Holden Cruze (my review).. Bad economy!

EDManual · 27-12-2011, 01:39 PM

Hired a Holden Cruze with the 6 speed auto, 17inch alloys, 1.8 4 cyl, leather seats and sunroof in Adelaide last week.

First impressions were plasticky, but nice to look at especially inside.

This car had 10,000km on it.

I like how low you can sit.

Started it up to a really noisy rattly engine. Would not rev out well at all, in fact had near no more pull from 4000 - redline, than 2000 to 4000!

However I drove it revving it out the whole time and it became smooth, lost its rattling and gained speed in the higher revs! Obviously was not run in, and luckily I came along to bed the rings in!

The steering had no feeling or weight to it. When driving at 50% (near no one does that these days... more like 5% of the cars capacity!), it handles quite well, but that would be due to the large tyres I suspect. When really moving its not great at all. Heaps of understeer that comes all of a sudden (when stab control is off). When stab control is on you just cant really get moving into, round and out of bends like you would want to.

Over 2 days driving I must say i liked the driving position, and it was still nice to look at.

Fuel consumption was not brilliant however, trip computer said i was averaging 16.1 litres per 100 (reset before I started), when filled up, the manual calculation was 17.2 l/100. 300km to a tank of 53 litres. The light came on at about 280km.

Time and time again I am amazed how terrible the economy is on small automatic cars! If you want to drive them at about half the pace of a falcon (which is flat out in a car like this), you really pay for it in fuel!

About half my driving was in the Adelaide hills, sure I was moving, but no high speeds. Just spirited driving. The rest around the suburbs, glenelg, marion etc. Never really speeding, just revving it out with the AC on.

I say, DONT BUY ONE if you like driving. An xr6 turbo, SS commodore or something would use less fuel. If you just want to get from a to b, sure.

Remember the Topgear test with the Prius Vs a V8 M3 BMW? The prius was flat out, with the M3 keeping up behind, but just cruisy fast for it, and the Prius used more fuel than the V8.

Same sort of thing with this.

Plus again its amazing what a good work out can do for an engine! Completely different car to drive (engine wise) after just 150Km!

Kryton · 27-12-2011, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EDManual/

Fuel consumption was not brilliant however, trip computer said i was averaging 16.1 litres per 100 (reset before I started), when filled up, the manual calculation was 17.2 l/100. 300km to a tank of 53 litres. The light came on at about 280km.

However I drove it revving it out the whole time.

what the hell do you expect from it?

jpd80 · 27-12-2011, 02:06 PM

Smaller automatic vehicles have to be driven like momentum vehicles, not horsepower cars.
If you're under them all the time of course they will drink fuel...all of them and a word to the wise,
drive a Falcon with mid throttle shove to get the same acceleration and you're in for a shock at the pumps too.

Around Brisbane in mixed driving, my wife's CX-7 get 9.4 l/100 km, getting cranky in the traffic and booting
off the line everytime and it goes to 13.5 l/100 km, moral of the story is this your driving style is key to economy.

302 XC · 27-12-2011, 02:12 PM

Minister had a courtesy car years ago ,a 4 pot camry auto, drove around using the gearbox from L up , just to get it moving anything like her car at the time
Nothin down low and had to nail it to do anything, and the fuel bill driving like this showed
4 pot auto cars there for grannies arent they ???

jpd80 · 27-12-2011, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 302 XC

Minister had a courtesy car years ago ,a 4 pot camry auto, drove around using the gearbox from L up , just to get it moving anything like her car at the time
Nothin down low and had to nail it to do anything, and the fuel bill driving like this showed
4 pot auto cars there for grannies arent they ???

I'm driving an LV Focus atm with 2.0 auto, stick the boot in that thing and it breaks traction off the mark...

Whohohhoooo how long's this been going on..

Mr Hardware · 27-12-2011, 02:16 PM

well take a competitors car - if i rev my corolla out all the time i return about 9.5L/100klms, otherwise it's usually sitting somewhere in the mid to high 7's.

calais · 27-12-2011, 02:17 PM

If you were thrashing to guts out of it, like you have written was the case, Im confused as to just what you were expecting.

Fair enough the car is gutless, but hardly to blame for the fuel consumption. And seeing as the people who buy or rent auto four potters clearly arent looking to buy a sports car, why would you expect it to drive like one?

Bucknaked · 27-12-2011, 02:21 PM

Its not a performance car, so why would you flog the hell out of it trying to make it compare to something that it isn't. Anyone can drive around with the car in high rev range and obtain poor fuel consumption.

I think your review is nothing more than an effort to discredit the other camp. I can bet if you drove a falcon or a commodore bouncing if off the limiter, you will see fuel consumption in the mid to high 20's.

Franco Cozzo · 27-12-2011, 02:30 PM

I don't like the Cruise's seats, they feel hard and the "leather" is of low quality.

In Focus · 27-12-2011, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

I'm driving an LV Focus atm with 2.0 auto, stick the boot in that thing and it breaks traction off the mark...

Whohohhoooo how long's this been going on..

Ha ha. After I redid the exhaust, I've been chirping the tyres off the line without really going for it. Use to be I had to really put the foot down...

jpd80 · 27-12-2011, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by In Focus

Ha ha. After I redid the exhaust, I've been chirping the tyres off the line without really going for it. Use to be I had to really put the foot down...

Yeah, I'm wondering how good the new Focus would have been with a conventional 6-speed auto trans,
I have a feeling that US buyers are not in love with the powershift box, so sad, Ford could have had it on a string...

Jimmyd · 27-12-2011, 03:57 PM

I have had the dubious pleasure of driving the Cruize as a renter twice - first one had 5k on the clock, second 7.5k.

First one was absolutely gutless, figured it was a lemon, second was the same - since then I flatly refuse to accept them as a renter to the point of walking from the Avis counter and catching Taxis instead.

Pure and simple - these things are plain dangerous. Not enough power to merge with traffic, pain to see out of, and stupidly thirsty. Will not drive another one, they should not be on the roads.

SpoolMan · 27-12-2011, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Damo

I don't like the Cruise's seats,

They feel like sitting on MDF way to firm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmyd

First one was absolutely gutless,.

I would rate it as the worse new car I have ever driven, how they get such good reviews I will never know, power was not very good and the auto seemed confused didn't want to kick down then it would on delay..

mcnews · 27-12-2011, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

Yeah, I'm wondering how good the new Focus would have been with a conventional 6-speed auto trans,
I have a feeling that US buyers are not in love with the powershift box, so sad, Ford could have had it on a string...

The DSG boxes I have used are absolutely crap around town. VW have been doing it for ages but still the latest Golf box is woeful and rough around town, squeeze the throttle a little and it drops down what seems like widely spaced gear ratios and want to take off etc. I couldn't make it offer a smooth drive around town at all.

Auslandau · 27-12-2011, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpoolMan

....how they get such good reviews I will never know,

One reason only ...........

If it had a DAEWOO badge it would sell 2 fifths of ..... all.

Homer · 27-12-2011, 04:58 PM

Seats are extremely firm, they put my in-laws off buying one.
They didn't even want to test drive as they were too hard.

Everyone else must think they are fine with the amount they sell...

Franco Cozzo · 27-12-2011, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpoolMan

They feel like sitting on MDF way to firm.

I would rate it as the worse new car I have ever driven, how they get such good reviews I will never know, power was not very good and the auto seemed confused didn't want to kick down then it would on delay..

Thats right, even just driving my supervisors Cruise into the workshop, you can feel how firm the seats are, not very comfortable.

EDManual · 27-12-2011, 05:24 PM

The seats are firm, but do have good bolstering.

I am merely pointing out that, yes if you drive like I do, and some big car (with torque to get the car going) drivers will get this sort of consumption.

Also I found it very interesting a lemon of an engine can improve within hours, just by ripping into it.

I am explaining that for me, a car like this is useless due to not enough power contributing to the need to keep it floored.

mik · 27-12-2011, 05:27 PM

even looking at reviews of economy cars fitted with auto trans, you see very few with an economy you`d expect from a supposedly very fuel efficient car, and they seem to suffer worse on the highway than expected because of the short gearing to give them some off the line performance, most i`ve seen have to be driven like snails to get better economy.

|Nate · 27-12-2011, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnews

The DSG boxes I have used are absolutely crap around town. VW have been doing it for ages but still the latest Golf box is woeful and rough around town, squeeze the throttle a little and it drops down what seems like widely spaced gear ratios and want to take off etc. I couldn't make it offer a smooth drive around town at all.

Recently drove an 08' Passat with the 6-speed DSG box, was extremely nice to drive and wasn't too bad around town IMO.
If you have it in sport mode, it likes to hold gears a bit better I reckon.

In relation to the Cruze, dad drives one every now and then as a work car, and said it's like a lawn mower engine inside a tank. As others have stated, damn that red/white coloured badge that when slapped on something, instantly sells thousands of said object.

Mackspower · 27-12-2011, 06:21 PM

Can definitely agree with the harshness of the seating . . . instantly uncomfortable and it doesn't get any better as the km's mount. The handling/suspension and gearbox in these units are diabolical. I have NO idea why they sell so well - even the price point doesn't explain it.

Kryton · 27-12-2011, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Homer

Seats are extremely firm, they put my in-laws off buying one.
They didn't even want to test drive as they were too hard.

Exactly the same for me too.
The car looked good on paper (Diesel version), the price was right, the styling was right and then i sat in it at the car yard.
Got out, shut the door, and left.
Didnt even want to take a test drive in it at that point.

new2ford · 27-12-2011, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Auslandau

One reason only ...........

image

How come AFF filters out my swear words but won't filter that?!

duaned · 27-12-2011, 10:58 PM

I had the 1.8 Cruze as a hire car in adelaide and I have no idea what some of you are wingeing about! Yes, they are not a fast car and are not intended to be. I found the power more than enough for city driving, and the brakes I thought were very good. No issues or hunting with the gearbox, and I didn't have to thrash it to climb the expressway or South Rd Ohalloren hill. But I guess none of this is important when they sell so well.

2011G6E · 27-12-2011, 11:37 PM

Bit like how Clarkson and the boys on Top Gear complain bitterly when some supercar just hooks in and grips sweetly around a corner instead of getting the tail out...if you've overcooked it enough to get out of shape, you're losing time while the guy who took a nice line and carved through the corner is up ahead accelerating away...they're not drift cars, they're performance cars.

A Cruze isn't a performance car, it's a family car, and anyone buying one with the expectation of a wheel shredding fireball but which also has the economy of a scooter is going to be sadly mistaken. Horses for courses...

I think hard seats are sadly becoming more common...the leather ones in our G6E certainly aren't getting any better with age, and in fact are sometimes downright uncomfortable on a long highway trip...

Falc'man · 28-12-2011, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Auslandau

One reason only ...........

image

If it had a DAEWOO badge it would sell 2 fifths of ..... all.

You hit the bulls-eye there.

The thing is there are people who don't really care about the dynamics, or quality, or economy, but are just doing their bit for Australian manufacturing. Or assembly in this case, even before Holden glued them together here quite a substantial percentage of people still though they were made here.

We (the enthusiasts) can tell what is what thanks to our common interest of automobiles, they, just don't care.

A colleague of mine, who's an engineer, a rev-head, a seasoned racer, thought these cars were made in Germany...

"No, they're not Korean, they're German."
No, they're Korean.

"Are you serious? I'm sure they're German."
No, they're Korean.

"Really? They're not German?"
No, they're Korean.

"Oh... okay... wow, that's interesting. hmmm."
No, they're Korean.

1TUFFUTE · 28-12-2011, 01:14 AM

IF YOU THINK THESE HORRIBLE CRUZE CARS ARE ACCEPTIBLE IN THIS DAY AND AGE THEN A FOCUS IS WAYYY TO GOOD FOR U. IF YOU DRIVE THEM BACK TO BACK 99 OUTA 100 UNBIASED PEOPLE WILL TAKE THE FOCUS...AND YOU CAN TAKE THAT TO THE BANK

Brazen · 28-12-2011, 03:39 AM

Cruze and Mazda 3 are my top picks for small cars. Although I think the Mazda 3 looks better. The 1.4ITI Cruze is a little ripper and is one of the most comfortable, solid and refined small cars on the market.

Havnt driven a new Focus but thought the superceded one was very overrated as an overall package (hence why we bought the Fiesta instead at the time).

GT-E · 28-12-2011, 08:46 AM

My Outlaws just bought a new Cruze in Red. It is the 1.4lt turbo petrol.
Wow what a cheap and nasty little car. The fit and finish was average, the car drove like a 1990 corolla with as much power.
The gearbox felt lazy, slow and the ratios were all over the place, it felt wrong geared.
I just nodded my head and said nice car, but they knew what I really thought.
You put a cruze and a focus side by side and it is like comparing a Cherry to a BMW. They both look like cars, but under the skin all is revealed.

SpoolMan · 28-12-2011, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duaned

I had the 1.8 Cruze as a hire car in adelaide and I have no idea what some of you are wingeing about! Yes, they are not a fast car and are not intended to be.

I based my experience with the Cruze against a car that was 3 years older.
We have or had (until last week) 1.6L 2007 Fiesta Auto and it would rape the 1.8L Cruze for performance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

IF YOU THINK THESE HORRIBLE CRUZE CARS ARE ACCEPTIBLE IN THIS DAY AND AGE THEN A FOCUS IS WAYYY TO GOOD FOR U. IF YOU DRIVE THEM BACK TO BACK 99 OUTA 100 UNBIASED PEOPLE WILL TAKE THE FOCUS...

True
My wife is unbiased the badge means very little to her, after looking at many cars around low $30k, her Focus Sport is on order.