Chevrolet Cruze Forums banner
Cancel
Create thread New Garage Forums

1.8 vs. 1.4T both Manual

Tags
14t manual
Jump to Latest
21 - 37 of 37 Posts
#22 ·
trevor said:
2014 cruze LS with the 1.8 and AT. I am averaging 35mpg and fill up every week (430+ miles a tank). Majority of my driving is hwy at 60-70 mph.
Click to expand...
DIC measured or pump measured?
 
#23 ·
In my manual there is the belt chain replacement interval 10 years or 150000 km. I have an 1,8 LT with 5 speed manual gearbox. And I'm very pleased with my car. I intentionally did search for this engine as others here are 1,6 l or 1,4T and the latter one only in hatchback or SW and I wanted sedan. And I thought that turbo is not suitable for my driving style, I'm driving this car in "Easyrider"-style, very carefully. I have a feeling that turbo makes driving too agressive. My gas consumption is about 6,6 litres/100 km. Very good indeed, I think.
 
#24 ·
nuclearsteel said:
I drive right now about 140 miles round trip, 4 days per week, and 1 day about 200 miles, so figure on about 750 miles a week.
Click to expand...
With this many miles it would not take long to pay the extra $1400 for the 1LT with the 1.4T. The ECO manual would be the even better car, with this many highway miles. check out the MPG comparisons below. 1LT gains 1MPG city, 2MPG highway over the LS. The ECO manual gains 3MPG city, 6MPG highway over the LS. With 750 miles a week the ECO MPG increase is good for over $500 fuel savings a year over the LS.


Compare Side-by-Side

nuclearsteel said:
Everyone seems to say the 1.4T is worth the extra money...I guess I'm just not seeing it. I can get a LT1 manual for $16,400 OTD with all the rebates and stuff. The LS I can get for about $15,000 OTD.

My math tells me it needs to be about 5 to 7 MPG to be worth it, provided the 1.4T doesn't require 89 octane.
Click to expand...
That $1400 more for the 1LT also gets you Cruise control, aluminum rims, and many more avalible options, not just the 1.4T.

Most notice a MPG improvement with midgrade or premium, even with the extra cost one usually breaks even or comes out slightly ahead. You only really needs higher octane with the turbo in the heat of the summer so this is not really a big concern.
 
#25 ·
Bullet said:
In my manual there is the belt chain replacement interval 10 years or 150000 km. I have an 1,8 LT with 5 speed manual gearbox. And I'm very pleased with my car. I intentionally did search for this engine as others here are 1,6 l or 1,4T and the latter one only in hatchback or SW and I wanted sedan. And I thought that turbo is not suitable for my driving style, I'm driving this car in "Easyrider"-style, very carefully. I have a feeling that turbo makes driving too agressive. My gas consumption is about 6,6 litres/100 km. Very good indeed, I think.
Click to expand...
No clue how the 1.6 is and if the 1.4 is close to what we have it's not that bad an engine unless you rev it a lot. I guess it all depends on what you consider fast or aggressive as my Subaru is 300+ HP when it runs. My fuelly says 6.5 L/100K for the ECO but it may go up when I get around to putting the new gas receipts in. Subaru 2.5 turbo eats about 13.1 L/100K.
 
#26 · (Edited)
Well, the 1,6 engine is quite lazy. The 1,4T should be the same than You have there and this 1,8 also should be the same as You have there in LS-model. You can imagine how the 1,6 is as thinking 20 hp off from the 1,8. Both are without turbo.
I somehow feel this 1,8 just perfect for me, I also have a Range Rover with 3,5l V8, perhaps 165 HP, and it feels also quite similar. No fast acceleration, but still having power enough for normal driving on the road. Though RR is for off-road, small gravel roads and tractor paths mainly and it is a totally different vehicle there. Range takes about 18 l/100 km in winter time, couple liters less in summer.
Now I need to say that I have no any experience from the 1,4T, just my own imagination. I also thought turbo would be more complicated and that for more easy to have troubles after some years, but I may be over-careful here.
 
#28 ·
Bullet said:
Well, the 1,6 engine is quite lazy. The 1,4T should be the same than You have there and this 1,8 also should be the same as You have there in LS-model. You can imagine how the 1,6 is as thinking 20 hp off from the 1,8. Both are without turbo.
I somehow feel this 1,8 just perfect for me, I also have a Range Rover with 3,5l V8, perhaps 165 HP, and it feels also quite similar. No fast acceleration, but still having power enough for normal driving on the road. Though RR is for off-road, small gravel roads and tractor paths mainly and it is a totally different vehicle there. Range takes about 18 l/100 km in winter time, couple liters less in summer.
Now I need to say that I have no any experience from the 1,4T, just my own imagination. I also thought turbo would be more complicated and that for more easy to have troubles after some years, but I may be over-careful here.
Click to expand...
Yes, replacing a turbo is an adventure out of warranty. Did it on the Subaru and I don't plan on having the Cruze long enough to experience that again when the warranty goes. The plus size about it is the turbo makes the 1.4 act/respond like a 2.3 when you get on it especially if you know how to downshift into the power band to pass a few slow moving vehicles. With a tune I would get less gas mileage because I would abuse the extra power. That's just me from history class speaking, others would get different results in the same conditions. I drove both cars and the 1.8 feels like an even slower honda civic with 4 adult passengers compared to my 1.4(with 93 Shell V power and NGK V Power plugs)


Sent from my iFail 5s
 
#29 ·
At 36,000 miles a year, the added conveniences of the 1LT will make themselves felt quite rapidly. Better fuel economy and better passing power make themselves readily apparent. So does cruise control, which isn't available on the LS. Also, not having to spend $1000 on a timing belt change around 80k miles or so mostly pays for the difference. The 1.8 uses a timing belt, while the 1.4T has a timing chain.

I'd still say get the Eco MT, since that car will easily net you 42-46 mpg, depending on how fast you drive. 6-10 mpg more saves time at the pump, and will break even for you after a year and a half. Assuming you keep the car for 5 years, it's gravy for 3.5 years. More if you keep the car longer.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#30 ·
I have an LT1 RS 6 Speed and I'm averaging 42-ish MPG right now. Probably between 70-80% "highway". I say "highway" because it's all very hilly, turny backroads. I'm more than happy with 42 average.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#34 ·
trevor said:
$1000 for a timing belt? Where?
Click to expand...
Dealer pricing. Every timing belt car I or others in my family have owned, it's been about $1000 to change the belt at the dealer. After doing the timing belt on my old Hyundai, it's a bit of a pain in the rear that I'd rather not go through again.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#37 ·
This talk of the turbo failing is the reason I've been looking for a way to make the turbo a lifetime part, not a wear item.

My search has led me to bypass filtration of the oil. Using a good synthetic oil and bypass filtration, if I am successful in that endeavor, should maintain an oil quality that will prevent all mechanical wear of the turbo, at least as far as oil lubricated components are concerned. I am not the least bit concerned.

Sent from mobile.
 
21 - 37 of 37 Posts
About this Discussion
36 Replies
19 Participants
Last post:
XtremeRevolution
Chevrolet Cruze Forums
posts
760K
members
118K
Since
2010
CruzeTalk.com forum, news, discussions and the best community for owners to discuss all things related to the Chevy Cruze.
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Discussion Gen1 1.4L Turbo Gen1 Service Issues đź‘‹ CruzeTalk New Member Introductions Gen1 Audio, Electronics & Electrical