GM is testing the waters — conservatively — in the diesel passenger car market with the 2014 Chevrolet Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel. In doing so, the company is re-entering a market space it hasn’t occupied in nearly 30 years, and faces only only the Volkswagen Jetta TDI here as a competitor here in America. Pending the success of the Cruze Diesel, we may see more Chevrolet models sporting a diesel powertrain.
Last weekend, Motor Trend voiced the question as to whether or not America may see such an offering with the restyled 2014 Chevrolet Malibu. The short answer is that it’s possible, but the market has to show demand for a diesel vehicle — namely, the Cruze Diesel first — before such an engine is offered.
Would you welcome a Malibu diesel?
Comments
I actually want to see an ATS diesel
California doesn’t want one with diesel at $4.30 a gallon while gasoline is $3.79.
The new smaller diesels can get way better fuel mileage than gasoline engines. Clean diesel is where the market will go.
The price of diesel is more (even though there is a shorter process to get it) But clean diesel cars get that much more mpg’s so even though you’re spending more at the pump, you’re getting more out of your car!
Well that would add another 6% to sales.
GM needs to figure out how to get people to love the Cruze Diesel first and then they can move on from there.
The American public is not in love with Diesels as a whole let along a GM diesel and GM needs to figure out how to fix that before they plop them in ever car.
I think once the Cruze is on the market that will change things in time with the MPG it will show.
I am for diesels but I know there is much work to be done yet in the public perception.
The difference in fuel prices is a moving target – who knows what that will be a few years down the road. Historically, diesel was always cheaper, it’s just been in the last few years that it’s been higher. However, right now in WI, Diesel is $3.95 and Unleaded Reg is $3.97 (just went up 30 cents for whatever reason).
A diesel Malibu is an interesting proposition. It would be good competition for the Passat TDI and upcoming Mazda 6 Skyactive Diesel. Yes, diesel is more than petrol, but when the mileage is up to 50% more than petrol, there will be cost savings over the life of the vehicle.
I think the biggest problem that the diesel engine faces in the US is the ignorant and inflammatory statements that the technology tends to attract. The first thing from detractors who otherwise clearly see that diesels can be quiet and refined, is that diesel costs more than gasoline. This, as we have seen, is not always the case. Diesel is often times more expensive than 87 octane fuel, but is generally competitive with or cheaper than 93 octane. When we hear silly remarks that diesel is $1 more than gasoline, the type of gasoline is almost never mentioned. That and the fact that nowhere that I checked could I see a $1 difference between 87 and diesel anywhere in the US, says to me that there is a lack of actual research being done.
Take our learned friend above that declared that diesel in ALL of California costs $4.30 per gallon, while EVERY gasoline pump there reads $3.79 per. Highly unlikely. In fact, it is GROSSLY untrue and I am calling the person who made the statement guilty of obfuscating the truth. I did a check at gasbuddy.com and it says that the average price of diesel in most cities in CA is barely 20 cents more expensive than regular (87 octane) fuel. In fact, Santa Barbara, which has the highest average, has diesel costing less than regular – $4.130 (g) vs $4.106 (d).
If you go to fueleconomy.gov and compare all four VW Jettas (diesel, 20, 2.5, and 2.0t) with manual transmissions, you will see that it costs roughly $51 to fill the tank of the diesel and the 2.0t, while it costs $48 to fill the tanks of the 2.0 and the 2.5. Yet, the diesel gives 444 miles, while the best of the rest only offer 365 miles. The diesel also costs $1700 per year to fuel, while the best of the rest only musters $1950. Now, bear in mind that those figures are based on diesel costing the same as premium. Using the CA example above, this would not necessarily be the case. In San Diego where the cost of regular and diesel are separated by a mere $0.04 the figures would be $57.68 (d) and $57.13 (reg) to fill the tanks. Let me put it another way. At 38 mpg average, for an extra $0.04 you get an extra 6 miles of distance from the diesel, when compared with the 2.0 with 28 mpg. An extra 6 miles in the 2.0 would cost you about an extra $0.85. That same $0.85 spent in the diesel would get you an extra 28.9 miles…The math doesn’t lie like we do…
Yes, I would welcome a diesel Malibu and seriously consider its purchase just for the fuel economy and power. It is nice that people like Richard tell it like it is.
I would consider a diesel. Trouble is they always charge $3-4k more for them, and it never seems to pay off. I’d like to see a diesel in the Equinox and also a new Colorado with the 2.8 turbo diesel. It already exists in Asia. Mazda is putting their diesel in the CX-5 and the Mazda 6.
Instead of the 2.4L I4 in the Equinox and Terrain, GM should put the 2.5L I4 into them. The 2.5L gets better fuel economy and has more power. There should also be a Hybrid with Plug-In / 2-Mode technology with a Twin Turbo 2.8L V6 with roughly 365HP, Displacement On Demand (shut’s off 2 cylinders), VVT, SIDI, electric motor will add more torque. These CUV’s could get up to 60-70 mpg with the electric range (50-85 miles), and then still be able to get 35-45 mpg with the 2-Mode 2.8L Twin Turbo V6 with up to 365HP or a 1.9L Twin Turbo I4 with up to 295HP (70 HP loss from 2 cylinder deactivation) (D.O.D), VVT, and SIDI.
103 out of 143 newly registered Chevrolet Malibu in the first 5 months 2013 in Germany are Diesel powered.
A 2.0l 4 cylinder engine giving 118 kW and 350 Nm torque.
Available with manual and automatic transmission (6 speeds).
YES, but not all loaded up like the Cruze…. Needs to be <$26-$28K
YES. Need it without all the expensive options for $26K – $28K
My wife and I would buy a diesel Malibu in a second. The only reason we never bought the Cruize is because its too small for our family. We are holding out another year for a diesel Malibu or even Equinox diesel otherwise we have no choice but to go with a Volkswagen.
Come on GM, do something right for once and give diesel an honest chance. The Cruize aint for everybody so dont base its sales on whether or not diesel will make its way to larger sedans or smaller suv’s.
Cheers.
GM asleep Once Again.
You cannot sell what you don’t have available – it’s That simple!!!
For many, the Cruze is just too small. …and while you’re at it, bring over a hatch or wagon. WHY is all this SO obvious to everyone except GM management???
Look at VW. A very large percentage of sales is in diesel, and everyone else is simply too expensive. A GM mid size diesel would be perfect, HELLO!
A Cruze hatch and a Malibu coupe and wagon!
I would buy a diesel malibu no question about it. Diesel is taxed more heavily than gasoline and that should be corrected by raising the tax on gas. My diesel will last much longer than a gasoline equivalent.
Yes I want one now I have a 14 cruze diesel fantastic,,,please do the Malibu !!