[XtremeRevolution]

Divorce is requiring me to downsize from my F-150. I'm pretty much sold on the cruze after driving focus , 3,elantra, Altima and fusion. Primary requirement is money saving. I want a manual trans. My local dealer has 3 2012 manual base Eco, Lt/RS, LT/allstar. All within a few hundred dollars. Extreme revolution explained in great detail that LT/ECO MPGdifference is about 5-6 mpg. So maximum saving would point to ECO. My question is for ECO owners. Does the transmission gearing or envy of RS or other options make you regret your choice ? Most of my driving will be highwa. Thanks

Never regretted it for a moment. For 100% highway driving, you'll definitely appreciate the added fuel economy of the Eco. Keep in mind, what I pointed out was an average. The highest numbers on the Eco compared to the highest numbers on the LT were closer to 10mpg, if one will be doing 100% highway driving.

 

[ctrider]

Well, I've stated before on here that I was close to buying a 2012 2LT RS that was loaded, leather, heated seats, etc. I then saw the 2013 ECO MT and decided to take it for a ride. I have 1600 miles on it, and have never once thought about missing anything on the RS. In fact, the 2013 has some features that the 2012 didn't have, so I'm real happy with my choice. I've also seen mileage much higher than I expected and the MT has been a lot of fun to drive. I forgot how much I missed a standard trans, especially a 6speed.

 

[sciphi]

No regrets here. I love the fuel economy, and the car is still darned quick when it needs to be. For all highway driving, the Eco MT is the car to get out of the Cruze lineup.

 

[ozarkkawi]

How do you like the my link on your 2013? My dealer has 2 2013 manual ECO's. I like the options the mykonos has like streaming audio. Just not sure it's worth the extra$$$. Guess I'll just have them work up numbers on the 2012 and 13

 

[ozarkkawi]

My link not Mykonos. Darn auto correct

 

[ErikBEggs]

If you want the stick, get the Eco unless you reallllllllly want RS or Leather (2LT)

 

[NYCruze2012]

Coming from a Chevy Aveo to the Cruze Eco was a little slice of heaven. The best fuel mileage I ever got with my Chevy Aveo 1.6L automatic was 32mpg highway. Typically it was about 30mpg.The 2012 Cruze Eco 6MT although rated at 42mpg hwy has far surpassed that on several occasions. I have been getting between 46 & 47mpg on my daily commute to work. Regrets? Absolutely not!

I'm telling you the truth officer! I wasn't speeding but I sure passed a whole bunch of people who were!

 

[obermd]

I never even looked at the LT or LTZ trims. I drive 30 miles each way to work with most of it at 55 and 65 speed limits. Raw MPG, fun to drive, and with a stick shift were my driving criteria.

 

[ctrider]

How do you like the my link on your 2013? My dealer has 2 2013 manual ECO's. I like the options the mykonos has like streaming audio. Just not sure it's worth the extra$$$. Guess I'll just have them work up numbers on the 2012 and 13

I absolutely love MyLink. Having weather, 5 day forecast, gas stations not only listed, but can call. Pairing to my phone was a breeze and I am really enjoying Pandora, I forgot how much I liked that ap. It does have Gracenote and Stitcher. Touch screen is nice, but the voice commands are really great while driving.

The DIC has been upgraded too, with a few more screens.

I'm glad I bought the 2013. Plus it's a year newer!

 

[Hoon]

Drive both and decide.

I strongly prefer the LT, but obviously different strokes for different folks.

The fuel difference for me is like $175 per year, and i think the LT is considerably more fun.

 

[RyanPatty]

not to mention the eco is lighter and a inch lower then all other cruzes

 

[sciphi]

not to mention the eco is lighter and a inch lower then all other cruzes

It's not an inch lower, it's only 10mm lower. And, IIRC, the lighter body weight got spread out to the rest of the Cruzes midway through MY 2012.

I'd still say Eco MT because it's still a lot of fun to drive, and with fuel prices only going up and up, it makes sense to buy the most efficient car that meets one's needs.

 

[weimerrj]

The only thing it, is that the Eco gearing is a bitoff for slow speed driving. I wish 3rd was a bit shorter so I can select it in turns instead of 2nd, which is a bit too short. The Lt manual gearing looks to be a bit better, but the shorter 6th will hurt on the highway.

 

[obermd]

The only thing it, is that the Eco gearing is a bitoff for slow speed driving. I wish 3rd was a bit shorter so I can select it in turns instead of 2nd, which is a bit too short. The Lt manual gearing looks to be a bit better, but the shorter 6th will hurt on the highway.

I have no problems with the ECO gearing. 2nd is comfortable at 10 MPH, 3rd at 20 MPG, and 4th at 30 MPH. I had no problems with the gearing for 1-4, it was 5 and 6 I had to get used to.

My ECO MT looks a lot shorter than my LS MT when viewed from the front. I suspect it's because I put the plastic-chrome trim on my fog lamps, making the eye look down.

 

[sciphi]

The only thing it, is that the Eco gearing is a bitoff for slow speed driving. I wish 3rd was a bit shorter so I can select it in turns instead of 2nd, which is a bit too short. The Lt manual gearing looks to be a bit better, but the shorter 6th will hurt on the highway.

I've never found that to be an issue. 2nd and 3rd are pretty short in the Eco to start. And, my other manual car had a tall 3rd compared to 2nd, so shifting to 2nd for a tight turn became second nature. The 1.4T doesn't mind revving one bit based on the okay-sounding noises it makes at higher RPM's, so winding out the car a little in 2nd is okay by me.

 

[jblackburn]

The only thing it, is that the Eco gearing is a bitoff for slow speed driving. I wish 3rd was a bit shorter so I can select it in turns instead of 2nd, which is a bit too short. The Lt manual gearing looks to be a bit better, but the shorter 6th will hurt on the highway.

The LT's a bit like that too. Coming around corners in 3rd at 20 mph, I usually find either my foot on the floor or me wanting to downshift and then feeling like it's revving too high. There's not really a "sweet spot" for those speeds.

The Eco's top gears bothered me in traffic and on hills. 6th is useless for anything but cruising. 4th gets you up hills. Unless I lose speed in traffic on hills or really want to get moving more quickly, my LT never leaves 6th gear.

 

[Beachernaut]

I haven't regretted buying the ECO. However, I suspect that I'd be happy with the non ECO also.

 

[SkidooSteve12]

I never even looked at the LT or LTZ trims. I drive 30 miles each way to work with most of it at 55 and 65 speed limits. Raw MPG, fun to drive, and with a stick shift were my driving criteria.

I looked up the prices for the options and wanted them, but ended up with a base model Eco 2012 that I am really enjoying. I test drove the base Eco twice before I was ready to buy, so I knew I was fine with it. Sure power seats and NAV would be cool, but this is my commuter car, driving 400 miles a week on average and expecting to save nearly $100 a month in fuel over my Impala. The cell phone blue tooth and XM radio is very nice to have, and the USB port for my ipod or music on a flash drive. Plus the dealers have some great incentives right now on the 2012's. My wife and I both love to drive the 6 speed manual and find that we take it now most everywhere, even with our 3 kids in the back! Gas money savings is great!

 

[blk88verde]

Since mine is a 2011 - the ECO was the 1.4T model with the Manual Trans. No regrets here. I only wanted manual with the tiny 4 we have. As far as tight turns - I used to always go to second gear, however finding 3rd works ok too, if on flat ground.