Those of us in the U.S. will have to wait until sometime in 2013 to see the diesel-powered Chevrolet Cruze, but GM insiders seem more than willing to dish out some details on the oil-burning Cruze well in advance of its debut.

Ward's Auto reports that "sources" have confirmed the oil-burning Cruze will achieve a highway fuel economy rating "in the range of 50 miles per gallon." Additionally, unlike the manual transmission-equipped, 42-mpg rated Chevy Cruze Eco (an automatic Eco is available, but its mpg rating is well below that of the manual), the diesel Cruze, according to Charlie Klein, GM's director of global mass, energy and aerodynamics, will be a fuel-sipping sedan regardless of which trans is bolted to the engine.

As for that engine, GM has unofficially confirmed that it will indeed be based on the 2.0-liter diesel that's found under the hood of the Holden Cruze CDX. In the Holden, the 2.0-liter mill pumps out 160 horsepower and 265 pound-feet of torque. One last bit of info: we hear that the diesel Cruze's torque will allow it to easily outrun the Cruze Eco.


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
  • 86 Comments
      Robert Wantin
      • 3 Years Ago
      Would make a damn fine combination with the 5-Door.
        Chase
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Robert Wantin
        Cruze Hatchback Diesel.... here's a beer to that!
        Joe Bo
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Robert Wantin
        Agreed. about to purchase a focus or fit but if this was available I'd definitely spend the extra cash to get 265 ft lbs of torque.
      first
      • 3 Years Ago
      Laser, do you have any experience with the Cruze Eco? My coworker routinely get 44 MPG (above the 42 rating) in his ECO on his 1 hr drive to work (90% freeway)
        Dsuupr
        • 3 Years Ago
        @first
        My best was 50.7 mpg on a 200+ road trip. I often get 44 to 45 mpg for my highway drives, which include driving above the speed limit with the AC on. My city driving tends to net 38 to 40 mpg.
        The Other Bob
        • 3 Years Ago
        @first
        first: I agree. In reading Cruze owner forums, there are owners pulling 50 mpg on the highway. Unlike some other cars, this one seems like the mpg is underrated.
      spa2nky1
      • 3 Years Ago
      Lets hope they have an "under promise, over deliver" motto...I'd hate to see this come to market with a sub 50mpg highway rating.
      TRU-BOOST
      • 3 Years Ago
      Diesel is the way to go. I am glad to see so many manufacturers offering diesel options in the near future. My next car WILL be a manual trans diesel. Which one is the question....
      richsodapop
      • 3 Years Ago
      i think if goes good here ,you will see that engine in other models soon.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        MJC
        • 3 Years Ago
        Firstly, it's awfully hard to "play the system" with a diesel engine. It's going to be turning very low RPM at any highway speed, resulting in good fuel economy. Secondly, if you read the reviews of the Cruze, many owners average in the high 30s for MPG. It's common sense that with a turbocharged engine and agresive city driving, you will get really low fuel economy.
        • 3 Years Ago
        [blocked]
        AJ Abrams
        • 3 Years Ago
        Oh my...first comment is from an idiot GM hater. Imagine that. I don't suppose you have proof of your statement?...no of course you don't because it's about as ludicrous a statement that could possibly be made and can be disproved with a visit to any model ownership site.
        reattadudes
        • 3 Years Ago
        judging from your vocabulary ("Government Motors", "Snuze", "eco-snot") I'm guessing you're about 16. you obviously aren't aware the GM has paid back all the the money the US Government required them to, and seven years early. the "Government Motors" moniker is not correct, and is soooo 2009. maybe when you get your license (if you can reach the pedals), you can make your silly judgments from behind the wheel of a car that is actually driving down the street, not just sitting in the driveway while you make "vroom vroom" sounds.
      justgoawaymad
      • 3 Years Ago
      big deal, my last tank of gas in my 1500 dollar metro Xfi was 55.98 on gas. No diesel here. AND 75% of that was in town driving. I guess at 200k i should think about rebuilding it. But with that kind of mileage .....why bother?
        Car Guy
        • 3 Years Ago
        @justgoawaymad
        It's not a "big deal" when you get in an accident. Your Metro, from a crash safety perspective, is a death trap. The Cruze and current generation have safety technology light years ahead of that car.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @justgoawaymad
        [blocked]
          Justin Campanale
          • 3 Years Ago
          I remember when I was in college, my friend had a Metro. He accidentally drove it into a wheelbarrow at 25 mph and the wheelbarrow won. The Metro was totaled and had to be towed away. TRUE STORY.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @justgoawaymad
        [blocked]
          • 3 Years Ago
          [blocked]
        Joe Bo
        • 3 Years Ago
        @justgoawaymad
        You get better fuel efficiency with a motorcycle too. Or better yet a bicycle.
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Joe Bo
          [blocked]
          bhtooefr
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Joe Bo
          @sixpackdan: And your Victory would be along the lines of a muscle car in car terms, I do believe. The Metro would be the equivalent of, oh, a 250 scooter or so in bike terms.
        Chase
        • 3 Years Ago
        @justgoawaymad
        As was previously mentioned, does your Metro have room for a 22' ladder, and does it have 10 airbags?
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Chase
          [blocked]
        Glynn Hadskey
        • 3 Years Ago
        @justgoawaymad
        Everybody loved to over state their mileage. When we are talking EPA number that you can only make comparisons with other EPA numbers . A 90 Xfi returned a very respectable 42/52 47 combined rating using 2008 method from a detuned 1.0 3 cylinder. So be happy that you can beat a Cruze Diesel and enjoy your 49 hp.
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Glynn Hadskey
          [blocked]
      Albert Ferrer
      • 3 Years Ago
      Well I guess soon North Americans will be able to enjoy the weakest link in European motoring. Even more. I frankly can't understand US petrolheads' obsession with diesel. You don't have to have it, yet you want it. I guess grass is always greener on the other side...
        Alex
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Albert Ferrer
        I love how you don't even bother to explain what's wrong with diesel. By all means, don't bother, we aren't listening to you anyway.
          Albert Ferrer
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Alex
          How many diesels have you driven actually?
          Albert Ferrer
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Alex
          I have driven many diesels, and while they can be fast and the economy is certainly there, they simply can't match a good petrol engine for enjoyment.
        jbm0866
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Albert Ferrer
        You nailed it, we always want what we can't have...and then when we finally get it we move on to wanting something else. For Americans concerned with saving money at the pump, diesel costs a bit more than even premium (highest octane) here where I live...that can seriously cut into that 50mpg.
        dinobot666
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Albert Ferrer
        It also has a lot to do with the types of vehicles that we drive in North America. They're typically heavier and cover much longer distances. The torque from a diesel is an excellent application for these kinds of uses.
          Albert Ferrer
          • 3 Years Ago
          @dinobot666
          But the diesel's main point is fuel consumption. With the much lower fuel prices over to your side, why would a car enthusiast want to put with bad NVH charateristics, a narrow powerband or turbo lag? Diesels have definitely improved but they aren't as good a petrol engines.
        emperor koku
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Albert Ferrer
        We don't all want diesel! I don't!
        bhtooefr
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Albert Ferrer
        I do have it. It's called a 12 year old Golf TDI. Relatively good NVH characteristics, bucketloads of torque, and it'll get high 40s on the freeway, even when I'm driving like an ******* with the AC cranked. I can do central Ohio to Kansas City or central CT on a single tank (and have done so), and it's far more fun to drive than a hybrid or even a base model 2.0 Mk4 Golf.
      protovici
      • 3 Years Ago
      I'll stick with the Ford, who has proven to run a company in and out of multiple recessions, yet still make cars cheaper and better. Everything from mustang's to trucks. Built Ford Tough!
        reattadudes
        • 3 Years Ago
        @protovici
        if you're trying to imply that Ford was somehow smarter than GM and Chrysler with regard to finance, you might want to think again. the only difference between Ford, and GM and Chrysler is that Ford had secured their financing for their own restructuring FOUR DAYS before the stock market crash in September of 2008. GM and Chrysler had theirs on the way, but everything was canceled when the crash occurred. if that hadn't happened, Ford would have been in the same dire straights that GM and Chrysler were. and by the way, that "I'll stick with Ford" Mercury Lynx with the diesel engine your crowing about? it was made by Mazda, not Ford.
          Justin
          • 3 Years Ago
          @reattadudes
          Thank you... People need the truth...
          montoym
          • 3 Years Ago
          @reattadudes
          I also find it funny that Ford mortgaged everythign they had (right down tot he Blue Oval) in order to secure the financing they recieved. Odly enough, many American homeowners did exactly the same thing with their homes and were blamed for bringing down the entire American economy. So on one hand, you mortgage your home to an inch of its life and you're incredibly stupid. But, if you're a huge corporation and you do so, you have incredible foresight and made an excellent decision. Sorry, can't have it both ways I'm afraid. Ford got incredibly lucky, they weren't any smarter than GM or Chrysler, they just fel into good timing.
          emperor koku
          • 3 Years Ago
          @reattadudes
          blah blah blah
        Adrian
        • 3 Years Ago
        @protovici
        Both are making good cars these days. And not every car they make is cheaper or better, it depends on the segment.
      Rob
      • 3 Years Ago
      I have had the opportunity to rent both a Cruze ( non turbo) and a Focus. I am very impressed with the leap forward both these cars have made and they deserve to be considered when cross shopping. The cruze felt very solid and was well put together. It was a bit underpowered for my liking but certainly not intolerable. I would strongly consider a diesel with a 6 speed manual in this car with those kind of torque figures
      TDIMeister
      • 3 Years Ago
      The Everly Brothers sung it best: ♫ Dreeeeaaammm. Dream, dream dream, Dreeeeaaammm... ♫
      lemonite
      • 3 Years Ago
      Clean, efficient diesels in America? Get out of town! Diesel is dirty, we want innovation, we want overpriced hybrids, we want 50mpg! /s
        DrEvil
        • 3 Years Ago
        @lemonite
        Cut the stupid rhetoric, I am not a diesel fan, but is happy to see any car that is efficient and safe come to market. Probably because I took the time to to look at the big picture as far as future transportation and its impact on society at large. I have no problem with cars such as this and the Jetta TDI along with hybrids and electrics as interim / transitional / stop-gap answers. Diesels are not the final answer. BTW: Diesel is dirty, not as bad as it used to be, but still dirty. Get off the cost of today's hybrids and electrics. Whenever new technology is launched, cost of owning said technology is expensive. Go do some research, cell phones weren't always the bargain that they are today. Check out the cost of the 1st generation Betamax VCRs, and CD players. I guess we should have stayed with Eastman Kodak Technicolor instead of HD and so on. Ever saw what a new 80286 IBM personal computer with a 10 mb hard drive used to go for ? try between $3 - $5 K.
        Adrian
        • 3 Years Ago
        @lemonite
        /s means sarcasm, Dr. Evil. No need to come at him with the stats, I'm sure he already knows and agrees with you.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @lemonite
        [blocked]
    • Load More Comments