Chevrolet Cruze Forums banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Now this is a fun test: They loaded it with 400 lbs of books and drove it up Mine Hill Rd:

We were amazed, and then stunned by the front-wheel-drive Cruze Turbo Diesel’s flawless performance up Mine Hill Road. We kept waiting for a stutter, cough, stumble or, at least, some kind of motorized groan. But the Cruze Turbo Diesel was the little engine that could — offering not even a trace of strain up Mine Hill Road.

We loaded it with books — hauled from our eldest daughter’s apartment in New York, about 400 pounds worth of books — and made the trip up Mine Hill Road, again. Still, there were no complaints — absolutely none from the Cruze Turbo Diesel.
Their highway mpg was 44.

2014 Chevrolet Cruze Turbo Diesel: The little sedan that could - The Washington Post
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 · (Edited)
Good review. Nit to pick. The photo is an LTZ, not a TD (can tell by the wheels..., though the fine print correctly indicates it is an RS).
Maybe GM needs to spam the photo services with more current pictures of the TD? I still see a lot of articles with pictures of the car from the auto shows.

My ECO MT (1.4T) has zero, no, zilch (you get the idea) issues with mountains, even when loaded down. I do have to downshift, sometimes as far as 3rd gear to maintain speed going both up and down mountain passes. With the additional torque in the Diesel I would expect nothing less.
He does describe the road as "winding" up a steep hill. This is different than a highway grade. Many drivers tend to slow down on curves. I can see how on a long up hill stretch of curves where people are slowing down and then trying to accelerate again how a car with lesser torque could fall behind and not be able to recover as easily.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I had the misfortune of driving a 127 HP Chevy Tracker in the mountains - on the highway at 65 (it could barely do 70 on a flat road), and up a twisty, windy road at 25-35.

Not only did it handle like a cow; it needed to be at 4-5000 RPM to climb a hill and maintain speed...and I'm not kidding at all...the cruise control alone would do this. Piece of junk.
Was it the 2-Door or 4-Door? I drove '96 2D Tracker for a while, it had no problem going over 80 mph, but it was winding pretty high in 3rd gear on the highway and didn't feel real connected to the road at that speed. I got the impression that the torque converter never locked up at highway speeds. It couldn't climb hills very fast but it could climb some pretty steep hills in 4wd mode. I once used it to push a big Ford 250,with a tandem rear axel, that was stuck in the snow up a steep, short hill.

It was a winter beater for me and I also experimented using high mix ratios of E-85 in it for a couple of years to see how the engine would handle it. It actually ran better in some respects using mixes of 40% ethanol or more. In particular, the PCV valve stopped blowing out with the EtOH, when I was going through PCV valves at a rate of a more than one per year on regular gas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 · (Edited)
4-door 2001 (new body style). It was terrifying at highway speeds - wind gusts had it wandering all over the lane.

They are supposed to be great cars off-road, but this one was 2WD and absolutely horrible in snow...and on the road.
It surprisingly held its own off-road considering what it was. It definitely made you nervous on the highway, though. Had a lot of problems with the fuel system too. I could just never quite keep it in tune and the fuel rail was always needing to be cleaned out. I had to use premium gas in it and lots of Lucas fuel cleaner or it would get gunked up and stall at idle. It was always running at high load on the highway, so it liked the premium gas anyway in that situation. It liked to run rich and I'd try lean it out and replace sensors, or whatever, and it would get rich again. I think that's why it did okay with the ethanol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Back in the mid 1970's I drove this route - lucky me - I had a Turbo Charged car - a 1973 Pinto 4 speed manual with a T04B Air Research Turbo kit - did not have to downshift once and was blowing by big engine motorcycles on the climb. The car weighed under 2000 lbs with 225 hp - dyno verified.
Neat. Turbos were kind a rare back then. They still had carbonizing problems. The supercharger was still the preferred forced induction method. They seem to have mostly solved the carbonization problems with turbos nowadays, tho.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top