Mine too - I guess it's normal. The Gen 1 ran 1 tick under 1/2.Coolant does go a tick over 1/2 most of the time, I've often wondered if that's normal or not.
I cannot imagine a dealer taking this concern seriously.......and there really is nothing to repair. If it was off by 5mph or more then the only course of action is panel replacement.Does anyone else have an issue in their Gen2, where the digital speedometer is 1.5 MPH off compared to the analog one?
View attachment 229330 View attachment 229338
Which one is right?!
Will eventually get this taken care of during my next oil change, but don't want to go out of my way to get it fixed.
Oh, I'll absolutely be complaining over this. While it may sound important in the grand scheme of things, I pay my hard earned money for this and I expect a certain level of service from not only GM, but the dealer I purchase from. I've complained over "lesser" things and have had them repaired. It's a deficiency and it'll be repaired, otherwise I'll not use that dealer again and would also consider GM in question as well. It won't get that far, and it'll be repaired when asked for. I've never not once got my way with a reproducible, warranty issue/defect, except once, and involved corporate to resolve it.I cannot imagine a dealer taking this concern seriously.......and there really is nothing to repair. If it was off by 5mph or more then the only course of action is panel replacement.
The analogue is IMO, just about in agreement with the digital and in all seriousness, any analogue instrument falls into the 'close enough' range......same as any of the other analogue instruments.
If you split hairs that tightly you'll go crazy if you compare your readings (digital and analogue) to a GPS......be prepared to see the panel one to three percent higher than GPS actual.
Going further, as the tires wear, the percentage will increase since they are getting smaller in diameter.
Worry not, enjoy the car.
Rob
Where does it sit at 40? 45? 60?Oh, I'll absolutely be complaining over this. While it may sound important in the grand scheme of things, I pay my hard earned money for this and I expect a certain level of service from not only GM, but the dealer I purchase from. I've complained over "lesser" things and have had them repaired.
Both of mine (2012/2016) have consistently been 1.5-3 MPG off the manual calculation.I haven't check that specifically, but I have noticed that the MPG calculation is if off compared to manual calculation (tank up, set trip odometer to zero, tank up, divide the odometer miles by the gas put in).
I have checked about five tanks now, and the variation has been between 99% to 90% (the computer being more optimistic).
In my previous 2011 Cruze, I checked it about seven times and it was around 97% each time.
Don't read this:Oh, I'll absolutely be complaining over this. While it may sound important in the grand scheme of things, I pay my hard earned money for this and I expect a certain level of service from not only GM, but the dealer I purchase from. I've complained over "lesser" things and have had them repaired. It's a deficiency and it'll be repaired, otherwise I'll not use that dealer again and would also consider GM in question as well. It won't get that far, and it'll be repaired when asked for. I've never not once got my way with a reproducible, warranty issue/defect, except once, and involved corporate to resolve it.
Toyota Corollas/Honda Odysseys/Toyota Priuses must show they're going faster by 10-15 mph then, since they're always crawling in the left lane. Hmm...
Dealer ordered a new cluster under warranty, it'll be installed on Monday. I think you're misunderstanding that the gauges do not match what the corresponding digital readout indicates. I am not going to continuously subtract 1.7529593292 MPH every time I look at the analog gauge, which I do far more than the digital screen. I'm well aware of the inconsistencies of a vehicle speed in regards to tire size, tread, weight etc read as opposed to a GPS measurement. That's not my concern here.
" GM's domestic products are the most accurate" So I guess the question is, which of the two in this domestic GM car is the most accurate one?
Its just odd that Gen 1 was consistently off 97%, but Gen 2 varies 90% to 99%.Both of mine (2012/2016) have consistently been 1.5-3 MPG off the manual calculation.
My Gen 1 was never consistent. It could be anywhere from 1.5 to 5 MPG off (very rarely). Shrug.Its just odd that Gen 1 was consistently off 97%, but Gen 2 varies 90% to 99%.
At least with Gen 2, if I assume the 90% all the time, my MPG for my commute is still better than Gen 1 at 97%. (39 mpg vs. 37 mpg) so even if the computer is off, Gen 2 is still a better car MPG for my driving.
I think it's safe to say that the digital display is the better reflection of what the car's computer wants to show you. To determine which is more accurate, you'd have to have some kind of outside measurement, such as a timed measured mile to know for sure.So I guess the question is, which of the two in this domestic GM car is the most accurate one?
Do you like it? How is the pick up or acceleration? How would you compare the driving of that body with a 1.5 and the Cruze with a 1.4?I am driving a 2018 Equinox for the time being.