Jump to content

Custom Search





Welcome to the Chevrolet Cruze Forum


Sign In  Log in with Facebook

Create Account
Welcome to the Chevrolet Cruze forum. You must register to create topics or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Benefits of membership:
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members
  • Create a photo album and post images. . .more!
Click here to signup now.
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

Fuel economy - Cruze Hatchback Premier RS

fuel fuel economy

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   malcol6

malcol6

    New Cruze Member

  • Cruze Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • Location:Reston, VA
  • My Cruze's Year:2017
  • My Cruze: mycruze
  • Current Vehicle:2017 Cruze Hatchback Premier RS
  • Interests:Fuel economy

Posted 13 February 2017 - 11:51 AM

Actual experience:  28.8(-)mpg, 43% City/57% Hwy vs  EPA estimates 28 city, 31 combined (weighted 55 city, 45 highway), and 37 highway.  We use cruise control almost in all driving conditions above 25 mph; we use top-tier gasolines as recommended by GM and Chevrolet.  We maintain tire pressures checking at least monthly.  With this automobile, we use nitrogen in its 18 inch wheels/low profile tires.  Based on our prior experiences with GM automobiles and the way we drive and maintain our cars, we expected better, 

 

The 2017 Cruze Hatchback Premier RS is a superlative car especially with its additional options for passenger comfort and driver confidence.  Ours has no substantive defects except one - fuel economy.  By this forum, that has not been a significantly issue with Cruze non-diesel owners for the last several years.  Left rear passenger door requires more "umpf" than others to be closed; the others close with almost no effort.  Tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS) is sensitive with the 18 inch wheels.  Driver Information Center (DIC) is very intuitive -- annoyance is that reported fuel economy averages for last 25 miles, 50 miles, and 450 miles are nearly always about 10-15%+ more than actual fuel economy, as measured by miles driven/gallons consumed.  Tripodometer reset at every fuel-up averages 3-8%+ more than actual fuel economy.

 

We know that fuel economy varies across the different Cruze models, and our current Cruze is the heaviest among the 2017 models.  We have purchased two prior Cruzes - a 2011 Eco and a 2012 Eco.  Other GM cars we have owned include a 2005 Chevrolet Venture LT and a 2007 Pontiac Vibe.  ALL of these automobiles routinely met or exceeded their EPA estimates, as we have driven them and based on fuel logs we keep.  Only the Vibe is no longer in use within our extended family.

 

We know that fuel economy variance is from a number of factors:

- driver variance and vehicle load (EPA fuel economy ratings acknowledges)

- environmental differences (weather and road types and conditions) (EPA fuel economy ratings acknowledges)

- fuel differences (EPA fuel economy ratings acknowledges)

- variation within GM production cars (Chevrolet secret?!?)

 

Chevrolet Customer Assistance stands behind the EPA estimates.  Know how these are obtained, know what they represent. Old EPA ratings gave a range, current are point estimates only.  What the variance is, due to differences among production cars of the same model, is known only to GM/Chevrolet.  Dealers don't want to know or obtain.    

 

Our experience has been very consistent in our Cruze's first 4184 miles of use.  One dealer checked fuel stoichiometry after 3000 miles, and the measurements were within specification; and, asked us to drive more miles and track the fuel economy claiming with additional "break-in" the fuel economy may improve.  For this car, we keep its fuel log public at fueleconomy.gov (you can see its updated average only) and fuelly.com (the fueling log is fully accessible).  rxmonchamp (fuelly.com) with his 2017 Cruze HB Premier achieves fuel economy meeting and exceeding EPA estimates, based on his log of his car's first 5541 miles.

 

Actual experience (18 fuelings) until next fueling:  28.8(-)mpg, 43% City/57% Hwy vs  EPA estimates 28 city, 31 combined (weighted 55 city, 45 highway), and 37 highway.  We use cruise control almost in all driving conditions above 25 mph; we use top-tier gasolines as recommended by GM and Chevrolet.  We maintain tire pressures checking at least monthly.  With this automobile, we use nitrogen because of the 18" wheels/low profile tires.  Others in this forum have reported rapid drop off in fuel economy above 60mph with earlier model year Cruzes that have 18" wheels.  Best fuel economy highway has been 33.4mpg with most miles driven at 60mph, two passengers, minimal cargo/luggage.  At this point, fuel economy underperformance is 12.5% adjusting based on the EPA combined estimate method (28x0.43 + 37x0.57)=32.95mpg expected vs 28.8mpg actual.  

 

Not sure how Chevrolet stands behind a specific car that is under warranty and underperforming to the EPA estimates substantially.  One dealer has said that with the computers-controlled 1.4L Turbo, there is nothing that dealer's service department can offer.  We are looking forward to experiencing that Chevrolet will correct our car's underperformance, and will use this forum to acknowledge any Chevrolet actions taken.  A "case" has been open since January 20.

 

 

 

 









Lose this advertisement by becoming a member. Click here to create a free account.


#2 OFFLINE   grs1961

grs1961

    Cruze Member

  • Cruze Members
  • PipPip
  • 384 posts
  • Region:Australia and Oceania
  • Location:Mentone, Victoria, Australia
  • My Cruze: mycruze
  • Current Vehicle:Holden JG Cruze CD Diesel
  • Interests:.

Posted 14 February 2017 - 06:07 AM

> our Cruze's first 4184 miles

 

Your engine is not yet run-in.

 

You do understand that the USAian EPF have changed how they test vehicles, and are trying to give a more realistic number for new vehicles?


Edited by grs1961, 14 February 2017 - 06:09 AM.

  • mick15 likes this

168124.png


#3 OFFLINE   NoGMOs

NoGMOs

    New Cruze Member

  • Cruze Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:MN
  • My Cruze's Year:2017
  • My Cruze: mycruze
  • Current Vehicle:Hatchback
  • Interests:No interests

Posted 09 June 2017 - 11:59 AM

I bought a gas 2017 Cruze LT Hatchback, 16" wheels. Currently 1100 miles. Best part of this car is the fuel mileage. According to the in-dash mileage recorder, I get an average of 36.8 mpg, approx. 50/50 city and highway. On a flat highway, I get between 50-60 mpg. I don't do jack rabbit starts or drive over 65 mph. A possibility for the person with less than expected mpg, it could be the larger tires or perhaps the computer is not adjusted correctly for your particular model. You definitely should be getting better mileage.



#4 OFFLINE   proliance

proliance

    New Cruze Member

  • Cruze Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • Location:Nashville, TN
  • My Cruze's Year:2017
  • My Cruze: mycruze
  • Current Vehicle:2017 Cruze LT Hatchback
  • Interests:photography, travel

Posted 15 June 2017 - 11:04 AM

I've had my 2017 LT Hatchback for almost 8 weeks and have put 5500 miles on it.  The onboard computer seems to read about 5% high for mileage, but I still average about 38 mpg when I do the math myself.  I do mostly highway driving.  

 

If Chevy can't figure out why you're getting poor fuel mileage I'd ask them buy it back.  Good fuel mileage is one of the main reasons I bought my Cruze. 


  • DnaAngel likes this

#5 OFFLINE   Lorrette

Lorrette

    New Cruze Member

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 14 posts
  • Region:Europe
  • Location:UK
  • My Cruze's Year:2011
  • My Cruze: mycruze
  • Current Vehicle:Cruse SX 2011
  • Interests:Cars in general

Posted 15 June 2017 - 11:17 AM

Hey, yeah it also depends if you drive highway or at the city centre, also it takes a bit time to kick up. I'm just thinking of getting on lease at DSRLeasing a new cruze.



#6 OFFLINE   malcol6

malcol6

    New Cruze Member

  • Cruze Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • Location:Reston, VA
  • My Cruze's Year:2017
  • My Cruze: mycruze
  • Current Vehicle:2017 Cruze Hatchback Premier RS
  • Interests:Fuel economy

Posted 06 February 2018 - 02:28 PM

Updating from nearly one year ago.  BOTTOM LINE:  WE HAVE AN UNDERPERFORMING CHEVROLET CRUZE HATCHBACK PREMIER with respect to its fuel economy; it has CONSISTENTLY EXHIBITED ABOUT 10% LESS FUEL ECONOMY THAN "ADVERTISED".  We are conservative drivers driving the car to maximize fuel economy.  However, we get ~10% less than EPA ratings under all driving conditions.  GM/Chevrolet has shown zero willingness to address through dealer interactions.

 

Actual experience overall through 16891 miles driven, 68 refuelings, 565 gallons (and retaining almost all fuel receipts):  29.9mpg, 42% City/58% Hwy vs  EPA estimates 28 city, 31 combined (weighted 55 city, 45 highway), and 37 highway. Against the weighted average we should see about 33.2mpg instead of 29.9.   We use cruise control almost in all driving conditions above 25 mph; we use top-tier gasolines as recommended by GM and Chevrolet.  We maintain tire pressures checking at least monthly.  With this automobile, we use nitrogen in its 18 inch wheels/low profile tires.  Based on our prior experiences with GM automobiles and the way we drive and maintain our cars, we expected better.

 

The 2017 Cruze Hatchback Premier RS is a great car especially with its additional options for passenger comfort and driver confidence.  Ours has no substantive defects except one - fuel economy.  By this forum, that has not been a significantly issue with Cruze non-diesel owners for the last several years.  Tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS) is sensitive with the 18 inch wheels.  The Driver Information Center (DIC) is very intuitive -- annoyance is that reported fuel economy averages for last 25 miles, 50 miles, and 450 miles are nearly always about 10-15%+ more than actual fuel economy, as measured by miles driven/gallons consumed.  Tripodometer reset at every fuel-up averages 0-8%+ more than actual fuel economy.  

 

We know that fuel economy varies across the different Cruze models, and our current Cruze is the heaviest among the 2017 models.  We purchased two prior Cruzes - a 2011 Eco and a 2012 Eco.  Other GM cars we have owned include a 2018 Chevrolet Equinox Premier AWD, a 2005 Chevrolet Venture LT and a 2007 Pontiac Vibe.  ALL of these automobiles routinely meet/met or exceeded their EPA estimates ... yes, even the Equinox that is still in its break-in period, as we have driven them and based on fuel logs we keep.  Only the Vibe is no longer in use within our extended family.

 

We know that fuel economy variance is from a number of factors:

- driver variance and vehicle load (EPA fuel economy ratings acknowledges)

- environmental differences (weather and road types and conditions) (EPA fuel economy ratings acknowledges)

- fuel differences (EPA fuel economy ratings acknowledges)

- variation within GM production cars (Chevrolet secret?!?)

 

Chevrolet Customer Assistance CLAIMS to stand behind the EPA estimates.  Know how the prior and current EPA estimates are obtained, know what they represent. Old EPA ratings gave a range, current are point estimates only.  What the variance is, due to differences among production cars of the same model, is known only to GM/Chevrolet.  Dealers don't want to know or obtain.  Chevrolet Customer Assistance has done NOTHING to "assist".    

 

Our experience has been very consistent in this Cruze's 16900+ miles of use.  For this car, we keep its fuel log public at fueleconomy.gov (you can see its updated average only) and fuelly.com (the fueling log is fully accessible).  

 

Would like to see Chevrolet "stand" behind a specific car that is under warranty and underperforming to the EPA estimates substantially.  One dealer has said that with the computers-controlled 1.4L Turbo, there is nothing that dealer's service department can offer.  We are looking forward to experiencing that Chevrolet will correct our car's underperformance, and will use this forum to acknowledge any Chevrolet actions taken.  Several "cases" have been opened since January 20, 2017, and closed, as "nothing can be done".  There is an easy fix.



#7 OFFLINE   DnaAngel

DnaAngel

    New Cruze Member

  • Cruze Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • Location:SC
  • My Cruze's Year:2017
  • My Cruze: mycruze
  • Current Vehicle:2017 Chevy Cruze LT
  • Interests:making money

Posted 11 February 2018 - 03:05 PM

Odd. I have a 2017 Cruze LT with 16k miles now and the one thing that really sold me on the car was the MPG's. The dash readout is horribly optimistic. 

 

I average about ~32 MPG (320-340 miles to a tank) on average in my commute to and from work, which is about 70% City driving. I use top-tier fuel as well (Shell almost always) and keep my tires slightly over-inflated to about 40 psi and use a top end synthetic oil (Amsoil Signature Series 5w-30). The dashboard says 34-35 MPG, but when I calculate it out by hand it's around 32ish. 

I recently went on a 1500 mile road trip and got better than the EPA estimated 40. I averaged 41.7 when I calculated it out by hand. Dash said 45.3 (lol). Having inflated tires, good fuel and oil help, but what impacts our MPG the most is your own driving habits. How hard do you accelerate from stops and how hard are you breaking? That is probably your answer to your MPG issue. Also, what is the terrain? Warmer, flatter regions closer to sea-level will see the best MPG's. Cold air kills your mileage, why you tend to get worse mileage in the winter vs the summer. 

 

Also not sure what all packages your Cruze has equipped, but each one adds weight. The EPA estimates are taken with a base model, in an optimal climate and geographic to maximize test results. IIRC, the Hatch is heavier than the sedan right off the bat. So regardless of the sample and conditions, it's going to under-perform to the EPA estimate. Also, you mentioned 18-inch wheels? That is also an MPG decrease since larger wheels are heavier and add rolling resistance.  Hatchback, RS package, 18 inch wheels, a few added packages I assume. I would say your 29.9 is not worse, but actually better than it "technically" should be, all things considered. Virginia is pretty hilly too.


Edited by DnaAngel, 11 February 2018 - 03:30 PM.










Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: fuel, fuel economy

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Privacy Policy Terms of Service ·