Print 79 comment(s) - last by superstition.. on Feb 13 at 11:06 PM

Diesel-powered Cruze will start at under $26,000, get up to 42 mpg

Chevrolet has officially announced the specs of the diesel-powered version of the 2014 Cruze. The 2.0-liter turbo diesel engine generates 148hp and 258 pound-foot of torque. Chevrolet promises that the clean diesel engine will achieve 42 mpg on highway, which oddly enough is the same as the $5,000 cheaper Cruze ECO. The vehicle will also accelerate to 60 mph in 8.6 with its standard six-speed automatic transmission.

According to Chevrolet, clean diesel engines generate at least 90% less nitrogen oxide and particulate emissions compared to previous generation diesel power plants. In order to achieve its “clean” status, the engine uses urea injection that is supplied from a 17-liter tank. As a result, customers will lose a bit of trunk space to accommodate the urea tank. Another downside is that the tank will need to be refilled every 10,000 miles.

“Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel is the most sophisticated passenger car diesel engine GM has ever produced,” said Jens Wartha, GM global program manager and chief engineer for the Cruze’s diesel engine. “We merged European diesel expertise with the real world driving preferences of North American consumers.”
The 2014 Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel will be priced from $25,695 including destination charge. The vehicle comes with the Chevrolet MyLink infotainment system, a two-year maintenance plan, and a five-year 100,000-mile powertrain warranty.

Mazda announced that it would be selling a diesel version of its Mazda6 in the United States not long ago, and Volkswagen has been selling diesel-powered passenger cars here for decades.

Source: GM

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By mgilbert on 2/7/2013 9:24:34 AM , Rating: 5
What is it with people and manual transmission these days. Automatic transmissions are more reliable, and don't require a new clutch every two or three years at a cost of $1,000 or so, and cars with automatic transmissions get better gas mileage, because computers can shift more efficiently than any human. Manual transmissions simple don't offer a single advantage over automatics anymore. 30 years ago they did, but not anymore.

RE: Manual?
By Brandon Hill on 2/7/2013 9:26:03 AM , Rating: 2
Manual transmissions simple don't offer a single advantage over automatics anymore. 30 years ago they did, but not anymore.

I can think of at least one advantage:

RE: Manual?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: Manual?
By Brandon Hill on 2/7/2013 10:54:46 AM , Rating: 5
Da hell? I saw the story last week on The Car Lounge, and instead of wasting my time using their terrible search to find the original link, I did a quick google search for "Corvette carjacking florida" and this popped up.

You're always looking to start *&#&$, aren't you :-)

RE: Manual?
By cyberguyz on 2/8/2013 7:56:40 AM , Rating: 1
And what douchebag rag do you read?

RE: Manual?
By Jeffk464 on 2/8/2013 12:21:28 AM , Rating: 3
Two advantages actually, you can push start a manual. I had to do it last month because it was to cold for a diesel.

RE: Manual?
By hpglow on 2/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: Manual?
By Brandon Hill on 2/7/2013 10:30:35 AM , Rating: 3
Plus you look like a giant vagina driving an auto, specially if you drive a sports car.

OK, so if I drive a full-size pickup, SUV, or a full-size sedan (Avalon, Impala, Lexus LS, 7-Series, S-Class, etc), why the hell would I want to row my own gears? Rowing my own gears in a 4,000-pound sedan or a 5,000-6,000 pound pickup/SUV isn't my idea of fun.

I drive a midsize sedan. Most of the time, I'm shuttling my 9-month old around in the back seat, running errands, or cruising on the highway to see family. I couldn't care less about rowing my own gears.

Now if I'm going to buy something like a Corvette, or a Miata, or an M3, or a BRZ/FR-S, you better give me a manual.

But I also wouldn't thumb my nose up at a DCT in a sports car either.

RE: Manual?
By JediJeb on 2/7/2013 6:41:02 PM , Rating: 2
I must say I prefer the manual in my F150 over any one I ever drove with an automatic. It is especially better when you are in those sticky situations where you need complete control over the torque applied like snow or mud. On slick roads I can upshift to put less torque to the wheels with a manual but you can't force an upshift with an automatic. Plus when driving to work in normal weather I usually only need three gears instead of five, and an automatic makes me go through all of them instead of skipping the ones I don't need. Just like when driving a semi, just skip the ones you don't need when running empty, use them all when the load is very heavy.

RE: Manual?
By GotThumbs on 2/7/2013 10:12:51 AM , Rating: 5
They are reliable and if you need a clutch every two or three years...your doing it wrong. Only an inexperienced driver will burn up a clutch that fast. I've got two vehicles (sports car and diesel truck) and have owned them for 10 and 6 years respectively and have yet to replace a clutch.

You can also get better fuel economy with a manual trans. When I'm exiting a freeway, I just slide the truck out of gear and coast to the light. Engine is at idle and consumes less fuel than an automatic.

At the end of the day, its a personal choice.

Best wishes,

RE: Manual?
By JZavala on 2/7/2013 1:09:19 PM , Rating: 3
actually, if you have a obdII controlled engine(or somewhere when they started using that system), you're better off leaving it in gear, as when its idling its using fuel, but most cars that have that type of engine management cut fuel all together and you use no fuel. thats how geo metro drivers(with obdII) get 70-100mpg. they leave it in gear when decelerating and it uses absolutely no fuel.

something an automatic cannot do.

RE: Manual?
By robertisaar on 2/7/2013 4:23:36 PM , Rating: 3
not only does OBD2 have nothing to do with it, automatic models do it as well...

excellent example? my wife's old 1990 Pontiac Grand Prix. 3.1/automatic, the factory calibration allows DFCO to be entered and it did MANY times in our owndership of it. Me being me, i tweaked the calibration further to even keep the TCC locked when DFCO was entered so that it would coast without fuel for even longer periods of time.

RE: Manual?
By ianweck on 2/7/2013 11:04:30 AM , Rating: 2
13 years and 120,000 miles on my original clutch over here.

RE: Manual?
By JediJeb on 2/7/2013 6:44:42 PM , Rating: 2
16 years and 235,000 miles on my original clutch, replaced it last year but after taking it out realized it wasn't worn enough to worry about, but put the new one in just for the heck of it. Less than $500 even having a transmission shop do the work.

RE: Manual?
By Spuke on 2/7/2013 11:16:26 AM , Rating: 2
It doesn't cost $1000 for a clutch job. You must be thinking of automatic transmission rebuilds which do cost somewhere in that neighborhood. Also, never replaced a clutch every 2 to 3 years either. The only time I've ever replaced a clutch was when I owned a car for 12 years (250,000 miles) and I did that one once. Manual cars are FAR cheaper to own than autos not to mention they're simple to repair/replace if you're a DIYer. I know gearheads that won't touch an auto tranny.

I will agree that today's autos are more efficient than manuals and shift faster and more consistently than any human. My wife's new BMW X1 has an 8 speed auto that's simply fantastic. I'm so impressed by it that my next car will either have that transmission or a dual clutch.

RE: Manual?
By TerranMagistrate on 2/7/2013 2:05:22 PM , Rating: 2
I know gearheads that won't touch an auto tranny.

No surprise there; automatic transmissions, especially those eight gear ones from Aisin Seiki and ZF are at least an order of magnitude more complex than any other part of a vehicle.

RE: Manual?
By dubldwn on 2/7/2013 11:55:34 AM , Rating: 2
Manual transmissions simple don't offer a single advantage over automatics anymore.

For many of us, they're more fun to drive. For a few of us, they're an absolute requirement for driving enjoyment, not to mention more control over the car. No accident that a 2013 Viper, among others, only comes with a manual. I understand an A to B person wouldn't get that.

RE: Manual?
By bill.rookard on 2/7/2013 1:50:24 PM , Rating: 2
There's another advantage of a manual vs an auto: push start. My driveway has a decent slope to it, more than one occasion I've had the odd 'dead battery' (cold Michigan weather) so I just get rolling and pop the clutch.

As far as clutch longevity, my Mustang (and yes I drive it... aggressively...) still has the original clutch after 125,000 miles, so your 'every 3 years' statement means you must not know how to drive one properly. Every other MT I've had (and -all- my cars are MT's) usually need a new clutch at the 120-150k mark, which is about what you would expect for what is essentially a 'wear and tear' item.

Seriously, it's the equivalent of a big round circular brake pad, and you don't expect to get unlimited mileage out of those do you?

As for the rest of the MT, it is just a simpler design, and as such, the simpler it is, the longer it will last. The auto-trans may have gotten a bad rap in the 80s-90s, but they certainly have improved a great deal, and in many cases with the computer controlling the shift points - they actually can get better gas mileage than the MTs. Ultimately though, they -are- more complicated, and with more complicated machinery, it just makes it easier for something to go wrong.

That's why I like the simplicity of a MT. It's gears and levers. No hydraulic pressure. No electronic solenoids. Fewer potential points of failure.

RE: Manual?
By Jeffk464 on 2/8/2013 12:19:04 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, I can't even imagine considering a manual in anything I would want to buy. Besides better gas mileage, and better reliability, its a hell of a lot easier to stuff my face with a burrito while driving.

RE: Manual?
By conquistadorst on 2/8/2013 8:52:40 AM , Rating: 2
...require a new clutch every two or three years at a cost of $1,000 or so

lol, I bet he/she owned a stick-shift once (or knew someone that did) and unbeknownst to them, was getting scammed by their mechanic. Sorry dude, just simply not true. Unless you leave your foot on the clutch the entire time heh. My manual civic '01 was considered a "lemon" because I had to rebuild my 2nd gear after its 10th year. Honestly it was probably my fault because it was the first car I learned on. Regardless, even though my clutch didn't need replacing right then I decided to replace it anyway since I was planning on driving it another 10 yrs anyway. It was an extra couple $100 at that point. It would have lasted another 1-3 years if I left in the original.

Stick is just more fun to drive. Speaking from my own experience, I'm always reminded how much I love stick whenever I go on vacation for a few weeks and have to drive rental with an automatic. I get so excited to drive stick again when I get back. Automatics are boring. Especially in an underpowered car.

I'll list you 5 advantages:
1 - more fun
2 - cheaper to purchase
3 - cheaper to maintain
4 - you pick your gear (engine control)
5 - more fun

RE: Manual?
By mcnabney on 2/8/2013 10:46:17 AM , Rating: 2
That is pure BS.

Manual transmissions are far far far more reliable than automatics. Always have been. Always will be. The most obvious reason is that they have far fewer moving parts and points of failure. And even in the event of a failure - if you drive like Fast & Furious - replacing a clutch is really cheap. Replacing an automatic transmission is serious money. In fact, that is probably the #1 reason I have seen people scrap an otherwise good car. Transmission breaks and the $3k repair cost is more than the car is worth.

"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki