And if so, what did you think?
I am looking at getting one, and haven’t made it for a test drive yet. Just wanted to hear from anybody that might have some experience with it.
Me and my girlfriend test drove one. It was peppy and had good sightlines. The interior finishes were miles ahead of what I’ve come to expect from a Chevy. That said, the Cruze with the options she wanted had the car in the $24k range which is a lot for a small car.
and this attitude is why smaller cars in the US have traditionally been bleh.
Not precisely. The issue is more that you could get the same or better options in a full size car. Smaller cars should be fully appointed, but they shouldn’t be as expensive as a full size. Car companies mark up options packages far beyond what they are worth, paying $2500 for a nav system that is usually less desirable than a $500 removable unit is tough to justify. The Cruze was no different. We cross shopped a Kia Optima and it was bigger, more powerful and equal or nicer in option and interior finishes. The Camry and Accord were much worse than both and we’re waiting to see what the Focus is like. I suspect the new Malibu will be similar in price and finish to the Cruze.
My dad test drove one for some reason and seemed to be extremely impressed by it. To put that in perspective, in all my 30 years Dad has driven either a half-ton or one-ton Ford pickup. Anyone who knows how brand-loyal truck owners can get should find that somewhat noteworthy.
I rented one for a weekend this last Christmas. My wife and I both liked it. The only drawback was that the interior, in particular the back seat, is pretty cramped. The back seat is pretty much just for kids.
One of my friends just bought one, it’s a nice car as small Chevys go - definately a nicer car than the Cavalier I used to have but for the price that they paid for it they could have gotten into a Hyundai Elantra which I consider one of the gold standards for inexpensive small cars.
well, we’re kind of saying the same thing. Small cars have traditionally sucked in the U.S. because of what you said; vs. Europe where a B- or C-segment car might be the family hauler. Witness the failure of the Saturn Astra; the “enthusiasts” bemoaned the fact that GM wouldn’t let them have the awesome compact cars they sold in Europe, so they took an Opel Astra, slapped a Saturn badge on it, and said “here you go.” Customers said “it costs how much?” So it was a flop.
However, with fuel prices as they are trending, we are fast approaching the point where bigger is not automatically better anymore.
I’m sorry, but that’s contradictory and off-base. What if I want a smaller car for the fuel economy benefits or driving dynamics, but also want it to be nicer than a stripped shitbox? This is what I was talking about with my initial post in this thread. I don’t care if a loaded Focus costs more than a base Taurus (which it does, BTW) if I want the Focus’s markedly better fuel economy. I also want a nice Focus, so I don’t need to be penalized for not going with a larger car.
“what it’s worth” is not necessarily equivalent to “what an individual customer is willing to pay for it.” Those options are priced as they are because they have to pay for the billions of dollars already spent on developing the car.
I doubt it. D-segment cars like the Malibu are going to get a lot more expensive in the near future as the automakers use every trick in the book to meet upcoming CAFE requirements. Those things like eAssist aren’t cheap.
I think we should wait and see how Hyundai’s long-term reliability and durability pan out before we anoint them king of the world. Looking at CR’s ratings it’s only in the last few years where their cars weren’t pockmarked with black circles.
The problem is that the Cruze is built by Daewoo, and Daewoo has yet to build a car that was worth a toot. GM talked Suzuki into selling a couple Daewoos as Suzukis (the Verona and Forenza), and the head of Suzuki ended up publicly apologizing for their poor reliability.
And the craptastic Chevy Aveo is also a Daewoo.
No Cruze for me, no thanks.
Rocketeer, there’s so much wrong with your post.
- GM Korea led the styling
- GM Europe (Opel) was engineering lead
- North American cars are built in Lordstown, OH, which has nothing to do with Daewoo (which no longer exists)
- The Aveo is gone, and the replacement Sonic is built in Michigan.
Seriously, did you even try to know what you were talking about?
I had a 1995 Hyundai Accent that wasn’t fit to be used as a car bomb. It was a terrible, unreliable car and I was happy the day it died. My wife has had had a 2001 and a 2004 Elantra and is now in a 2011 Tuscon and all three of her vehicles have been bullet proof. Hyundai is currently building cars to the same quality of a Honda or a Toyota but without the premium price tag and as opposed to some other car makers out there I could mention (CoughNISSANCough) every time we’ve needed to have anything done under warranty all three dealers we’ve dealt with seemed happy to do the work. My next car will be a Hyundai, no questions asked.
-
GM Korea is the old Daewoo. From Wikipedia, which is probably good enough for this sort of discussion: “In 2001 General Motors bought most of Daewoo Motor’s assets to form GM Daewoo.”
-
From Wikipedia: “Underpinned by the front-wheel drive GM Delta II platform, GM has confirmed the Cruze development program occurred under a global design and engineering team.[22] Most of the design work was conducted by GM Daewoo (now GM Korea), with GM’s Opel division responsible for most of the engineering.” Okay, you’re right on this one.
-
Assembly location means nothing. Most problems with a car occur at the design stage, when bad decisions are made.
-
What, you’re arguing with the use of present tense? I can walk down to my local Chev dealer this morning and buy an Aveo; that doesn’t mean “gone” to me. And in any event, the Sonic is another Daewoo car; the second-generation Aveo, in fact, according to Wikipedia.
-
Most people think the interior appointments are quite good. A Subjective call.
-
The Cruze has a pretty spacious trunk. Larger than the Chevy Malibu, for example.
-
The car in general is definitely geared towards quiet, comfortable cruising instead of frenetic, sporty handling. There is plenty of sound dampening and the suspension is compliant.
-
The 6 speed manual transmission on the Cruze is excellent and capable of 42mpg highway on the “Eco” model. By comparison most reviews find the 6 speed automatic sluggish and annoying, although this could be an artifact of the transmission’s “learning” ability. The manual is the one to get.
-
Because the Cruze and its platform siblings the Buick Excelle/Opel Astra has been available in China and Europe for a few years, any reliability issues should be sorted out by now
-
The way things work with car platforms is that you want the newest platform you can afford, because the underlying platform is a big part of how safe the car is in a crash. The Cruze platform is brand new, and as such it does extremely well in crash testing. Go here for a consolidated listing of all crash test information from both NHTSA and IIHS tests.
The Cruze gets 5 stars on front and side impacts on the new NHTSA 2011 test cycle (much tougher than the old NHTSA test), and top marks on all IIHS tests including roof crush.
By comparison, The Kia Forte, also a relative newcomer, only gets 4 on the NHTSA test. There is no crash test information on the newest Elantra or Ford Focus yet.
It is MUCH safer than the Toyota Corolla or Honda Civic, an unfair comparison as both those cars are over 5 years old and due to be replaced within a year or 2, and MUCH safer than the Mazda3 or Nissan Sentra. The Subaru Impreza and VW Golf both had good reputations for safety but AFAIK have not been tested on the newest NHTSA test.
To put it in perspective, the Cruze is safer than either the 2011 Audi A4 or 2011 Mercedes C-Class, similarly sized luxury cars that costing twice as much or more.
IMHO this would be the dealbreaker for me. If I’m going to drive a boring car (and all these cars are pretty boring, although having a 6 speed manual helps a lot) I’m going for the safest one.
I spent a week with the Chevy Cruze (I’m a reviewer). I found the stick got about 35 mpg; the auto, 33.
I didn’t find the back seat cramped at all. Leg room was good; width not so much.
I have an Elantra for a week right now, and it’s nice, but I thought the Cruze was a much more driver-friendly vehicle. And the Elantra is only get 30 mpg.
If it’s not TOO small for you, can I recommend the Ford Fiesta? That baby was sweeeeet. And much cheaper. I’d much rather have a hatchback than a small sedan.