I'm not a fan of GM or diesels as too often the claimed performance appears to be wanting. But given GM's problems with making an efficient hybrid, perhaps this is the engine they've been missing: Source: First Drive: Chevrolet Cruze Turbo Diesel | TheDetroitBureau.com This is one vehicle that I look forward to reading about in Consumer Reports but something about the EPA specs has me curious: Column 1 0 [th]Cruze Diesel[th]Jetta Diesel[th]metric 1 [tr][td2]27[td2]30[td]City MPG 2 [tr][td2]46[td2]42[td]Highway MPG 3 [tr][td2]33[td2]34[td]Combined MPG 4 [tr][td2]mid-size[td2]compact[td]EPA size 5 [tr][td2]94[td2]94[td]passenger ft{3} 6 [tr][td2]16[td2]16[td]luggage ft{3} Source: Fuel Economy The combined MPG seems close but a little off. But the real problem is the Cruze class size does not match the EPA volume. The Jetta is in the proper class. Bob Wilson
The consensus over at cleanmpg is that, in general, diesels are under rated on the EPA test. Could the volume specs posted an the site involve rounding that is leading to the size discrepency. Perhaps midsize has a minimum in the hip, shoulder, leg, etc measurements that the Jetta doesn't meet. B segment cars have grown in size. In some ways the Cruze is roomier than the Malibu. In what way is the MPG off? The engines are both 2L with turbo. The Cruze is the heavier car, so it looses out in city. Weight is less an issue with highway driving. Plus, the Cruze uses SCR(urea solution) for emissions. The Jetta uses EGR and a NOx trap which reduces efficiency. Larger Passat TDI, with the same engine, uses SCR, and it has nearly identical ratings to the Jetta.
I checked the link on the EPA web site and the next size up from compact requires a minimum of 110 ft{3}. Also, the GM web site shows the same ft{3}. I'm pretty sure the vehicle classification is just a web site error. The Chevy Malibu has 111 ft{3} from the larger trunk. It qualifies as a midsize. I was looking at the highway MPG but when I checked the City again, there is symmetry. Any difference between the Jetta and Cruze combined could be rounding error. But what I need to do is get the roll-down data for both cars and see if there is a significant drag reduction. Heavier weight could increase the rolling drag but the City numbers are really pretty wretched. I suspect it is losing efficiency by heating the brake pads. One thing I like about the Cruze Eco are the variable, cooling air inlet vanes. But I can not find a source that shows the diesel has them. Bob Wilson
According to a cleanmpg review, the Malibu had about has much or less space in the back seat as the Cruze. It is about 190lbs difference between the two. Another variable to consider is the transmission. While both an automatic, the Cruze is a traditional step type one. The Jetta uses a double clutch type, which is close in operation and efficiency to a manual transmission. I haven't heard anything about the active shutters and I doubt it has them. Keeping the turbo cool is important for long life.
It's funny we in Europe got a latest press release from GM (Opel) about new turbo petrol engines (1.6 SIDI) and new 1.6 diesel engines, no word about new 2.0 diesel yet. Current 2.0 diesel engine in Chevrolet Cruze is available for years in Europe, it develops 163 HP, but it gets worse fuel economy than Passat 2.0 TDI (city or highway).
They made some changes for the USA version. Why GM's 2.0-liter diesel is cleaner in America's Cruze than it is in Europe
Well, I stand corrected: Source: e-mail Somehow, I did my sums wrong. It is 110 ft which just meets the EPA minimum for a 'midsize.' Bob Wilson
