Chevrolet Cruze Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I currently drive a 2011 LT 6A, summit white Cruze with power seat, sensors, remote start, etc. I'm trading up to a 2012 bc the GM Employee rebates are awesome on the Cruze. I am just having a little trouble deciding. I'm torn between a 2012 LT, Blue Topaz with the All-Star (sunroof and Pioneer sound) 6M and conveinence. Or a 2012 Crystal Red Eco, 6M with convenience. Will the manual Eco give me lots better mileage than the manual LT? Help please! Thanks
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
485 Posts
Yes the Eco will give you better gas
Mileage. And the sunroof for the dealer to install is only like an extra $900. IMO the "premium" sound system is junk, you can get aftermarket speakers that sound better for around the same price


Sent from my iPhone using AutoGuide.com Free App
 
  • Like
Reactions: XtremeRevolution

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
485 Posts
However I think you should wait till the 2014 Cruze SS comes out to upgrade ;)


Sent from my iPhone using AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I trade every 1 to 2 years anyways. The manual LT should get better than what I'm getting now, correct

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using AutoGuide.Com Free App
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
485 Posts
Manuals theoretically get better gas mileage because you can shift at lower RPM points. However if you are someone that plans on ripping through gears then no, it wouldn't be any different than in your AT


Sent from my iPhone using AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
15,743 Posts
I trade every 1 to 2 years anyways. The manual LT should get better than what I'm getting now, correct

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using AutoGuide.Com Free App
Yes, but don't expect to get the kind of numbers the Eco guys are pulling. You will get a few mpg better than the automatic Cruzes with a manual LT, but a manual Eco will still blow it away.
 

·
Administrator, Resident Tater Salad
Joined
·
17,330 Posts
All I've got to add, after having a sunroof and good stereo in my last car, I'm kicking myself now for not having got the All-Star package for another $1000. But it was hard enough tracking down the manual LT, and I needed a car quickly.

But yes, the Eco will beat the LT for highway driving. In-town, don't expect a difference. I can be in 6th gear by 35-40 if I want to and regularly get 40-42 mpg DIC on a 8-mile city/highway jaunt if I try hard enough. I can also drive it like I just don't care about gas mileage that much and still get very respectable MPG numbers.

Try both, and see which gearbox you like more.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
485 Posts
IMO all in all an MT is more of a fun drive than an AT. Even though the AT has the "performance" shifter there is considerable lag between you pressing up and it actually shifting up.


Sent from my iPhone using AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,158 Posts
If your commute is much longer than 30 minutes one way the Eco MT will start saving gas pretty quickly. Gosh knows what will happen to gas prices a year from now or even next summer.

If MPG isn't as high a priority, I'd then get the "fun" car with a sunroof and all that. It'll still get decent fuel economy.

Do you want a car more focused on MPG's that can still be pretty darned fun, or do you want more of a luxo-mobile that still gets okay MPG's?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Thanks for all of your replies. I weighed in on each pros and cons. Basically fuel millage against sunroof and color. I'm going with the LT. And I'm stoked! 2011 LT with 20k for a 2012 LT. Payment changed less than $19/month

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using AutoGuide.Com Free App
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,296 Posts
Sticker EPA ratings on my MT 2012 2LT Cruze shows a big 38 mpg. Small print shows a more realistic range of from 31 to 45 mpg. Eco is a tad bit better, but depending on what kind of fuel you use, how you drive and maintain it can be far worse than the 2LT.

For the little extra the 2LT cost, and the far superior vehicle you are receiving, feel it was well worth the money, and the ability to have a spare tire with a manual transmission.

If I could get away with driving my 2LT in 5th gear at 30 mph, can easily average 56 mpg, but only with summer gas, still paying the same amount for nitrogen, oxygen, and MBTE's that some say is causing cancer for this terrible winter gas.

Love the extra 3 gallons of gas I can carry for an extra 120 miles of driving, least I can still buy ethanol free gas up here, so a round trip to Chicago without a fillup. Besides when I use up those 3 extra gallons of fuel, hey, I am just like an Eco. Even with the spare tire added, but my new wife only weighs 120 pounds where my old one tipped the scales at 230, so making up on that weight difference as well.

Even worse was my old 1990 Thunderbird where I had to slap in 300 pounds of sand bags so the car would move in the snow. Cruze is a far superior balanced car. Did love my old 1984 Honda Accord DX with a MT, a consistent 46 mpg, thought we were moving forwards instead of backwards.

If you can't decide, do you want one of us to decide for you? You may have different preferences. Key reason why I waited for the 2012's to come out, couldn't even buy a 2LT in 2011 with a manual transmission. GM made that choice for me, I didn't buy anything back then.

May never use that spare tire, but I know its there, that makes me happy.
 

·
Epic Beard Man
Joined
·
5,389 Posts
ECO MT ftw. As much as I like my remote start, chrome door handles, heated mirrors, auto dimming rear view, backup sensors, push button start/keyless entry, and LTZ wheels, I'm starting to wonder if I shouldn't have gone with a 6MT. I did buy the car for mileage, but wanted the goodies as well. I honestly think I manu-shift the 6A almost twice as much as I would the MT, and that would be if I went into every gear. I was afraid of having a clutch, but my hand is getting more of a workout than I expected (that's awkward).

I guess ^ just says I need Trifecting.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,167 Posts
ECO MT ftw. As much as I like my remote start, chrome door handles, heated mirrors, auto dimming rear view, backup sensors, push button start/keyless entry, and LTZ wheels, I'm starting to wonder if I shouldn't have gone with a 6MT. I did buy the car for mileage, but wanted the goodies as well. I honestly think I manu-shift the 6A almost twice as much as I would the MT, and that would be if I went into every gear. I was afraid of having a clutch, but my hand is getting more of a workout than I expected (that's awkward).

I guess ^ just says I need Trifecting.
Not me my LTZ all the way.
 

·
Administrator, Resident Tater Salad
Joined
·
17,330 Posts
Automatics are so overrated. I can count on one hand the number of good automatic transmissions I've driven...and so many others that have no clue what they're doing.

I would like heated mirrors, though. I loved having those when it rains. And ok, I do miss the heated seats and sunroof sometimes. And the horsepower and awesome audio system. Perhaps I should have gone with the 2LT. But I don't like leather. My 1985 Saab had heated cloth seats...whatever happened to those?!

But hey, I'm happy with my car, and it's what I can afford now. I'll get something nicer down the road, and it won't be an economy car made up to be a luxury car.
 

·
Epic Beard Man
Joined
·
5,389 Posts
I wonder how many electronics would be involved to swap over the auto for a 6MT?

I absolutely love my LTZ though and wouldn't think to trade it for an ECO, but I would certainly add the shutters, gearing, etc. to make it into an LTZ with an ECO package if it were fairly cheap to do.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top