# 2012 Cruze LT vs. 2011 Cruze LTZ, A Review...



## ErikBEggs (Aug 20, 2011)

Hey guys..

So I'm with my mom on a trip to Alabama and we were scheduled to get a Nissan Versa Sedan as our rental car. At the rental car office, we saw a black Cruze LT parked next to it and the guy offered it to us for an extra $2 / day (the Cruze is somehow in their midsize category instead of compact) so we took it! Haha! So I got to drive this thing for 150 miles today so here are some general comparisons between this Cruze and the Cruze I drive!

2012 Cruze 1LT 
ODO: 2,200 miles
Options: The 16'' rims, Black Granite Metallic, Black / Black cloth interior

vs.

2011 Cruze LTZ
ODO: 20,500 miles
Options: Sunroof, RS Package, Black Granite Metallic, Black / Brick leather interior
Mods: Trifecta Tune, 30% tint


Appearance:

Biased or not, the LTZ RS is just a better looking car. The foglights and chrome are distinguishable and you can see the car sits a tad lower with the RS package. The 18'' wheels set the look off nice without being overly large. Still, the 2012 LT with its 16'' rim package looked pretty nice with the same paint scheme but looks more ordinary on the road.

The Drive:

So my driving impressions were immediately noticeable when I got behind the wheel. For starters, I must say I was very very impressed with the amount of quality and refinement that you get with just the 1LT. You get a ton of things you would want in an ordinary commuter car and it feels pretty substantial. On the road, the 1LT actually rides _*more comfortably *_than my LTZ does, due to the different suspension and different tire / wheel set up. Bumps are dissipated extremely well throughout the cabin and although my car rides pretty well you notice that the sport-tuned suspension is much firmer, though it is never harsh. The steering seemed less responsive and while the 1LT handles well, it is not as athletic as the LTZ with the RS set up. I noticed the steering to be less sensitive as a whole on the 1LT. Braking was much the same; I could not tell if the rear discs provide any additional stopping power but the brake pedal requires alot more travel to stop. Braking is still strong and secure, but by comparison I can simply tap my own pedal and get immediate stopping power.

Acceleration was more than adequate in the 2012 1LT in its stock form. I was most impressed with the way the transmission shifted after just 2,200 miles. Granted, the shifting still isn't perfect but it definitely seemed more confident and less "confused" as my 2011 LTZ did on the day I drove it home from the dealer (I purchased mine with 1,700 miles on it). By comparison however, the trifecta tune shifts smoother than the stock 2012 transmission due to set programmed shift speeds in the ECU. Although the 2011 automatic transmission Cruze's are faster than 2012's on paper, the difference is not perceivable in the real world.

For those who aren't familiar, the 2012 automatic transmission models received a 2 MPG increase on the highway do to a revised final drive ratio. I was pleased with this fix, because the engine speed slows down quite a bit on the highway compared to my 2011, which certainly leads to better fuel economy. I drove a 450 mile trip home in my 2011 last week at 65 mph (cruise control engaged the whole way) and my DIC read 38.0 MPG, and 38.2 MPG from the pump at the end of the trip. At 65 mph, my tachometer reads ~2450 RPMs. In the 2012 LT I was able to set the cruise control all the way up to 72 mph for the tachometer to show 2500 RPMs. At the end of the 135 mile highway ride, the DIC read 39.6 MPG despite the brisker pace!!! Interestingly though, I was experimenting with different speeds. Due to the effect the final drive has on engine speed, the faster you drive on the highway, the more fuel this new gearing will save. To clarify, at 70 mph the tachometer difference between the two models is greater than at 60 mph. Therefore, if you have a lead foot you won't be penalized as harshly in the new Cruze models.


Features:

I have the model with all the bells and whistles so a few features caught my eye I have to at least make note of:

-No sunroof! Personal preference
-Automatic climate control - again, another convenience thing. Air conditioning was crisp and cool so no problems other than having to constantly monitor the knob.
-Power driver seat - I thought this was standard on LT models now because it had the leather wrapped steering wheel w/ cruise control!
-DIC - seemed too busy for me. I personally did not care for the triple information display and having endless displays to choose from.
-Heated seats - Love mine in the winter!
-Leather vs. cloth - the cloth is actually well done. You can live without the leather, even though I love mine!


So there you have it! Impressed overall. Glad to say I had the opportunity to drive another Cruze!


----------



## Starks8 (Jul 20, 2011)

Great write up and very informative! So are you saying the 2012 1LT you rented didn't have the power driver's seat? Maybe you got a fleet model?


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

The interior, even on the base trim LS and 1LT, is what sold me on the Cruze. It's just REALLY, REALLY nice, and somewhere where you're happy to be for long drives. From the moment I stepped into one back in 2011, I really liked the car. The cloth seats are very comfortable on long trips, and the cabin is quiet. The absolutely AMAZING ride on terrible roads is also one of the major things that sold me on the Cruze. The ride is almost as good as my mom's Accord, and way less floaty than the 03 Camry I owned and the 02 my girlfriend drives. Coming from a Volvo with a sport-tuned suspension where you could feel every pebble and crack in the road, it was a very nice change.

I had a Malibu as a rental, and being used to my car now, it was hard to get used to how incredibly tight the brake pedal was...I guess the Cruze with 4-wheel disc brakes is like that. Still, the 1LT has a progressive, linear action with the brake pedal - and even with drum brakes, it stops extremely well.

I believe the power drivers seat was part of the convenience package with rear park assist. I could have done without it, but eh. I found the only 1LT manual in a color I wanted within 200 miles, so it wasn't like I had too many to choose from in a short time period.

The stock radio sucks, though. I kinda wish I'd gone for the All star package with the sunroof and Pioneer system.


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

jblackburn said:


> I believe the power drivers seat was part of the convenience package with rear park assist.


Don't forget that package also includes remote start, if you also have the automatic.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

spacedout said:


> Don't forget that package also includes remote start, so its really worth the money.


Not on a manual, unfortunately. Thought that was a super cool feature on a rental Impala I had in the winter.


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

jblackburn said:


> Not on a manual, unfortunately. Thought that was a super cool feature on a rental Impala I had in the winter.


I realized I should have included that info once I had written that(I corrected it to late). you do get the package for less money though so there is a plus side.


----------



## steve333 (Oct 23, 2010)

Glad for this write up. I test drove an LT1 today and was wondering how much tighter the sport suspension on the LT2 would be. The roads where I am are horrible, with pot holes and rough roads all over the place.
I think I would prefer the leather seats so I may just get an LT1 with leather


----------



## jfischer (Sep 17, 2011)

The rental LT's don't have power seats, and some other features of a "regular" 1LT.


----------



## SkullCruzeRS (Nov 3, 2011)

As far as I know you can't get a 1LT in leather, you need to make the upgrade to 2LT.


----------



## Starks8 (Jul 20, 2011)

Yea, SkullCruzeRS is right.


----------



## jsusanka (Jan 31, 2011)

"car sits a tad lower with the RS package"
wrong- the LTZ package is what lowers the car.


----------



## steve333 (Oct 23, 2010)

SkullCruzeRS said:


> As far as I know you can't get a 1LT in leather, you need to make the upgrade to 2LT.





Starks8 said:


> Yea, SkullCruzeRS is right.


You can get leather with an option package, I checked the chevy site


----------



## Starks8 (Jul 20, 2011)

steve333 said:


> You can get leather with an option package, I checked the chevy site


Are you in the U.S.?


----------



## litesong (Oct 14, 2011)

ErikBEggs said:


> Hey guys..
> 
> So I'm with my mom on a trip to Alabama and we were scheduled to get a Nissan Versa Sedan as our rental car. At the rental car office, we saw a black Cruze LT parked next to it and the guy offered it to us for an extra $2 / day (the Cruze is somehow in their midsize category instead of compact) so we took it!


If the Nissan Versa had had a CVT, I rather would have seen you review the Versa. Despite the Versa's EPA highway rating of only 38mpg(which didn't really test the Versa's low highway rpms), I think the Versa would tromp either the Cruze LT or LTZ for mpg, in any situation. Also, CVTs are superior as a truly elegant mode of transportation.


----------



## steve333 (Oct 23, 2010)

Starks8 said:


> Are you in the U.S.?


Yes


----------



## steve333 (Oct 23, 2010)

I am wrong and you guys are right. No leather with the LT1.


----------



## Daisy81 (Jun 17, 2012)

litesong said:


> If the Nissan Versa had had a CVT, I rather would have seen you review the Versa. Despite the Versa's EPA highway rating of only 38mpg(which didn't really test the Versa's low highway rpms), I think the Versa would tromp either the Cruze LT or LTZ for mpg, in any situation. Also, CVTs are superior as a truly elegant mode of transportation.


This topic is not about the Nissan. It is comparing the two model years currently available in the US and the available trim levels. Please stay on topic. Thank you.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

litesong said:


> If the Nissan Versa had had a CVT, I rather would have seen you review the Versa. Despite the Versa's EPA highway rating of only 38mpg(which didn't really test the Versa's low highway rpms), I think the Versa would tromp either the Cruze LT or LTZ for mpg, in any situation. Also, CVTs are superior as a truly elegant mode of transportation.


So go buy one and stop trolling this forum. All I ever hear you talking about is how horrible of a car the Cruze is, and how everything is better than the Cruze. Don't want a Cruze? Great. Buy whatever your heart desires. You started off asking legitimate questions, but lately your posts have been focused on trash-talking the car and it's gotten out of hand. Your post has been reported. 

For the record, the Nissan Versa is a butt-ugly econobox that is inferior to the Cruze in almost every way. There is nothing appealing or desirable about it. Not only that, but it made the top 10 list as the 4th worst car for presence of toxic interior chemicals, which, ironically, you provided us. There is nothing "elegant" about it.

See Page 6:
http://www.healthystuff.org/documents/2012_Cars.pdf

By comparison, the 2012 Cruze Eco scores a 1.14.


----------



## steve333 (Oct 23, 2010)

The Nissan Versa is absolute garbage. and CVTs suck.
Not even in the same category.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

^this. 


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app


----------



## Daisy81 (Jun 17, 2012)

So I just went over and looked at the Versa on the web site. My first impression was the 90's would like to have their boring design back. It looks like a blob and has no style at all. The next thing I notice is the 109HP at 6000RPM! That is worse then the Honda Fit and I had a horrible time with that car and trying to get on the highway without getting run over. The rear breaks are drums not discs which is another thing inferior to my LTZ. The last straw is the interior. It is horrible.

Also why are we comparing the Versa to the Cruze anyways? The Versa is in the same class as the Chevy Sonic which kicks the crap out of the Versa too.


----------



## Daisy81 (Jun 17, 2012)

steve333 said:


> I am wrong and you guys are right. No leather with the LT1.


I found this with a quick google search. It is custom fit seat covers for the front and back row seats in the Cruze. It isn't cheap though. You're looking at about $700 to get both but if you already have the car but really want leather without having to buy a new Cruze this is an option. It is interesting because they have a huge list of vehicles they make the covers for.


----------



## steve333 (Oct 23, 2010)

Daisy81 said:


> I found this with a quick google search. It is custom fit seat covers for the front and back row seats in the Cruze. It isn't cheap though. You're looking at about $700 to get both but if you already have the car but really want leather without having to buy a new Cruze this is an option. It is interesting because they have a huge list of vehicles they make the covers for.


Interesting


----------

