The 2011 Chevrolet Cruze has been called the most important car release from GM in decades. The Cruze is Chevy's new post-bankruptcy world car that it's been working on since 2006. The car will be sold in markets all over the world and was designed by an international team from Germany and Korea. It's one model for one world. The cost savings of such a setup far eclipse the expense involved in planning and executing worldwide distribution.
Assuming it sells, that is. Because if there's anything harder than trying to develop a world-class compact car for the entire world, it's trying to convince people that the 2011 Chevrolet Cruze is as good as a Honda Civic or a Toyota Corolla. That it's better than the new Ford Focus and Hyundai Elantra. That it's not a Cobalt or a Cavalier.
With a turbocharged 1.4-liter inline-4, navigation, iPod integration, heated seats, leather interior and a six-speed automatic transmission, the Cruze hits all the right notes. And to see if those notes hit with harmony or simply echo through a hollow room, we've bought a 2011 Chevrolet Cruze LTZ for our long-term test fleet.
What We Bought
In LS trim, with a 138-horsepower 1.8-liter inline-4, 16-inch steel wheels, antilock brakes, a six-speed manual transmission, OnStar and XM Radio, the 2011 Chevy Cruze will run you $16,275 before any options. Opting for that would be the cheapest way to get into a new Cruze. And while it wouldn't have been a penalty box, we wanted to see what the Cruze really had to offer.
The first step up the ladder, to 1LT, gets you GM's new 1.4-liter inline-4 which is turbocharged and makes the same horsepower (138) as the 1.8-liter but with much more torque twisting the meter all the way to 148 pound-feet compared to 123 in the 1.8. This new engine is bolted to a six-speed automatic transmission. A 1LT Chevy Cruze will run you $18,175.
In 2LT trim ($20,675) you get the 1.4, the six-speed auto, 16-inch split-spoke wheels, leather-wrapped wheel and shift knob, heated power seats, steering-wheel-mounted radio controls and remote start. Nice. But the LTZ, one step up, adds a USB port (a new must-have), ultrasonic park assist, chrome door handles, four-wheel disc brakes, 18-inch wheels, automatic climate control and Bluetooth hands-free phone connectivity. These features come at a price, though; $21,975. Some $5 grand more than the base car, and that's before options.
Painted Summit White and with a cocoa/light neutral interior, our 2011 Cruze has the $1,995 audio system with navigation, 7-inch color screen and 40GB hard drive; the power sunroof ($850); Pioneer Premium audio system ($445); and compact spare tire ($100).
An iPod hookup, hands-free phone, navigation: These are all niceties that, when found in our long-term cars, always result in higher mileage at the end of the year. Something about knowing where you're going, how to go there and having something to do while you're going there all add up. Besides, we shelled out our own money for this Cruze and this is how we wanted it.
And speaking of our own money, we paid for the 2011 Chevy Cruze out of our own budget at a time when the vehicle was just launched and dealers were completely unwilling to negotiate. The Cruze was ours for exactly the sticker price of $26,085.
Why We Bought It
It's GM's first serious dance on its global platform and the hype machine is spinning the 2011 Chevrolet Cruze as a compact giant-killer. A year in our long-term test fleet should prove or disprove the claim.
Let's be good Americans for a minute and pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist. In the U.S. alone, according to our data, in 2009 Toyota sold 252,389 Corollas, Honda sold 244,603 Civics and Chevy sold just 104,724 Cobalts. That's a difference of some 140,000 units, which is a lot. Can GM get a bigger chunk of the pie with the new Cruze? Is a 1.4-liter inline-4 enough for an American car? Will we get the 24 city and 36 highway mpg the EPA predicts?
At the end of 12 months and 20,000 miles, will we be won over by GM's effort, or will this fall into the same tired category of "better than before, still not good enough?"
Current Odometer: 2,098
Best Fuel Economy: 30.2 mpg
Worst Fuel Economy: 22.2 mpg
Average Fuel Economy (over the life of the vehicle): 25.5 mpg
Edmunds purchased this vehicle for the purposes of evaluation.
Follow the long-term road test blog for updates about our 2011 Chevrolet Cruze.
Add A Comment »
shark09 says:
09:58 AM, 09/06/2011
Dumped my Corolla I was tired of replacing the muffler eveyr 20,000 miles. The head gasket blew at 80,000 several other break downs and tow jobs i donated the heap of rusted junk. never again.
tomanyt says:
07:10 AM, 12/09/2010
Boring. Boring. Boring.
percula925 says:
06:41 PM, 12/08/2010
interesting..
mk40 says:
12:12 AM, 11/29/2010
Nice car.. took a test drive and was impressed how it drove and how roomy it was. I'm sure I would have no problem getting the EPA mpg, the way I drive.. I don't like to waste fuel nor am I in a big rush... there's just too many traffic lights and speed cameras around here. Plus, I pump my tires up more than 30 psi so it coasts better. Inside line probably drives more aggressively so 3 mpg off the combined estimate is not surprising to me. I would only consider the manual Eco model though since manuals work better with a small engine like this & the mpg gains are compelling to me at 42 for a car this size. I know how to easily exceed EPA estimates.
camry1998 says:
06:40 AM, 11/24/2010
Correction to my previous post: I paid $19,520 for my LT one with connectivity package (Bluethooth, USB, cruise, etc), not $20,520.
Reading through all these posts, I am not surprised at the focused up-roar on on bashing the Cruze by comparing $26K to other loaded up C-class cars. The author is mostly to blame for this. Don't beleive me? Read the results below.
Fact is, you can get a Cruze with pretty much all the stuff you need/want at less than $20K. The real comparison is what you get at $19,520 with the Cruze compared to what you get at that price with Honda and Toyota. This is actually GM's positioning.
At my price, I have the 1.4 turbo, auto trans, 10 airbags, stabilitrack, traction control, etc. What I do not have when compared to the LTZ is leather seats, sun roof (?), tush warmers, power seat adjustments, navigation (my $90 GPS works better anyway) and perhaps different size wheels.
Take a look for yourself and compare standard equip and options.
bjgw66 says:
02:19 PM, 11/23/2010
recoiloperated: I would way rather have the civic than a cruise, but I have to admit; your spot on, the 2011 Civic 2011 Corolla etc... are the competition... that is what is on the market right now. I think what may have some peoples panties in a bunch is that if you REALLY want the best car in the small car segment, that you may have a hard time choosing between a current Civic and a Cruise, but they are assuming that the new Honda (is due in APRIL) is going to be a better value than the Cruise will ever be... being that it is a compettitor to the 2011; and Honda will very Likely improve the formula for the segment again in a very short time.
aceboku says:
12:43 PM, 11/23/2010
I just purchased the LT1 for around $19,000 (after add additional packages to it). I think I got great bang for the buck. This car is better than my Nissan Altima 2.5SL when I first purchased it. I've been a Nissan person for years (also had a Nissan Maxima) and at this stage I began moving toward an American made vehicle - not because it's American but because it looks attractive (inside and out), rides solid and seems to perform better than expected. I'm recommending this vehicle to all my friends and family. At the end of the day it's about how a customer perceives value that counts. Time will tell whether the vehicle will hold up but I think it's worth taking the chance. Even Toyota, Honda & Nissan had to start somewhere. Let's see what Chevy is able to accomplish.
recoiloperated says:
11:26 AM, 11/23/2010
"Please explain to me how the 2012 Civic which we havent seen is the Cruze's real competition vs the currently on sale 2011. Its not GM's fault that HOnda pushed back the Civic due to the economy. As for right now- the current Civic is the competition"
Because using outgoing competing models that are less than a year away from replacement as the benchmark for a brand new design that should last ~5 years on the market is a poor strategy.
camry1998 says:
11:13 AM, 11/23/2010
Regarding the trimlines and options, I bought the "one step up" LT1 along with the a package that contains the USB and Bluetooth for MSRP $20,520. A buyer does not need to go all the way to LTZ to get Bluetooth and USB.
My mileage report - 36 MPG on the highway when cruising at 70 MPH, 38+ MPG when cruising at 55-65 MPH. 98% of my driving is interstate commuting so I can't speak accurately for city mileage.
Owned for one month, driven 2,888 miles so far.
This is the first GM car I have ever owned. My histroy is mostly Toyota, Nissan, and briefly Ford. I am quite impressed so far with this car.
agentorange says:
11:07 AM, 11/23/2010
It is so disappointing to see that so many of you, and I suspect most of America, still have not grasped the realities of small/economy cars.
Let's start with size. It is ludicrous to criticize a small car for being small. This is especially true in the American market where certain prejudices make it difficult to build a space efficent small car because of the demand for a cars with a trunk. This "requirement" immediately sets where the roofline has to go within a given platform size and results in either limited headroom, limited legroom, or sometimes both. A hatchback design allows the rear seats to be eased back those vital two-three inches without the headroom penalty. However, offer the average American a hatchback and he/she will give you a look usually reserved for puppy kicking child molesters. This is due to the embedded racial memory of the US hatchbacks of the late 70s and 80s, which were crap. The US car industry's bean counters did not understand that a luggage cover that raised with the hatch is a must as it conceals your goodies and eliminates much of the noise issue. Pretty much ALL European hatchbacks came/come that way and it works. The hatchback is a simple solution when builkding small cars, so why not go with it?
Having compromised the design of your small car because of the trunk, you then say "make it bigger". Well DUH! bigger means more weight which means a bigger engine and...oh dear, what happened to the economy? You want a small car with decent economy and a trunk you have to suck it up about the small rear seat. Physics wins yet again.
On the subject of weight, how come so many of you cling to the idea that weight equals safety. While there is some correlation, a PROPERLY designed lightweight structure can be safer than a poor heavy one. I have seen this first hand in Europe where a heavy Ford design turned out to be LESS safe than a lighter Mercedes offering. The other reason that weight=safety is a bit of a myth is because MUCH of the extra weight in cars these days has little or nothing to do with safety requirements. A lot of it is thicker metal or heavy sound insulation there purely for NVH reasons. As an aside, IMHO many of the NHTSA rollover requirements make cars LESS safe as they have created big blindspots behind massive roof pillars. If you cannot see to stay out of an accident, how did it help?
I agree with many here that the Cruze is overweight and probably fundamentally a little too big for its intended market. For IL to compound the felony by loading up their test example does not give this car ANY chance of appearing competitive in price or performance.