2011 Chevy Cruze Eco / XFE will have 1.4 turbo, 42 mpg (US) hwy rating

[texanidiot25]

Very very few shops charge per hour, as in an actual amount of time. Each job has a set rate in "hours", and you charge off a certain rate. Say, $60/hour. So, for the sake of example, a 1.5hour job is $75 bucks. This is regardless of how much time it actually takes to do the job, whether the mechanic takes more or less than 1.5 hours to get the job done, that's what the shop gets paid. This encourages efficiency and speed, so you can do say 10 hours of work in only 6. My dad can pull an equivalent of 80 hours/week at his job as a Cadillac tech, while being there much less.

Time is money, and mechanics don't get paid to do it the hard way.

Looking at other photos of that Passat, it's tucked under the exhaust manifold (grabbing it from the top being hard), and above the suspension (grabbing it from below being ridiculous). VW's are notoriously labor intensive cars to work on, period. And as far as other late model and future cars? Well, they're certainly not getting any simpler, and trying to package a lot more tech into the same size hole.

[MetroMPG]

GM has released a PR piece about aerodynamics. See here:

GM Commemorates 30 Years of Aerodynamic Progress -- WARREN, Mich., Aug. 4 /PRNewswire/ --

They list the aero mods on the Cruze ECO:

• Segment-first active air shutters in the lower grille opening. When open, the air shutter provides additional cooling for the engine. When closed, the air shutter reduces wind drag.
• A front air dam, lower ride height, and underbody pans minimize underbody drag beneath the Cruze
• Tire blockers reduce the pressure build up in front of the tires and thus reduces drag
• A rear deck-lid spoiler increases the air pressure behind the Cruze Eco and reduces its CD

[Daox]

For cars, cutting through the air accounts for 13 percent of all fuel consumed, according to the EPA-defined city and highway driving schedule. For full-size SUVs, the effect is even more pronounced, accounting for 22 percent of fuel used.

Perfect example of why the EPA test cycles are flawed.

[cfg83]

Daox -

Originally Posted by Daox

Perfect example of why the EPA test cycles are flawed.

I have no problem with the EPA test as a "first stop" base comparison. I just wish they allowed for more tests to be published like the one you are citing above, aka no A/C or start-stop allowances in city-driving tests (the reason Mazda cited for not integrating it into their drivetrains).

More tests = more data points for comparison.

CarloSW2

[gone-ot]

...the MITCHELL's FLAT-RATE MANUAL, anybody heard of it, huh, huh?

[MetroMPG]

More Cruze tidbits - some hard numbers:

the [grille] shutter system reduces the drag co-efficient by 0.016, which is about equivalent to a mile per gallon highway fuel economy improvement

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y75Jg6HiU8

[gone-ot]

...looks like an excellent "ecomodder" retro-fit project for the non-ECO model Cruze cars!





...which "...begs the question..." why not put it on ALL models???????????

[Daox]

I'd be curious as to how much the actuated block costs them. I bet its very little.

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

They list the aero mods on the Cruze ECO:

A front air dam, lower ride height, and underbody pans minimize underbody drag beneath the Cruze

So they do combine lower ride height with bellypans and an air dam ...


The top grille is also partially closed off from behind.

[MetroMPG]

I was surprised they went with a motorized shutter. I guess GM's earlier research on shape memory alloys for grille blocking proved impractical or expensive:

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...emory-397.html