[jblackburn]

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.

Our 5-cyl Volvo finally blew up at 250,000, and my brother elected to just drop another engine in it.

Personally, I'd have crushed the thing years ago...for sure, the rest of the car falls apart around the engine if the body doesn't rust out first.

 

[turboguy327]

I have owned several diesel cars in my life and last year chose to get a Cruz diesel. I personally like the power economy and ride. I debated the cruise and the Jetta however the Jetta is our scares and demanding a lot of money. Also is the Jetta is dated compared to the cruise. The technology package is nice I enjoy that very much. On the way home I got 60.7 miles per gallon then while at the dealership they had a California recall that cut into the economy by 10 percent. I always get 40 miles a gallon knocking around my neighborhood and a little over 50 on trips. I will probably chip The car later on. In fact, I like the car so much I will be purchasing an extended warranty for 150,000 miles. So in closing I would like to say from me, I love the car and I am happy with my decision.

You can’t tune it and add the warranty. The tune will void the power train warranty.

 

[turboguy327]

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.

I’ve rebuilt plenty of engines... Both for performance reasons and to keep a vehicle going. I buy cars with blown engines and repair them all the time. If people didn’t rebuild engines, machines shops wouldn’t be so easy to come by.

 

[BodhiBenz1987]

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.

I can't really speak to what mpg I'd be getting in a gas Cruze manual though I'd love to try one on a trip and see. Yes, from what I've heard you can easily get 40 mpg on the highway. But I easily get over 60 mpg on the highway in my diesel. Not 50. Road trip of 1,200 miles round trip, averaged 66 mpg. Road trip of 750 round trip, averaged 66 mpg. And as mentioned I have hit 70+ mpg on the "last 25" many times and a few times on the "last 50". So 40 vs 65 is not a small difference. At that ratio even now with the biggest price split between gas and diesel I see per year (70 cents) the diesel less $ per mile. And in the summer, diesel and regular are around the same price where I live. And as MRO1791 mentioned, the gas Cruzes seem to do better on higher octane fuel so that's worth factoring in too.
Don't get me wrong, for sure the gas would be a better economical choice for many people depending on driving habits. But to say a diesel is a "worthless purchase" is a stretch. People just need to do the math and weight various aspects. It's not like most people make a 100% economical choice, anyway. When you factor that diesel is a little more spirited with its torque, it was the obvious choice for me. It wasn't that much more expensive than a similarly equipped gas Cruze. The biggest drawback to me is the reliability issues and potential for lack of support from GM but I decided to take a chance.

 

[Aussie]

There are a lot of pro's and con's about owning a diesel, so here is my take on it. I bought new in 2012 and currently have just passed 69K km. Most of my trips are short and the engine spends much of the time below normal temperature. I have a light that warns me when I need to keep driving and it has lit up 3 times in the life of the car. In 6.5 years I have had 0 mechanical issues. The main difference to the US cars is no snow in winter and no DEF tank. I didn't buy just for economy, but for that big car lazy feeling you get with a torquey engine. At 110 kph on the freeway it is doing 1750 rpm, so engine wear is low. If you buy a car like you are an accountant the chances are you don't enjoy driving, the rest of us buy something we actually want to drive.

 

[TDCruze]

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.

It is true that gas engines last long enough that most cars fall apart before the engine needs any major work.

For those that drive tons of miles a year a diesel is still a solid bet.

Not a lot of people rebuild engines anymore, because they do last longer and its not worth it by the time it is needed.
I have swapped in good low mileage junk yard engines recently though. It can still be worthwhile.

 

[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.

 

[resurgent cineribus]

Thanks for the feedback everyone; lots of good points/ideas.

I have crunched the numbers a bit. gas/diesel prices fluctuate sometimes at different rates times. Last time I filled up I think diesel was 2.99 and 87 was about 2.30. I think i mentioned in the beginning that I do a lot of highway driving which probably is a pro for the diesel; my commute to work is about 30 miles each way and I do a far amount of driving for work throughout the day some days. It possible that under some conditions my costs could be a little less with the gas but even then it would be close (and probably more likely the diesel would win) i'm less worried about calculating the exact break-even point vs gas with initial purchase price especially if i buy a lightly used one that has already been hit pretty hard by depreciation. I'm driving an old V6 escape right now and probably average 2-2.5 tanks of gas a week (14 gallon tank). I didn't do the math on that but the gas savings over my current car will probably be a nice perk with how much driving I do.

I do worry about major mechanical system issues ie clutch, turbo, etc. Years ago a friends TDI jetta (that introduced me to small diesels and i learned to drive a stick in) had the turbo fail while we were driving through the mountains; that car barely made it up them without the turbo kicking in. I've been shopping some almost new-used ones that still have at least a good chunk of factory powertrain warranty on. Basic maintenance and repairs I'm plenty happy to do myself

The longevity of gas vs diesel engines may or may not be a major factor. My escape is still cruising along with 282k on it but the rust is what is killing it. Unless I moved or got a dedicated winter beater it will probably be what kills all my cars before the engine goes (assuming a decent engine of course) With that said in several years if you needed a replacement or rebuilt gas engine they'll probably be easy to find vs diesel.

I'm shopping around seeing if i can make a purchase happen. I suppose i should at least go by a dealership and sit in one just to make sure its a good fit for me before buying.

 

[BodhiBenz1987]

I do worry about major mechanical system issues ie clutch, turbo, etc. Years ago a friends TDI jetta (that introduced me to small diesels and i learned to drive a stick in) had the turbo fail while we were driving through the mountains; that car barely made it up them without the turbo kicking in.

It's probably worth noting regarding my car's turbo failure that I wouldn't have even noticed it if it weren't for the check engine light and feeling like it didn't have quite as much oomph on hard acceleration. It was from what I'm told an internal electrical failure causing the variable veins (or maybe even just one of them) not to open all the way. But otherwise it still worked. Given that I haven't heard anyone else have the issue I'm not sure the issue itself is too likely to happen to another TD. The wait time to get a part was the big concern in my mind because I worry it will happen with other parts.

 

[firehawk618]

If you're looking for cost / benefit in a new Cruze diesel vs gas you won't find it. Besides the premium paid for the car new the fact that diesel is significantly more expensive than gas *and probably always will be* washes away any money savings because of increased economy. In fact it's probably more expensive to own the diesel over the life of the car because of the added fuel expense.

Anyhow, I chose the diesel because I love the torque curve. 1.4t just doesn't do it for me for my daily commuter.

Definitely go drive one. Try to drive a gas and a diesel. You might just save yourself a bunch of time and research if you don't like them.

Thanks for the feedback everyone; lots of good points/ideas.

I have crunched the numbers a bit. gas/diesel prices fluctuate sometimes at different rates times. Last time I filled up I think diesel was 2.99 and 87 was about 2.30. I think i mentioned in the beginning that I do a lot of highway driving which probably is a pro for the diesel; my commute to work is about 30 miles each way and I do a far amount of driving for work throughout the day some days. It possible that under some conditions my costs could be a little less with the gas but even then it would be close (and probably more likely the diesel would win) i'm less worried about calculating the exact break-even point vs gas with initial purchase price especially if i buy a lightly used one that has already been hit pretty hard by depreciation. I'm driving an old V6 escape right now and probably average 2-2.5 tanks of gas a week (14 gallon tank). I didn't do the math on that but the gas savings over my current car will probably be a nice perk with how much driving I do.

I do worry about major mechanical system issues ie clutch, turbo, etc. Years ago a friends TDI jetta (that introduced me to small diesels and i learned to drive a stick in) had the turbo fail while we were driving through the mountains; that car barely made it up them without the turbo kicking in. I've been shopping some almost new-used ones that still have at least a good chunk of factory powertrain warranty on. Basic maintenance and repairs I'm plenty happy to do myself

The longevity of gas vs diesel engines may or may not be a major factor. My escape is still cruising along with 282k on it but the rust is what is killing it. Unless I moved or got a dedicated winter beater it will probably be what kills all my cars before the engine goes (assuming a decent engine of course) With that said in several years if you needed a replacement or rebuilt gas engine they'll probably be easy to find vs diesel.

I'm shopping around seeing if i can make a purchase happen. I suppose i should at least go by a dealership and sit in one just to make sure its a good fit for me before buying.

 

[BodhiBenz1987]

If you're looking for cost / benefit in a new Cruze diesel vs gas you won't find it. Besides the premium paid for the car new the fact that diesel is significantly more expensive than gas *and probably always will be* washes away any money savings because of increased economy. In fact it's probably more expensive to own the diesel over the life of the car because of the added fuel expense.

Again, people need to do the math and observe fuel prices local to them. To say no one will find an advantage or money savings are "washed away" is extreme. Again, every summer almost without fail there is a time when diesel and regular are priced the same where I live and usually a day or two where diesel is actually cheaper. Factor in that I'm getting 20 mpg more on the highway than a gas Cruze (assuming I would get 45 mpg in a gas Cruze), and that is a huge savings per mile during those months. As I said before right now diesel is 70 cents more expense and that would put me close to even with cost for a gas model. So over the course of a year the fuel cost is cheaper in a diesel, in my specific case. Do I drive enough to offset the upfront cost of the car? Maybe not. But it wasn't that much more expensive than the same spec gas model so in theory I would eventually make it up. And if I drove a ton, at the fuel prices I see, I would make it up. Like I said, the math might favor the gas car in many people's case and I didn't really chose on math alone. But to say the fuel cost is a wash or negated no matter what isn't accurate ... because it varies and there are some people, even if a minority, that will save because of the diesel's fuel economy.

 

[resurgent cineribus]

Uh oh I didn't mean to start huge debate on cost/efficiency/roi lol

Yes there are a lot of variables but I imagine I might fall into the camp that would ultimately come out ahead. Near my house today a gallon regular is 2.55 and diesel is 2.83. Assuming mostly highway driving at 40MPG for the gas (6.38 cents per mile) and 50mpg for the diesel (5.67 cents per mile) My 38 mile each way mostly highway commute route trip would be about $4.30 for the diesel and $4.84 with the gas. Yes I didn't factor in the DEF because I'm not too sure the average miles per gallon of DEF (I thought it was around 5000-6000?) at around $10 a gallon? that would add in roughly .2 cents per mile (and would no doubt be paid for with all the autozone gift cards I get as rebates)

So yes assuming these numbers only I'd come out ahead even if not by a lot. The cost differential up front also assumes you are buying brand new and I think that narrows a bit on the pre-owned market. For someone like me that drives 25-30k miles a year and tends to keep cars for over 10 years there may eventually be a break-even point but like some of you the mileage isn't the only consideration. As a bit of an enthusiast I like the extra torque and to have something a little unique. The only variable that would torpedo any of these calculations is if one engine was significantly more reliable than the other.

 

[johnmo]

As a bit of an enthusiast I like the extra torque and to have something a little unique. The only variable that would torpedo any of these calculations is if one engine was significantly more reliable than the other.

Sometimes I feel like I'm driving a science experiment. And I kinda like that.

The answer is always "it depends."

I like the long range. I fill up about once a week. There's value in that for me. Tough to put a dollar amount on that.

I think I do come out ahead on cost per mile because I'm averaging close to 55 MPG lifetime with little special effort to drive economically. A gasser Cruze just isn't going to do that.

I'm planning to put at least 300k miles on my Cruze. I've put close to that on gasoline engines too, so that's probably a wash.

 

[froyofanatic]

Man these fuel economy numbers y'all are posting are nuts. I get 40s. But I live in the hills and drive like a bozo. I think the sedan gets better fuel economy than the hatch, and the auto better than the stick...so I have both of those going against me.

 

[resurgent cineribus]

Yeah the sedan is a little better than the hatch but strangely on these cars the auto knocks off a few MPGS. I know auto transmissions have gotten good enough that they usually beat the rated manual MPGS (in the old days it tended to be the opposite) not on this one though

 

[TDCruze]

Man these fuel economy numbers y'all are posting are nuts. I get 40s. But I live in the hills and drive like a bozo. I think the sedan gets better fuel economy than the hatch, and the auto better than the stick...so I have both of those going against me.

Yeah I can't break 50 MPG very often.
Here in my area I almost never get to draft another vehicle, that and we always seems to have a head wind...

 

[JPinSTL]

Man these fuel economy numbers y'all are posting are nuts. I get 40s. But I live in the hills and drive like a bozo. I think the sedan gets better fuel economy than the hatch, and the auto better than the stick...so I have both of those going against me.

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

 

[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

 

[JPinSTL]

My '00 Golf TDI 5spd turbo'd and chipped was pretty consistent for 42mpg Summer and 39mpg Winter for the same commute and 9yrs/250,000 miles. But it was pretty used up by 350,000. I know cetane is an issue, but I really have now way of testing. I do buy 90% of my fuel from the same 3 stations and have for 10yrs. The Cruze was averaging 45-46mpg over the Summer and seems to be about 41-42mpg this Winter, all hand calculated. I will say it calculates out a bit better than the computer says I'm doing by about 3mpg. I did once see 53mpg over 50miles running 65mph on the interstate on a cool morning with no AC late this Summer.

I'm completely happy with the MPG, even with DEF thrown in.

My old Golf 1.9L with the upgrades and the Cruze 1.6L are very similar power wise. VW shifted smoother and the turbo came in much faster. However the Cruze is quieter, eeks out a little better MPG, and has 20yrs of improved conveniences.

 

[BodhiBenz1987]

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

Sedan vs hatch makes a pretty big difference between the aerodynamics and the larger wheels. Also my 65 mpg tanks of fuel were on road trips where I hit almost no traffic, going 65-70 with a few stretches faster or slower. Pure highway miles. There are a lot of factors .. fuel quality, driving style, weight of driver/cargo, tire pressure etc. I'm not claiming I average 60+ mpg all the time ... just that it routinely hits that mark on long enough highway stretches and I find that very impressive. If I really wanted to lie about my mpg I'd go all-in and quietly change the DIC to UK mpg and tell everyone I was getting 100 mpg. :wink: