Archives

Since the only dealership in town is a GM, I've often tried to make to make a purchase there.

Is it known which new choice with at least 5 total seats will work best for extending milage to new heights .... any preferred choices that are/will-be manufactured in North America ?

The Chevy Cobalt XFE will be coming out in late 2008 as an 09' model. It has a rated highway FE of 37mpg which is th best Chevy has had in a long time.

The 2008 Malibu with the 4 cylinder and the 6 speed automatic transmission BEATS both the Camry and the Accord in EPA mpg. It is rates 22/32 vs 21/31. By all accounts it is a good car, and the new EPA figures underestimate what you can expect , especially highway. I would expect 35 mpg or more with the cruise control set on 70 mph , and maybe 40 mpg at 60 mph.

The Malibu is a lot bigger(interior room= roadtrip capability) than the Cobalt , and has a newer chassis etc ,so it should ride better. You also get the good EPA numbers with an AT, not the MT that gives you the best numbers with the Cobalt.

The Cobalt is nice, but the Malibu is nicer, and maybe easier to buy since anything with mpg numbers over 35 mpg is in short supply.

Charlie
PS I'm not sure where the Malibu is built; all of the Big 3 have plants in Mexico/Canada.

PS I'm not sure where the Malibu is built; all of the Big 3 have plants in Mexico/Canada.

Most fuel efficient GM small cars and the location of their assembly plants:
Chevy Aveo - built in Bupyoung, South Korea
Chevy Cobalt - built in Lordstown, Ohio
Chevy Malibu - built in Fairfax, Kansas, and some at Lake Orion, Michigan
Chevy HHR - built in Ramos Arizpe, Mexico
Pontiac Vibe - built in Fremont, California
Pontiac G6 - built in Lake Orion, Michigan
Saturn Astra - built in Antwerp, Belgium as an Opel Astra
Saturn Aura - built in Fairfax Kansas
Saturn VUE - built in Ramos Arizpe, Mexico

For "country of assembly", look at first character of VIN. 1,4,5=USA, 2=Canada, 3=Mexico, J=Japan, K=South Korea, W=Germany

Since the only dealership in town is a GM, I've often tried to make to make a purchase there.

Is it known which new choice with at least 5 total seats will work best for extending milage to new heights .... any preferred choices that are/will-be manufactured in North America ?

My brother just picked up a new HHR in the past week, thanks to the 0%/72mo offer. He has an '06 Silverado 2500HD with gas V8 and automatic. With basic hypermiling techniques, he's average 20mpg with much of it in urban NYC traffic. Knowing what he can do with the Silverado, and considering that he was using the big truck even for short trips to the market or Blockbuster, he wanted to "trim the fat" from his overall fuel usage. Getting a small runaround car will save quite a bit of fuel, if driven properly.

He decided on the HHR for a few reasons. 1- It's very tall so you don't have to crawl down into it. 2 - With auto-trans (a virtual requirement for anyone with long legs who drives in gridlocked NYC), it gets the same EPA numbers as the Cobalt. 3 - With the flexible seating arrangement and large cargo area, it can be used in place of the big truck much more often than a small sedan.

Although the HHR is assembled in Mexico, its engine comes from Tonawanda, NY or Spring Hill, TN. Much of its content is from the US. And the money "stays here" in a country based in North America.

So far, with the EPA quoting 22/30 (new 08 estimate), he's already in the mid 30s and it's not even at 100 miles on the odometer. The little Ecotecs start to really shine after breakin, so I told him he has no reason to expect less than 40mpg (double the truck's usage) in the daily grind.

Out of the current GM lineup, built in Canada/USA/Mexico, the fuel sippers with the most "room for five" would be Chevy Cobalt/HHR/Malibu, Pontiac Vibe/G6, and Saturn Aura. With the simplest of hypermiling techniques, GM vehicles will usually deliver the EPA's highway number for an overall combined average.

If you can wait about a year, there is a new "Chevy compact" coming that will be assembled at the Cobalt's Lordstown, Ohio plant. It will not be named "Cobalt", but will be about the same size. Built in the next generation Delta-II platform, it will have a 1.4L turbo engine that is said to get "over 40mpg easily". So unless the car purchase is urgent, it may pay to wait for that upcoming new model.

My advice is to take a trip outside of town to a city that has more options than just Chevy.

We had to take the trip into the city when the Saturns first came out in the 1990's. It was hard to beat its 49 (Imperial) mpg (41 mpg USA) back then. We came close to a decision on an Accord ... just down the street from the Saturn dealer. At that time we went quite a few times before we finally bought one of their 5speed sedans.

The local GM dealer has seen quite a bit of me ... but its been tricky deciding on the right vehicle to replace the old for best economy-potential. Given that we are now accustomed to a 1.9L naturally aspirated single-cam for so long, ... the 1.4turbo engine might be the ticket to achieve what we are used to or maybe even a bit better; .... the cobalt chasis is something similar in size/weight (slightly roomier) and would seem like something we might be able to graduate into if they come in standard shift as well.

Hi PDW:

___What I recommend is that you consider a new vehicle that take you down the road “if” a gallon of fuel reaches $10.00 per gallon within a possible 3 to 5 years. Not saying it will but what if it does? If the 29 combined of the Cobalt XFE doesn’t cut it, I would suggest that you seriously begin to look elsewhere. Loyalty doesn’t mean anything when gas prices rise as the sales of Ford, GM and Dodge P/U’s and SUV’s have proven this year in particular.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

pdw -you don't say what you currently drive , but the 37 mpg that the manual transmission Cobalt XFE gets is better than any Saturn's mpg (probably any Saturn ever made) .The EPA changed its rating system. 37 MPG is probably 42 or more mpg by the "old system") .The XFE Cobalt will at least match your Saturn , and it will be a much nice car (quieter , better ride, roomier etc) . In fact there aren't more than a handful of cars that rate 37 mph hy in the USA .Maybe you Canadians get some better FE cars , but I suspect you get the same choices we get.

Luck,
Charlie

PS I can only think of the Prius,HCH 2 and maybe that Smart that beat 37 mpg?? There must be others, maybe a Yaris , or Fit ?? None of the TDI VWs will match that FE .

Waiting a bit is not a bad idea either . Maybe the new GM will get 40 mpg . Besides , if the new Prius and the Volt are big successes then maybe the resale of "old" 2004 Prius will drop a bit . 155" is about the shortest a car can be an still fit 5 adult North Americans -the Fit has the most room smallest car trophy.

Charlie

According to Maxx, Its replacing the cobalt but it's not a cobalt .... similar size .... with a 1.4litre turbo

must admit it sounds inviting

Hi XCEL
Loyalty goes out the window pretty quick I agree.

pdw -you don't say what you currently drive , but the 37 mpg that the manual transmission Cobalt XFE gets is better than any Saturn's mpg (probably any Saturn ever made) .The EPA changed its rating system. 37 MPG is probably 42 or more mpg by the "old system") .The XFE Cobalt will at least match your Saturn , and it will be a much nice car (quieter , better ride, roomier etc) . In fact there aren't more than a handful of cars that rate 37 mph hy in the USA .Maybe you Canadians get some better FE cars , but I suspect you get the same choices we get.

In Canada EPA stickers have been deceptive. They invoke the Imperial gallon mpg, which is miles per gallon imperial (your 50mpg = our 60mpg) and then, instead of squaring off in kilometers per litre, we get "litres per 100 kilometers" ... completely screwing up for making wise comparisons.

You are right ... we got basically the same choices.

(ohh .... and I practised in an old Saturn SL 5speed)

I have been drivving a 04 Pontiac Vibe (same as toyota matrix) for 4 years/102,000 miles and it has been a great car.

According to Maxx, Its replacing the cobalt but it's not a cobalt .... similar size .... with a 1.4litre turbo

must admit it sounds inviting

Article elaborating on a press release from 6/3/08
"Today Rick Wagoner, CEO of GM, announced a range of strategic moves for several GM brands. Most notably, Chevrolet will see a new compact car in its ranks besides the Cobalt and Aveo powered by a new 1.4 liter turbo engine producing between 120 and 140 hp.

In a desperate move to please US consumers, this new engine will find its way into the new and yet unnamed Chevrolet compact car which will be built at GM's Lordstown, Ohio plant starting mid-2010.

The new 1.4 liter turbocharged engine will be built at GM's Flint plant and boasts a 9 mpg improvement over GM's current offerings in the segment, the Cobalt for instance. Whether this new compact car will replace the Cobalt is unclear at the moment, and they may just co-exist side-by-side."

The Chevy Cobalt and HHR and former Saturn Ion and current Saturn Astra are built off the same "Delta platform". A revised and updated version hits the factories starting next year, and it's being called "Delta-II" - same basic setup but refined and improved. The Volt will be based on Delta-II as well, so a lot of money is going into making significant improvements over what we see on the roads today.

So the new 1.4L Ecotec turbo engine will look (externally) like the current 2.0L version we see now in the Saturn Sky Redline and Cobalt SS, but internally will be lower displacement and about half the power, and 50% better FE. The new platform rolls out later this year in Germany and that will be our first glimpse at what the next Chevy will look like.

They are not saying what the name will be, but the plans at the Lordstown plant suggest they will be producing the new car alongside the Cobalt, at least for a while. Why? I suspect two reasons. First, the Cobalt is cheaper to build, so they can have it on sale at Walmart prices as a modern-day "Rambler" - cheap to buy, insure, and drive, while the new Delta-II car will offer better performance and packaging at a higher price. And second, if they call the new car something else (Chevelle or Nova, for example), then they have more bragging rights along the lines of "Chevy has ### models that are EPA rated at 30mpg or better!" Kill the old Cobalt and bring in the new, and you don't have "more models that get that kind of mileage".

For people who consider GM products, there is a lot of hope in this updated platform. The Cobalt has never been a bad car, but it's about as interesting as CSPAN. The next car promises more style and performance, and dramatically better MPG. That last promise is the one most people in the US care about right now, and I'm hoping GM delivers on it.

Hi MaxxMPG:

___I love your avatar :D

___PDW, the XFE we are speaking about is the current (latest) Cobalt with a stick and bestowed the XFE model. Available as an 08 with the 09 achieving another 1 mpg on the highway. The 1.4L Turbo is going into something completely new and or different from Chevrolet and I cannot wait :)

___Where there were none, now the Cobalt XFE and the Malibu with the new I4 w/ and brand new 6-speed AT are on my list of vehicles of interest. That 6-speed is also flat towable meaning everything is open for use ;)

___Good Luck

___Wayne

PDW, I use a 2005 Cobalt with a manual 5 speed and have averaged 39.7 mpg over the past 12 months. You can check my mileage logs for the past year at http://www.cleanmpg.com/index.php?page=garage&displayunits=MPG(US)&viewcar=1194. This result comes with a Rochester winter.

It is a lot easier to get the better mileage with a stick shift in this car. Now during this warmer time of the year I am getting a true average of over 42 mpg. Note that I have also calibrated the odometer and lowered the mileage by approximately 3.5%, since the odometer measures distance 3.5% high.

The fuel economy gage measures over 46 mpg now, but it is somewhat optimistic.

One problem with hypermiling the Cobalt is that the ride is a little harsh with the tires at 44 psi. The door frame tire pressure is 30 psi.

While it dose not make the list, talked to a customer yesterday who avg 30 mpg going from North GA to Florida, and about 28 mpg going from North GA to Northern Tennessee in a 2008 Impala 3.6lt. Manufactured in Canada. She said she her driving habits were to keep it at the speed limit.

Hi Ookii, now that you mention this, I remember the Impala was known to be good on gas, esp for its size.

Xcel, ... it would be neat to experience a six-speed automatic

John,
I've worked a lot at trying to figure how much gas my 94 Saturn spends on warming itself up. I figure about 4 times less warm-up gas-wasteage in peak summer than in dead of winter, but only 2 times as much in winter coldspells than on average (at our 42nd latitude).

I tested this often by filling a litre (empty-tank) and running it out again (got good at handling small fuel containers). Distances achieved are progressively farther the warmer the engine ... best at peak temperature every-time.

Despite 'thermosing' the engine (in addition to the radiator restriction) the Saturn has taught me how expensive it is to warm up a frigid engine in various sub-zero temperatures, .... but also the every day cost. That's why the prius has the thermos ... I found out later.

A new car will use less warm up gas than an old one ... because of the great compression for one thing ....

thanks everyone for all the help

PDW, this Fall I intend to get an engine block heater and put the car on a timer for about 2 hours before I start it up each morning. I would like to get a factory block heater, but will probably get a pad. Then, the only problem is somehow heating the block at 3 PM at work each day.

When you mention 2x and 4x for gas wasteage, what is the value of 1x? How many ml?

I would be fairly certain of X=500ml which would be at a morning startup temperature in the neighbourhood of about 70 degrees on the Fahrenheit scale where the engine is approximately that temperature as well. X then represents an average of approx .75 lbs (three quarters of a pound).

x= .7 lb on a hot tarmac in the summer (expansion)

x= .8 lb in cold northern climate (shrink)

So PDW, does that mean that the wasted gasoline during warmup is (2x-4x) or 1.5 lbs to 3 lbs of gasoline. So that would equate to 1/4 gallon to 1/2 gallon of gasoline (at 6 lbs/gallon) wasted during each start up?

Hence a block heater would save (very optimistically) up to 1/2 gallon of gas every day the car is started.

The average is 1.5lbs (2x) ... that's on a '94 single-cam Saturn 5speed Sedan.

In the summer (right now) the thermosing materials keep the engine warm all day. Thermosing (I found) was only safe for hypermiling/FASing.

Your block heater idea is great, but I would only need it for 20 minutes in my case. Oil heating at the same time. What seems to work good for FE on the '94 is oil heat. The truckers say their oil runs at 250degF (higher than the boiling point of water). I suspect that once the oil is hot ... the real savings begin.

( In daily driving the engine was off 90% of the time in the city, approx average 33% of the time in hilly country, about half the time on the highway where its gradually rolling country ... and over flat prarie against wind at night (lights on) what worked best was steady cruise.)

A Co-workers wife bought a new $16,000 Cobalt a couple of weeks ago for a about $10,600 out the door. They gave several discounts and they got an additional discount for being a repeat finance customer through some GM finance arm.

Keep in mind that a Pontiac Vibe is actually a Toyota Matrix and a Chevy Aveo is actually a Daewoo.

At the dealership I saw the GM G5 ..... the equivalent of a Chevy Cobalt. There are a limited number of 5 speeds (none on the lot ... go figure).

If indeed they are a scarce commodity, ... then it's easy to assure the salesperson that putting our name on an early order for the new 1.4turbo car from Ohio is the way to go.

The Aveo and Vibe (Matrix and Daewoo equivalents) were all lined up there too.

At the dealership I saw the GM G5 ..... the equivalent of a Chevy Cobalt. There are a limited number of 5 speeds (none on the lot ... go figure).

If indeed they are a scarce commodity, ... then it's easy to assure the salesperson that putting our name on an early order for the new 1.4turbo car from Ohio is the way to go.

The Aveo and Vibe (Matrix and Daewoo equivalents) were all lined up there too.

The Aveo is also sold in Canada as the Pontiac G3, too.
Try this link and see if it works - http://apps.gm.ca/app/GMCanada/NewVehicleLocatorCriteria.do?lang=en&nav=0&cta=blank
It's the Canadian version of gmbuypower.com and it lets you find the car you want by Postal Code. Then you can go to the dealer with the VIN of the car you choose and see if they can swap with that dealer to get the car you want. You typically have more bargaining power when buying off the lot (even if via a dealer swap) than ordering the car from the factory.

I use gmbuypower.com all the time to locate cars for people. Then it's easy enough to look up the invoice price for the vehicle so you know what price point to use to start bargaining.

As for the upcoming 2010 "Chevy Compact", here are two links for anyone who is interested in the upcoming new model -

GM Press release describing the 1.4L turbo four:
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewpressreldetail.do?domain=137&docid=45710

Spy shots of the car at motortrend.com -
http://www.motortrend.com/future/spied_vehicles/112_0806_2011_chevrolet_compact/index.html
The Motor Trend article says, "The Chevy compact will have more equipment, benchmark safety and quality, ... and most important, 'nine miles per gallon more than Chevy's entry in this segment today.' Add 9 mpg to the current 2.2L five-speed manual Cobalt, and you get 33 mpg city and/or 42 mpg highway (Wagoner didn't specify which, or if both)."

Hi I'm new to the forum this being my first post. I've been lurking for a few weeks. Since this is the first reference to an HHR I've seen, I decided to post. I have a 2LT auto w/2.4 great mileage on the highway, mileage in the city is a difficult ti maintain 20mpg avg on an 8 mile round trip w/ 12 top lights each direction. I switched over from a trans am to this car in 06 for the economy and roominess

Grumpee, welcome to CleanMPG!
I am waiting until this weekend to get an initial "report card" from my brother to see how he's doing on FE. Since he was getting 20mpg in a 3/4 ton pickup with a 6.0 gas V8, I would think he's getting an average of upper 20s to 30mpg using the same techniques. His HHR is the 1LT with the 2.2, which has the same 22 city, but is rated at 30 highway to the 2.4 liter's 28mpg.

For your city travel, the mpg can be improved with more tire pressure, coasting toward lights and congestion, shutting down the engine at traffic lights, and pulse and glide if the traffic conditions permit. Since my brother is driving during congested "rush hour" in the outer edges of New York City, he can use P&G as the traffic speed varies. The other trick is to get to know the transmission (which is the 4T45E, which is flat towable up to 65mph, so NICE-off is ok) and where the best driving speeds are relative to top gear cruising. Generally speaking, getting to 40mph is best, when safe and practical, as it gets to 4th gear for low rpm high load cruising.

City driving is the biggest challenge to pulling high MPG numbers, but the hypermiler's toolbox has plenty of techniques to make the best of the situation.

I tested/test-drove (you know what I mean) an HHR ... acouple of years ago ... but not enough to get an idea of the milage potential ....

Maxx, ... thanks for the sites ... the 9mpg-more is a good starting point

how does a turbo fare with FASing ? (just thinking outloud)

I tested/test-drove (you know what I mean) an HHR ... acouple of years ago ... but not enough to get an idea of the milage potential ....

Maxx, ... thanks for the sites ... the 9mpg-more is a good starting point

how does a turbo fare with FASing ? (just thinking outloud)

Had dinner with my brother last night - the one with the new HHR. He hasn't driven far enough to get through two tanks to see what sort of average he's getting for MPG, but the iFCD reads a steady 45 at 55mph, so he's very pleased. When I set the budget spreadsheet to show him how you can pay for much of a smaller car with fuel cost savings, I set 33mpg average as a target. He should be right around there now, even though it's still on breakin and not loosened up yet.
He was showing the other guys on the job, including a peek at the fuel consumption numbers. They were dumbfounded. I think that people see the HHR and assume it is a truck, and they don't realize it is just a Cobalt station wagon and so it gets the same MPG as the Cobalt coupe/sedan.

Whether or not to FAS a turbo engine seems to be generating a lot of strong opinions around here lately. Much of the "you'll blow the turbo" opinions date back to thirty years ago, as turbocharging was working its way into mainstream cars. Those early turbos did not have a system to oil the turbo bearings after engine shutdown. High-load driving followed by a prompt shutdown (quick stop for gas off the interstate, for example) would damage the bearings as the oil in there turned into charcoal from the tremendous heat.
Fast forward to today, and modern turbos have auxiliary lubrication systems that oil the turbo bearings for a short time after shutdown - long enough to protect the unit. If synthetic oil is used (as we use on the wife's Daytona turbo and it's trouble-free all these years), periodic FAS should be fine, with these two thoughts added -
1 - If the owners manual contains a warning or caution not to shut the engine down after high speed driving after "xx" number of minutes, you follow the manual. If the manual does not say this, you can assume that the engine can be cut without damaging the turbo.
2 - The turbo only spools up to self-destruct territory under very heavy load and high engine rpm. Back off the go-pedal and the waste gate opens and the turbine spins down over time. To keep our turbo trouble-free, I just tell my wife to "drive easy" and keep the boost gage at 0 for a few minutes before arriving home to shut the engine down. If shutting down (to fuel up or stop at the market for 2 minutes) after high-load driving, it's still been "ok" for us, since the car is soon restarted (as it would be during FAS as well) and the oil pressure would reach the turbo bearings again.

What's kept turbos out from under the hoods of most cars in the US has been owner abuse and neglect. With longer powertrain warranties, the automakers would sink themselves if they added a turbo to every car. Most people (meaning "non-hypermilers") change their oil once every leap year. And as we see on the road, they mash their accelerator to the floor and scream past us so fast that we can barely see the AAA sticker on their trunklid. They have no idea what a timing belt is and they bee-yatch that their mechanic is trying to screw them out of "600 dollars to change some fan belt thing". Over the years, I've known quite a few dealer mechanics from Ford and GM, as well as independent shops, and you would NOT believe the stories you hear. What people do to cars (that actually survive the owner's abuse) is literally unbelievable. With that in mind, it will be very interesting to see what GM and Ford (with their new line of EcoBoost engines) include as safeguards to protect these engines from the wrath of an enraged and abusive public.

The water cooled turbos of today are like apples and oranges to yesterdays oil cooled versions. My first turbo seized at 247K miles for two reasons from what I can tell.
One, I was uninformed about the evils of K&N air filters. When I pulled the inlet hose the front of the compressor wheel was covered with a oily grime. The second was I had the idea that all oil is the same. I ran dealer bulk 10W30 (Pennzoil) with 3,000 mile oil changes with OEM Mann oil filters. Today I have 115K miles on that new turbo and the front of the compressor wheel is as shinny as the day it was installed. The difference is since replacing it I use OEM paper filters. Also I now run Mobil 1 10W30 with 5,000 mile oil changes now on the turbo car.
There are plenty of Volvo's and Saab's running around using Garret or Mitsubishi water cooled turbo's with 250K plus miles on them.
As far as abuse killing these turbos I have been amazed at some of the sludged up engines at my dealer and the turbo's don't seem to be failing. Do they occasionally fail in extreme cases? Yes.
All the manufactures have to do is cover their butts by letting the owner know that they will not cover a cooked turbo if the oil changes are not followed.
Back in the early 80's Volvo bought me two turbo's due to the fact that I do over service my cars. They were amazed at the fact I got 42K miles out of my original Turbo. From what I heard that no one had gotten that many miles out of the original oil cooled turbo in the 1981 242 at the time. Volvo bought me a new one even though I was past the 12 month 12,000 mile warranty. When I blew an oil seal in the replacement around 90K miles, I cooked the turbo, and the catalytic converter.
Volvo picket up $1200 in parts and I bought three to four hours of labor.

Nice flashback to days gone by.

It makes one imagine how far we've come since then.

I would hope the prolonged spooldown of a turbo is an adequately lubricated one ... to include a variety of shutdown conditions all with uniform and negligeable wear and tear.

I just rented a 2007/early 2008 Cobalt with the lower fuel economy rating at averaged 41.6 mpg just by going 50 mph on cruise. I traveled approximately 110 miles on my trip. If the new ones are more efficient, you might be able to get 50+ mpg at those driving conditions.

My 2003 Monte Carlo gets 36 mpg hauling 5 comfortably going 50 mph with windows down. This is a vehicle that is rated 28 on the old EPA standard. I have been taking four kids to a driving school 40 miles away and they are all convinced that driving slower is a money saver.

Freyguy - some Chevy's GMs get much better FE than many folks give them credit for- especially most -2 007 on- recent versions , but the Impala from 2000 on always got good FE for a large fairly quick sedan.

The 5.3 Chevy Trucks/SUVs are all 20+ mpg highway vehicles and the most recent versions are true 24mpg hy at 70 mph. Granted they aren't what you want to commute in , but consisering their intended use ,they are FE.The latest 5.3 pickups/SUVs can get 20 mpg city with motor on P&G , tire pressure Mobil 1 and motor shut off at all lights/long stops. By city I mean city driving with trips at least 10 miles in length.If you average 2 miles per trip you get 12 mpg .

Charlie

Just hypermiled the Astra ... the 5 speed

The salesman couldn't believe how the FAS worked .... easy to do and smooth.

But how does one go about ordering one of those 1.4Litre turbos in advance .... the one we were discussing earlier in the thread to be built into a car in Lordstown Ohio in the near future ?

But how does one go about ordering one of those 1.4Litre turbos in advance .... the one we were discussing earlier in the thread to be built into a car in Lordstown Ohio in the near future ?

That new car is currently known as the Chevrolet Cruze, and is due in the US as a 2010 model. It is still about 18 months away, although GM may speed it up a bit considering the current demand for small cars. Here are a few links with information on the car -

http://jalopnik.com/398768/2010-chevy-cruze-to-get-45-mpg-fight-prius-with-one-powertrain
http://www.leftlanenews.com/chevrolet-cruze.html
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/09/chevy-cruze-to-be-built-in-lordstown/

I suspect that the reason for the new name is to allow Chevy to sell the car as a premium compact alongside the Cobalt, which would be positioned as a budget entry. As for pre-orders, I don't think GM's dealer ordering can handle them more than a few months before a vehicle launch, but it's worth it to keep checking the web for any updates.

The Jalopnik article (link above) says it best - "... If it can achieve 45 MPG it'll put the 2009 Toyota Prius, which gets 45 MPG highway, right in its sights." Although the Prius will have moved on to even higher FE numbers, it is still a respectable goal to reach 45mpg with only a gasoline engine. And it's certainly better than the 2009 Cobalt's 33mpg (AT) to 37mpg (MT).

The new Cruze will be built on the Delta2 platform (shared with the next Opel/Saturn Astra, Chevy Volt, unnamed Pontiac rebadge, and possibly a small Buick as well), and will be roughly the same size as the current Delta cars (Chevy Cobalt & HHR/Saturn Astra & Ion).

Now raise your hand if you'd love to see a new HHR (with or without the funky '49 Suburban styling) with that 45mpg powerplant and the same level of room and versatility provided by today's HHR! :D It'd also be good for about 45mpg, as the current HHR (aka "Cobalt station wagon") matches the Cobalt sedan in city MPG and gives up only 1mpg on the highway. In fact, that's what sold my brother on his new HHR. He went to the dealer looking for a Cobalt econobox (cheap and 40+mpg with hypermiling) and ended up spending an extra $20 a month on the car payment to get the HHR, as it offers the same FE but with the taller seating position and loads of cargo space.

GM dealer's sales attitudes/innovations will make a lot of difference to GM's overall success (sales) in the near future. Welcoming in the customers for example like Saturn did to attract buyers in the early nineteen nineties with their first models (ie I believe it was 19 visits and 28days for the average sale) ... is one way to do this right.

Giving the customer what they are looking for and giving them lots of time to decide on it (patience) is the way to do this; .... from a recent experience in searching I've concluded this still needs some work in a lot of our sales establishments.

This upcoming car is beginning to show itself the newest example of an in-demand (mostly homegrown) product that has early indication as again giving picky patriotic buyers the sought-after 'value for their money'.

Thanks for the sites/pictures.

This link has a spyshot of the Cruze interior:
http://thecarfanatic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/cruze-interior.jpg
It looks like a Daewoo logo on the steering wheel, but that is understandable since the Cruze will be sold in Korea as a Daewoo. The interior looks like a combination of new Malibu and Traverse, with the familiar two-tone interior. If the final showroom models look anything like this spyshot, the Cruze has a real chance of selling in large volumes. The Malibu is still selling strong after a year on the market, mostly due to the stylish design. The Cruze is expected to follow up on the same design theme, but should offer 50% better FE (based on current Malibu EPA numbers vs projections of Cruze numbers), so it should be right on target. For the sake of GM, let's hope so!

'For their sake' .... Maxx, ... that's the point to make.

I'm going out to have another chat with my dealer today.

The idea that we'll come in there to give them our furs for something shiny (sort of like the native Indians did years ago when the white man first came). We're all are like those Indians these days ... but we're smarter, and maybe GM has figured it out ...

You see, ... we (my family members at least) are not going in anymore for 0-72 months without a fight; best thing was to pay cash (cause that's what we eventually could do when our vehicles don't rob us blind).... but whichever ... best to take our time studying which vehicle is going to deliver the most for our dollar ... all factors considered.

Freyguy - some Chevy's GMs get much better FE than many folks give them credit for- especially most -2 007 on- recent versions , but the Impala from 2000 on always got good FE for a large fairly quick sedan.



Charlie

From what I have seen at the EPA site the 2000 Impala is worst, and the 2001 is best according to user reports 2000 / 2005. I just obtained a 2001 and was getting 26.24 and 27.20 mpg on a open loop. The c.converter suddenly went bad on it. The car seems to run smother and cooler with a new c.converter so it looks like I'm hitting a closed loop now. No where to go but up. :-)

A lot better than the 1989 Caddy which I only avg about 20 mpg recently. (sigh)

OM

The Chevy Impala has been around a long time (seems like 40 years) ... and as far as I know has always done great in FE for its class.

The Impala name has been around on and off since 1958, with the current FWD version on the road for the last nine years. The current iteration (W-body) has great FE potential, but that doesn't guarantee low fuel costs. The driver must unlock the potential by driving gently. If you drop the pedal whenever you see green lights, the V6 will drink with the best of em. But keep the tach at around 2 during acceleration and below 2 when cruising and it will sip like a four-banger.

The next Impala will be a stretched Epilon version as the old W-edsel (now 20 years old) retires. This will likely happen as most models move to the new Epsilon-II (2009 Opel Vectra, 2010 Buick Invicta, 2011 Saturn Aura, 2012 Chevy Malibu). So just as Toyota made the Avalon by stretching the Camry, GM will make a new Impala by stretching the Malibu. My Epsilon-Malibu sedans are getting some impressive FE, so the next Impala should show some promise.

I had talked my mom out of getting an 07 Impala and into an 07 Saturn Aura XE instead. After years of driving her Dodge Grand Caravan, this thing is a gas sipper compared to that caravan. My malibu sips gas when accelerating lightly. But when my wife drives my car it sucks the tank down. I asked her why she accelerates so fast when she's driving but when I accelerate softer it hurts her back. It's because she can brace her back using her arms (on the steering wheel) and back muscles to brace for the acceleration. She's got a lead foot and she's not afraid to use it. It's kind of sad that the Cobalt gets better MPG than the Aveo right now.

It's kind of sad that the Cobalt gets better MPG than the Aveo right now.

I was wondering how those two compared.

I was wondering how those two compared.

As far as I can see on the future-cars sites, the Aveo will continue to be a guzzler (relative to its size) until it migrates to the same platform as the Opel Corsa, which is in about three years. The collective guess right now is that the Aveo moves to the Gamma B-car platform (Opel Corsa/Meriva) and gets the three cylinder Ecotec from the Volt. With the 1.4L 4cyl turbo rumored to hit low to mid 40s MPG in the Cruze, the 1.0L 3cyl in a Gamma body shell has to be good for low 50s at least, unless they fired all their good powertrain engineers by then. The current plan is to build this new Aveo in Lordstown, Ohio alongside the Cobalt and Cruze. If this all pans out, the next Aveo will be made in USA with an Ecotec engine instead of being an imported Daewoo with the 'Woo motor.

To follow the progress of the new powerplants, you can google: GM family zero engine

Their sales will pick up to match the occasion once they can display some of this serious leading-edge inventory.

In tandem with the new products GM needs to continue to display the best kind of hospitality ... like their early Saturn dealers ... easy/visible << CUSTOMER PARKING >> and a friendly greeting/showroom atmosphere at all times to eliminate any buyer confusion. Many are already doing this well, as well as service setups have been designed to modern standards.