[MRO1791]

Good advice here.. I'd add seriously look at a sedan. The trunk is very large, better MPG, lower cost. Final assembly in OH. The DMF is a real concern for the manual, but even with mine replaced at 12k under warranty, I still love the car, it's a very easy manual to drive. I also have 2 9sp autos. That is a solid transmission, don't rule it out.

With the seats up, the hatch has virtually no cargo space.. make sure you look at one in person.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MRO1791]

Unless you can get a diesel Cruze for zero or very close to zero cost over a comparable gasoline model, it's a worthless purchase. Even for zero cost it's still questionable. Fuel costs will be higher to the point that the higher fuel economy will not offset the additional purchase price of a gasoline model. That, and every single part to maintain or repair a diesel model is higher cost than the gasoline engine. You can easily achieve 40+ mpg highway with gasoline Cruze vehicles. Buying a diesel gets you about 50 mpg, so it's a 25% increase in fuel economy. But the cost of fuel is higher and then DEF is a cost factor.

In about 16,000 miles of driving I have figured out that a diesel purchase just doesn't make sense when you can get high efficiency with a gasoline model.

Hmmm, I just had a gasoline Cruze rental on a business trip. 169 miles, virtually all highway... 33MPG, calculated from 5 gallons of fuel. I just got 52MPG in my Diesel, calculated, virtually identical driving conditions. That is a pretty massive difference. I could add that the gasoline engine screams higher RPM yet doesn't have the get up an go low end torque of the diesel. Where I live there is minimal cost difference from gasoline to Diesel, some parts of the US diesel is cheaper. As to DEF, it's statistically insignificant. A $7 2.5gallon jug at Walmart will get you well over 6000 miles... That is about a penny every 10 miles, and it's possible to get cheaper DEF at truck stops.
Yes, it's true the Diesel costs more to buy, but I got 2 of mine for $20k, well equipped... A comparable gasoline car with similar options would be about $17-18 k.. over the first 6 years with 12k/year the fuel cost savings cover that and then some, drive 24k per year it's covered in about 3 years. Beyond that the fuel savings cover the possible additional parts costs. This is just math. I should point out that it's typical to get near double the milage before overhaul than a much higher RPM gasoline engine.. that and there have been some difficulty with the gasoline engine and burning pistons, and some have determined that it really is best to use 89 or higher octane fuel to get best performance... All that said, the gasoline engine car is a fine option for some, especially if you look to replace the car before 5 years, and definitely if you drive limited miles. The diesel is an option that can make sense for higher milage, especially highway heavy drivers.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MRO1791]

People keep saying this like it's something that frequently happens in passenger cars. Oh, yeah, someone put 300,000 miles on a car and then put the engine in for an overhaul to keep on truckin'.

No one does that. Or almost no one does that. These aren't semi tractors where rebuilt engines are frequently fitted to dodge new emissions regulations and the cost of buying new. Passenger cars routinely rust/fall apart around the engine. I can count two people I've known in my life that had an engine rebuilt. One was a Chevy Astro van that they had a guy do a ring job and light rebuild on a weekend because it was cheap enough to make it worth it for a vehicle that was otherwise fine. The other was a Chevy Equinox with the POS made-in-China engine that dropped a valve, so a Jasper rebuilt engine was in order for a vehicle with only 40,000 miles on it.

Everything else becomes worthless to say you're going to overhaul and engine and keep the same vehicle. Technology is advancing enough that people desire new cars to get the latest Bluetooth satellite radio whatever. Or their car has tons of rust. Or the brakes, struts, tires, etc. are also all clapped out and it's another $2,000 to fix all that.

These mythical engine rebuilds for long-term car ownership just don't happen.

Might not happen for you, but I have a 1962 Land Rover.. It does not have the original engine. My 1996 Saturn has over 200,000, and is close to needing a re-build, it burns some oil, but otherwise runs fine, and the body and rest of the car are fine, where I live they don't salt the crap out of the roads so cars don't rust away in 5 years.

Experiences will vary, and for the kind of person interested in a diesel, these are the kind of people who are more likely to keep a car a long time, just look a the VW TDI types, they tend to keep a car for a long time.

So the point is, just because you don't see it often, or never, and it does not apply to you, does not mean it is not a factor for other people.

 

[MRO1791]

I'm with you. All these claims of 60+ are hard for me to accept. I drive 120 miles round trip for my commute from the start of the Ozark to STL Metro weekdays. I run 75-80mph and I've seen 48mpg in the Summer (bought in July '18) and low 40s in the winter. I have a 6spd HB

The high MPG is with 60-65 MPH, and the lower drag of the sedan, as well as low rolling resistance tires factor in. To get 48MPH going as fast as you are going is actually pretty amazing.. see if you can find any other car getting that with those speeds. Another factor is fuel quality.. yes for diesel it can vary and significantly impact MPG. It could also play into your situation. On my Gen 2s the life time averages are all in the mid 40s, and long trip highway miles are mid 50s, in the right conditions 60+ is very possible. Best 50 mile is 69MPG, and I've verified computer to actual fuel from fill up, the computer is consistently lower than actual by 1-2MPG.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MRO1791]

Don't assume gasoline engine cars cannot be as just as durable as diesel engine cars. While there are diesel cars which, when properly maintained, could go well over 500k miles without any major engine or transmission work (e.g. 123 chassis Mercedes Benz 300 D), I seriously doubt that is the case with more modern diesel cars. Cars are simply built too cheap nowadays, engines are way too complicated with ridiculous emission systems, and even if the engine block/transmission can last a long time, it is the electronic controls and sensors that will make repairs economically unsustainable as the car or truck ages.

I had 340k miles on my 1999 Mazda 626 ES V6 and the car still ran great with the original engine and transmission without any major work having been done(I bought the car new). I know of people who had Volvo 240 cars with 300k+ miles on the original engine/transmission. Same for Nissan hardbody pickups and Toyota 1980s pick up trucks, some with well over 500k miles on the original engines/transmissions.

And everything you are concerned about with modern Diesel engines, except the emissions is applicable to modern gasoline engines as well. As far as the emissions go, many improvements have been made, and with the heavy trucks now using these systems over many more miles than is typical for most cars, I'd expect those issues to become less of a concern. I get the complexity of the electronics, but generally I think the quality in many areas is far better than prior cars.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MRO1791]

The injector pressures in these cars are around 20,000 psi vs about 2,000 psi for mechanical fuel injector older diesels. I too suspect that repairs on this engine will be very expensive once out of warranty. And GM could not even offer a 100k miles, 5 year powertrain warranty on this diesel engine? I am not encouraged when I see cheap materials used in construction of this car. Cheap plastic everywhere, even clutch master cylinder and hydraulic line to clutch slave cylinder is plastic!

Repairs on any modern car can be expensive. Gas engines are going direct injection, with injectors that won't be cheap , along with fuel pumps, etc. As to plastic parts, sure all cars are going that way. Anyone who relies in dealership service for repairs for any car risks expensive repairs. A transmission on any car is going to be expensive.. the marginal additional cost of diesel parts is insignificant when fuel cost savings are factored in.

Now I should point out that the commercial, heavy duty vehicle market where fuel and maintenance costs are calculated and vital to ability to make profit or go out of business.. that is dominated by Diesel engine powered vehicles. Make of that what you will, but it's a pretty good endorsement of diesel being economically viable as an engine choice in any vehicle..

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

[MRO1791]

for heavy weights, sure

otherwise, not so much...see fords investment in big gas motors for vehicles

Driven by challenging and expensive, and recent emissions standards... The cost of diesel emissions has come down, technology has improved. That and all emissions systems and motors hate frequent short run / city style driving.. but it's worse for Diesel emissions.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk