charge more to loose less if it flops are doesn’t meet sales predictions.
If it does decent, I bet we will see the Cruze Eco-D, which is where we will see cloth seats and manny tranny, along with the typical Ego trim aero pieces and addons
This kind of makes me angry. In seemingly now typical G.M. fashion, they get the idea or concept right . Then they go botch the details up, and I’d like to use another word instead of botch but it would get censored. Sad.
I’m in total agreement with pretty much all of the above, GM sort of messed up what could have been a brilliant idea and a succesful car. Hopefully GM will rectify the situation…
They seem to be doing a lot of that recently. [sigh]
I saw this at the Chicago Auto show today and was underwhelmed. 42 mpg is too low, and I thought Chevy would launch this with a refresh across the model line, making the changes too tough to notice. It should be “The NEW Cruze, lead by the NEW Diesel” not “The OLD Cruze, with an indistinguishable and over-priced model…”
Or offer Biodiesel found in Astra?
The price will be what drives value driven folks away from this car. When you do the math it’s easy to see one would never recover the extra acquisition cost over a regular Cruze.
I want one! I drive from NY to Chicago 4 times a year and 200 miles a week to Connecticut. I have a 2011 ECO with a six speed manual.I consisting get over 40 MPH on the highway and about 35 in the city. I’ve averaged 54 MPG once driving from Manassas Virginia to Long Island at 58 MPH with control. I have nitrogen in the tires!
Disappointed thus far, I will not get one with diesel fuel being 40- 60 cents a gallon more than gas with the same MPG . They need to offer a manual trans, ECO equivalent model and get mid 50-60 MPG to be worth it. Putting a larger gas tank in to make the claim that it goes 700 miles on a tank is slightly misleading. PS I’ve never bought a foreign car. I also own a 2013 Malibu LT2 with the new 2.5, I’ll save my comments for that blog.
Same problem all new cars have…they cost to bloomin’ much to justify. Especially for high mile drivers. There’s a lot of good used stuff out there that has already been broken in. Leases are OK, if you just want something to look nice in your driveway.
I like diesels. But why does it cost a dollar more in the US? When I go overseas diesel fuel is cheaper and diesel cars are everywhere. The cruze’s 1.4 gas turbo would be cheaper to buy and operate. You pay more diesel fuel, more to buy the engine, and maintenance costs are higher, and you better keep up on the maintenance or pay even more down the road. It would be all worth it if the fuel was not so high priced.
If other articles are correct at torque news, the mpg is expected to be 32 city, 56 highway and 44 combined. Past reports on this site keep referring to 44 but never say if its highway or combined until this article. Time will tell. And it will support 20% biodiesel blend supposedly. Waiting to get my hands on one to check out. Otherwis all the other points are valid especially the options. But selling my manual now, having a manual truck, I like the automatic.
I like the Chevy Cruz, but I think that adding a Turbo Diesel to the lineup is like “this is the answer to the question nobody asked.” I expect that it might make up about 5% of the Cruz sales, it just is NOT needed.
GM’s marketing department is once again falling on their sword. That entire department needs to be purged. They are killing really good products…Haven’t they learnt that you simply cannot unveil a car with the top-of-the-line model? You wait until all of the lower models can be unveiled…the volume sellers have to go through the door first. Then when excitement is gathered, you unveil the top-end model a few months later. These fools need to go back to school…
Totally agree with the previous few comments. This was a chance for GM to make its mark and they appear to blowing it. Too pricey, poor fuel economy(for a diesel), added costs(exhaust fluid), Yadda yadda. Its as though they aren’t sure what the plan for this car should be. What is the direct competition, target demogrphic etc. typical Detroit I hate to say. The real issue will be the Mazda 6 diesel due out this summer. It has the price, size, looks and economy to destroy the Cruze. Running costs should be lower and there is always the perception (rightly or wrongly) the Japanese quality will be superior. So the diesel Cruze will probably flop as they present it currently. Which is a real shame as anything that bring more publicity to diesel power is badly needed in America.
Richard, you got it right in my point of view. Time and time again this type of thing is happening. I keep hoping for so much better out of G.M. but it isn’t happening. I’m not a fan of very much else out there as far as other manufacturers go, and it is disappointing.
They keep messing up these decisions. Who keeps dropping the ball, engineering, marketing, upper management, or the bean counters? Or maybe all the above. They will turn around and drop the car and say diesels don’t sell in America.
Must be the lack of maintenance, which makes GM not push Diesels. Gas engines need at least spark plugs by 100,000 miles. Diesels need nothing but oil changes until death.
You guys just want to forget GM and its promises. Get a real car and buy a VW Golf diesel DSG Auto. It will blow you away, and the opposition.
Ken — while the VW EA189 (2.0 TDI) and its successor, the EA888, are fine engines — as are the transmissions they’re mated to, the powertrain combos are not perfect.
Driving my fiance’s 2012 Jetta TDI with the DSG, I notice a very annoying trait that occurs under braking: the transmission downshifts aggressively as the vehicle is being slowed by the brakes, which results in the “pushing” of the vehicle forward by the down-shifting, making it more difficult to stop.
That’s a major engineering flaw, one that should have been noticed and corrected before ever allowing the vehicles to hit the market.
So while the Cruze TD doesn’t have an efficient and direct-acting DSG, at least it won’t exhibit the rather unsafe bugs found in the DSG, like the one I mentioned.
It’s interesting that you mentioned these niggles with the DSG. I have a coworker with a 1.4 TSi (twin charged) Jetta that has DSG and it shudders noticeably as it moves away from rest. The dealer is giving him the old “they all do that” crap, but I’m not buying it. VWs, like everything built on the wrong side of the Atlantic, are garbage and are just failures waiting to happen.
Will be interesting to see if that’s something VW addresses with the next-gen Golf that will be made in Mexico…
GM has underestimated the importance of this car and the growing acceptance of diesel over the next few years.
So the 2012 Jetta TDI retails @ $22,775 & achieves 30 City (mpg) & 42 Highway (mpg) (MSN autos). Thre Cruze gets 42 hwy. Anyone complaining about the Jetta mpg?
I agree though, they should introduced this model when the Cruze is all new or refreshed. Hopefully this is the top of the line model with decontented models to follow at a lower price point.
From what i just read, most of the people who made comments are anti Diesel or Anti GM. I feel this is just a start for other vehicles to get Diesel option with in GM and i think that is a great idea. Now don’t be critics, instead give suggestions.