# Reliability of the 1.4 turbo?



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Are there any current Cruze owners who are concerned about the long term reliability, say a ten year period, of the 1.4 turbo? I am just wondering if more issues will arise as your Cruze starts to
rack up the mileage, as opposed to the standard 1.8 148HP new KIA Forte engine?

I had read you have to be more careful with a turbo and always wait 30 seconds before turning off the engine. Would a turbo be more high maintenance in this regard?

In other words, can the Cruze 1.4 turbo easily get to 150-200k mikes WITHOUT any major issues associated with the turbo?

Thanks


----------



## Dark Matter (May 16, 2012)

Tough to get data on the projected lifespan of the turbo but it is a wear item. Of course the turbo is just one of many differences between these vehicles.


----------



## Smurfenstein (Nov 16, 2011)

So far the 1.4T is holding up rather well, between a couple Eco's who have already racked up 100K+ miles, and a Sonic owner who has tuned his to pump out over 200hp and 250tq to the wheels and drives that thing hard for at least 10K+ going to the drag strip and just tuning/modding.

I would say that as long as you take proper care of your car's engine, and you don't get a random defect/bad part, the 1.4T will last as long as you need the car.


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

nodule said:


> I had read you have to be more careful with a turbo and always wait 30 seconds before turning off the engine. Would a turbo be more high maintenance in this regard?
> 
> In other words, can the Cruze 1.4 turbo easily get to 150-200k mikes WITHOUT any major issues associated with the turbo?


You do not need to cool off a modern turbo with idling. 

I would not worry so much. Early turbos were more prone to failure, some with as few as 50,000miles. I checked on the 1.4T turbo price a few years back, it was around $400. Don't know if its still currently true but at that time a 1.4T complete create engine was thousands less than the 1.8L cruze engine. 

There is quite a few people with more than 50,000miles already, at least one with more than 100,000 with no turbo related issues.


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

In my opinion, you are just as likely to run into problems like carbon build up with the Kia Forte's engine that uses direct injection. Maybe even more so than worrying about the Cruze 1.4's turbo.


----------



## blk88verde (Apr 30, 2011)

> you are just as likely to run into problems like carbon build up with the Kia Forte's engine that uses direct injection.


 According to my brother, who supplies tools to car dealers, he sees the techs cleaning carbon build up from relatively low mileage BMWs and Minis with DI fairly often. Can be a pricey job when out of warranty.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Bowtieguy,
I understand, thats why if I do go with the 2014 Forte, I would go with the base 1.8 Liter 148hp engine, not the GDI.


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

Ah, my mistake I didn't notice the 1.8 isn't DI. The 1.8 is only available on the LX, which is more comparable to the Cruze LS than the trims with the 1.4T(LT/LTZ/Eco). In that case, and comparing the price points/options of the Forte LX with the Cruze LS, I would honestly give the Forte a try. But if it was Forte EX vs Cruze LT/LTZ/Eco, I would take the Cruze.


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

Not concerned here. I'll take a turbo over GDI any day. When the turbo fails, it's easy to bolt on a new turbo, change the oil, and be good to go. Cleaning intake valves is something I'd rather not do. Although, Hyundai's engines haven't been known for deposit issues.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Yes, the nice thing about the Forte LX with 1.8, 148hp, you can get it with the "Popular Package", which adds very classy looking 16" wheels, 6 speakers, turning signals in the
mirrors, etc, as opposed to the base Cruze LS that I believe is those cheap hubcaps only.


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

Right now the 2014 Forte LX automatic with the Popular Package is retailing for $19,100, according to Kia's configurator. A 2013 Cruze 1LT automatic without any packages is retailing for $18,965. Equipment and features between those two are pretty darned close. Those are the two I'd be cross-shopping, not the Cruze LS. 

It sounds like you are digging the Forte more than the Cruze. At the end of the day, get what makes you happy. Life is short, drive what makes you happy.ccasion14:


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Yup. im slighty leaning towards the Forte, been I still may be swayed back to the Cruze 1LT! Still doing my research on the pluses and minuses of both vehicles.
I do like the peace of mind of the 5/60 10/100K KIA warranty though. As a current Hyundai owner, I am very familiar with that warranty and have saved a bunch
of money with a few issues for my 2005 Elantra GLS.


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

nodule said:


> I still may be swayed back to the Cruze 1LT!


Check out my "cruze accident" thread to see how well they(cruze) protect the occupants in a real highway speed crash.


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

Sounds like you have a good relationship with your Hyundai dealer. Is the local Kia dealer part of the same network? If it is and the local Chevy dealer is only so-so, buy the car that has better local support in case a problem arises. You're also familiar with the quirks of a Hyundai/Kia vehicle, which helps your case for buying one. 

Also, your 2005 Elantra is the high-water mark for the Elantra IMO. Hyundai nailed the styling, the engine power, the fuel economy, and put together a darn good interior. The current-gen MD Elantra (the sedan, not the i30 hatch Hyundai calls an Elantra here) has more features, but is missing the fun to drive nature of the XD and the RD/J2 Elantras. I put a lot of miles onto a J2 Elantra wagon with a stickshift, and have happy memories of that car. It was a ball of fun to drive.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Sciphi,
You are absolutely right! Those 2004-2006 generation Elantras were great. My 2005 Elantra GLS actually rides quite a bit smoother and quieter than current Elantras.
My 2005 was using Multi-Link rear suspension, now they are all torsion beam rear suspensions. But I never liked the mushy brake pedal feel of my 2005 Elantra.


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

Now the better question, have you driven both cars you are looking at? Most modern cars will go 150,000 miles with few minor & no major repairs. That means it really boils down to which car you like to drive better.


----------



## NickD (Dec 10, 2011)

My major concern with the turbo was the experience I had with GEICO where I was accident free with them of something like 25 years when I purchase my 88 Supra with a turbo. Using the argument that I was picking up an extra 3 mpg with it went nowhere. Had to change insurance companies, but still greater than normal rates. Because it had a turbo.

Just the contrary with the Cruze, rates were even lower than my much older 04 Cavalier. Turbo didn't make any difference, but the fact that the Cruze has ten air bags did. Statistics!

In regards to getting robbed on replacement parts, that includes anything in a car that can go wrong. What about an 18 buck MSRP on one of those little cheapa$$ plastic clips that holds the back seat in? Or laying out 40 bucks for a tire valve?

In quoting out literally thousands of projects for production, never was the high dollar items that drove up the price, was always that little stuff that did. Would be far more concerned about your ABS modulator, another throwaway piece of crap. And watch out for junk on the road, that catalytic converter replacement can break you. Should never have been placed that under the vehicle, Fort Knox would be a more logical spot for it.


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

NickD said:


> And watch out for junk on the road, that catalytic converter replacement can break you. Should never have been placed that under the vehicle, Fort Knox would be a more logical spot for it.


Been driving for over 20 years and 100s of thousands of miles and never lost a cat to road debris.

Supra had high insurance rate because it would have been classified as a sports car and not because of the turbo engine. Same reason a n/a camaro will have higher rates than a supercharged Buick ParkAve.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

While I was looking for a new car, I discovered that just comparing the listed specs. and features of cars was a bit like comparing apples and oranges. Yeah, they both might have the same features, but the implementation was different enough to make one more attractive than the other. I ended up downloading the operator's manuals to see how different features compared. My feeling is that I spend a lot more time inside driving the car than looking at it, so how things operate is very important. And on the driving point, do drive the cars as much as you can, as close together as you can, and over the same course to be able to see which one(s) you like. I know that sounds like a lot of work, but $20K or so is a lot of money to me.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

NickD said:


> My major concern with the turbo was the experience I had with GEICO where I was accident free with them of something like 25 years when I purchase my 88 Supra with a turbo. Using the argument that I was picking up an extra 3 mpg with it went nowhere. Had to change insurance companies, but still greater than normal rates. Because it had a turbo.


The problem wasn't with the Supra, it was GEICO's view of turbos. My ECO MTs insurance rates are lower than the Mitsubishi Lancer (no turbo) I traded.


----------



## ErikBEggs (Aug 20, 2011)

NickD said:


> My major concern with the turbo was the experience I had with GEICO where I was accident free with them of something like 25 years when I purchase my 88 Supra with a turbo. Using the argument that I was picking up an extra 3 mpg with it went nowhere. Had to change insurance companies, but still greater than normal rates. Because it had a turbo.


Interestingly, when I bought my Cruze, my insurance went DOWN compared to my dads 4 door Infiniti I-30. Yup, down. Nothing is better than a car with 10 airbags, 4 doors, and daytime running lights


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

Yep, as of right now there aren't many other cars safer than a Cruze. We've seen some terrifying crash pictures, and the folks are reported to walk away with a few bruises and airbag scrapes. Safety ratings on the Cruze are a little better than the Elantra, upon which the 2014 Forte is based. 

Really, it comes down to which dealer you like better, and which car you like better. No point in getting a great car if the only dealer in the area is horrible.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

nodule said:


> Yes, the nice thing about the Forte LX with 1.8, 148hp, you can get it with the "Popular Package", which adds very classy looking 16" wheels, 6 speakers, turning signals in the
> mirrors, etc, as opposed to the base Cruze LS that I believe is those cheap hubcaps only.





nodule said:


> Yup. im slighty leaning towards the Forte, been I still may be swayed back to the Cruze 1LT! Still doing my research on the pluses and minuses of both vehicles.
> I do like the peace of mind of the 5/60 10/100K KIA warranty though. As a current Hyundai owner, I am very familiar with that warranty and have saved a bunch
> of money with a few issues for my 2005 Elantra GLS.


I test drove the Forte when I was looking for a new car last year in January. It was very high on my list due to price. Here's what did it for me. 

- The road noise. In the Forte, it's terrible. Get on the highway with it, then get in a Cruze immediately afterward. Also try revving that Forte engine up, and do the same with the 1.4T. 
- The fuel economy. The Cruze wins, hands down. Check the fuelly.com ratings, not the EPA ratings. The Cruze consistently averages 7-8mpg better. 
Forte: Kia Forte MPG Reports | Fuelly
Cruze: Chevrolet Cruze MPG Reports | Fuelly

- Power ratings are not SAE certified with the Forte like they are with the Cruze. Don't compare horsepower ratings until you see some dyno results. The Cruze is guaranteed to put down the power it is rated for. 
- Interior quality. The Cruze wins, hands down. There's just no competition. The Kia feels like sheet plastic. 
- Interior space. The Cruze wins again, hands down. In fact, I had 1/2" of head room in the Forte when I test drove it, with the seat in the lowest position. 
- Safety. The Forte's 6 airbags doesn't compare to the Cruze's 10 airbags and an absolutely incredible safety record. 

IMO, the Cruze is simply more car than the Forte. It wasn't worth the $1-$2k price difference for me to buy the Forte over the Cruze given what I was giving up. I also didn't like how they tried to make the car feel faster by making the throttle extremely sensitive; like an on/off switch. 

Big point on safety with a Cruze: safety ratings are only officially posted against other cars in its class. Otherwise, one would have a very difficult time explaining how a Suburban can get similar safety ratings to a Malibu. We both know which one would fare better. That's a detail that most people don't consider. From what we've seen in Cruzes that have been involved in collisions, they greatly exceed their reported safety ratings, and do very well against much larger cars.

While I will admit that they've come a long way from where they were 10 years ago, so has GM. The Forte is, in most respects, far behind the Cruze.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

Well stated XR. Unless you do side by side objective comparisons, you will make a subjective decision and that might change how you feel about it down the road, so to speak. The published manufacturer descriptions can be misleading.


----------



## NickD (Dec 10, 2011)

Supra is considered a touring car, anyway, the heck with GEICO, far happier with Erie and saving 15% for 15 minutes is BS with all those commercials.

If we get off the subject of safety and switch over to luxury, Cruze practically has every luxury option a person could ask for. With maybe the exception of two items.

First is a dash mounted DVD player, that you can't use when driving anyway. So when do you use it? Ha, can say to the wife, instead of watching a DVD on our ten foot protector, let's go out and sit in the car and watch it on a seven inch screen. Besides that, can pick up a portable unit for around 50 bucks.

Second, is a super high performance engine, that you can't use legally anyway, but does look impressive on TV commercials. But with a minor drawback, giving those oil companies a lot more money.

For quietness, Cruze is very hard to beat in any price range. Did have a couple of problems, stuffed some foam in my driver's side weather stripping, and some more in that slide out arm rest.


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

The 2014 Forte is all new. It is not the same as the 2013 Forte...

But as XR did, you should thoroughly test drive and crawl in/out/over both and see which suits you better.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

BowtieGuy said:


> The 2014 Forte is all new. It is not the same as the 2013 Forte...
> 
> But as XR did, you should thoroughly test drive and crawl in/out/over both and see which suits you better.


To be fair, I have seen the 2014 Forte as well. I maintain what I said previously, although not enough 2014 models have been posted on Fuelly.com to merit much comment with regard to fuel economy. 

Even as a 2014 model, it still feels like a Kia. A dressed up Kia, perhaps, but still a Kia.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

The Cruze has a surprising TIGHT read seat, VERY disappointing. I was over at another Chevy dealer in my general area and they have a new color called "Blue Ray Metallic".
It was a 1LT Automatic, very sharp, dark blue color.


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

Everybody's tastes and experiences are different. I looked hard at a Elantra, having had good experiences with Hyundai vehicles in the past. It didn't suit my tastes, and what I wanted out of a vehicle. The Cruze Eco MT continues to fit the bill very well, even after ~2 years of ownership. 

The rear seat isn't bad, nor is it the best one out there. The average-size folks I've had back there were fine. Then again, I rarely use the back seat for anything. It was not on my criteria when I bought the car. But for fitting a few car seats and growing kids, it'll hopefully be okay. 

OP, keep us in the loop on your search.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

nodule said:


> The Cruze has a surprising TIGHT read seat, VERY disappointing. I was over at another Chevy dealer in my general area and they have a new color called "Blue Ray Metallic".
> It was a 1LT Automatic, very sharp, dark blue color.


Yes, but you drive in the front, do you not?

Here's what it comes down to. These are both cars in the compact segment, so there will be sacrifices. If you get a car with more rear seat, you will sacrifice front seating, or headroom, or trunk space. Pick your poison; they don't call them compact cars for nothing. If you want something bigger, try a Malibu or an Optima, or slide the front seats up an inch or two. In the Cruze, the front seats go VERY far back. I'm 6'1" and I can't even reach the pedals with my toes if the rear seat is all the way back. 

I carried 3 full grown people in the back of my Cruze for 2 weeks when my sister, brother, and brother in law came to visit me. The shoulder room was a bit tight with all three of them back there, but they had no issues with knee room.


----------



## iKermit (Dec 13, 2010)

I dont think you will have any issues with the components of our engines. And if anything you got this great community backing you up.

Kia Forte however is well a Kia. Id go all technical but im on a phone in a far away land. But if there was any issues with our cars I doubt rental companys would buy them as fleets... just saying. 

I am 6 ft tall my wife is 5'7 but puts her seat as far back as me and for a COMPACT car it is very spacious. Any passengers in the back never complain just compliment. So get the Cruze and as you can see. We on CRUZETALK are really passionate about our cars lol.

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Good points XR and Sciphi,
Have you guys noticed also that the center armrest is way to small and mounted too low? No matter how I adjusted my seat, my elbow would not rest in a natural position.
Also, on the test drive while at a light, the Cruze 1LT slighty jerked forward, twice! I asked the salesman if he felt that and he respnded "no, i didnt feel anything." But I can tell by is reaction he felt the same thing.
But I absolutely LOVE this Blue Ray Metallic color, I thing its the best color I seen on a car. Its the perfect color for the Cruze.

Any of you Cruze experts here know if the 2014 Blue Ray Metallic will be available in the gray interior? The one I saw was black interior
which I hate.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

The engine will be the last thing in the car to let you down. Little issues (electrical, rattles, etc) will plague you way before then with either car. 

NEVER buy the first year a car was redesigned. It's just asking for problems. 

If rear seat room is an issue, step up a class. They're all small in this class in the rear seat - except the Corolla, but it's junk. I borrow my girlfriends car if I'm hanging out with my guy friends. My 6' + friends just are not comfortable in the Cruze (likewise, I'm not comfortable in most of theirs). The Cruze is fine for 5'8" or less people in the back (in fact, we did 2000 miles with me and 3 girls in one and everyone was fine). 


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

"NEVER buy the first year a car was designed". 

Not always true. Where you saying that for the 2011 Cruze??


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

nodule said:


> "NEVER buy the first year a car was designed".
> 
> Not always true. Where you saying that for the 2011 Cruze??


UMMM... big yes, his statement is true for ALL new things. So much so I would not even buy a used 2011 cruze. The model year change over is usually July/August for GM, I waited till April 2012 to get my car(built in January 2012). 

You always want to wait till any bugs/issues get worked out, why be a beta tester at $20,000+ out of your pocket?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

nodule said:


> Good points XR and Sciphi,
> Have you guys noticed also that the center armrest is way to small and mounted too low? No matter how I adjusted my seat, my elbow would not rest in a natural position.
> Also, on the test drive while at a light, the Cruze 1LT slighty jerked forward, twice! I asked the salesman if he felt that and he respnded "no, i didnt feel anything." But I can tell by is reaction he felt the same thing.
> But I absolutely LOVE this Blue Ray Metallic color, I thing its the best color I seen on a car. Its the perfect color for the Cruze.
> ...


The armrest is small, but I find the height to be acceptable. It can be moved forward a few inches though for long-distance comfort. 

The transmission is adaptive and takes a while to learn your driving habits. In addition, it will feel like it jerks a bit as it's coming to a stop due to the upshifting to keep the RPMs high and keep DFCO enabled. DFCO cuts off fuel and uses the car's wheels to turn the engine while the car is slowing down. 

You may be able to custom order a car with a special interior, but I don't know off the top of my head if you can get that specific color combination in a lot.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Well, if I do go with the new Forte, I would have some piece of mind with KIA's 5/60K, 10/100K warranty.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

I dont know if wanting a gray interior with the Blue Ray Metallic would be "custom." There is nothing special or rare about a gray interior!


----------



## APCruze (Mar 7, 2013)

Dont forget, With the Cruze you are supporting US Jobs and can join the next Lordstown Meet.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

APCruze,
I know, that is a strong consideration of mine in deciding. However, I have any great successful with Hyundai vehicles for the last 10 years!
And, believe it or not, the Cruze would be my first American car ever!


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

nodule said:


> Well, if I do go with the new Forte, I would have some piece of mind with KIA's 5/60K, 10/100K warranty.


 A longer warranty is not a reason to buy a car, one can get an extended warranty if they are that much of a worrier. It still boils down to how you like the driving dynamics, controls of each car. That should be the majority reason for your decision. 

For me I also like to know the money I spend supports American jobs and the money is staying in America.


----------



## APCruze (Mar 7, 2013)

nodule said:


> APCruze,
> I know, that is a strong consideration of mine in deciding. However, I have any great successful with Hyundai vehicles for the last 10 years!
> And, believe it or not, the Cruze would be my first American car ever!


It ultimately boils down to what vehicle you personally like more. I grew up with my parents owning Fords, I owned fords, my wifes family owned Fords. Needless to say I was biast to getting a Ford since my Explorer had 225000 miles on it and was still running strong when we got our Expedition (a year prior to the Cruze) When It comes down to it most vehicles are designed to last 150000 to 200000 if properly maintained and driven. I think this is were a lot of brands get bad names is people fussing cause the car they drive like it was stolen and never change things out till it breaks, or do oil changes till 10,000 and 20,000 miles and then say the company made a bad vehicle. 

Although I never thought I would drive a Chevy cause I liked Ford better, I knew with the right maintance and care of the vehicle It will last the same amount of time as any other vehicle. I think by alot of comments in this thread you have alot of great information to go off of in your decision and dont rush it. 

Also play the sales game, go drive both and let them both know you are a serious buyer between the two and let them start a bidding war to get your cash...

Good luck on which ever one you get.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

nodule said:


> Well, if I do go with the new Forte, I would have some piece of mind with KIA's 5/60K, 10/100K warranty.


See below:



spacedout said:


> A longer warranty is not a reason to buy a car, one can get an extended warranty if they are that much of a worrier. It still boils down to how you like the driving dynamics, controls of each car. That should be the majority reason for your decision.
> 
> For me I also like to know the money I spend supports American jobs and the money is staying in America.


I agree with the above completely. 

Here's what it boils down to. If your purchasing decision is based, by any consequential degree, on what will amount to 24k miles of bumper to bumper warranty, then you should reconsider your choice of vehicle. If you are at all expecting that a vehicle will have powertrain problems before it hits 5 years or 100k miles, then you should reconsider your choice of vehicle. 

One has to remember that this is 2013, not 2003 or 1993. The 1.4L Turbo engine is a global engine with some incredibly advanced features incorporated and major steps that were taken to improve reliability. I'll give you an example. The piston rings have a diamond-like coating that GM developed. This makes the rings much, much stronger, which causes them to be significantly more durable. However, this also allows GM to tighten tolerances, and significantly reduce friction, which is how some people are achieving above 50mpg with their Cruze (Eco manual). The turbo is thermal-siphon cooled and requires no "cool-down idle" time. In other words, the coolant will flow when the car is off by design of the cooling system to keep the oil in the turbo from catching fire. The car comes from the factory with a synthetic blend oil, not a conventional oil. The engine mounts are massive and were placed there specifically to reduce felt vibration. The engine makes 100% of torque at 1850RPM. The alternator and A/C compressor are variable rate. The alternator charges the battery, then shuts off entirely to save fuel, then fires back up when the battery depletes a certain amount. The oil pump is also a variable rate pump, which reduces load and improves fuel economy. The tolerances on this engine are laser-checked on the assembly line (I saw it with my own eyes), and a "cold dyno" tests the engine up to 7000RPM which measuring airflow, vibration, and a plethora of other factors to ensure that every engine is absolutely perfect. The engine is driven by a lifetime timing chain, not a timing belt. 

I can go on, and on, and on about how much GM put into the 1.4L engine to make it reliable. GM has the largest and most advanced powertrain facility *in the world*. 

Check out this thread:
http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/14-c...99-chevy-cruze-gm-powertrain-inside-look.html

And check out my review of the Cruze:
http://xtremerevolution.net/behind-the-wheel-of-the-chevy-cruze/

On top of all this, there's CruzeTalk, which is arguably one of the best online forums in existence. 

The Cruze is built here in the US, providing jobs to Americans in Lordstown, who build this car with a very great level of pride. Check out what our own members had to say on the National Tour/Meet I set up:
http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/18-e...iscussion/13679-my-lordstown-2013-report.html
http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/18-e...2013-lordstown-trip-picture-video-thread.html
http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/18-e...ooking-back-2013-cruzetalk-national-meet.html

The Cruze is a driver's car. 24k miles of bumper to bumper won't make a consequential difference given what we've seen with these cars as far as issues go with the Cruze. I will keep mine for at least 200k miles unless someone totals it. As spacedout said so well, you need to choose the car based on the driving dynamics, and controls of each car, but I would add to this the significance of safety (I can't count how many times we had a CruzeTalk member total their car and immediately go out and buy another Cruze), build quality (in this regard, there is simply no competition), aftermarket (if you plan on modding it at all), and honestly, the community. As a bonus, I am very proud to have bought an American car that supports American jobs and the American economy. 

We are very proud of our cars, we talk about them very enthusiastically, and even though we've owned them for only a couple of years, we love our cars. Take that as a sign that this is an excellent car, as it takes an excellent car to get so many people so passionately enthusiastic about it.


----------



## 2013Cruze (Aug 4, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> See below:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Very well put.

Couldn't agree more.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

I would also look at the quality of the dealership service departments. You will, with any car, eventually need something fixed. A good service department will make this as painless as possible and get the job done right on the first visit.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

XR,
Thanks for taking the time to type out your passionate thoughts on the Cruze. You make some strong points for the Cruze for me to consider. My goal is to make this purchase 
by the end of this month.
Remember, though, MANY modern compact vehicles today, WITH all proper maintenance done, can go to 200,000 miles! MANY 2004-2006 XD generations Elantras are at
or over 200,000 miles.
My current 2005 ELantra GLS is in MINT condition with 70,000 miles and drives and shifts SUPER smooth. This is with faithful 5000 mile oil changes with Motorcraft Syn Blend
and tranmissions flushes at 30K and 60K. I can just feel this Elantra can easily make it till 200K.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

Out of curiosity, why are you looking for a new car?


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

+1 on the Cruze being a driver's car. It always manages to keep a smile on my face, even just tooling around in traffic.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Obermd,
Because its an old ladies car. Its the beige color with hubcaps. I want a new car that is more modern with all the new modern features.
My friends call it "Golden Girl."


----------



## jsusanka (Jan 31, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> See below:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It is the only logical choice.

And it is cool.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

nodule said:


> XR,
> Thanks for taking the time to type out your passionate thoughts on the Cruze. You make some strong points for the Cruze for me to consider. My goal is to make this purchase
> by the end of this month.
> Remember, though, MANY modern compact vehicles today, WITH all proper maintenance done, can go to 200,000 miles! MANY 2004-2006 XD generations Elantras are at
> ...


With proper maintenance, the 1.4L Turbo will go way beyond 200k miles. The body will rust long before that engine fails, and that's a simple fact. 

I don't disagree that the Elantra is a reliable car, but having driven the newest one, I can say without a doubt that I would not own one. The 1.6L DI engine simply doesn't have enough power.

Here's where the difference between the Cruze and the Kia are likely to be noticeable:

- After 75k miles when things start to rattle - the Cruze interior fit and finish is far better. Overall, the Cruze is far more refined. 
- Road noise on the highway will bother you after a while. I know what lengths GM took with the Cruze to keep it quiet. 
- Fuel economy will frustrate you after a while. Kia and Hyundai were already sued for falsifying their fuel economy ratings. Let me clarify that - they overstated them and lied to the EPA to make their cars look better. The lawsuit forced them to report correctly, which dropped some models by 6mpg. This goes back to my previous point of SAE certification on the power ratings. When GM says the car makes 138hp, it means that every Cruze will make at minimum 138hp at the crank. When GM says that the Cruze Eco will achieve 42mpg, it means that it will do it in the winter, with 10% ethanol fuel, cold weather, a car full of people, and snow tires. Note - they said the Diesel would get 46mpg, and it was tested in the real world at 58mpg. That's just how GM does things now. 
- When someone else sits in your car. This was a big one. If you sit in a Kia, you know you sit in an economy car, and you're fine with that, because you went out and bought an economy car. Other people know it's an economy car, and it doesn't phase them. When someone sits in a Cruze, however, their eyes get big and they are impressed. They ask how much you paid for it, and when you tell them, they can hardly believe it. The Cruze doesn't feel and drive like an economy car. 
- If a semi truck falls on top of your car, will you get out alive and with only minor injuries? If you're in a Cruze, you will. 

























I'll be honest; price wasn't the biggest concern for us when we bought our cars. We wanted to stick to a range, naturally, but we didn't go out and find the cheapest car money can buy. Surely there are cheaper cars available, like a Sonic sedan. We bought the Cruze because it amazed, impressed us, and exceeded expectations, at a price that's not questionably low or annoyingly high. 

Like I said, I can go on and on and on about how great the Cruze is, but the truth of the matter is that the car sells itself. I'm just pointing out the facts. I'm not coming in here like a Honda salesman saying you should buy the car "because it's a Honda." I'm just pointing out what may not be obvious or easily found, like the engine technology, or the safety features (forgot to mention the massive reinforced beam behind the rear seats to protect from rear end collisions), or the fit and finish, or so on and so forth. I'd recommend you take the time to look through the links I posted in my last post if you haven't already. Just drive one and you'll understand why we're so crazy about it. It's not just another economy car.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

jsusanka said:


> It is the only *logical *choice.
> 
> And it is cool.


I see what you did there.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Thanks XR,
But have you sat in or driven the new 2014 KIA Forte?? The interior is JUST as nice and refined as the Cruze! I seriously doubt many people will say this looks like
a cheap economy car. Its surprising that many folks still have the impressions of KIA's from the 80's and 90's is still the normal. The new KIA's are NOTHING like the
terrible build quality of the past.

XR, Edmumds full review of the 2013 Cruze list one of the "cons" as... "six speed automatic's sleepy responses". What exactly does that mean?


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

nodule said:


> MANY 2004-2006 XD generations Elantras are at or over 200,000 miles.
> My current 2005 ELantra GLS is in MINT condition with 70,000 miles and drives and shifts SUPER smooth. This is with faithful 5000 mile oil changes with Motorcraft Syn Blend
> and tranmissions flushes at 30K and 60K. I can just feel this Elantra can easily make it till 200K.


Not trying to stir the pot but how is that impressive about the XD cars?
GM was building cars in 1988 that would do that. The 3800 V6 with routine maintenance like you mention is a 250K motor as well and when they ironed out most of the bugs with the 4T40 by 1990 it was a solid transmission as well. Problem is I've seen many people not properly maintain their car and blame it on the manufacturer when it fails.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

nodule said:


> Thanks XR,
> But have you sat in or driven the new 2014 KIA Forte?? The interior is JUST as nice and refined as the Cruze! I seriously doubt many people will say this looks like
> a cheap economy car. Its surprising that many folks still have the impressions of KIA's from the 80's and 90's is still the normal. The new KIA's are NOTHING like the
> terrible build quality of the past.
> ...


The interior looks really simplistic and kinda sparse, to be honest. (I've got to say, I like the Elantra better), but I'm sure their materials are good-quality - most of the Elantra was. 

The 1.8L 148-hp engine in the Elantra/Forte is NOT underpowered; the 1.6L in the Accent is.

The 6-speed auto in the Cruze was one of my major gripes about the car...I rented one and spent a week with it. Don't expect to easily get the fuel economy you see on the window sticker without a manual transmission. That said, also don't expect it from the Kia, either...the Elantras usually don't hit anywhere near their EPA numbers.

I'm an advocate for the Cruze, but I just don't like the transmission.

http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/9-ch...orum/13463-so-i-just-rented-my-own-car-3.html


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

So exactly what is the major gripe or con of the 2013 Cruze's automatic transmission? I do know that during my test drive TWICE the car slightly jerked forward while
stopped at a light...it was very disconcerting and im wondering why this is not discussed much here. Or may I am just missing this discussion.Chevrolet Cruze Review by MotorWeek - YouTube

Impressive review for sure of the Cruze by MotorWeek. But, to be fair, I have yet to find ANY negative professional reviews, either written or
You Tube, on the new 2014 Forte. All seems to be very impressed with the huge leap in refinement, driving dynamics and ride comfort.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ckpRTokFV0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQXDsysuffk


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

Guys, as much as we'd love to strongly advocate for the Cruze, let's let the OP make his choice. Our job isn't to be salesfolks. Let the car sell itself, which it is very capable of doing. 

I'll be honest, I have high regard for that generation of Elantra. That was the first time Hyundai really figured out how to consistently bolt together a reliable, appealing compact for the US market. They sold decently, and proved to be good cars. It set the stage for their current sales success. Before that, Hyundai was a bit of a laughingstock. Now they're the ones laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

nodule said:


> So exactly what is the major gripe or con of the 2013 Cruze's automatic transmission? I do know that during my test drive TWICE the car slightly jerked forward while
> stopped at a light...it was very disconcerting and im wondering why this is not discussed much here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ckpRTokFV0


I'm happy with how our 2013 LT/auto cruze shifts.
The Cruze has a "neutral idle" mode that puts the trans in neutral to save fuel. I've noticed this when taking off when we first bought the car.


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

sciphi said:


> Before that, Hyundai was a bit of a laughingstock. Now they're the ones laughing all the way to the bank.


 Yes they were along with the early gen Kia but for some reason even after people bought those piles they went back for more.


----------



## NickD (Dec 10, 2011)

Hyundai wasn't much of a consideration for me, 60K warranty was a bit of an attraction, but not with a dealer noted for poor service, next nearest on is 120 miles away. In the 80's with the then junk coming out of Detroit, my entire family and me went with Toyota, Honda, or Nissan. Local dealers were crooks, before the internet, had to drive down to Milwaukee to get half way decent prices. A lot of that has changed today with the internet, but still have to wait for parts.

Even doing all the work yourself, even recently, my Toyota dealer wanted $450.00 for a fuel pump for my Supra, got that off the internet for a hundred bucks. But you still need additional means of transpiration while waiting. Because of this, practically all of my family switched back to domestics in the early 90's when Detroit finally started producing something half way decent. 

Another PITA with these things were those rubber bands that had to be frequently replaced in particular with an interference engine. Dealers were charging anywhere from 800 to 2600 bucks to change these things, for a Honda, belt was only 17 bucks. So sure spent plenty of weekends changing those. GM spent millions to develop a far more reliable and quiet constantly lubricated timing chain, that was a very welcomed improvement.

Another hinderance least in my life, is the misery these Asian countries caused us. Just hate giving them any of my money. In a 30 mile radius, have eight Chevy dealers with some willing to give good service. Least I have a choice. And all cars have problems, Honda's and Toyotas even rust out quicker now than domestic cars. But for some really strange reason, doesn't seem to hurt the resell value. Suspension parts also wear out like crazy in these cars as well as exhaust systems and brakes. Were decent cars in the 80's compared to domestics, but people are still gauging this from like 25 years ago. 

Must be uninformed.


----------



## Robby (Mar 1, 2013)

Two things to think about.
Current Hyundai owners may disagree but anytime I drive one with over 50k on the odometer, they feel like old, clapped out, much higher mileage cars......lotta road noise, feel loosey goosey.....you can tell they age poorly.
Rust.....the Koreans are were the Japanese were 20 years ago......here in the 'salt belt' I think if you put one in a quiet garage you can hear them rust. There are very few 6 year old Hyundai's (and Kias) that don't show severe corrosion up here....especially suspension components and mounting points.
Clearly a poor grade (cheap) of reclaimed metal being used here.

Engine is an engine/trans is a trans (except CVT...automotive M-80)....I contend good maintenence prevails.....but when the engine is bolted to a rusty, loose driving hulk......well, not much fun there.
Look around and see how many 6+ year Asian/Korean vehicles are out there compared to domestics.

I know that a 6 year old Malibu drives about the same as the dayI picked it up and shows no evidence of our winters.
But, I also know that G.M. uses a ten year salt bath schedule as part of design criteria.

Lastly, few folks are aware that Japan and Korea each require a vehicle removed from service after 5 years....there is a recertification proceedure but it is prohibitively expensive.........Do you really think they are using different materials for export?

My younger son owns a Tuner shop......buys engines and transmissions from Japan by the container load.....all removed from 5 year old cars out of service, to be installed in cars here......cheap too, with a warrantee.....Accord engine and trans assembly works out to around 400.00 bucks (yes he will mark it up....a lot)

Anyways, if you want longetivity, which includes staying good looking/good driving for the long term, lean towards domestic....if this is only a three year relationship and your not a 'Car Person' buy cheap.

MHO and experience,

Rob


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Rob,
My 8 year old Hyundai Elantra GLS with 70,000 miles rides JUST as smooth, quiet and tight and as one! It may be because I never treated my Elantra as a disposable, throw
way car. 5000 mile oil changes, transmissions flushes at 30K, 60K, air filter replaced every 15K, coolant flushes at 30K, 60K, all belts changed and timing belt. My suspension
is tight and like new, original shock and struts, tires ALWAYS wear perfectly. Not a single squeak or rattle.

To be honest, it actually rides smoother than day one since I upgraded to the top of the line premium grand touring tire...the Michelin Primacy
MXV4.

I also have to say I am a very conservative driver, I accelerate smooth and easy and have a feather light touch when braking. I have a nice easy 10 mile one way work commute in
the suburbs of central NJ.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

nodule said:


> Thanks XR,
> But have you sat in or driven the new 2014 KIA Forte?? The interior is JUST as nice and refined as the Cruze! I seriously doubt many people will say this looks like
> a cheap economy car. Its surprising that many folks still have the impressions of KIA's from the 80's and 90's is still the normal. The new KIA's are NOTHING like the
> terrible build quality of the past.
> ...


I have stated before in this thread that I have in fact sat in the new Forte, and my position on it does not change. It is absolutely not as refined as the Cruze. I have been careful in choosing my words in that regard, and I chose to say refined, not stylish, or attractive, or impressive. I refer to the choice of materials, the way it's all put together, and the fit and finish. I also said earlier that Kia has come a long way, and that GM has also come a long way, and that Kia is still behind. You need to consider that all auto makers are now building much better cars (with the Corolla perhaps being an exception). If you say that the Kia has greatly improved from what they used to be years ago, that means absolutely nothing to me because the only comparison point is an old Kia. 

You seem to be taking offense to this, as if you have a stake in Kia or something. I'm not saying that as an insult; just as an observation. I have the impression that you are not objective here and that you are leaning heavily toward the Kia due to your current ownership of a Hyundai. Again, just an observation. Here's where I see that:



> Its surprising that many folks still have the impressions of KIA's from the 80's and 90's is still the normal. The new KIA's are NOTHING like the terrible build quality of the past.


I'll be honest here, we're not that ignorant. I personally chose my words carefully and I maintain that even though Kia has come a long way, the Forte is still a Kia and still feels like a Kia. I agree that they are nothing like the terrible build quality of the past, but that doesn't automatically make them the best. 

If you want a Forte, buy a Forte. 



nodule said:


> So exactly what is the major gripe or con of the 2013 Cruze's automatic transmission? I do know that during my test drive TWICE the car slightly jerked forward while
> stopped at a light...it was very disconcerting and im wondering why this is not discussed much here. Or may I am just missing this discussion.Chevrolet Cruze Review by MotorWeek - YouTube
> 
> Impressive review for sure of the Cruze by MotorWeek. But, to be fair, I have yet to find ANY negative professional reviews, either written or
> You Tube, on the new 2014 Forte. All seems to be very impressed with the huge leap in refinement, driving dynamics and ride comfort.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ckpRTokFV0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQXDsysuffk


As I noted, it is an adaptive transmission that takes a while to get used to your driving. GM sent me an LTZ with an automatic for review and I didn't find anything wrong with it. The transmission felt fine. It does disconnect from the drivetrain when waiting for a stop and engages when you step on the gas to take off, and that may be felt as a "jerking forward," but I didn't feel anything abnormal about it. 

With regard to the reviews, you haven't read any because it's a 2014 model. You simply won't read many at all because people haven't had a chance yet. Give it another half a year. 

I will warn you though. Many people learned here that it's not the greatest idea to buy a first model year of any car, be it the Focus or the Cruze or the Dart. The Forte is the first model year of a redesign, so that's also something to consider. 

With regard to the reviews that you read, I will maintain that just because it's a huge leap from before, doesn't mean it's suddenly the best. Just because it impresses you for being a Kia, doesn't mean it's better than the other options out there.

If you are set on the Forte though, just buy one and be happy. Ultimately, it is your decision to make, not ours.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

XR,

I apologize, I didnt realize you have sat and driven the new 2014 Forte. And your perception is incorrect. I am NOT leaning one way or another....yet. I will be deciding
within the next few weeks.

In regards to NO professional reviews and opinions on the new Forte...they are PLENTY! Go on You Tube and type in 2014 KIA FORTE review
and at least 6 professional videos reviews are available.

But just out of curiosity, what are the cons to the 2013 Cruze, in my opinion?

Also, some mechanical Cruze questions for you....

-What is the recommended oil change interval?
-Timing belt or chain? Maintenance free?
-Sealed transmission, or trans oil change at 30K, 50K, etc?

Will Chevy let you download the 2013 Cruze owner's manual?

Thanks


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

I drove a 2013 Cruze 1LT automatic for three days earlier this year. In and around town the automatic is well behaved. On the open road I would always put it into M6 mode. In full automatic the transmission would downshift, sometimes two gears, for even a 1-2 MPH acceleration. M6 prevents this.

Oil Change interval: at least 5,000 miles but no later than the Oil Life Monitor reaching 30% when using the semi-synthetic AC Delco oil. My understanding is 8,000 or 10% on Mobil 1 full synthetic, whichever occurs first.
Tire rotation - ignore the maintenance schedule and do this every 5,000 miles (or sooner if you do a lot of low speed turning). Get a tread depth gauge and rotate as soon as you start noticing the front tire tread depth dropping faster than the rear tire tread depth.

For the rest of the maintenance schedule for the 2013 Cruze, take a look at the Service and Maintenance section in the 2013 Cruze Owners' Manual. Regardless of what you get, get familiar with the maintenance schedule for your car. Some dealerships are very pushy about doing "additional required" maintenance to "prevent the warranty from being voided". If you get one of them, run, don't walk, to another dealership.


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Obermd, You absolutely right about ignoring the maintenance schedule for tire rotations. Ive had many conversations with the folks at Tire Rack. Tire wear is always greater initially, in the beginning, so the first two rotations should be a 3000K, than move to 5000K for the life of the tires. Too many folks never follow this rule and rotate at 7500K or 8000K...BIG mistake. I am very fortunate to have a GREAT chevy dealer and KIA dealer within 5 miles of my home, both of which are noted for great, honest service departments! I guess one of the advantages of living in central NJ.


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

The 1.4T uses a timing chain. I'd expect it to be a truly lifetime part as long as oil changes are kept up on. For the transmission, it's a good idea to drain and fill every 30-45k miles. Doing so will ensure a long life. Most folks ignore their transmissions until they fail. GM says it's "lifetime" filled. I choose to interpret that as lifetime of the powertrain warranty. The severe service schedule does indicate changing ATF every 47.5k miles, the same time the air filter needs changing. Most folks drive under severe service, so change it just like you're doing now. 

Since you have good dealers nearby, it's really up to you to decide which is the better car for you.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

nodule said:


> XR,
> 
> I apologize, I didnt realize you have sat and driven the new 2014 Forte. And your perception is incorrect. I am NOT leaning one way or another....yet. I will be deciding
> within the next few weeks.
> ...


Thank you for clarifying; it's nice to know that you're objective about it.

Perhaps I should have been more clear. I don't take any stake in professional reviews, which is why I haven't posted any personally. They are often biased, as many paid publications are. Unfortunately, many are heavily biased in favor of imports. The best indicator for me is the people who actually own it. What do they have to say about it, and what experience do they have with other cars? The review I wrote on my site about the Cruze is a tad biased, but mostly factual. I do favor the Cruze, so it's difficult to be completely objective about it, but nothing I said in my review is false, and you have to admit it is a very thorough review. 

What are the cons to the 2013 Cruze? I'm assuming you asked for my opinion. Here's what I'd point out. 

- Cost. Certainly, it's not as cheap as a Kia. 
- Winter heat. The 1.4L Turbo takes a while to warm up, partially due to how efficiently it runs, and also due to how little friction there is on those piston rings. That said, the only people who really complain about it are people who have sub-5 minute commutes. Consider that this is going to be a an issue with all tiny engines that simply do not burn enough fuel to heat up in the winter. Once you get the car up to speed though, it warms up much more quickly. 
- Performance. This isn't really a con, but it's something worth noting because it's different. The Cruze is not a 1/4 mile racer. However, it was specifically engineered for in-town power. Most other manufacturers can't wrap their heads around the fact that most people don't care what the car's horsepower rating is once you wind it up near redline. We want it to be practical around town, and in that regard, the 1.4L Turbo makes 100% of the 148lb-ft of torque it is rated for at 1850RPM. Compare that to the 125lb-ft or so of torque in the Forte's engine, which is produced way up top. If you are expecting a 1/4 mile racer, the Cruze is not one, but it is far more practical around town. 
- Oil changes. We highly recommend full synthetic, which is more expensive. The upside to this, however, is that you can usually go 8000-9000 miles on one oil change. I believe this answers one of your questions.
- No lumbar adjustment on the seats. 
- Manual transmission fluid from the factory is junk. 

That's about all I can think of. There really is very little wrong with this car. It's safe, it gets excellent fuel economy, it makes great power around town, it is smoother than any other car I've ever driven, it's so roomy that it's interior volume technically classifies it a midsize car, and so forth. 

To answer your questions, 
- Timing chain, does not need servicing. It's a lifetime part. 
- Sealed transmission, but recommended to change the fluid regularly like any other automatic. Interval depends on your driving habits. 

This one?

http://www.chevrolet.com/content/da...rship/Manuals and Videos/02_pdf/2k13cruze.pdf


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

nodule said:


> -What is the recommended oil change interval?
> -Timing belt or chain? Maintenance free?
> -Sealed transmission, or trans oil change at 30K, 50K, etc?
> 
> Will Chevy let you download the 2013 Cruze owner's manual?


The car does have an oil life monitor but most feel it would let you go to long between changes. If you use the dealer fill Dexos synthetic blend you should be fine changing at 5,000miles. If you choose to use a good dexos approved full synthetic like Mobil 1, you could safely go 7500miles between changes. 

The 1.4T uses a timing chain thats considered a lifetime part, though I think I have read online one should probably change at 200,000miles. If you opt for the LS with the 1.8L it uses a timing belt that needs to be changed by 97,000miles. The difference in price between the LS and 1LT is around $1500, but you get the 1.4T, 16in aluminum rims, and allot more available options. 

If you compare the MPG of the cruze LS vs 1LT the upgrade pays for itself in fuel savings, you save $1000 every 5 years with the 1LT over the LS. You also save the maintenance of a timing belt since the 1.4T uses a chain. Compare Side-by-Side



Here is a direct link to the PDF of the 2013 cruze owners manual.


----------



## Robby (Mar 1, 2013)

nodule said:


> Rob,
> My 8 year old Hyundai Elantra GLS with 70,000 miles rides JUST as smooth, quiet and tight and as one! It may be because I never treated my Elantra as a disposable, throw
> way car. 5000 mile oil changes, transmissions flushes at 30K, 60K, air filter replaced every 15K, coolant flushes at 30K, 60K, all belts changed and timing belt. My suspension
> is tight and like new, original shock and struts, tires ALWAYS wear perfectly. Not a single squeak or rattle.
> ...


Your conservative driving techniques and thoughtful maintenance are serving you well.....and, to a degree, operating environment.
Over here, a 8 year old Hyundai is not much more than a parts car......and not a lot of usable parts either.
I laugh at the 10 year warranty ads because in the salt belt, Hyundai's rarely make it.

As far as staying tight....you can also give yourself credit for not crashing through too many potholes.

Currently, Hyundai is under investigation for rear suspension rustout failures.

If you get a chance to operate a similar mileage same make vehicle as your own, do so.....you'll see what I mean.

If I may ask though, if you have had such success with the brand, why consider Chevrolet?
Just want to try something different, potental better mpg, or what?

I too am able to make a throwaway car hold up well beyond the norm.....some years back I snagged a 2 year old Metro for stupid cheap......a 3 cyl 998cc 5 speed, base base base version.
Ran it to 100k and found some guy that needed a cheap ride.....I got my money back after 5years and 75k miles......whata deal and it never had a failure.
LOL, Wasn't much to fail to begin with.

Good luck,
Rob


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Robby,
Thanks, as I stated in a post a few up here...As nice as my Elantra runs, its an old ladies car, beige exterior and interior with hubcaps. All my friends and co workers
call it "Golden Girl" or "The Golden V". I really want a more sleek, refined upscale car now with all the modern features. "Golden Girl" has been
babied from day ONE...professionally detailed every 6 months. showroom mint condition, inside and outside.


----------



## Robby (Mar 1, 2013)

Yeah, thats a good reson for a change....gotta laugh a bit....beige......us car guys know that as the color a old guy buys for his last car.....ever....like before death.
They usually admit it too 'Yep, this is gonna be my LAST car'.....'Same color as dirt, I won't have to wash it so much' (gloomy thought).

Ug.....I still get so excited I'm wondering what the next one will be as I drive off the lot with this one.

Oh well, good luck on your quest.....I'm a very picky nutcase.....the trans shifts just fine but because it is 'adaptive' it takes several thousand miles to learn your style.
As stated, the 1.4 uses a chain....your methods regarding top notch service mean you will have nothing but good luck with whatever you choose.

Rob


----------



## blk88verde (Apr 30, 2011)

> thats a good reson for a change....gotta laugh a bit....beige......us car guys know that as the color a old guy buys for his last car


 I hate beige cars and beige interiors. I had a light beige cloth interior on a 2002 Black Mercedes C230k 6M - would not stay clean-and very difficult to try and clean


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

blk88verde said:


> I hate beige cars and beige interiors. I had a light beige cloth interior on a 2002 Black Mercedes C230k 6M - would not stay clean-and very difficult to try and clean


AGREED. My first car was a Honda with a tan corduroy interior. It was hideous. 


Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## jmurf (Mar 25, 2013)

nodule said:


> Robby,
> Thanks, as I stated in a post a few up here...As nice as my Elantra runs, its an old ladies car, beige exterior and interior with hubcaps. All my friends and co workers
> call it "Golden Girl" or "The Golden V". I really want a more sleek, refined upscale car now with all the modern features. "Golden Girl" has been
> babied from day ONE...professionally detailed every 6 months. showroom mint condition, inside and outside.


 Good Lucky with whatever you choose! You seem to take pride in whatever you drive and IMO thats the most important. I cannot remember how many times my dad told me "If you take care your machine, it will take care of you" I think it come down what you like and what you are willing to live with when it come to choosing a car. I chose the Cruze for several reason. 1) To get back on with GM, i know growing up my parents went away from GM due to issues they couldnt get resolved with a few of their cars. Insead of holding there local dealers accountable they took it out on GM...that trend continued with me in my younger days. I was loyal to Toyota for years. I wanted something fresh and new and deff wasnt going get that with the Corolla. 2) I wanted to help bring back the "Sprit of America" and show that the mistakes in the past are indead in the past (i guess time will tell). 3) I like how user friendly and easy it is to do basic maintenence on the Cruze. My 11 year old so did most of the work on our 2013 ECO AT oil change (under my very close supervision ofcourse) The spark plug change (or regap) is by far the easiest i have ever done. My last change was on an 2006 Impala LTZ 3.9L..it took forever for my knockles to heal after that. 4) The safety record/ratings of the Cruze is paramount. I still cant believe it holds up the way it does in a crash and with three kids; that was one of the biggest factors put me over the top. 4) The intieror room is crazy. Again with a wife and three kids i wanted to get every inch out of a car i could without having to pay midsized car prices. I was able to achieve that with the Cruze. 5) The sporty look is an added bonus both inside and out. While drivng i rarely have to reach or take my eyes off of the road for anything. Its either on the wheel or on the easy to operate main console. The outside is solid and has turned heads. As far as the 1.4L. Im truley amazed at how peepy that little engine is...it is smooth, quiet, has a pretty good passing gear and plenty of get up and go (keeping in mind it is an economy car). I never noticed any change in performance when i reached 105mph ( I just had to see what it would do...i got nervous going that fast so i back it off, but impressive none the less. I have compaired it with the 2013 Focus, 2013 Mazada 3, 2013 Elantra and just found myself giving up to much in certain areas. i.e. Room and comfort in the Focus..not to mention its choppy nature. Elantra i just didnt think it looked as good as the Cruze and the interior made me feel older then i am (believe me i dont need any help feeling older). The Mazada 3 was fun to drive but i heard and even noticed some things i didnt like about the dealership. (the salesperson might want to make sure when they give a tour of the service area there isnt a custumer and a service manager is a shouting match) I cant say much about the Kia i never drove the Forte (my mom has one..a 2010 and she likes it. She is a point A to point B driver..as long as it gets her there and back she can really care less) That was my experience with my hunt for the right car and why i bought the Cruze, but everyone is different when it comes to their needs, wants, and what they are willing to live with. Goodluck, please keep us posted with whatever you choose. We are not only Cruze fans and automobile fans as a whole im sure. Happy Hunting!!!


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Thanks, jmurf,
On a test drive on the 1LT Automatic on a very hot afternoon, I noticed that the Cruze becomes VERY underpowered and sluggish. Is this just an unfortunate trait of the Cruze you have to live with?
That certainly could be a deal breaker for me as I run my A/C all the time in the summer. With my 140HP 2005 Elantra, there is very little power lose with the A/C on.


----------



## Robby (Mar 1, 2013)

nodule said:


> Thanks, jmurf,
> On a test drive on the 1LT Automatic on a very hot afternoon, I noticed that the Cruze becomes VERY underpowered and sluggish. Is this just an unfortunate trait of the Cruze you have to live with?
> That certainly could be a deal breaker for me as I run my A/C all the time in the summer. With my 140HP 2005 Elantra, there is very little power lose with the A/C on.


On another thread, we were discussing how the 1.4t pulls timing (power) on hot days while running the A/C.
The general consesis, and my own experience, has lead us to use mid grade fuel in the summer to keep the engine from pulling timing because it 'hears' spark knock.
Also, the mileage improves somewhat, offsetting the increased per gallon cost.

Most likely, your road test was in a vehicle filled with regular, which is what is called for.
Some folks don't 'pick up' on the feeling.....those that are 'machine sensative' notice it immediatly.

Rob


----------



## jmurf (Mar 25, 2013)

nodule said:


> Thanks, jmurf,
> On a test drive on the 1LT Automatic on a very hot afternoon, I noticed that the Cruze becomes VERY underpowered and sluggish. Is this just an unfortunate trait of the Cruze you have to live with?
> That certainly could be a deal breaker for me as I run my A/C all the time in the summer. With my 140HP 2005 Elantra, there is very little power lose with the A/C on.


 I havent had a very hot afternoon yet. It is getting warmer, and i have only had the car about 3 months. I cannot see that being a deal breaker for me...it is an economy car. If you have already experiencd something in the Cruze that is a deal breaker for you then it seems you have already taken the Cruze out of the running...good luck with your decision that is not a Cruze


----------



## nodule (Apr 26, 2013)

Well, if mid grade 89 octane fuel will solve the problem the Cruze is still in the running.


----------



## jmurf (Mar 25, 2013)

nodule said:


> Well, if mid grade 89 octane fuel will solve the problem the Cruze is still in the running.


 That all i have ever run in the Cruze is 89 or 91 octane..the gas prices in MO arent that terrible so i do like the extra boost. It hasnt been to hot although i have run the A/C and i personally havent noticed a difference


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

nodule said:


> Well, if mid grade 89 octane fuel will solve the problem the Cruze is still in the running.


There are countless threads on this subject. Higher octane fuel improves power and fuel economy, and keeps the car from hesitating in hot weather with AC on. It is a high compression turbo engine after all.

Sent from AutoGuide.com App


----------



## Reeba (Jul 28, 2016)

I have 164,000 miles on mine, and I've never had any major repair besides replacing the fuel pump. I got stuck in a snowstorm and when my car was pulled out a hole is torn in it. A lot of it has to do with your own personal maintenance, upkeep and how you treat the vehicle in general.


----------



## Hazlitt777 (Nov 2, 2013)

If anyone can find recent articles on the performance or durability of the 1.4 turbo, I would be very interested in reading them. Thanks.


----------



## Porkchopkb (Nov 20, 2016)

Hazlitt777 said:


> If anyone can find recent articles on the performance or durability of the 1.4 turbo, I would be very interested in reading them. Thanks.


 we had a 2012 2LT with 97k have the turbo fail. Lost all power. Crazy enough there were no ses or check engine lights on. Under gm 5yr 100k warranty it was replaced at no charge.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

At this point, I think we can say that they are DURABLE engines (200,000 miles + is not an issue), but not a shining star of reliability (water pumps, turbos, PCV issues, etc).

The basics are right; the little things need work. And there are the occasional piston issues.

But hey, it seems GM finally got their 4 cylinder timing chain game on point. Have not heard of a single issue with one.


----------



## Hazlitt777 (Nov 2, 2013)

This video has a lot of good things to say about the durability of the 1.4 turbo! The first motor ran till 420,000 and now with the second the car has over 500,000 miles. And he never ran premium gas, just 87.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPlMV3puRSs


----------



## CruzeTech (Mar 23, 2012)

Hazlitt777 said:


> This video has a lot of good things to say about the durability of the 1.4 turbo! The first motor ran till 420,000 and now with the second the car has over 500,000 miles. And he never ran premium gas, just 87.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPlMV3puRSs


And to think I got rid of mine @ 107,720 because I didn’t want it to leave me stranded, and to start having problems with it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Alex V. (Sep 20, 2013)

102K on mine and the only one of the common problems I've had to deal with yet is the water outlet. The PCV may be getting sketchy but it hasn't failed yet. Two random P0420's that didn't come back quickly, no oil consumption - I believe it's a dependable engine _if you don't drive it until it drops_ like most people will, being used to 3800 V6's and Honda N/A 4-bangers that then just need a quick fix and are fine.


----------



## MINIAC12 (Jul 24, 2017)

I am right at 100,XXXmiles the turbo was replaced at 42,XXX by the dealer along with the required recalls. I just change the oil and have replaced two batteries up until 100 miles ago oh and 2 -02 Sensors. I started getting a 0496 CEL. It took me a while to diagnosis it because i was getting 0171 and 0299 codes also. 
After replacing the purge solenoid. I havent had any CEL's come back. I thought for sure it was going to need another Turbo which btw i found at Summit Racing the cheapest anywhere. My car is a 2012 LTZ RS. It has been a great car through and through.


----------



## CruzeTech (Mar 23, 2012)

There is, apparently, a newer part number for the turbo than the 2012s came with. My friend had his quit on him, at like 70k. My 2014, said to have the newer turbo, from the factory, I traded in, with 107,720 miles, and about 90,000 of those were absolute hard, hard miles with a BNR tune. Car boosted 21psi, for 90,000 miles of its life. Turbo never faltered. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## jc. (Jul 28, 2019)

nodule said:


> Y a-t-il des propriétaires actuels de Cruze qui s'inquiètent de la fiabilité à long terme, disons une période de dix ans, du 1.4 turbo ? Je me demande simplement si d'autres problèmes surviendront lorsque votre Cruze commencera à
> accumuler le kilométrage, par opposition au nouveau moteur standard 1.8 148HP KIA Forte?
> 
> J'avais lu qu'il fallait être plus prudent avec un turbo et toujours attendre 30 secondes avant de couper le moteur. Est-ce qu'un turbo nécessiterait plus d'entretien à cet égard ?
> ...


----------

