# 2011



## shawn672 (Oct 31, 2010)

1. The car has more torque then most other compacts and you can feel it. It would do fine in the mountains however with a full car you might sacrifice some mpg. I've found that I get the best mpg at lower speeds (less then 50) and obviously keeping the rpm's below 2100.

2. The engine and car as a whole is extremely solid and well built, you'll see that from the beginning (5500 miles, still rock solid). Although at 85mph your mpg will probably not be above 28... unless you have the ECO model, then possibly. Above 60mph you start to enter peak boost/torque which uses more fuel, all through the 2-5k range you're in heavy boost and the 1.4l will just suck gas down


----------



## osiris10012 (Feb 4, 2011)

I drove mine around 80 for a good distance hitting 85 here and there. the noise level was fine anywhere from 3000 rpm to about 3200 at these speeds. the downfall was my mpg went way down. other than that the the car was great handled good and quiet at these speeds.


----------



## willlm17 (Feb 18, 2011)

If I get 28-30mpg that is still a victory. I am coming from a 2002 Ford Focus SVT that only burned premium and got 30 if I was lucky.


----------



## osiris10012 (Feb 4, 2011)

willlm17 said:


> If I get 28-30mpg that is still a victory. I am coming from a 2002 Ford Focus SVT that only burned premium and got 30 if I was lucky.


when i was going 70-75 with 89 octane i was getting 37 mpg highway...not to sure what the city mpg is probably around 27-28


----------



## Aeroscout977 (Nov 25, 2010)

@ Shawn672 Yeah I think the only other model on the market that offers the same tq is the Sentra but at less MPG


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

I took my 2012 Eco up I-70 west of Denver to the Evergreen exit. Other than having to run in 5th instead of 6th it maintained 67mph up the first 6 miles (6,100 ft to 7,200 ft elevation). I had some minor engine knocking but that should be taken care off when as I'll be switching from 85 Octane to 87 Octane on my next tank. (Octane ratings are two lower than normal in Colorado due to elevation).


----------



## BucaMan (Mar 22, 2011)

And keep in mind, compared to normally aspirated engines, turbocharged engines are less affected by high altitude. I think you'll do just fine.


----------



## ErikBEggs (Aug 20, 2011)

Power wise you will be more than fine. However, for the speed of the highways there I would *not* recommend the Cruze at all. These cars lose much of their MPG benefits over cars with larger engines when you drive over 70 mph. I would consider other vehicles to be honest. A similar car structurally to the Cruze is the Buick Regal Turbo. Inside line got over 30+ MPG in the Las Vegas area with Cruise control at 79 mph. In fact, on their best stint they claimed they achieved 35 MPG at high speeds. The Cruze wants you to be closer to 45-55 mph for that kind of MPG. Details on these tests can be found here


----------



## tstolze (Jun 18, 2011)

I have taken several trips in my 2011 Eco, manual at 65/75 mph. All have come in between 44/46 mpg measured at the pump.


Sent from my Autoguide iPad app


----------

