[Markham109]

2015 Cruze 1LT automatic: 2015 -- Yearly AVG 23 mpg or 10.2 L/100km

1. September - present: 23mpg

I've only had the car for two months or so now, and with about 2500 km (1550 miles), I'm getting roughly 23 mpg or 10.2 L/100km with city driving. And it isn't gridlocked downtown traffic, just suburb driving.

Tbh, I was expecting a bit better mileage but this mileage is worse than my old 2007 Cobalt. Just can't figure out why it's this bad - my tires are certainly inflated (35 psi) and I don't drive aggressively either. A sibling of mine with a 2015 Corolla drives like he stole that bugger still manages to keep his city driving down to about 9.5 L/100km (24.8 mpg). Don't think I'll keep it after the two year lease. :sad010:

 

[obermd]

Moved to it's own thread. Hopefully someone can assist you in resolving this.

 

[Markham109]

Thanks!

 

[ChevyGuy]

Using the trip odometer, what's your average MPH? How long is your average trip? I get less than that, but it's because my trips average less than 2 miles and having to stop for a light every 3 blocks. EPA's "city" doesn't reflect my driving.

 

[spacedout]

A sibling of mine with a 2015 Corolla drives like he stole that bugger still manages to keep his city driving down to about 9.5 L/100km (24.8 mpg). Don't think I'll keep it after the two year lease. :sad010:

If you watch your instant MPG readout, I suspect your accelerating so slow that your on the gas most of the time getting single digit MPG. Drive your car slightly more aggressively and get up to speed quicker. Accelerating slowly burns more gas since the amount of time your on the gas is 3-4X longer. If you can get into 5th gear quicker with the automatic(above 30mph), constant speed like that in the city will achieve hwy MPG in the city.

Do you use remove start or idle the car to warm it? burning gas while not moving gets you ZERO MPG and really brings down your overall average. Winter time I loose 8-10MPG from my summer average since I do use remote start and idle the car, besides winter gas already being a penalty.

 

[jblackburn]

I see mileage like that when my average MPH is around 15 or so.

For me, that means a lot of idling at lights, then accelerating up to 35+

 

[_MerF_]

I have to admit I'm also sorely disappointed in the fuel economy of my 2015 1LT in city driving (90% of my commute). My average speed is somewhere around 24 MPH, IIRC...but an engine this tiny should be sipping at idle and this thing seems to gulp.

I'm not at all concerned about fuel economy, if I were I would be quite sore about this. Instead, I'm more happy about tuning it and making it peppy without feeling like I'm losing out on something.

 

[jblackburn]

I have to admit I'm also sorely disappointed in the fuel economy of my 2015 1LT in city driving (90% of my commute). My average speed is somewhere around 24 MPH, IIRC...but an engine this tiny should be sipping at idle and this thing seems to gulp.

I'm not at all concerned about fuel economy, if I were I would be quite sore about this. Instead, I'm more happy about tuning it and making it peppy without feeling like I'm losing out on something.

Not much fuel used at idle (IIRC, .25 gal/hr or something), but it's a tiny engine moving around a heavy car for the class. Every time you lay into that turbo, like these cars do from like 2200 RPM and on up, it's more inefficient than a larger (1.8-2.0 liter) naturally aspirated engine.

 

[_MerF_]

Not much fuel used at idle (IIRC, .25 gal/hr or something), but it's a tiny engine moving around a heavy car for the class. Every time you lay into that turbo, like these cars do from like 2200 RPM and on up, it's more inefficient than a larger (1.8-2.0 liter) naturally aspirated engine.

But the engine at vacuum should offset the times the turbo is spooling, hence the efficiency of the turbo. Although I don't have a boost gauge on the Cruze yet, I'm sure it's not constantly positive manifold pressure while cruising, like a diesel. And that's evident by the great numbers it gets when I do have the rare chance to set the CC and let it hit 50MPG (by it's own calculations, which I know are overly generous).

But, I get your point about small engine/heavy car. It's the acceleration that kills this and I'm always in stop/go. I'm just saying that I expected more out of it in city driving.

 

[jblackburn]

Right, the engines a fantastic "cruiser", but there are lots of cars coming out now that get a much higher city MPG rating. I guess that's why the new 2016 platform lost so much weight and got a totally new engine.

 

[spacedout]

My 1.4T auto is rated at 26city/38mpg highway so there is a 12mpg difference where most peoples average will fall(Its 14mpg with an Eco manual). This is the reason why you see such a difference between what each user gets for MPG. Now if you go look at say a silverado 5.3L the city/hwy difference is only 7mpg so every driver usually falls within 1-3mpg of each other no matter their route.

GM really needs to improve the city MPG, since the 2016+ has start stop tech and is lighter I'm sure this will really help things out. BTW I think the 26mpg city rating is kinda a joke, maybe if you can actually hit some 35mph streets with few stops. In residential areas with stops at every block my DIC is typically reading about 14mpg in town, average I would guess is probably closer to 21MPG city. Obviously the EPA test cycle still needs some work.

 

[ChevyGuy]

If you watch your instant MPG readout, I suspect your accelerating so slow that your on the gas most of the time getting single digit MPG. Drive your car slightly more aggressively and get up to speed quicker. Accelerating slowly burns more gas since the amount of time your on the gas is 3-4X longer.

I look at it differently (but with the same conclusion). Cars are more efficient at higher gears. The longer (in distance) you spend in the lower gears, the lower your MPG. Yes, a brisk acceleration will gulp gas, but only for a moment and then you're in the higher gear.

 

[spacedout]

I look at it differently (but with the same conclusion). Cars are more efficient at higher gears. The longer (in distance) you spend in the lower gears, the lower your MPG. Yes, a brisk acceleration will gulp gas, but only for a moment and then you're in the higher gear.

Exactly, with a light foot the cruze you will spend WAY to much time in the lower 1-4 gears. Like I said if you can stay above 30mph(in 5th gear) in the city on roads with few stops, I get close to hwy MPG in the city. Unfortunately I always seem to get stuck behind the people who think 25mph means 23mph! Unless its a speed trap people no one will stop you for 30mph in a 25mph zone! Guess this would be one advantage of a CVT, it would eliminate those shift points/speed limitations and some of my annoyance with slow drivers.

 

[Markham109]

Thanks for the replies and help guys. I definitely do take a bit of time to get up to speed (thinking that it would help the mileage). I do use the remote start but since the range isn't very long, maybe like 1 minute tops.

I'll try to drive less like a grandma and more like the average driver, and will report back in a week or two to see if it helped.

 

[obermd]

Markham, my 2012 ECO MT took 7,500 miles to reach it's full fuel efficiency.

 

[ssnscruzeeco2015]

Markham109, Welcome to dedicated Cruze ownership.

There are a large number of folks here who are achieving insane mileage numbers, I drive manual therefore can manipulate what gear I select in order to maximize the distance per liter based on the road ahead. I don't use a remote car starter. I also monitor my engine using enhanced digital OBDII instrumentation.

The key thing as many have observed already is to get the car into the highest gear as quickly as possible, without the ECU changing the best economical shift points. Drive as if you do not have brakes, which will enable you to take advantage DFCO (Deceleration Fuel Cut Off) and coast to stop whenever possible. (I am not an automatic driver, I am sure somebody here can get you ideal shiftpoints)

If you use the same route, observe your eco monitors as suggested to you and make mental notes of what worked for certain parts of the road or scenarios and what did not.

Also note that you car is still new. it took me nearly 5000 kms to get the engine and running gear loosened up and another 5000 kms to understand the nuances of the engine and the car.

Spend sometime online within the link below

Fuel Economy


And if you have lots of Toyota or Honda friends take a look in the link below for a laugh. My 3100 Lb beast is right up there in the list of micro fuel sippers of the 90's, so awesome mileage are achievable with some training.

EcoModder Fleet list - EcoModder.com

I am always around to help.

 

[ChevyGuy]

Drive as if you do not have brakes,

As long as the car is in one of it's higher gears, it will glide like a toy Hot Wheel. If I'm doing 25 MPH or more, I can easily go a block with no throttle with little loss in speed. So I try to watch ahead and get off the throttle if the next light is red.

 

[_MerF_]

As long as the car is in one of it's higher gears, it will glide like a toy Hot Wheel. If I'm doing 25 MPH or more, I can easily go a block with no throttle with little loss in speed. So I try to watch ahead and get off the throttle if the next light is red.

For real. I'm always surprised by how far this thing will coast with the clutch disengaged or in neutral.

 

[ssnscruzeeco2015]

I coast so well in my M6 Eco that I don't even bother coasting in neutral, all I got to do is drop a gear and force DFCO if required. I can go down to nearly 50KPH before I have to do that. The key is to keep it off the elevated idle that is invoked when the car is moving. If I could only get the idle RPM to drop while moving to the 600 or 700 range the way it does stopped, I would be very happy. if you try to take the engine below 1000 to 1100 while moving it will force the RPM up by injecting more fuel.

 

[Markham109]

OP here. So I've tried driving as suggested and getting into gear 5 or 6 as much as possible. After about 300 kilometers (185 miles), no real difference in mileage. Doing about 10.4 L/100km.

It certainly isn't the 8.5-9 L/100km (or whatever) Chevrolet claims, but I guess I'll just have to live with it for 21 more months until the lease is done. Apart from the poor mileage and a few music system glitches, no real complaints though. I guess no use being upset about something I can't control. :grin: