Chevrolet Cruze Forums banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

Well yesterday my place of work and my dealer replaced my headliner. initially visor broke and during install we found the headliner was warped. all covered under B2B thankfully. so thanks to some good members here ( shout out to RIXSTER ) I was able to pull up the document to show the shop how to do this without removing my glass. My car is in the shop and they where not able to finish by the time I got off so I got a GM loaner. My hopes was the loaner impala or the silverado.... no I got stuck with another cruze ( I want to try another vehicle not the cruze). So I got the car and it has 1,200 miles and is a red lt with RS. My diesel should be done today so might as well review the differences.


Exterior.
The Lt is a 2016 limited and has the RS so it has skirts, integrated fog lights and led running lights. The diesel has the normal front bumper form a non RS cruze ; with the addition of active aro shutters in lower grill and a NASCAR style main radiator deflector (big enough to cool but reduce drag). Not to much to go over here.


Interior.
Well im shocked here. The 1.4 LT Rs has cloth seats and trim. This is not surprising, what is surprising is the fact that the cloth seats are WAY WAY more supportive and comfortable then the CTD leather ones. The leather is spongy and cloth firmer. This may be personal preference but I prefer firm support over a soft plushy couch... think Lotus excige vs Cadillac huggy mobile. The LT did not have heated seats as does the CTD nor the leather dash inserts.The cab was more hush in the 2.0 and better insulated. when driving my norm roads to work the 1.4 showed more road imperfections. Rest is about the same between the two



Trans.
Ok so im gonna say it. I much prefer the 1.4 trans over my diesel. The gas trans is silky smooth, you hardly tell its doing its job. The gear shifter feels more tactile in the 1.4 then the CTD ( think how a scope click feels of a zenith or vortex scope vs a bariska or refield/ebay). Now the bad. The 1.4 is very gear down happy when WOT or when needing to pass. Doing 50 MPH going WOT drops 6[SUP]th[/SUP] to 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] and leaves you at 5,700 Rpm then shortly in a second shifts back up to 4[SUP]th[/SUP] . Why did it not just go down to 4[SUP]th[/SUP] in the first place I dont know. The trans in 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] gear has a slip zone when the Torque converter has not locked up yet. Very annoying feeling the slip zone but to be fair the CTD also does the same thing in 2[SUP]nd[/SUP]. I personally feel the 1.4 gear shifts are FASTER to respond to manual inputs then the CTD.



Steering/Suspension.
Ok so the 1.4 made for a pleasant drive. I can DEFINTLY feel the extra 300lbs of iron gone from the front axle. The steering is more responsive at speeds, it is finer feel, and at low speeds its note worthy to mention easier to go clock to clock then the CTD. Where I do think the CTD has the 1.4 beat is stability. When really getting on it the CTD is more stable and a lil bit less twitchy. The CTD may not jump front turn to turn but when you point and shoot it easily stays on track until you change the direction. Now I do want to CONFIRM that the 1.4 LT I drove did in fact have the z link rear.



Engine
Ok so the 1.4 I like. The CTD has a annoying slap an engineer worth computer programmed lag in throttle response. The 1.4 the moment you touch the gas goes... no lag just get up and go. The 1.4 does not have the annoying Get into neutral when not moving “feature”. When taking my work route the 1.4 helped me pull out into traffic much faster; the down side of the 1.4 was pulling power. 1.4 gets you into the lane faster but does not have the pulling/passing power the CTD does so closer calls. The 1.4 is much more silent at idle ( yah go figure ) but when up to speed or WOT gets louder then the 2.0. On the highway the 2.0 really shines and the 1.4 gets left in shadows; not to say the 1.4 is bad its just not up to par with the 2.0.

Brakes.
For a daily spirited driver im sure the brakes will serve you well, only complaint is the drum brakes in the rear... I HATE DRUMS! so that's just me. CTD vs 1.4 the CTd has firmer initial bite and feels more responsive, the 1.4 is easier to press but not as easy to modulate.

over all review. the 1.4 impresses me with a cozy ride, Great driving manors, super peppy engine and very willing to move. Downside is a bit anemic power out put combined with kick down of too many gears leads to lost opportunists in traffic. Drum breaks in 2016 STILL??. i hope this review can help any one trying to buy one or the other. both great cars IMO. the CTd is more powerful and more amenities. the 1.4 is just smile worthy around town.


 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
2,170 Posts
Very interesting comparison, that is too bad you couldn't get something different for a rental. I adored the Suburban rental I was given once when my Cobalt was in the shop.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Very interesting comparison, that is too bad you couldn't get something different for a rental. I adored the Suburban rental I was given once when my Cobalt was in the shop.
i was soo hoping for the impala loaner we have. would be nice to see how i like its driving dynamics
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
2,170 Posts
Also, I am with you on the drum brakes. Seriously, it really wouldn't be that hard to do 4 wheel discs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pandrad61

·
Moderator
Joined
·
2,254 Posts
X3, I wish mine had 4 wheel discs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
You would think it would be more cost effective to have a single brake system and since they have a rear disc option that is the one that would make logical sense.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
2,170 Posts
You would think it would be more cost effective to have a single brake system and since they have a rear disc option that is the one that would make logical sense.
I have indeed had that exact thought.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
25,596 Posts
I don't know why GM put drums on the rear of the LS, 1LT, and ECO, but once adjusted they work just fine. I've even driven a canyon near my home that would overheat the drums on my old Pontiac Transport (minivan) but my ECO MT's brakes don't even start to warm up. And yes, I was gearing down in the Transport.

For the engine - I've never been a diesel fan and personally found the CTD's engine feel to be rough when compared to my ECO. For steering, the extra 300 lbs in the CTD is noticeable. Both of these are personal preference however.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
I don't know why GM put drums on the rear of the LS, 1LT, and ECO, but once adjusted they work just fine. I've even driven a canyon near my home that would overheat the drums on my old Pontiac Transport (minivan) but my ECO MT's brakes don't even start to warm up. And yes, I was gearing down in the Transport
agreed. as i stated they are more then enough for a spirited street driver. a hard track day maybe not so much but 90% of drivers dont track.

For the engine - I've never been a diesel fan and personally found the CTD's engine feel to be rough when compared to my ECO. For steering, the extra 300 lbs in the CTD is noticeable. Both of these are personal preference however.
agreed as well. the 1.4 is defiantly smoother and more refined then the 2.0 but the 2.0 has incredible passing power for the class. the CTD would be soo much better with some better trans programming and the lag taken out of the computer. a diesel is a acquired taste in terms of drivability and character
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top