2011 Chevy Cruze: Yes Please!

Why would they show this car from the front, when it is the rear that is new?

From what I can see of the rear, I am not impressed. It doesn't seem like a proper 5-door-- the roof seems to slope too much (kind of like a Crosstour) to provide much additional cargo space.

I would love to see a diesel hatch of this car here. I love hatches, and I am saddened when I think about how few diesel options there are. I love my Kia Soul, but I just imagine how much more I would love it with a torque-lovin little diesel in it....like is available in Europe....

agree w/ ed124c - show the rear

from what is shown, looks good. helps that the sedan is a handsome starting point.

Give it up on the diesels. Do they make all auto writers have the EXACT same sort of thinking in order to get a job? Hatches are not the prevalent body style for compacts in the US and that's not likely to change. Diesels? The Cruze Eco, Focus and Elantra are putting the nails in the coffin of the propect of more diesels as we speak. The entire point of a diesel is to offer considerably better mileage than a gas engine. When the Elantra is getting 29/40 there isnt much incentive for anyone other than VW to be rushing diesels to market. Cruze Eco gets 28/42 vs 30/42 for a Jetta TDI which costs about $4k more. Do you really think GM is going to invest heavily in a diesel for the Cruze anytime soon? I don't.

"Why would they show this car from the front, when it is the rear that is new?"

" this concept soon to be shown at the Geneva Auto Show"

it is a teaser photo leading up to them showing the car in Geneva.

So its like a smooth version of the Malibu Maxx....

@1487 I think the primary difference is that the Golf TDI gets those numbers outputting marginally more horsepower and twice the torque.

Give it up on the diesels? Never. Better fuel economy, more torque and great real-world mileage. And no loving diesel isn't on the application. I think we develop the love for diesels after driving a few of them compared with the gas-powered counterparts. They're cool.

Do I really think GM will spend the time and money to make guys like me consider one instead of rushing to the only outlet (VW) who will give up the oil burners? Nope. Your point is the sane American one. Mine is the wide-eyed optimist.

I do have high hopes that Americans will ditch sedans for hatches and wagons, though. three-boxes never made much sense to me.
-mm

Mike Magrath likes this.

gloss:

I'm aware of the torque advantage but diesels (as with anything) need a justification. Diesels cost more due to the tech needed to treat exhausts diesel fuel costs more than premium in many places. Plus, its not available at many stations. When you consider all that there isn't a ton of incentive for GM or anyone else to invest in diesels in the US- which is why no one but VW and the German lux brands are doing so. Diesels have plenty of torque but the slow revving nature of diesels means that most are hardly speed demons. Is a Jetta TDI going to be faster than a Cruze ECO? Probably so. Is that acceleration gap enough to make up for the cost drawbacks? Probably not.

VW has had success with diesels- but VW is a niche automaker compared to the Big 6 and diesels overal share is TINY. When you are the only game in town it's not hard to have success in a particular niche- kind of like the Prius in its heyday.

As near as I can tell, it's 8.4 seconds 0-60 vs. about 10 seconds 0-60, which is substantial. I suppose the cost drawbacks would depend on where you live.

Personally, I'm holding out to see Mazda's Sky-D engines in a couple of years. I think the more people are given an opportunity to drive a next-gen diesel, the more converts you'll see.

As the people at Jalopnik put it, this car is like a girl with a great body but an ugly face. You really only want to see it from the back.

The more I see that front end the uglier it gets....the hood line that sits on top of the lights looks terrible and unfinished.

+1 1487

I agree with Mike Magrath. For long range highway cruising combined with extra towing capacity it is highly unlikely any gasoline engine will ultimately beat a diesel. As far as I can tell, diesel exclusivity is the only thing that keeps VW alive in North America. I would welcome some competition from the other brands who sell so many high mpg diesels in other markets.

Count me as a fan. I prefer the 5-door layout in a compact.

The problem is not with diesels, it's with many Americans attitude towards diesels.

They don't like them so they constantly make excuses why they are not a good idea.... ignoring that the rest of the world disagrees with them.

" I really liked the Astra, too."

The Astra was a perfectly nice car. At the same time, it was yet another example that the grass wasn't really greener on the other side of the pond.

firstwagon, it seems we disagree more and more lately.

Americans don't have a bad attitude toward diesels. Most people don't even remember the diesels of the 70's.

The reason the rest of the world (Europe) disagrees with US is because Europe heavily subsides diesel cars and fuel to the point they are price advantageous to gasoline vehicles. In order to keep up with the subsidized demand, they buy a lot of diesel fuel from the US. This drives up the price of diesel fuel in the US.

Hmmm, maybe I do have a bad attitude toward diesel.

firstwagon:

Do you ever tell the whole story? Thats a rhetorical question.

Diesel fuel costs are subsidized in Europe which makes it more palatable. In addition, some countries offer tax breaks or incentives for purchase of diesel cars. Diesel if very popular in parts of Europe, but not in Asia or America. You are incorrect in saying the rest of the world is embracin diesels. Diesels are more efficient by design, but advanced in gas powered engines are narrowing the gap as evidenced by the Elantra and Cruze ECO. On top of all that, without subsidies, diesel costs more than regular fuel in the US which makes it less than attractive when you can buy extremely efficient gas powered cars.

gloss:

No one has tested the Cruze ECO, but the regular Cruze has been clocked at 8.6-9.6 secs by various sources. Not a huge difference from the Jetta TDI. Again, the Cruze ECO starts at $19k vs about $23k for the Jetta TDI- that's a major gap for affordable cars.

"No one has tested the Cruze ECO, but the regular Cruze has been clocked at 8.6-9.6 secs by various sources."

What sources? How about some links?

I agree with body blue: let's see some links 1487, cause those are some very varied acceleration times for the cruze, whereas jetta tdi's are more consistent. Lest we forget the average driver is probably going to get a slower edmunds figure, not a power-brakind c/d figure. And the golf tdi starts a tad cheaper than the jetta as well.

And don't bet on the cruze eco being quicker than the cruze, fuel sippers are rarely faster than their traditional counterparts.

I love hatchbacks, but this cruze hatch doesn't quite do it for me.

The astra was a wonderful car to drive, handled everybit as good as a speed3.

And 1487: I find it interesting that you'd argue how a 23k fuel sipper borders on the edge of affordability, yet you have littered these blogs with posts justifing a 40k plug in hybrid....

eldaino:

Who normally road tests cars? MT, C&D and IL. You might want to start your search on those sites. Why in the hell would I make up 0-60 times for the Cruze? MT got 8.6, C&D got 8.9 and IL got 9.6- of course their times are usually the slowest.

Feel free to verify them if you don't believe me. And as I said, no one has tested the ECO yet.

As with many before you who try and challenge me in order to look cool you betray your ignorance as soon as you start typing. At no point did I say the Volt is worth $40k. I said that people who are interested in that type of car will pay for it. That's the bottom line. Since you are an expert on my viewpoints I'm sure you know I said I would never pay $41k for a Volt and have no desire to own one. That said, superior technology costs more money. In addition, when talking about CHEAP cars a $4k gap is significant. Most people shopping in this segment are on a budget so it would be foolish to dismiss a 4k price gap. The Jetta diesel is simply not a great value compared to Cruze ECO or Elantra- don't shoot the messenger.

BTW, Cruze eco is about 200lbs lighter than the standard car so it very well may be faster. And keep in mind no one has ever tested a Cruze with a stick so its possible that the manual tranny alone will make the Cruze faster.