[Patman]

After only having my new 2014 LT for @ a month, I swear it is much better than 2012 Eco. Granted I have only put 600 miles on it, but overall the automatic and the general performance for the type of driving I do make it much better car for me. I mentioned to a co worker, that to this point I don't miss the 6M. I thought that would have been my biggest hang up but I think the gearing of the LT vs the Eco(even as an automatic) given the type of driving I do make the driving experience much better. I was struggling to get mid 30s out of my Eco with @ 90% city driving and find myself hwy drives to boost the MPG. Given the non hwy driving I do and the hills around where I live make the LT a better fit for me. Honestly I found myself doing a lot of shifting around my area in my Eco which in and of itself gets old fast. I wonder how the LT 6M would have fared? Overall I am satisfied with my auto LT choice and seeing close to similar MPG(31/vs. 33) to the Eco which is encouraging.

 

[obermd]

With that much city driving the ECO MT wasn't the best choice. I'm glad you found the right car.

 

[Merc6]

After only having my new 2014 LT for @ a month, I swear it is much better than 2012 Eco. Granted I have only put 600 miles on it, but overall the automatic and the general performance for the type of driving I do make it much better car for me. I mentioned to a co worker, that to this point I don't miss the 6M. I thought that would have been my biggest hang up but I think the gearing of the LT vs the Eco(even as an automatic) given the type of driving I do make the driving experience much better. I was struggling to get mid 30s out of my Eco with @ 90% city driving and find myself hwy drives to boost the MPG. Given the non hwy driving I do and the hills around where I live make the LT a better fit for me. Honestly I found myself doing a lot of shifting around my area in my Eco which in and of itself gets old fast. I wonder how the LT 6M would have fared? Overall I am satisfied with my auto LT choice and seeing close to similar MPG(31/vs. 33) to the Eco which is encouraging.

The autos got better over the years. If I got one I'd have to be 15 or 16 LTZ RS and would look into a front end swap. For me the Auto LS/LT and LTZ didn't give me the same or better MPG as my eco 6m in the city or freeway. For some off reason it was like I didn't know how to efficiently drive the auto in stock form. In theory you could just snag some Eco wheels and be back at home in an eco when you walk up to the car again. There is way more to it than just that, If you want I still have the eco grille up this way. How did you like having 6 fan speed setting and an extra dome light in the 14?

With that much city driving the ECO MT wasn't the best choice. I'm glad you found the right car.

That's kinda me at the moment. My highest MPG was literally from following all the CT folks down long freeways. Most my commutes are in town and when I'm lucky I get to hold 41 MPH. CVT would have been the better mpg choice but I just didn't like it. As many issues as a few of us had with manual I was willing to go auto Premer but 3 car seats issue wasn't great in the Cruze.

 

[jblackburn]

The one thing that bugs the heck out of me about the automatics is the highway gear ratios.

4-5-6 have a HUGE ratio spread between them. Go to pass on the highway, and if a 1000 rpm bump to 5th isn't enough, you go to 4th with the engine SCREAMING.

Ford uses this same transmission in most of their FWD models (codeveloped with them), but with a taller final drive ratio. I feel like that makes them less busy in the city since you're not in 5th gear by 30 mph, and makes for better highway mileage and performance as well.

Otherwise, I quite like my automatic for what it is. It's peppy and responds quickly in city driving and seems to have a good idea of what I want it to do when I push on the gas a certain amount - something I cannot say about most recent automatics I've driven. Living where I do and dealing with the volume of traffic that I do, don't really miss my manual in a daily driver at all. I'll absolutely have one in a weekend toy, though.

I always got pretty crummy MPG with the Gen 1 auto LTs compared to my manual LT, but the Gen 2 seems to be about on par with what my old car got (less in the winter, though).

 

[Merc6]

Having the Eco 6m the autos always revved way to high and didn't want to go into 6th early enough for me. Stock tune you can't achieve 6th until after 41 or so MPH.

 

[jblackburn]

Having the Eco 6m the autos always revved way to high and didn't want to go into 6th early enough for me. Stock tune you can't achieve 6th until after 41 or so MPH.

Yeah, 6th is still 42, and seems it is even higher with A/C on. The difference I have noticed is that it will hold 6th on down to 38 or so if you slow down rather than downshifting immediately like the 1st gen would. The new engine's so quiet I hardly even notice unless its going above 3k and refusing to shift because I'm going uphill. That uphill grade shifting can be annoying at times since I live at the bottom of a bunch of small hills, but it's also quite helpful when it does it on downhill brake applications.

Shift points in other gears do seem like they happen at much lower RPM than I recall the 1st gens doing.

 

[Patman]

With that much city driving the ECO MT wasn't the best choice. I'm glad you found the right car.

Yea I know. At the time, I was just looking for another 6M and I wanted a 1.4 vs the 1.8 after my LS was trashed and it was available.
Not one of my better decisions or at least well thought out as I had never had that much variation in trim levels of a car and never driven a
high MPG type of vehicle

 

[Blasirl]

Wow, I wish I could nudge up just a hair from 25.2 MPG. I did slightly worse towing a small trailer to Toledo at 25.1 average MPG. Someday - when I 'm older I guess!

 

[chevrasaki]

The 2014 LT is the best trim level and year for the Cruze in my personal opinion.