[shivasuma]

I got to TD the new cruze a while ago. I would prefer the new cruze over the older one for the following:
1.] turbo-lag is greatly reduced. Lag is a pain in traffic. I sometimes hate driving (very rarely though) my I20.
2.]New engine is far more refined.

GM has fiddled with the top upholstery at the rear (near the sunroof) in an effort to release some head room. Its not that visibly and doesnt make much difference compared to the older one. Its still a very good car but the handling and steering do not do justice to the engine it has.

[Mpower]

Great move by GM!

It will make the car more appealing to the typical exec buyer rather than just enthusiasts. When is the A/T coming out?

[ashish22]

Thanks for the lovely comparison GTO and Ghostrider. I for one have the oldest batches of the cruze which rolled out in 2009 (I bought mine in Jan, 2010) which has the worst turbo lag out of all the cruze variants. But for sure i'll never let go of its turbo kick which i get beyond 1800 rpms. Its a trade off for the turbo lag but then who's complaining?

I'm actually happy with the way my car behaves, and i can live with the turbo lag. Although sometimes it gets really frustrating, but the instant i'm in the turbo zone i forget all my frustrations. So in a way its forgiving to drive this monster.

Any idea whether they have made any changes to the hardware of OEM music player or is it just the speakers which have resulted in a much better sound quality. If so could you throw some light on what speakers are they using now.

Once again thanks for the wonderful review, both of you guys!

[ethanhunt123]

Very good review. The new Cruze seems to have gotten rid of some of the worst aspects of its predecessor - bad turbo lag, hard clutch & lack of dead pedal !!

While Jetta/Laura clearly have better & more premium interiors - Cruze owns them in feature list (Start/Stop button, Keyless entry, Sunroof (:-) etc). Classic heart vs head debate - one which i will decide on later this year !

[drchernish]

Excellent review GTO sir. When I planned to buy the car from this segment I thought it must be easy but I was wrong It was a nightmare which had just started. Liked Skoda Laura in-spite of having a name which is not taken to very kindly in UP dialect. Well to cut long story short rejected due to malpractices by the dealer. Jetta dealer could not arrange a test drive in 1.5 months- still waiting. Elantra interiors rejected by wifey. Left is cruze which is most probably the choice if Jetta people don't show up with a test drive. How very simple something in life can turnout to be!!!
One thing I wanted to ask was regarding the truth about a facelifted cruze coming around Diwali - is there truth in it?

[justin.das]

Originally Posted by GTO

What you’ll like:
• Well-rounded 164 BHP engine is fast, refined & efficient. Turbo-lag is greatly

Is the above mentioned engine a GM version of Fiat Multijet 2.0 ?As per the
Wikipedia information there is a GM derived version of Fiat Multijet in use.Details follows

A new 2 litre (1956 cc, 83 mm bore, 93.4 mm stroke) Multijet diesel was introduced in third generation Lancia Delta in summer 2008. At its first version this engine produces 165 PS (121 kW; 163 bhp). For 2009 the engine was fitted to Alfa Romeo 159 as 170 PS (125 kW; 168 hp) variant. Fiat Sedici, Suzuki SX4 and the new Fiat Doblò generation use a 135 PS (99 kW; 133 hp) variant of this engine. GM Powertrain Europe develop new derivative - the BiTurbo version, with 195 PS (143 kW; 192 bhp), which is produced for Opel for the Insignia. GM Powertrain also developed [8] 2 litre 165 PS (121 kW; 163 bhp) engine for Astra and Insignia. The same engines was also available in the 2011 Saab 9-5 but with 160 PS and 190 PS, which shares its powertrains with the Insignia. The 2012 Chevrolet Malibu comes with a 160 PS version.

link:JTD engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[i_nv]

Dear GTO

Thanks for the neat and to the point analysis. I have been driving Cruze AT for last two years and have driven 30k km till date. Just love driving this car both in the city and especially on the highway.

According to me two big let down in 2009 cruise are JK Vectra tyre and the headlamps as rightly observed by you. I need a Tyre change now and would be grateful if the right stock could be suggested to me for a change.

Regarding headlamp, especially on the highway they are not at all confidence inspiring hence its difficult to cruise beyond 100 kmph at night.
Again if the fellow boarded could suggest me a right upgrade, it would be high appreciated.

Lastly, its great to know that the new speakers are much better. I have been wanting to upgrade my speakers for a long time but wasn't comfortable in disturbing the OEM. Will see is I can get these speakers from the dealership and will upgrade them.

Once again thanks for the update.

Originally Posted by GTO

The [i]
• Lousy JK Vectra OEM tyres & weak headlamps. An upgrade for both is mandatory

NOTE: Click any picture to open a larger higher-resolution version in a new window

[oxyzen]

I think they did a good thing by not changing the looks. They would have ruined it anyway. It does not get any better looking than the current one.


@ GTO.

For pure fun of driving which one would you choose?
Cruze or Jetta?

[drchernish]

Originally Posted by oxyzen

I think they did a good thing by not changing the looks. They would have ruined it anyway. It does not get any better looking than the current one.

Totally agree with you on this. I have friends in Europe who have bought this car just by the looks alone.

[F150]

Originally Posted by GTO

Acceleration is strong well beyond the 1.5 ton mark. In terms of fun, and how the engine feels, this is as good as it gets in the D1 segment. The mid-range packs a punch and, as a result, overtaking is as easy as point & shoot. The Cruze can effortlessly maintain high speed all day on the expressway, and easily keep up with the more expensive C-Class and 3 Series as well. The new engine is as much a highway mile muncher as before. 100 km/h in 6th gear sees the rpm needle at slightly below 1,700 rpm (just like the older engine), while 120 kph is at 1,950 rpm.

What’s equally impressive is the NVH insulation.

Thank you GTO for the review. The lines highlighted above should be enough to close the deal.

Chevy should have updated the tail lamps at least to the E class look alike lamps.

What would be your choice purely for " driving experience " Laura 2.0 Tdi or Cruze ?

Note the price difference between midlevel trims of Laura and Cruze, a good Rs 2.5 L.

[ghostrider]

Originally Posted by drchernish

Totally agree with you on this. I have friends in Europe who have bought this car just by the looks alone.

A friend of mine referred to this car as the "only muscle car in India". While I think that's a little exaggerated, I can see what he means. The combination of the butch exteriors and the sloping roof almost gives it a coupe like look.

Originally Posted by oxyzen

I think they did a good thing by not changing the looks. They would have ruined it anyway. It does not get any better looking than the current one.
@ GTO... For pure fun of driving which one would you choose?
Cruze or Jetta?

I suppose it depends on your preferences, like I mentioned in my post. If you enjoy outright speed, then you'll like the Cruze. The steering and suspension are better setup in the Jetta and Laura, though. I always advise people to DRIVE the cars and see which one fits their personal preferences.

Originally Posted by i_nv

Dear GTO

According to me two big let down in 2009 cruise are JK Vectra tyre and the headlamps as rightly observed by you. I need a Tyre change now and would be grateful if the right stock could be suggested to me for a change.
Once again thanks for the update.

If budget permits, get the Yokohama Advan Sports. They're some of the best tyres you can get in the market today. They've got fantastic grip, high speed behaviour, and they're very quiet. GTO and Akshay1334 recommended them to me and I'm very happy I took their advice.

Originally Posted by ethanhunt123

Very good review. The new Cruze seems to have gotten rid of some of the worst aspects of its predecessor - bad turbo lag, hard clutch & lack of dead pedal !!
While Jetta/Laura clearly have better & more premium interiors - Cruze owns them in feature list (Start/Stop button, Keyless entry, Sunroof (:-) etc). Classic heart vs head debate - one which i will decide on later this year !

If you're self-driven, I suspect you'll prefer the Cruze. If you're chauffeur driven you'll like the Jetta. The Laura's a very good compromise between the two, and it's much cheaper than the Jetta too.

Originally Posted by ashish22

Thanks for the lovely comparison GTO and Ghostrider. I for one have the oldest batches of the cruze which rolled out in 2009 (I bought mine in Jan, 2010) which has the worst turbo lag out of all the cruze variants. But for sure i'll never let go of its turbo kick which i get beyond 1800 rpms. Its a trade off for the turbo lag but then who's complaining?
Any idea whether they have made any changes to the hardware of OEM music player or is it just the speakers which have resulted in a much better sound quality. If so could you throw some light on what speakers are they using now.
Once again thanks for the wonderful review, both of you guys!

Most welcome, it was great fun to do. I don't think they made any changes to the player, I think they just changed the speakers a little bit. Probably a greater acoustic operating range to handle a greater range of frequencies.

Originally Posted by mobike008

Thanks GTO and Ghostrider for the wonderful side-by-side comparison of the Old vs. New Cruze.
Those couple of posts was like a quick summary for anyone looking to understand if old or new is good. Overall, wonderful changes to the new Cruze especially on the gizmo front where they moved majority of it to the base version. What left me disappointed is the zilch attention to its exterior.

In my opinion, they could have given a thought on following cosmetic changes :-
a) Better headlight design
b) Bit more devilish fog lamps design with some changes to fog lamp exteriors too
c) Biggest design change they could have done was to the rear lamps. That's what i dont like the most in this almost perfect looking sedan
d) Introduce a few funky colors. Especially the WCC blue which is there in my avataar picture and is similar to the Fiesta S. I absolutely love this color

In the process of improving the clutch action and addition of gizmos, they should have tried to retain that feeling when turbo kicks in as that's when you generally have a grin on your face. As that feeling is non-existent now, using same analogy of Ghostrider, its like Andre Agassi losing all his glorious mane and taking to the road with his bald pate.

Me? Well, after reading this review, I am so glad that I bought the older version as it never fails to make me grin each and every single day and i paid way too less too than what it costs now. I am not at all complaining !!!

P.S: I reckon its time to head to the Racing Dynamics dealer to ward off the onslaught of the increased BHP of the new Cruze

Well, that feeling of the turbo-kick isn't gone, actually. It's more spread out, so you don't get the volatile (to quote GTO) surge any more, but make no mistake - the performance is still very much there.
If you're getting the RD box, please let me know. I had it on my Swift, and I need to wait till I cover about 6,000 km on my Cruze before I can get it on the Cruze now. I'd love to get your feedback.

[noopster]

Great review as always GTO. Ghostrider's posts are the icing on the cake. Andre Agassi indeed!

It's always refreshing to see a review from an actual owner and I think ghostrider's and mobike's points are spot-on.

I loved the Cruze when it was launched and I like it a little better now. In fact, it was a little out of my budget and the rear seat was claustrphobic otherwise the diesel AT may have well been resting in my garage by now!

[PrideRed]

Crisp review and a nice comparison .Thanks GTO and ghostrider. Sad that GM did not give any exterior treatment to the 2012 model. Atleast new headlight's and rear lights would freshen up things.

Has GM reduced the inclination of rear seat backrest? In the new one backrest looks a little more straight compared to old one.

[MDe]

@GTO and Ghostrider: Thanks for the wonderful review on the new Cruze.

Personally I feel that dead paddle is the best non-functional feature that they have put in. When I bought the LT of 2011, I was pretty satisfied with all that I got. I loved the USB and the black interiors. In fact I have never used the CD player on my car, so whether it was 6CD changer or 1, doesnt really matter. Cruise control was never the top priority but the complete MID control is the only thing that I missed in my Cruze.

As Mobike008 mentioned, we can always get the extra power and reduced turbo lag with a RD or Pete's box. So nothing much that I think I've missed in the 2012 Cruze. New headlamps and tail lamps would have definitely made a difference. I was happy seeing the Autoexpo version of Cruze with projection headlamps and would have missed them if they were a part of 2012 Cruze.

I love the pull that I get post 1800RPM right now and it is a big addiction. But I am sure the new car is easier to drive in bumper to bumper traffic. Overall, I dont think I missed much in 2011 than what 2012 offers.

[kch82]

I have been digging around for information on the "new Cruze" that is expected to launch around Diwali this year. Earlier this news was shared with me by a colleague in Chevrolet and the same was confirmed by a dealer in Delhi last week. As to what I have been given to understand this new vehicle will have the front passenger seat electronically adjustable as well, a better ICE and a longer/double sunroof. There are more significant changes expected in the top line model and the price will go north again.

I was nearly on the verge of booking the present new Cruze AT but was advised against it as the "real new Cruze" is set for launch this year end. However what baffles me is that why would did not Chevrolet launch the complete upgraded vehicle instead of having 2 launched withing a short period of a few months.

Anybody has any news to share on this subject ?