Latest Consumer Reports Testing Scrutinizes GM Small Turbo Engines
21
According to Consumer Reports, testing has determined that GM engines don’t quite meet the fuel economy numbers that go with what’s on the Monroney sticker. Although it’s hard to take seriously anything CR publishes about GM at this point, here’s what they determined:
“The Chevrolet Cruze outfitted with the 1.4-liter turbo motor is slightly faster than one with the standard 1.8-liter four-cylinder, yet the mileage is no better,” stated the findings. “Using the EPA methods of testing, the turbo Cruze was rated 1 m.p.g. better in combined city and highway driving than the standard model.”
General Motors isn’t the only automotive group under scrutiny with mileage reports. Kia and Hyundai have been seen as untrustworthy, due to their exaggerations in the past few months. And this very report involved Ford, as well. We’ve also driven our share of Cruze turbos, and achieved better combined gas mileage than what the sticker suggests.
GM spokesman Tom Read states “The turbocharged Cruze has “better acceleration across the rpm range making for a more fun-to-drive car. However, if you have a heavy foot on a turbocharged engine, you’re not necessarily going to see a lot of fuel economy benefits. Mileage is really dependent on how you drive.”
Perhaps Consumer Reports should lay off of the right pedal, and learn to use the “Cruze” control.
Google+
Consumer reports is for the brain dead. And as stated above and as anyone who has any experience with turbo cars knows…under boost, all things equal, a Turbo car will burn more fuel than a comparable N/A of the same displacement.
It’s not magic. It makes more power by burning the same amount of air and fuel as a bigger engine…*shrug*
I have had my cruze for 2 years now. It has 40,000 miles and my LIFETIME fuel economy is 35 mpg combined. That is 5 mpg over the EPA ratings. I want to know who the hell and where the hell these people are driving these cars around and getting these numbers. I can assure you that they are all idiots.
On the other hand, I did drive my buddies Hyundai elantra because he insists it is better than my cruze. over 200 miles I got 28 mpg and it feels sluggish compared to the cruze.
Agreed Nick. I live in Canada where our Transport Canada ratings are not as realistic as the EPA ratings, yet I can still beat the highway rating with the 1.4 turbo. If Consumer Reports has been in business this long and still can’t figure out that a heavy right foot results in higher fuel consumption, then I give up.
I also read up on that Consumer Report article stating the Cruze would be the most unreliable car in their comparison test.
I have an uncle who owns a courier business, and he bought a 2012 cruze last year. It has just passed 110,000 miles. Its obviously out of warranty, and he has only had to fix 2 things on it. The a/c clutch went out, and he had to do the alternator. He’s more than excited to buy his next Cruze soon.
A 2012 Cruze with 110,000 miles??
Who even reads consumer reports these days ol
I’ve always looked at Consumer Reports in the following manner: If I want to buy a blender or dishwasher, I’ll consider their opinions. When it comes to cars, I’ll steer in the opposite direction.
The only products CR will provide good reviews for are from manufacturers who provide the funding for the magazine to even exist. In other words, CR is paid well for favorable product test results. ‘Nuf said……
Is it not the case that the wife of one of the editors – using her maiden name as seems the feminist fashion – holds a senior position in the ranks of Toyota USA?
Of course mileage depends on how you drive! That’s nothing new. CR is bird cage material.
More power and 1 mpg in both city and hwy doesn’t sound like “no better” to me. And obviously more throttle means more fuel consumption, always has, always will.
David, are you serious… WOW… I am going to burn my collection of CR right now…
As a long time Consumer Reports subscriber AND the owner of a 2012 Chevy Cruze Eco, I’m not at all surprised by their review. They are better than they used to be, but many of the automotive reviews seem to lack objectivity.
I honestly wonder if their tester or testers pushed the Cruze harder than necessary in local driving to reduce the mileage figures deliberately. They are substantially worse than anything I have every gotten in even the worst stop and go driving. My typical average has been 28-30 in city/suburban driving with numerous lights, and 39+ in highway driving in the 65 mph range. That’s with filling and calculating, not based on the optimistic computer reading.
My daughter has a very nice 2013 Subaru Impreza, but the Cruze is faster, quieter, gets better mileage and handles more solidly. Any comparisons to the dated Corolla are laughable. Sure, the Cruze could be made better with DI and shedding a few more pounds, which are likely for the next gen cars. But the 2012 Cruze Eco is truly an excellent vehicle that is far more fuel efficient than CU would have readers believe.
I honestly don’t know if the reviews for other products are more objectively undertaken than those for automobiles. As a result, I would never depend solely upon CU for ANY purchase. And yet, I still get the magazine! Ah, well.
Guys, this is a magazine that also rates on bras and washing machines. What do they know about cars?
I prefer reading the Motor Trend reviews.
Maybe they’ll start reviewing on sex toys, too. LOL!!!!
oh jeesus lets not even go there
I ordered my 2011 in Dec. 2010, so its one of the first ones made in the states. I expected to have some teething problems due to the new startup of the plant. The car arrived in Jan.2011 ( LT Turbo) and since then we”ve put on 31,000 trouble free KMS.(17,000 miles). Our mileage has been consistantly higher than EPA ratings by 10 to 12%. We love it and would buy another.
Considering how strictly the testing conditions are controlled, its a wonder that you can get close to them at all, regardless of whether you’re on the plus or minus side of the ledger.
@John Madden- That’s what I would have thought as well, but I with humans involved, making moderate changes to testing parameters could be accomplished quite easily. This may be deliberate or accidental, but I truly doubt they are sufficiently consistent in how they run these cars through the paces. The mileage they get for “city” driving on the Cruze is indicative of overly aggressive acceleration from a stop, in my opinion.
28,000 trouble free miles on my 2011 LT auto and beating EPA combined rating by 10% using pump calculations. The only time I’ve ever gotten down to the EPA city rating is when it’s well below freezing and doing a lot of short driving and lots of warming up and idling.