# 2014 Cruze Diesel Road Trip Test by The Car Pro confirms 700+ mile tank



## Ned23 (Jun 16, 2012)

So, they drove the car from Six Flags Park in northern California to Six Flags Park in southern California and back again, 710 miles, 14 hours, on one tank of fuel. He averaged 48.3 mpg The guy said it was all around better than the Jetta except for rear seat room, city mpg and the DEF refills. 






What is funny is how he makes a big deal about the fuel light coming on when they're 20 miles from the end of the trip. There's usually 1-2 gallons left when the low fuel light comes on in my car. I've gone 50 miles with the low fuel light on.


----------



## CruzeTech (Mar 23, 2012)

Still trying to justify it.


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

CruzeTech said:


> Still trying to justify it.


Do you typically beat your ECO combined MPG number? I would assume with similar aerodynamics and EPA testing you should see at least the same level above EPA combined with the diesel(and not have to row gears). With my 1LT automatic I'm averaging 5.8MPG above EPA combined or 2.2MPG lower than the highway rating not sure which I should use when considering the Diesel. If I use both I should average in the 38.8-43.8MPG range with the diesel auto. 

Liked the video above but it failed for one reason.... no indication what so ever the speeds that were driven to achieve the 700+ mile tank.


----------



## Tomko (Jun 1, 2013)

Great find!

thanks for posting.


----------



## ErikBEggs (Aug 20, 2011)

It makes no sense to trade a current Cruze for the Cruze diesel. It is simply a good investment for those already in the market for a Cruze, especially a Cruze 2LT.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

I wouldn't trade my gas ECO MT for a diesel - the cost per gallon for diesel won't cover the additional highway MPG. Also, having topped my ECO MT out at 715.1 miles I know for a fact that the ECO MT can easily get 600+ miles on a tank. Now the 900 miles GM's engineers got is out of the ECO MT's range, but I have to stop more often than every 600 miles anyway.


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

obermd said:


> Now the 900 miles GM's engineers got is out of the ECO MT's range, but I have to stop more often than every 600 miles anyway.


 This is why I think the Cruze has too large of gas tank, GM should have split the difference and put a 13.5gallon on all models (it would still have ridiculous range). My recent 607.9 mile tank average speed was 49.7, That equals 12.2hrs driving on that tank. I stopped dozens of times, slept overnight in a motel, needed a shower and at least 3 meals in the same time frame. Should shave 1-2gallons off to help save weight. ECO 12.6gallon is a bit on the small side.


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

Three gallons of* gasoline*, at 6.1 lbs-per-gallon, is 18.3 pounds, while just 2.2 gallons of *water*, at 8.3 lbs-per-gallon, is the same weight...just a couple "pit stops" so to speak (wink,wink).


----------



## ErikBEggs (Aug 20, 2011)

obermd said:


> I wouldn't trade my gas ECO MT for a diesel - the cost per gallon for diesel won't cover the additional highway MPG. Also, having topped my ECO MT out at 715.1 miles I know for a fact that the ECO MT can easily get 600+ miles on a tank. Now the 900 miles GM's engineers got is out of the ECO MT's range, but I have to stop more often than every 600 miles anyway.


Just so we are clear, I don't think GM is marketing the Cruze Diesel to current Cruze owners (your local idiot salesmen is most likely a different story). They are targetting Jetta, Golf, and Passat TDI prospective buyers


----------



## diesel (Jun 8, 2013)

My experience is that the diesel easily exceeds the highway estimate by at least 10% at normal highway speeds.


----------



## Merc6 (Jun 8, 2013)

Would be nice but, diesel prices in Cleveland area never move below $4.15 a gal. Diesel pumps are always filthy and have diesel all over the ground. Besides that I would have gotten one in a heartbeat seeing that I have driven diesel VW's for a good distance in a non conservative manner and still got great range. 


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## Eugene_C (Mar 15, 2012)

CruzeTech said:


> View attachment 15234
> 
> 
> Still trying to justify it.


If you're okay with the MT then the ECO is still a winner. But if you're like 90% of American car buyers who eschew shifting, then this beats the regular automatic Cruze and has a little extra power to boot. You could even tow a small boat or pop-up trailer with the TD. Plus if you're a hypermiler, you're going to get better than sticker mpg with diesel often.


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

CruzeTech said:


> View attachment 15234
> 
> 
> Still trying to justify it.


You never will if you're going to compare it to a eco m/t, apples & poptarts.



Merc6 said:


> Would be nice but, diesel prices in Cleveland area never move below $4.15 a gal.


We were just up in Michigan last week and Diesel was $3.95 and reg. gas was $4.25, $4.55/premium.
Same day a friend in Mississippi sent me pics of gas $3.26/Diesel $3.45:cussing:


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

Eugene_C said:


> If you're okay with the MT then the ECO is still a winner. But if you're like 90% of American car buyers who eschew shifting, then this beats the regular automatic Cruze and has a little extra power to boot. You could even tow a small boat or pop-up trailer with the TD. Plus if you're a hypermiler, you're going to get better than sticker mpg with diesel often.


The ECO-D owner's manual (at least the Canadian version) states not to tow with the ECO-D.


----------



## gulfcoastguy (Feb 21, 2013)

Diesel Dan said:


> You never will if you're going to compare it to a eco m/t, apples & poptarts.
> 
> 
> We were just up in Michigan last week and Diesel was $3.95 and reg. gas was $4.25, $4.55/premium.
> Same day a friend in Mississippi sent me pics of gas $3.26/Diesel $3.45:cussing:


3.21 regular unleaded and 3.43 diesel at Murphy's Express Gautier Mississippi an hour ago. Now that is the cheapest price in the county, I know some sharks who are trying to sell regular at 3.26 and diesel at 3.80. I tell them that they are number 1 in my book everytime I drive my manual TDI Jetta Sportwagen by. Now we do have a Chevron refinery only 10 miles away and oil wells less than 20 miles away. We also don't tax the @#$% out of diesel.


----------



## Eugene_C (Mar 15, 2012)

obermd said:


> The ECO-D owner's manual (at least the Canadian version) states not to tow with the ECO-D.


That can't be right, though. The manual probably hasn't been completely updated. The European Diesel Cruze is rated at up to 2600 lbs with a braked trailer and it's a pretty similar car. 

I checked Chevy's site and the 2014 Cruze owners manual isn't even available for download yet. So far only the 2014 Malibu is.


----------



## ErikBEggs (Aug 20, 2011)

I think the towing capacity will be the same as a regular Cruze because I don't htink they upgraded the brakes. GM doesn't want liability..


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

gulfcoastguy said:


> Now we do have a Chevron refinery only 10 miles away and oil wells less than 20 miles away.


We have a Cruze assembly plant <10 miles away and still pay $800 for deliveryartytime:
oh snap, that's not a good thing:angry:

My friend lives in Soso.


----------



## Skraeling (May 30, 2012)

Sigh.. would be fun to see what this could do with a mt.

Till it gets one I dont really care about the car.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

Page 9-70 of the manual at http://www.gm.ca/gm/english/owner_centre/chevrolet/resources/dispManualInfo (you'll need to select the make/model/year for the download) states:

*Trailer Towing (FuelEconomy Model or DieselEngine)​*The vehicle is neither designed nor​intended to tow a trailer.

Needless to say I was somewhat surprised given the extra torque and HP in the car.


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

Is the Jetta TDI rated to tow?


----------



## Eugene_C (Mar 15, 2012)

ErikBEggs said:


> I think the towing capacity will be the same as a regular Cruze because I don't htink they upgraded the brakes. GM doesn't want liability..


I think they actually did upgrade the brakes somewhat for the Eco-D, but that was mostly to handle the higher curb weight of the car. 

Most American cars seem to be underrated for towing. I think that has a lot to do with liability laws here and it might be related to the longer powertrain warranties, too. I don't think they trust consumers not to be idiots, and they're often on the hook for the bill when people do stupid stuff.


----------



## Eugene_C (Mar 15, 2012)

Diesel Dan said:


> Is the Jetta TDI rated to tow?


In Europe, the Jetta TDI sportwagon is rated at 3,300 lbs @ 12% incline with a braked trailer or 1,650 lbs with a non-braked trailer. I think that's for the AT and the MT has a lower rating. The European manuals also list different weights for a 6% grade vs. a 12% grade. 

In the US, I believe it's 1,000 lbs for the MT or 1.500 lbs. for the AT, and they don't specify any difference for braked vs. non-braked trailering nor differences for grades. 

It's clear that in America they don't trust consumers with knowing how to read complicated specs for things like towing or grades or trailer brakes.


----------



## gulfcoastguy (Feb 21, 2013)

I own a 2013 Jetta sportswagen TDI manual shift. According to the owners manual it is rated to tow 1000 lbs. The DSG automatic is not rated for towing. BTW a 12% grade is steeper than the allowable grade for bridges(7%) in the US.


----------



## ErikBEggs (Aug 20, 2011)

gulfcoastguy said:


> I own a 2013 Jetta sportswagen TDI manual shift. According to the owners manual it is rated to tow 1000 lbs. The DSG automatic is not rated for towing. BTW a 12% grade is steeper than the allowable grade for bridges(7%) in the US.


Agreed. You won't find interstates steeper than 6% either. The few that are for certain stretches are signed in advance. (i.e. "Trucks use low gear")


----------



## Eugene_C (Mar 15, 2012)

ErikBEggs said:


> Agreed. You won't find interstates steeper than 6% either. The few that are for certain stretches are signed in advance. (i.e. "Trucks use low gear")


Correction, they show 8% and 12% ratings in the European manuals. Must be some steep grades in the alps. /shrug. 

You will encounter some steep hills off the interstates, especially when you're looking for a camping spot.


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

ErikBEggs said:


> I think the towing capacity will be the same as a regular Cruze because I don't htink they upgraded the brakes. GM doesn't want liability..


The 2014 Diesel Cruse HAS larger front & rear disc brakes than normal 4-wheel disc Cruzes.


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

ErikBEggs said:


> Agreed. You won't find interstates steeper than 6% either. The few that are for certain stretches are signed in advance. (i.e. "Trucks use low gear")


Lots of state roads around here with 9-14% grades. Can't believe I can still get decent MPG driving in this crap, the diesel torque would be great where I live.


----------



## gulfcoastguy (Feb 21, 2013)

Diesel Dan said:


> We have a Cruze assembly plant <10 miles away and still pay $800 for deliveryartytime:
> oh snap, that's not a good thing:angry:
> 
> My friend lives in Soso.


Yep that was allways a joke of mine "how do you like your town? Eh? It's Soso." Actually try listening to nonlocals try to pronounce Gautier where I bought fuel. Here the local version "go Cha"

Actually untill the past couple of years fuel was cheaper inland rather than right next to the refinery and the cheapest was in the extreme north west corner of the state. You will find that the best price on diesel is not at truck stops. Look where construction and yard maintenance companies fill up their duallys instead. I like Murphy's because they just have a diesel hose on their diesel pumps. That reduces the odds of having an accidental misfuel by grabbing the gas hose instead on multihose pumps.


----------



## jpm84092 (Jun 23, 2013)

CruzeTech said:


> View attachment 15234
> 
> 
> Still trying to justify it.


My driving is in the Rocky Mountains and all it took was a test drive to convince me to switch from my 2011 Cruze ECO (6-speed manual) to the Clean Turbo Diesel torque monster. In the Rocky Mountain passes that used to require me to downshift my 2011 Cruze ECO (6-speed manual), my CTD scoots up those inclines in 6th gear without breaking a sweat or downshifting. In the long run, the dollars appear to favor the gas powered Cruze ECO I bought when they came out, but resale is likely to follow the path of VW as the engine proves itself. On a recent trip to Las Vegas (headwinds both ways of 20 - 40 mph) and temperatures 100+, I managed to get 42 - 44 mpg out of my little oil burner. I have made that trip before and my 2011 Cruze ECO needed to downshift on some of the mountain grades. No problem though for my oil burner.


----------



## jpm84092 (Jun 23, 2013)

OK - I am back from a trip from Salt Lake City to Milwaukee Wisconsin and return to Salt Lake. The overall combined mileage as calculated from fuel receipts was 50.0 mpg for the 2860 mile trip. I drove 75 mph in Utah, Wyoming, and Nebraska, 70 mph in Iowa, and 65 mph in Illinois and Wisconsin - with the air conditioning on. The 50.0 mpg mileage is based on pump receipts and not the car's trip computer (which was often off the mark). The little torque monster is not even broken in yet (1800 miles when the trip began). The entire trip cost me $219 in fuel costs.


----------

