Chevrolet Cruze Forums banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Took the Cruze ECO 6MT on a 4 day trip up to New Hampshire and Vermont, for my 13 year old's Lacrosse Tournament. Here's a summary with all the details:
  • 5 people in the car (myself, two 20 year olds, a 13 year old, and an 11 year old)
  • A full trunk (full-size cooler, lacrosse sticks, other supplies)
  • Thule roof rack with aero blades, and a Thule Caravan Cargo Bag (filled with 3 full duffle bags)
  • Long Lacrosse stick secured to roof rack
  • 750 mile round trip from CT. up through the White Mountains in New Hampshire, over to Stowe Vermont, and back to CT.
  • Averaged 5 mpg less with the full load, and roof rack/cargo bag (31 mpg vs 36) using only 93 octane.
The Cruze held up well, and the AC was more than sufficient to keep us cool through the 90 + heat. Biggest issue was the lack of power up the mountains with such a full load. On the highway, had to downshift to 4th to make it up the long hills.


Biggest takeaway for me is the need for more power with a full load. Am definitely considering the Trifecta Tune after this trip.


Land vehicle Vehicle Chevrolet cruze Car Chevrolet
Land vehicle Vehicle Car Chevrolet cruze Mid-size car
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,595 Posts
Patman, you should be getting more than 36 MPG on the highway when not using the roof rack. Even a fully loaded Cruze ECO MT should be getting in the mid 40s on the open road.

How'd your son's team do?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Patman, you should be getting more than 36 MPG on the highway when not using the roof rack. Even a fully loaded Cruze ECO MT should be getting in the mid 40s on the open road.

How'd your son's team do?
I actually get well over 40 on the highway. The 36 is my overall average in mixed driving prior to the trip. This trip was about 65/35 highway to city/rural. The cargo bag really hurts mileage.

My son's team went 2-1-2 on the weekend up at Stowe. Teams from all over the country were there, so it was a successful tournament. Thanks for asking.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,595 Posts
I know what loading the top of a car does to fuel economy, which is why I asked about the unloaded numbers. I also noticed your fuelly shows 34.7, which is what triggered my question about the unloaded mpgs.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,822 Posts
Biggest takeaway for me is the need for more power with a full load. Am definitely considering the Trifecta Tune after this trip.
Yes - you should be able to stay in a higher gear on those hills with the extra torque of the tune.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I know what loading the top of a car does to fuel economy, which is why I asked about the unloaded numbers. I also noticed your fuelly shows 34.7, which is what triggered my question about the unloaded mpgs.
Fuelly average came down with the trip mileage. In daily driving, I average between 35 and 36, because I deal with a number of traffic lights once off the highway in my daily commute.
 

·
Administrator, Resident Tater Salad
Joined
·
17,787 Posts
Stuff on top of the car really hurts highway power (and mileage) as well. We used to pile stuff on the top of our Saab 900 on long trips - one year, as a big family, we packed far too much and the roof rack was so un-aerodynamic that the car just couldn't do over 60-65 on the highway, foot to the floor. The weight of 5 people + a full trunk and <100 HP left in the old engine probably didn't help either.

The Yakima roof carrier has the same effect on a Jeep as well (when empty) at 70+ MPH.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top