Testdrive in a Diesel Cruze

My last diesel was a 2003 Jetta Wagon 5 speed manual TDI the base GL model. It obtained 45-50 mpg consistently.
The new diesels have to use another tank on board with a Urea solution, which does have a cost to it per gallon and needs to be filled on regular intervals. So even if the price of diesel is the same as 87 octane regular it still will cost more per mile. I believe that gas engines have gained in efficiency and diesel's have not.

I just don't see the fuel savings with a diesel over most hybrids out there. Look at the Honda Accord Hybrid which is heavier with more horsepower and beats the pants over the Cruze diesel when it comes to MPG's and 0-60 mph times.

alfon said:

My last diesel was a 2003 Jetta Wagon 5 speed manual TDI the base GL model. It obtained 45-50 mpg consistently.
The new diesels have to use another tank on board with a Urea solution, which does have a cost to it per gallon and needs to be filled on regular intervals. So even if the price of diesel is the same as 87 octane regular it still will cost more per mile. I believe that gas engines have gained in efficiency and diesel's have not.

I just don't see the fuel savings with a diesel over most hybrids out there. Look at the Honda Accord Hybrid which is heavier with more horsepower and beats the pants over the Cruze diesel when it comes to MPG's and 0-60 mph times.

Click to expand...

Having owned several Diesel vehicles, I can agree with this, other than the Urea part. For instance, my 1-ton pickup required the Urea tank to be topped off every 9,000 miles, at a cost of roughly $7. So the expense of the Urea is not a real factor. The expense of oil changes on a Diesel is a factor though, costing 2-3 times what a gas vehicle would. Diesel vehicles are becoming less fuel efficient as EPA regulations increase. A Diesel Hybrid would probably be the most fuel efficient, but also the most costly to purchase.

My last TDI was an '09 and the Prius I traded it in on trounced it in fuel mileage, in the city and on the highway and with less maintenance to boot.

SSonnentag said:

Having owned several Diesel vehicles, I can agree with this, other than the Urea part. For instance, my 1-ton pickup required the Urea tank to be topped off every 9,000 miles, at a cost of roughly $7. So the expense of the Urea is not a real factor. The expense of oil changes on a Diesel is a factor though, costing 2-3 times what a gas vehicle would. Diesel vehicles are becoming less fuel efficient as EPA regulations increase. A Diesel Hybrid would probably be the most fuel efficient, but also the most costly to purchase.

Click to expand...

Delete it. Not only will you never have to worry about DEF, the oil stays a lot cleaner for a lot longer. I get 25MPG with my 6.7 cummins and change the oil every 20-25,000 miles using amsoil and blackstone. And the engine will last a lot longer without that garbage on there.

Jmaj said:

Typically nothing like urban stop and go and I do some long driving trips - my GEN I lifetime mpg was 70 ish when I turned it in. I'm going to have to do some work on the Volt price.. I'll pay some delta over conventional for the EV but only so much.

Click to expand...

Then diesel may be for you. On moderate speed highway drives, gen 1 cruze diesel owners regularly beat their EPA ratings.

That being said, teh question IMHO, is not Cruze diesel vs Volt. For you, you should be assessing whether the regular Cruze might be sufficient. It gets good enough mileage on the highway, and the cost increase to the diesel may not be recovered during your ownership period.

Removing the emissions system from a car might void the warranty, you think?

Diesel vs. conventional Cruze, I would get the diesel just because. Volts are expensive, locally. Hate to think I have to ship one in from out of state. The path of least resistance is to go with the oil burner. Oh well, there's always next time.

Jmaj said:

Removing the emissions system from a car might void the warranty, you think?

Click to expand...

Yes, it will void the power train warranty as you'd be programming the PCM. But I have a cummins/ram so I wasn't worried about the warranty. It was deleted the day after I took ownership and I needed the warranty once for a front pinion seal leak at 98,000 miles and it was fixed under warranty.

Seeing as how the engine will actually live a long, healthy and trouble free life while doubling the MPG there is no downside, unless you have a ford, especially a diesel, then you'll need the warranty.

turboguy327 said:

Seeing as how the engine will actually live a long, healthy and trouble free life while doubling the MPG there is no downside, unless you have a ford, especially a diesel, then you'll need the warranty.

Click to expand...

Now you're just being silly. Removing emissions equipment will in no way double your MPG. You'd be lucky to gain a couple of MPG. It also violates federal law. I know in Arizona there are periodic road blocks where all diesel passenger vehicles are pulled over and inspected to check emissions equipment and the type of fuel being used. If you are found to be in violation there are expensive fines and penalties.

I went from 13-15 to 24-25 mpg hand calculated. In NY my truck passed it's annual state inspection. The truck injects fuel on the exhaust stroke to heat up the DPF, wasting a ton of fuel, watering down the oil with fuel, and creating a tremendous amount of damaging heat.

The point of a diesel is long engine life.

turboguy327 said:

I went from 13-15 to 24-25 mpg hand calculated. In NY my truck passed it's annual state inspection. The truck injects fuel on the exhaust stroke to heat up the DPF, wasting a ton of fuel, watering down the oil with fuel, and creating a tremendous amount of damaging heat.

The point of a diesel is long engine life.

Click to expand...

In other words, your emissions system was broken, so you took it out. No Diesel truck gets that poor fuel mileage. Even my longbed dually with intact DPF and urea system gets 20 mpg and 13 mpg when towing.

SSonnentag said:

In other words, your emissions system was broken, so you took it out. No Diesel truck gets that poor fuel mileage. Even my longbed dually with intact DPF and urea system gets 20 mpg and 13 mpg when towing.

Click to expand...

I doubt it came broken.

As we currently have a 2014 Cruze Diesel, one of the '17s was certainly under consideration for my vehicle before I decided on the Volt.

If the 2018s were out, and I could get the hatchback, as well as one trim level higher, I'd be in a Cruze Diesel hatch right now. But the '17s are only available in an LT sedan configuration.

Our '14 has been a great car, and easily surpasses the EPA mileage figures, especially once you put it on the freeway. We visited my in-laws last spring and made it from our house to Zebulon, NC (just east of Raleigh) without stopping. I filled the car up a couple days after arriving at 750 miles on the tank. And that was with the trunk absolutely packed.

As a volunteer administrator on CruzeTalk (sister forum to this one, owned by the same folks) I have read a lot about the Cruze Diesel. We haven't seen a lot of Gen 2 diesels yet but it does appear if you drive a long ways on a routine basis this is the car you want. The Gen 1 diesels don't appear to like short distance, stop & go driving, but that's where the Volt shines. As MP81 pointed out, the Gen 1 diesels can significantly beat the EPA numbers and we even have one member who has topped 1,000 miles on a single tank of fuel. Diesels are by no means "silent" but the Cruze Diesels definitely aren't loud, either inside or outside.

One more problem with DIESEL,,,in the serious winter you will need ANTIFREEZE,,or will freeze/gel, stopping the engine,,,I learned that lesson with an OLDSMOBILE DELTA 88 in the middle of a January night ,2AM on a small road in OHIO...I was young and ignorant of this particular problem, at minus 10 F*, a passing truck saved my life from hypothermia, the 2 batteries that GM put in this model were dead! Life is a learning expirience, sometimes we get lucky.

volt spain said:

One more problem with DIESEL,,,in the serious winter you will need ANTIFREEZE,,or will freeze/gel, stopping the engine,,,I learned that lesson with an OLDSMOBILE DELTA 88 in the middle of a January night ,2AM on a small road in OHIO...I was young and ignorant of this particular problem, at minus 10 F*, a passing truck saved my life from hypothermia, the 2 batteries that GM put in this model were dead! Life is a learning expirience, sometimes we get lucky.

Click to expand...

New fuels and modern diesels don't really have this problem. My cummins starts without a problem, not plugged in, no glow plugs or grid heater in that same temperature.

turboguy327 said:

New fuels and modern diesels don't really have this problem. My cummins starts without a problem, not plugged in, no glow plugs or grid heater in that same temperature.

Click to expand...

He did say Delta 88. They only offered diesels on those in, like, '78 through '83.

hellsop said:

He did say Delta 88. They only offered diesels on those in, like, '78 through '83.

Click to expand...

I know what he said, but he indicated that that was still a problem if his first sentence.

Jmaj said:

2017 with leather package.

This was a short test drive. The plastic was still on the seats, just off the truck on Saturday.

Pros

Diesel knock is absent, just as advertised.
9 speed automatic shifts smoothly - double clutch technology works. You have to get on the "oil" to make it downshift forcibly enough to feel it.
Stop-start technology.
Diesel torque + 9 speeds - pretty good acceleration

Cons
Low pitch engine rumble is always there - in no way is this silent propulsion.


Normally I would go with the Volt but the choice is not so clearcut here. There's zero state incentives, I'd have to buy the Volt and get 0% financing to go along with a modest amount of manufacturer's incentives. Even with the fed tax credit it's stretching to make the number close enough.

Click to expand...

Are you sure it's a dual clutch?

Every 9 speed transverse system I've seen to date is based on the same conventional torque converter ZF transmission, with dog clutches.

You'll want to be sure to experience the 3-4 shift (pretty sure it's that one, might be 4-5 instead) - that's where it has to engage the dog clutch, so the car stops accelerating for a second to shift.

Interesting. But not for me. Many years ago, a diesel fanatic friend talked me into buying a 1987 Mercedes diesel. Like the Delta 88 poster above, below 0F temperatures killed it and left me walking. That was enough for me. Never again. And there were other things I didn't like: maintenance was more expensive and fuel was messy, stinky and hard to find-- at least it was less expensive.

Diesel engines belong in trucks. I just don't see the benefit for cars anymore.

Back in the day, before the EPA declared war on diesels, they would get better mileage and last way longer than gas engines. The same EPA that is trying hard to kill diesels, forced manufacturers to vastly improve the gasoline engine for economy and low emissions. The benefit to the consumer has been better economy, power and longevity. Now that gas engines are so good, I just don't see the benefit of diesel.

There is a movement in Europe (long the bastion of diesel cars) to ban diesel engines completely. http://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/are-diesel-fuels-days-numbered.html/?a=viewall

IMHO electric and/or gas are the best choice for most folks.

saghost said:

Are you sure it's a dual clutch?

Every 9 speed transverse system I've seen to date is based on the same conventional torque converter ZF transmission, with dog clutches.

You'll want to be sure to experience the 3-4 shift (pretty sure it's that one, might be 4-5 instead) - that's where it has to engage the dog clutch, so the car stops accelerating for a second to shift.

Click to expand...

It's not a dual clutch.

This is the GM/Ford 9-speed. It's not a ZF.