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

[Deezler]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

...if the GM turbo-2.0L can produce 260 hp, it's fair to guess-ta-mate 182 hp in a one-to-one scaling from 2.0L down to 1.4L (all else remaining equal).

...anybody seen any "specs" for the turbo-1.4L engine yet? Has it been used in Europe already?

Hmm, good thought. I get the sense that this engine was designed more with mpg in mind vs the 260 HP sports car setup. So potentially reciprocating components are balanced further towards light weight and efficiency and thus may carry a lower design safety factor. On the other hand being of smaller displacement, the engine will typically be required to operate in a higher loaded duty cycle... so.

Who knows, I'd like to get some more specs too. The wiki entry is still very slim:
"Opel and US-market Chevrolet versions of the Delta II platform compact cars will feature turbocharged version of the 1.4 L engine with of variable valve timing, and optional gasoline direct injection.[1][2] This small turbocharged engine will deliver the performance of much larger naturally-aspirated engines while maintaining fuel efficiency of a small engine. Expected Highway fuel economy is more than 40 mpg.[clarification needed]

* 1.4 L Straight-4 (1364 cc): 72.5 mm (2.85 in) bore, 80.6 mm (3.2 in) stroke, 9.5:1 compression, 140 hp (103 kW) @ 4900 rpm, 200 N·m (150 lb·ft) @ 1850-4900 rpm.

The engine will be used in:

* 2010 Opel Astra
* 2011 Chevrolet Cruze


Oh, heres some more specs right from GM:
GM Media - United States - Press Kits

[KITT222]

Originally Posted by Unforgiven

I could be wrong (it has been a while since I last looked at it) but I believe the posted ratings for Toyota Corolla showed auto doing better than stick... there seems to be perhaps about 4 models of cars where auto is beating stick in the "posted" EPA ratings... having said all that, unless the gearing is really different, I sitll feel the stick shift will rule.

Am I the only one that has noticed this, or does the '07 Corolla have better fuel economy than the '10? I know, the whole new/old standards, but even with the new measure, the older Corolla is better. What happened at Toyota?

Originally Posted by cfg83

Hello -

I contrasted some elements :



The front grill is maybe 40% faux. It's not clear to me if some of the holes above the Chevy logo are filled or not. There are small spats in front of the tires. There is a little hole in the driver-side foglamp area, but that might not mean anything. As far as I can tell, the LRR tires are Goodyear Assurance, 215/55R17.

CarloSW2

The permanent grill block, is on every Cruze. Just trying to get some decent styling with functionality. If I do end up getting a Cruze I'll have to see if they could've blocked the grill any more than they did. I cant spot that active grill block in the picture. Maybe they have the tech ready, but just not installed in the picture, or its just hid that well.

[cfg83]

KITT222 -

Originally Posted by KITT222

Am I the only one that has noticed this, or does the '07 Corolla have better fuel economy than the '10? I know, the whole new/old standards, but even with the new measure, the older Corolla is better. What happened at Toyota?

...

The permanent grill block, is on every Cruze. Just trying to get some decent styling with functionality. If I do end up getting a Cruze I'll have to see if they could've blocked the grill any more than they did. I cant spot that active grill block in the picture. Maybe they have the tech ready, but just not installed in the picture, or its just hid that well.

Go back to post #60 and you can see the grill block *below* the bumper. It's not obvious, but it's there. It's not flush to the lower grill. It's maybe 1" or 2" back.

Regarding Toyota, everyone has been doing it. Honda got rid of the Civic Coupe HX because it was competing against their Civic Hybrid. I was really angry with the Saturn Ion (a proto-Cobalt because it's a Delta platform) because it didn't get the *same* MPG as my S-Series (it's only a few MPG, but it just stuck in my craw). I just wish they had stuck around long enough to make an Ion XFE, .

CarloSW2

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by KITT222

The permanent grill block, is on every Cruze. Just trying to get some decent styling with functionality. If I do end up getting a Cruze I'll have to see if they could've blocked the grill any more than they did. I cant spot that active grill block in the picture. Maybe they have the tech ready, but just not installed in the picture, or its just hid that well.

...that lower road-lamp "dark spot" might be the screw attachment that holds the plastic facia assembly (in lieu of road lamp) in place.

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by Deezler

Hmm, good thought. I get the sense that this engine was designed more with mpg in mind vs the 260 HP sports car setup.

...hm-m-m-m, looks like a turbo 1.6L 184 hp might also become available?

Shanghai GM | Chevrolet Cruze to get 1.6 turbo engine this year | China Car Times

[cfg83]

Old Tele man -

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

...hm-m-m-m, looks like a turbo 1.6L 184 hp might also become available?

Shanghai GM | Chevrolet Cruze to get 1.6 turbo engine this year | China Car Times

Go back to post #70. That's another Opel Ecotec engine. We're focusing on the MPG Cruze, but I could easily see the 1.6T being a Cruze SS, or maybe a CruSSe, .

CarloSW2

[KITT222]

I went back and I could see the shutters. Wonder how they open/close them?

cfg83 - I know the Saturn pain... sorta... As a new car buyer coming to lots soon, I have indeed considered the Saturn's. I see plenty of the SL's/SC's on the roads (one day I counted of 20 in a single trip). But for me, I want to keep the car for a loooong looong time. That makes the 8-18 year old SL's/SW's (SC's too sporty. Yes, a teen doesn't want a sporty car) a bit old. Plus for miles, these cars have 160,000-350,000 miles, so they aren't going to last long, especially since that safety net warranty is gone. So I checked out the Ion. For a while I dismissed it, and went to the Focus. Then I again checked the Ion, the '07 this time, and it was better. Not brilliant, or S-series great, but acceptable. Until I saw the interior. Mid-mount gauges, no good. Though again about adjusting to it, but still, I keep tracking back to the Aveo's, so its more likely I don't get a Saturn. Too bad too. That high school is door-ding heaven...

[cfg83]

KITT222 -

Originally Posted by KITT222

I went back and I could see the shutters. Wonder how they open/close them?

Since it's based on MPH, the ECU/PCM must send a command to a motor to open/close them.

cfg83 - I know the Saturn pain... sorta... As a new car buyer coming to lots soon, I have indeed considered the Saturn's. I see plenty of the SL's/SC's on the roads (one day I counted of 20 in a single trip). But for me, I want to keep the car for a loooong looong time. That makes the 8-18 year old SL's/SW's (SC's too sporty. Yes, a teen doesn't want a sporty car) a bit old. Plus for miles, these cars have 160,000-350,000 miles, so they aren't going to last long, especially since that safety net warranty is gone. So I checked out the Ion. For a while I dismissed it, and went to the Focus. Then I again checked the Ion, the '07 this time, and it was better. Not brilliant, or S-series great, but acceptable. Until I saw the interior. Mid-mount gauges, no good. Though again about adjusting to it, but still, I keep tracking back to the Aveo's, so its more likely I don't get a Saturn. Too bad too. That high school is door-ding heaven...

Those are all good reasons. I fully admit to being emotionally invested in Saturn S-Series. Because I am not a "car person" aka gear-head/monkey wrencher, I don't have the skillzz to move from car to car easily. I do feel comfortable with my S-Series because I have saturnfans.com and I have learned a ton of stuff about S-Series since 2006. I consider the S-Series to be "the modern Chevy Corvair", because the Corvair was created to fight VW Beetles and the S-Series was created to fight Japanese economy cars.

Maybe 6-months ago I was really really really tempted by a 2006(?) white Ion stickshift coupe, 23K miles. It was $8K in a Ford used car lot, which would normally sell it for $11K. I just *knew* that the original owner had panicked when Saturn went under and traded it for a Ford. I did all the R&D on it and I figured I could deal with any issues it had, but then it sold. But that's ok, because I didn't want to give up my S-Series and it's "the devil I know".

CarloSW2

[gone-ot]

VW Bug vs. Ford Falcon vs. Chevy Corvair vs. Plymouth Valiant vs. Pontiac Tempest vs. Olds F85.

...ah, those were the "..good old days!" (ha,ha).



...so, IF the information "soures" are reliable, it looks like the Cruze Eco 1.4L-Turbo engine will be '...loafing along...' at 59 mph at 2,000 rpm with the M6, and six-mph slower at 53 mph at 2,000 rpm with the optional A6.

Goodyear Fuel Max 215/55R17 = 795 revs-per-mile
M32 6-spd manual (1.4L): 6th = 0.61, final drive = 4.18
Hydra-Matic 6T40 6-spd auto: 6th = 0.74, final drive = 3.87

...so, using the equation:

MPH = [ 60/(A*G) ]*[ RPM / rpm ]

...where:
A = final drive AXLE ratio (M6 = 4.18, A6 = 3.87)
G = highest (6th) GEAR ratio (M6 = 0.61, A6 = 0.74)
RPM = engine rpm
rpm = tire revs-per-mile (795 for Goodyear Fuel Max 215/55R17)

[MetroMPG]

GM has released US pricing for the ECO Cruze - it's higher than the base model (expected), on par with the mid-range LT model.

Looks like this:

$16,995 - LS
$18,995 - LT and ECO
$22,695 - LTZ

Source: GM via gm-volt.com