Chevrolet To Show 2011 Cruze Eco with 40mpg Highway at NY Show
28 March 2010
| The 2011 Chevrolet Cruze Eco. Click to enlarge. |
At the upcoming New York International Auto Show, Chevrolet will reveal the compact 2011 Cruze Eco—the high-efficiency model referenced last year that will deliver an estimated 40 mpg on the highway using a 1.4L Ecotec turbo with variable valve timing mated to a six-speed manual transmission. (Earlier post.) Along with the Eco, the 2011 Cruze will be offered in LS, LT and LTZ trims.
City fuel economy, as well as estimates for the Cruze Eco equipped with an available six-speed automatic transmission, will be finalized closer to launch. The Cruze Eco will be available in the fourth quarter of 2010.
The Eco achieves greater fuel economy using a number of features that enhance its aerodynamics, minimize weight and reduce rolling resistance. Details include:
- A lower front grille air shutter that closes at higher speeds to improve aerodynamics and opens at lower speeds to optimize engine-cooling airflow.
- The upper grille has more “closeouts” to improve aerodynamics.
- A lower front air dam extension, extensive use of underbody panels and a rear spoiler enhance aerodynamics.
- A lowered ride height improves aerodynamics.
- Unique 17-inch lightweight aluminum wheels.
- Ultra-low rolling resistance 17-inch Goodyear tires.
The axle ratio on the manual-transmission model is also optimized for fuel economy, while helping the car deliver confident performance. Chevrolet estimates the Cruze Eco will deliver 0-60 mph performance of about 10 seconds with the manual transmission and 9 seconds with the six-speed automatic.
Cruze’s 1.4L Ecotec turbo is standard on Eco, LT and LTZ models. Rated at an estimated at 138 hp (103 kW) and 148 lb-ft of torque (200 N·m), it enables a cruising range of more than 500 miles (800 km). At approximately 100 horsepower per liter, the new turbocharged 1.4L has the power of a larger engine but retains the efficiency of a small-displacement four-cylinder in most driving conditions.
The 1.4L’s turbocharger is integrated within the exhaust manifold, for reduced weight and greater packaging flexibility in smaller vehicles. A reinforced crankshaft and stronger connecting rods are unique, delivering additional strength to support the engine’s pressurized, high-rpm performance.
Standard on LS models is a 1.8L Ecotec four-cylinder rated at an estimated 136 hp (184 kW) and 123 lb-f. of torque (166 N·m). Backing the Cruze’s engines are six-speed manual and automatic transmissions.
Cruze models for the United States and Canada will be produced at the Lordstown, Ohio assembly complex. In February, Chevrolet announced the addition of a third shift at Lordstown that will add 1,200 workers to support a ramp-up of Cruze production. More than $350 million has been invested to re-tool the plant and add new manufacturing equipment.
Sounds like it might be a truely great car.
But does it offer high quality at a reasonable price?
Is this the car that they "should have been building"?
This is a tough segment for GM to be in.
Manufacturing has gone overseas - mostly because of labor costs.
They were building (and still are) the cars the people WERE buying - trucks & SUVs (they WERE #1, after all).
Is this the car that they "should be building"? I certainly hope so.
"confident performance" - I like it.
Posted by: ToppaTom | 28 March 2010 at 08:25 AM
This is GM's worldwide D Segment compact $15k car offer to match Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla, Mazda-3 etc.
Will the USA-GM made edition match competition's quality?
Posted by: HarveyD | 28 March 2010 at 09:15 AM
It is a C-segment car, although it is near the large end of the C-segment. The Malibu is th Chevy D-segment competitor.
Posted by: Stan Peterson | 28 March 2010 at 01:05 PM
All GM's cars must pass the quality level standards being posted by FORD or they will continue to lose market share. People will be looking for a higher quality level across all segments of the GM line. Looks like a good start.
Posted by: Lad | 28 March 2010 at 01:18 PM
GM is finally building a 40-MPG car... 7 years too late for this former car-shopper. I just did 38.5 MPG on the weekend's driving, so I'm in no hurry to trade.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 28 March 2010 at 09:10 PM
GM has long-built long range vehicles, at least in Europe under the Vauxhall and Opel badges and have recently introduced Chevrolet as a new "cheap" brand to replace the former Daewoo brand.
Ten years ago I drove a Vauxhall Cavalier 1.7TDi, with a diesel Isuzu engine, quite impressive power for a relatively small displacement Diesel engine and good range - up to 50mpg(imp).
About six years ago I then used to drive a 2002 Vauxhall Vectra 2.2DTi, again a Diesel which also had more 'reasonable' economy, say 45mpg (imp).
What puts me off GM though is the interiors. The Cavalier was tired despite the low miles. The Vectra felt cheap and plasticky - typical it seems of US derived car-makers. It didn't help being beige either - it literally started to change the colour of my hair to something a bit more silvery! These cars wern't mine out of choice they were company cars I drove at the time.
Anyway good to see the engines getting better through and more efficient over the pond - if they can improve them here too, and sort the interiors out, I may well consider GM. I'll stick to VAG group cars in the meantime. My wife's old 1997 Audi A6 gets up to 60mpg(imp) on a good steady run despite having a 5cyl 2.5TDi and the interior's not bad, even after 180,000 miles.
Posted by: Scott | 29 March 2010 at 03:53 AM
Stan:
I stand corrected. I dont know why GM India is pushing this vehicle as a Segment D car?
Posted by: HarveyD | 29 March 2010 at 09:37 AM
Harvey,
I have no idea. I do know that GM makes a line of cars we will never see, in the USA, the so called developing country cars. Perhaps they chose to sell a Captiva or Matiz as their C-segment car, and then chose to sell the larger C-segment car, as a small D-segment offering.
But this is pure speculation and jsut a pure and simple wild ass guess, SWAG.
Posted by: Stan Peterson | 29 March 2010 at 11:33 AM
Engineer-Poet said, "I just did 38.5 MPG on the weekend's driving, so I'm in no hurry to trade."
What is this vehicle rated for by the EPA?
Posted by: Patrick | 29 March 2010 at 12:36 PM
It's rated 26 MPG city, 38 MPG highway. I regularly exceed the EPA figures.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 05 April 2010 at 08:36 PM
My 200,000 mile 12 year old Neon with 5 speed has a measured 38 mpg average in mixed driving over the 85,000 miles I've had it. On the highway, I usually get 42 and have gotten 48. I don't hypermile.
Why are the hot new high fuel economy cars able to get barely more mpg than old technology?
Posted by: fred schumacher | 06 April 2010 at 11:17 AM
My 2004 Passat TDI is a lot bigger than a Neon, carries 5 adults with knee room, has a cavernous trunk and is rated to tow 50% more (in real life, tows 100% more).
Diesel engines have their advantages.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 06 April 2010 at 09:00 PM