|
Chevy Cruze Eco
My rolling couch is gone, replaced by a 2012 Cruze Eco with the 6-speed stick. First off, this is a comfortable car for racking up the miles in. And so on and so forth...
Onto the MPG's. So far in the 170 miles I've driven it, it's averaged right around 45 MPG, 50 per the DIC. A short 10 mile trip through rural and suburban areas indicated 51.3 MPG on the DIC. That was with 7 stop signs and 2 red lights. Techniques used were P&G, DWL, and keeping a reasonable speed. I did get on it a few times to get up to speed, and during the pulses. I'm not daring to EOC this puppy yet due to the turbo. I still have half a tank to go, so I won't know tank results until later. It's a fun car to drive, and really hustles when needed. Likewise, go easy on the boost to get good MPG. This is without my ScanGauge II, which is re-training out in Arizona. Can't wait to get that back so I can see what this car can really do. |
Congrats, thats a hefty increase in mileage there. :)
|
Thanks!
I did some experimenting with this car. It truly is bipolar in how it can get good fuel economy, and go like stink. Keeping one's foot out of it, 50 mpg should be easily doable. Keeping one's foot down and 35 mpg is more realistic. Pictures will be up later. |
This is most excellent! :D
|
99LeCouch -
Me likey. It's always fun to take pix of one's brand new wheelz. CarloSW2 |
99LeCouch -- if you're interested, here are some Cruze Forums:
• Cruze ForumZ • Cruze Talk • Chevrolet Cruze Forum ...in compliance with "full disclosure laws" be advised that I'm affiliated with all three. |
Nice ride! I just rented a Cruze 1LT 1.4T and liked it quite a lot. I wondered why it pulled after a bit of acceleration and remembered it had a turbo! The small displacement is hardly noticeable. Which brings me to the question, do you have a boost gauge hooked up? It was getting great FE until it became too much fun to drive :D
I rented it back-to-back with the Focus 2.0 SEL 5-door and like the drivetrain and overall feel of the Cruze a lot better. Another question, what is the pump-type noise when depressing the brake pedal -- an electric boost of sorts? Anyways, enjoy and keep that turbo cool before parking :thumbup: -RH77 |
Thanks, guys!
Filled up the tank in anticipation of this hurricane this weekend, and got 40 mpg. 7.4 gallons over 296 miles. We'll say there were times I was specifically trying to load up the engine rolled into that figure, and a good bit of idling letting my fiance re-acquaint herself with driving a manual. Not too shabby, considering how the car's been driven so far. Driving is entertaining. The chassis really comes alive at higher speeds, and settles down nicely at more reasonable speeds. |
Got my SGII back today! Firmware version 4.06.
Turns out the turbo is providing a bit of air at highway speeds. My boost gauge was reading right around -1 to 0 PSI at 55-60 mph in 6th gear. This is compared to -10 PSI at idle. Speaking of which, at a warm idle the LUJ consumes 0.2 GPH while coasting in gear, and 0.15 GPH parked. LOD is calculated per gear. Strangely enough, the car monitors and reports FPR! It's usually at 43 PSI at idle and cruising speeds. I still need to program an Xgauge with a knock sensor to run a few tests on what octane gas this car prefers. And a 0-60 test just to say I've used it! Overall, the Cruze and SGII play nicely together. Or at least mine is, for the day it's been connected up. |
Someone will have to back me up on this, but "Zero-Pressure Boost" can help the engine with volumetric efficiency at cruise and assist with pumping losses, increasing FE. The question becomes how much energy does it require to spool the turbine to achieve this situation...
Have fun with that new SGII software! -RH77 |
I have more playing around to do with TPS values since they're a little wonky. It could be this engine uses its DBW throttle to go without an IAC, and keeps the throttle partway open at all times.
It would seem not to take much energy to spool the turbo at cruising speeds. It's a low-power turbo designed to provide power over a wide RPM range, not a high-RPM screamer. It definitely would help with VE since it's still forcing some air into the cylinders. Yeah, it's not actively providing more air. It's still providing more air than a NA engine would have at that RPM. |
Could you get any pics of the aero bits under the car and around the wheels?
|
Fr3AkAzOiD -
Quote:
CarloSW2 |
Ask, and ye shall receive...
Apologies about the quality. Front shutter system backside: http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...o/IMG_2235.jpg Front wheel airdam: http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...o/IMG_2236.jpg Engine bay undertray: http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...o/IMG_2238.jpg http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...o/IMG_2239.jpg Underbody tray on driver's side: http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...o/IMG_2240.jpg Passenger underbody tray. Note front jack point on top of picture: http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...o/IMG_2241.jpg http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...o/IMG_2242.jpg Rear wheel airdam: http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...o/IMG_2243.jpg Very dirty rear end: http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...o/IMG_2244.jpg Looking forward from the rear of the car. Yes, that is the front bumper laying on the ground being modded: http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...o/IMG_2245.jpg It's okay on the underside for OEM. It still could use some improvement, especially under the rear of the car where nothing was done. |
Ideally, you should run as much boost as possible before the A/F ratio starts going rich. I'm tuned to start going rich at 3psi. It'd be really interesting to see what your more modern engine can do.
It doesn't look like there's enough room, but if you can, put a turbo blanket on, and wrap any unshielded exhaust parts. I went from a factory heat shield, to a blanket + heat shield and it mad a huge difference in under hood temp. |
...FYI the Garrett Model MGT1446MZGL (GM # 55565353) turbocharger unit actually bolts "into" the exhaust manifold, and thus is additionally "cooled" via circulating engine coolant.
...illustration: http://parts.nalleygmc.com/images/pa...071P03-004.JPG |
First tanks: 40 mpg and 42 mpg. Those were on 87 octane. I'm presently trying 93 octane to see if it has a positive effect on fuel economy.
I also got an oil pan heater that's going on shortly. That'll help out some in the winter. |
...believe it or not, but using that oil pan heater religiously will ensure the engine oil is already "warm" for a much quicker engine warm-up time and resulting in better fuel economy.
...just don't FORGET TO UN-PLUG it before you drive off!!!! |
Don't worry, I'll make sure! My car's the first in/last out every morning, so there's lots of time to trip over the cord walking out to it!
I also ordered some Nokian R snow tires. They claim LRR and fantastic grip. We'll see. |
Quote:
|
I did okay last winter. The other driver whose car is getting an oil pan heater might need a reminder or two...
|
The Eco MT has 2 ways of maximizing FE while coasting. Most common is to scale the injector pulse width way back to inject just a tiny amount of fuel. It does have a true DFCO, but it takes a bit of time to engage. The ignition timing on the SGII goes to 40+ degrees when the IPW's are scaled back, then goes to -1 to -7 when it's in DFCO. I've gotten better at forcing DFCO to engage by shifting to a higher gear when going downhill or approaching to a stop sign. It's great to see my average FE leap up on the SGII when it's in DFCO.
|
Filled up again, and 45.2 mpg. This car is the real deal for a FE dedicated driver.
|
First "eco" mod: 150 watt oil pan heater. Not tested to see if it works yet, but it's installed. The oil pan is wrapped around the exhaust so the oil heats up faster. That means there's little flat room on the bottom of the pan. I installed it on the side of the pan where there was room, and a flat enough surface. Not ideal, but it's where it was doable. If it's up on ramps again soon, I'll snap a picture of the oil pan and my far-from-pretty install. Not like anybody's going to see it...
|
Update: I darn near got 50 mpg highway coming from Erie, PA on I-86 back home. No hypermiling used, just setting the cruise control at 62 mph and letting it roll. Well, I did DFCO down the hill to my exit. I can get 50 mpg during parts of my commute, even with stop signs and traffic lights clogging up the in-town part.
The last tank was 46 mpg calculated by hand, and the current tank looks pretty good also. I'm quite impressed with this car's fuel economy, and how it drives. A few dash rattles have cropped up, and they're hopefully being addressed shortly. Aside from that, it's been a very pleasant car. |
Pan Heater - energy used?
That's great news on the Cruze!
I test drove a Cruze Eco yesterday and it's on my next car consideration list. I'm also considering the Sonic with 1.4 and having a tough time deciding between the two. If the Cruze Eco came as a hatchback in the US, it would be a no-brainer -the Cruze would be the obvious choice. I'd be upset if I got the Sonic, and next year they expanded their ECO line and did mods on the Sonic. I was curious on your pan heater thoughts. When considering the pan heater, should the usage of electricity be considered in the grand scale of things, as to if the efficiency of the car will be increased in a proportional amount? After all, the electricity costs something. Scott |
The pan heater is like running a 150 watt lightbulb for a few hours every morning. For the 50 cents a month or whatever cheap price it costs to run, it's a great way to increase winter fuel economy on the cheap. It's cheaper than a $3.80 gallon of gas.
I don't think they'll do any mods to the Sonic since they have the Cruze to sell. With the diesel Cruze slated for next year as the Eco-D, they're pushing the Cruze Ecos as the fuel-efficient cars in the lineup. Making a Sonic Eco would undercut their marketing of the Cruze. The 1.4 with a manual transmission is a great engine. My Cruze has all the power I could want, and then gets low-mid 40's for average fuel economy when the power isn't needed. Getting the slushbox knocks 3 mpg off, and it's extremely hard to recover. |
Why is the cruze so damn heavy?
|
Good question. The special edition Cruze Eco with weight reductions is still heavier than any other of the competition. It shows in the city mpg rating, too.
|
...the "listed" curb weight of the Eco Cruze is 3,009 pounds...but, that's for the M6 model, not the A6 model, which is closer to 3,200 pounds!
|
It's meant to be a "small midsize" car rather than a "large compact". This car has a very solid feel to it. The doors close with a solid "thunk", the hood is weighty, and the ride over bumps is quite composed. It's also not thrown around by a mid-corner bump. Handling is fairly composed as a result. In terms of driving feel and passenger space, it feels akin to a mid-90's 3-series.
Driving this car is very different from driving a 2012 Elantra. The Elantra does not feel anywhere near as composed or as solid as a Cruze. The Elantra is noisier, bumpier, worse-handling over broken pavement, and just feels less substantial. Well, considering the heaviest Elantra is still 250 lbs lighter than my 3000 lb Cruze Eco, there's a reason for that. It's all in GM's marketing the Cruze as a more efficient alternative to a larger car instead of a cheaper Sonata like Hyundai is marketing the Elantra. GM wanted the Cruze to occupy a niche of it's own instead of playing second fiddle to a larger car like Hyundai is doing with the Elantra. |
...agree! We 'replaced' our 1999 Malibu with the 2010 Cruze and both the wife and I agree, the "interior" space is about the same.
|
99LeCouch -
Quote:
If I were GM I would engineer a Sonic Eco and keep it in my back pocket. Maybe just swap in a thrifty drivetrain from an Opel Kadett. If the competition ups the MPG ante or the price of gas skyrockets, fire back with a Sonic Eco. CarloSW2 |
|
The DFCO is pretty nice. On larger hills, the DFCO can be engaged for up to a minute.
|
I'm not sure why this is news. Every EFI car build in the last 30 years has had DFCO. Maybe the GM engineers got more aggressive with DFCO in the eco cruze. Would be nice if they implemented that on all their cars.
|
...it's not just on the Eco, it's on all of the Cruze models--both manuals and automatics.
...and, it's a function of the engine, not of the transmission. |
If I'm not mistaken, DFCO has been pretty much universal since OBD2 came out in the mid nineties, isn't it?
Nice ride, btw. Too bad the safety nazis won't let them build a similar car that weighs a thousand pounds less. |
My old Buick didn't have DFCO. It would reduce the injector pulse widths a lot, but never completely cut them off.
It's possible the DFCO in the Eco MT is more aggressive since the older GM AT's let the engine basically idle when going downhill. IIRC the 6T40 in the AT Cruzes is similar. Don't quote me on that, however. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:14 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com