• Jul 14, 2008
Rising fuel prices, both in the U.S. and abroad, means that automakers can now offer similar engines in vehicles sold throughout the world. According to Automotive News, General Motors' next small car, the Chevrolet Cruze, will be offered with a new 1.4-liter force-fed four-banger, putting out between 120 and 140 horsepower and returning fuel mileage in the 40 mpg range.

The first version of the Cruze will be a sedan, but other body styles, including hatchbacks and wagons, are likely to come to market soon thereafter. The Cobalt-replacing Cruze will be built in Lordstown, Ohio, and sales will begin next Spring in Europe after the production version of the car is shown in Paris this October.


[Source: Automotive News - sub. req'd]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 29 Comments
      • 6 Years Ago
      I, for one, am very interested in seeing the hatchback and especially wagon models. If GM makes a big step like they did in the Malibu re-design, this could potentially turn into their top selling vehicle the way the market has changed. I hope they understand the importance of this car for the future of the company.


      I still hate the name though.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Wow...this Cobalt replacement looks like a winner.

      Between the exterior shots and the interior shots, now news about a 40MPG version, things are looking good for the General.

      Let's hope they can deliver.
      • 6 Years Ago
      40 MPG??????????? Finally, this shows that GM can do something right. I still want to see how it will compare to Civic in interior quality, looks and overall quality. I want to point out the word INTERIOR, it needs to be competative with Civic ( which is just great) and also the price needs to be low.


      This looks like it has a potential to be something interesting, however this also shows how weak the managment is for GM, this car should have been here 2-3 years ago. Now all this car can do is help GM fight competition......had it come 3 years ago it could have given the Focus run for its money, they could have easily converted the aging Focus crowd into Cobalt crowd.
        • 6 Years Ago
        I disagree that this is finally something right. It's a step in the right direction, but they're still behind. You mention the Civic in terms of quality, but how about in terms of engine? The R18 in the Civic makes 140hp and gets 36mpg, naturally aspirated. 40mpg in a turbocharged engine means that it won't be easy to see that 40mpg, because it will make that number off-boost. Given that off-boost, a turbo engine will make a fraction of its power at any given time, this engine off-boost will make less than 100 peak hp, which means that most drivers will be on-boost more frequently than they would with a more powerful turbo engine, and on the throttle more than a similarly-rated naturally aspirated engine (as in the Civic). Sure, it might make more torque than the Civic at full-throttle, but it won't be much more due to the difference in displacement, and let's face it, what doesn't make more torque than the R18 engine?
        • 6 Years Ago
        @ Don - there are a few inaccuracies in that autosavant article. the Corolla MT gets 35 MPG, for ex. and the Cobalt auto is waaayyy behind Civic/Corolla in overall MPG

        still the XFE is a great showing by GM, and this Cruze looks really promising, if it can indeed deliver 40 MPG!
        • 6 Years Ago
        Dave, you have no idea what you are talking about. The 9-3 is on a modified version of Epsilon, the Cobalt is on Delta. The Cruze will be on Delta II. Do a little research before spewing useless crap out of your mouth.
        • 6 Years Ago
        If you want to see what the Cruze will look like and drive like just go test drive a Saab 9-3. If you look at the spy pics next to the Saab you can see where they are getting the platform.

        And since the current Cobalt is basically the OLD 9-3 reused...it would seem they are again reusing an old Saab design for a Chevy.

        Even the Turbo 1.4L engine would be the one that first showed up in the Saab Aero X concept.
        • 6 Years Ago
        I know the interior sucked, but I was able to eek out 38-43mpg in my old 1997 Neon 5spd. It handled great, stopped great, and since it weighed around 2400lbs, it was quite fast (15.9 e.t.)

        It's kinda sad that over a decade has passed yet GM still isn't able to achieve that level of performance.
        • 6 Years Ago
        The Civic interior looks terrible, it shouldn't be hard to beat. I was going to buy a new Civic for my wife the but interior turned us both off, it reminded me of a mid 90's Pontiac interior. The 2001-2005 interior was far nicer.
        • 6 Years Ago
        @vintage: Chrysler can't even match that anymore...
        • 6 Years Ago
        Better get your facts straight, the Cobalt XFE is best in class for MPG. Also, better than the Civic and Focus.

        http://www.autosavant.net/2008/04/suddenly-cobalt-beats-its-competition.html
        • 6 Years Ago
        I tried a bit of hypermiling in my mother's pathetic 2008 or 2009 [new] Corolla and managed 46MPG on the freeway over 45-50 miles. That's rated at 36 (best), I wonder what I could in this...
        • 6 Years Ago
        "This looks like it has a potential to be something interesting, however this also shows how weak the managment is for GM, this car should have been here 2-3 years ago. Now all this car can do is help GM fight competition......had it come 3 years ago it could have given the Focus run for its money, they could have easily converted the aging Focus crowd into Cobalt crowd."

        While I somewhat agree, it is also true that this car was in devlopement two to three years ago, when gas was still somewhat affordable. Most pundidts will says that this car was in reaction to $4/gallon gas, but really it was being readied long before that.

        The thing is $4 gas might make small cars PROFITABLE, which until now, wasn't worth banking on.
        • 6 Years Ago
        @TJ: Yeah I know. Sad. Stupid 3400lb Caliber. I miss the 2400-2600lb neon. That car plus a bit more refinement and a better interior would be a world beater car.... in stock form, a neon will easily outhandle a mini cooper... and the SRT4 drivetrain was superb. Even the non turbo 2.0 liter DOHC and SOHC engines were pretty great, once they fixed the headgasket issues.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Great job, GM! This is exactly what the market is demanding. I agree with a previous poster: hopefully Wall Street is smart enough to understand that GM has truly turned a corner on its products.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Cavalier, Cobalt, Cruze. Instead of chaning the name very few years, I hope this one actually changes the quality!
      • 6 Years Ago
      ...I don't believe it. Unless they're knocking 500 pounds off of the car and optimizing it in a wind tunnel, slapping a turbo on it won't improve its real world economy numbers.
        • 6 Years Ago
        It's also a smaller engine. The Cobalts that make 36mpg use a 2.2 liter ecotec engine.
      • 6 Years Ago
      GM seems to have the wheels turning slowly, but at this rate, 2010 should be a huge year for them. Camaro, Volt and now a 40 MPG vehicle afterwards. Stock specualters hopefully pick up on this and toss some cash in the ring to keep them moving. Afterall they do have other nice vehicles and a solid pickup truck.
      • 6 Years Ago
      They need a coupe!
      • 6 Years Ago
      The General will definitely have a hit on their hands with this model!

      http://www.gmaccessoriesstore.com
        • 6 Years Ago
        Rick,

        36 on the highway is good, but I have a Saab 9-3 wagon with the 210 hp 2.0 L turbo 4 and I've averaged 28.2 mpg with maybe 60% highway miles.

        And, just because it's turbo doesn't mean it requires premium. Many of the prior Saab engines have only required regular gas. This includes the light pressure 175 hp 2.0 L turbo 4 which they got rid of, (wish it was back now that gas prices have skyrocketed). When I had that engine with an automatic, in a 2004 9-3 sedan, I got 33-34 mpg on the highway consistently. Not bad for a 3,200 lb safe reasonably sized sedan.

        The General has some great powertrain expertise. I expect to see lots of great things soon, including this 1.4L turbo.
      • 6 Years Ago
      So whats the point of owning an Aveo that only averages 29 mpg?
        • 6 Years Ago
        Packaging.

        The Fit (and to a lesser degree, the Aveo) are much better packaged vehicles. In urban duty, the Fit actually gets quite reasonable mileage compared to the Civic; only on the highway does the Civic's slippery shape work to it's advantage.

        I'd imagine the Aveo is similar. I do remember the Aveo had more functional space than the Cobalt, as well as better seats and fit/finish.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Esprit bird: evidently you've never owned an Aveo. Whilst living in the States I had an Aveo (base model no aircon) for two years which I used for a 25-mile commute into Cleveland. I averaged 35.9mpg in that time, with 32.5mpg being my worst and 39.1mpg being my best. 35-38mpg was pretty commonplace.

        They weren't market leaders in the B-segment in terms of fuel economy, but these were 1990's tech machines, and the fuel economy was normal for a 1600cc from that decade. But for the asking price ($9,300 I paid for mine) cheap commuting couldn't be beaten Stateside.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Same as owning a Fit that gets less mpg than a Civic.

        I'm not sure what the point is, but Fits and Aveos do sell, so I guess there is a reason.
    • Load More Comments