• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    2014 Chevrolet Volt Sees A $5,000 Price Cut



    William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    August 6, 2013

    Despite piling on incentives to move Chevrolet Volts off dealer lots a couple months ago, sales rose to a meager 0.1 percent to 11,643 vehicles through July. Add in the fact that the Nissan Leaf dropped it price earlier and is currently experiencing a rise in sales and the inevitable was bound to happen.

    Today, General Motors announced a $5,000 price cut to the 2014 Volt. That means the starting price is now $34,995 (including $810 in destination). Factor in the $7,500 federal tax credit and you're looking at a price of $27,495.

    “The lower price and cost savings from driving on electricity provide Volt owners an unmatched balance of technology, capability and cost of ownership. The 2014 Volt will offer the same impressive list of features, but for $5,000 less," said Don Johnson, Chevy’s US VP of sales.

    Source: General Motors

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at william.maley@cheersandgears.comor you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    Press Release is on Page 2


    2014 Chevrolet Volt Now Offers Even Greater Value

    • Pricing for the 2014 model will start at $34,995

    2013-08-06

    DETROIT – The Chevrolet Volt, already recognized for having the most satisfied owners will soon come with another people pleaser: a lower price. The 2014 model will start at $34,995, including an $810 destination fee (excluding tax, title, license and dealer fees).

    If consumers include federal tax credits ranging from $0-$7,500 (depending on individual tax liability), pricing could start at $27,495. Individual tax situations differ, so consult a tax professional prior to claiming any credits to confirm eligibility for vehicle tax benefits.

    “The lower price and cost savings from driving on electricity provide Volt owners an unmatched balance of technology, capability and cost of ownership,” said Don Johnson, U.S. vice president, Chevrolet sales and service. “The 2014 Volt will offer the same impressive list of features, but for $5,000 less.

    “We have made great strides in reducing costs as we gain experience with electric vehicles and their components,” Johnson said. “In fact, the Volt has seen an increase in battery range and the addition of creature comforts, such as a leather-wrapped steering wheel and MyLink, since its launch in 2010.”

    Volt owners who charge regularly typically drive 900 miles between fill-ups and visit the gas station about once a month. The 2014 Volt will continue to provide owners with impressive fuel economy of 98 MPGe (electric) and 35 city/40 highway on gasoline power without any need to change their daily driving habits while saving $900 in annual fuel costs. Today’s Volt owners have logged 364 million miles, including 225 million electric miles.

    The Volt’s lower price also changes the comparative set of vehicles on popular auto information sites like kbb.com, Edmunds.com and cars.com, where visitors to these sites can search for a new vehicle by type and/or prices. The Volt’s lower price will broaden its exposure to price-sensitive prospective buyers using these sites to search for a plug-in electric vehicle or a gas-powered alternative sedan.

    The Volt continues to be the best selling plug-in vehicle in America and is attracting new buyers to the Chevrolet brand. More than 70 percent of Volt buyers are new to General Motors. Not surprisingly, the Toyota Prius is the most frequently traded-in vehicle for a Volt.

    California continues to be Volt’s largest market. The 2014 Volt will continue to offer a low emissions package that earns the Volt a coveted “sticker” for single-occupancy HOV lane access in California and New York.

    The Chevrolet Volt allows gas-free driving for an EPA-estimated 38 miles (61 km), depending on terrain, driving techniques and temperature. The range-extending engine gives the Volt up to 380 total miles (615 km) of total driving range. The 2014 Volt will start to be available in dealer showrooms late this summer. Chevrolet will introduce two new colors – Ashen Gray Metallic and Brownstowne Metallic for the 2014 model year – and a leather-wrapped steering wheel.

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback




    I mentioned this to my coworker that bought a Volt in June. He thinks it's a good thing, should lead to more sales. He's still happy he bought the 2013 rather than wait on the '14, partially because the color he got isn't available on the '14.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    All I can say for people for who bought a plug-in hybrid is that these cars do not make economic sense without the $7500 in federal tax credit and up to $6000 in state subsidies (eg. California) -- and sometimes not even then.

    That's $13,500 of hard earned tax payer dollars and/or increase in the national debt. If it works for you after the subsidies, well... good for you! But, bad for the tax payer, bad for me, bad for the economy and bad for energy independence.

    I have no problems with misguided "global warming" coolaid drinkers wanting to feel good about themselves and cut carbon emissions. But, I do have a problem with them doing it with my money.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I agree with Dwight. Plus it makes everyone who has already purchased one look like a fool, and resale value will plummet. All around bad deal.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This is the wrong thread to persist in this discussion, but I want to emphasis that I have absolutely no qualms with people who feel good about driving a car that gets them 70 mpg or 100 mpg -- nevermind the economics -- just like I have no problems with people wanting to drive cars that go from 0-60 mph in 3.8 secs but doesn't have rear seats. If hyper-miling makes you happy, all the power to you!

    My quarrel is with the public policy of using tax payer money to subsidized such behavior, especially when the reasoning behind such policy is based on an environmental hypothesis that is totally bogus, founded on fraudulent data and propagated through bullying voices of proper science into silence.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The taxpayer subsidies to ExxonMobile are much greater than any subsidy the public gets via the Volt or Leaf. So spread your outrage around proportionally please.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The taxpayer subsidies to ExxonMobile are much greater than any subsidy the public gets via the Volt or Leaf. So spread your outrage around proportionally please.

    That's untrue on so many levels...

    The Federal government does not subsidize Exxon Mobil per say, they provide tax credits for certain energy production activities. And in fact, a lot of the so called subsidizes are not subsidies at all.

    Every year, we spend about $75 billion on such activities. Of these only about half ($38 billion) goes to fossil fuel producers. The remaining half goes to Alcohol incorporation, renewable electric production and Ethanol production.

    Of the 37 billion or so that goes to fossil fuel production, most ARE NOT subsidies at all...

    About $16 billion is foreign tax credits -- credits company receive on US taxes for taxes they already paid to foreign governments. It's like if you worked in Russia and paid 12% (Russia as a 12% flat tax) of your income in Russian income taxes, you get to take that 12% as a deduction on your US income taxes because you didn't actually earn that money -- it was lost to foreign taxation. This applies to you, to any company and to oil companies! Why shouldn't it?

    About 14 billion goes to credit for producing unconventional fuels. Most of the time, it is for producing fuels the oil companies don't want to produce or cannot make a profit on, but is mandated by the government. Again, I hardly call that a subsidy, more like a compensation for compelled activity. It's like you don't want to ride a bicycle to work, but the government say you must. You claim that this results in 2.5 hours a day of lost productivity and lost wages because of increased commute time and increased tiredness. The government says, OK, we'll pay you 2.5 hours of wages, but you ride that bicycle.

    The rest, about 8 billion goes to credit for expenses incurred in oil, gas and coal exploration. Again, why would anyone consider that a subsidy? That'll be like saying that if you buy a food truck and install the equipment so you can sell hotdogs, that you shouldn't get to deduct that on your business tax returns as an expense!

    -2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Federal government does not subsidize Exxon Mobil per say, they provide tax credits for certain energy production activities.

    You could have saved yourself a lot of typing if you had stopped right there, for a rose by any other name....

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    All I can say for people for who bought a plug-in hybrid is that these cars do not make economic sense without the $7500 in federal tax credit and up to $6000 in state subsidies (eg. California) -- and sometimes not even then.

    That's $13,500 of hard earned tax payer dollars and/or increase in the national debt. If it works for you after the subsidies, well... good for you! But, bad for the tax payer, bad for me, bad for the economy and bad for energy independence.

    I have no problems with misguided "global warming" coolaid drinkers wanting to feel good about themselves and cut carbon emissions. But, I do have a problem with them doing it with my money.

    Again this is about more then numbers. You thinking is always so narrow.

    The last sentence sums it up for now.

    The real picture here is to create a market for these cars and let them advance and grow to the point that they cost much less and get more efficient. This is like the space program. Shooting a chimp into space may not look like a big deal but it and satellites were the first steps to the moon.

    This is where the real point comes in. The whole thing was not really landing on the moon the whole thing was about developing technology to do it. This is what propelled up into the future with electronics and other systems and medical things we never would have had. In fact we all would not be here now discussing this.

    I understand why the government is doing what they are doing and why GM is investing so much into this. With out a market the suppliers can not and will not invest in the new and improved technology.

    I can see a lot of good coming from improved Batteries and other electronics and not just cars. I am not a global warming guy and really have little interest on this end but I can see a cell phone battery that may need charged once a week. I see a smaller electric motor that may one day replace my heart and run the pump to keep me or someone in my family alive when no donor heart is available. It is endless.

    The fact is the government squanders many more trillions than what they are doing here. The fact is they are not going to cut the pay outs to the voters as they have been buying votes for years. They will continue to increase our taxes too.

    While this may not be as exciting as the space program I think we can reap similar rewards long term here. Lets face it since they axed much of the space program we are behind the 8 ball on technology growth. Today we need some kind of program to bring this new technology forward. The company who cracks the battery issue will become the new Microsoft or Apple.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, I will very much have preferred zero subsidizes for Ethanol, "Green" Energy and no gasohol blending mandates. But on the otherhand, there is no justification for double taxing oil companies when every other business and individual do not have to pay foreign taxes on top of US taxes with no deductions or for saying that capital expenses should not be deductible.

    But, yes, philosophically I am of the persuasion that US government should be significantly smaller in size and scope.... that it should take less (in taxes) and do less (in services, entitlements and, yes, subsidies).

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, saw that coming..hopefully more coming. I can agree with both sides, but Hyper hit it on the nose-we need to get the tech out there-

    There will always be car people cars (maybe!), but for the person who shops for cars like a fridge and want to save money, the Volt could not be any more picture perfect....

    We are getting there....

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The new ELR I suspect will show some of the new second gen Volt technology. I see it will have around 55-56 more HP, Not sure how they figure it as electric or gas but it should be more fun to drive. The Volt is not really a slug to start with.

    I am not a big spending guy and I would shut down most of the crazy government spending that is going on. They just toss it around like garbage. But the investment into this line of cars is the only way they will grow to the point people will like them and it will make them to the point where they may make a difference in your wallet.

    Also the fall out from the investment into the electronics here will reap benefits elsewhere.

    Now for the spending on all these other programs for the study of slugs and other many other issues I would axe in a heart beat. Too many people with their hands out expecting the government to do it all where they have no place being.

    The Ethanol would get cut right away. It not only is damaging to cars but it also drives up grain prices some years to increase food cost. With the lesser MPG etc. I just do not see a need for these blends other to make a few companies happy and farmers.

    At least with the Volt and other electric cars you have a choice if you want them and if not don't buy one. Later on even if you do not own one you will reap the benefits they have learned from the investments in you other cars in aero dynamics, tires and electronics. I think a lot of new ideas will be applied to even gas cars with lighter materials.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Gov spending on R&D for Space to the auto industry and High Tech is good for the country. We could easily get this out more if we just closed some of our 1082 military bases and 500 black op bases and spent that money at home. Just closing 25% would allow us to invest in the roads, Electrical Grid, Clean water and securing the borders along with pushing the VOLT technology into more GM cars.

    I would have no problem giving each auto company even asian and europe company say 1 billion each as long as they deliver within 18 to 24 months a CUV or SUV Hybrid auto that uses a VOLT like power train. Helping companies to move to better technology that is over all good for the planet and for job creation is a good thing in my book.

    I really HOPE GM will scale the VOLT technology and get it into full Size SUV's, Pickups and Vans. This is where we can really see benefits for fuel savings.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    we do have to diversify vehicle propulsion beyond gasoline and its inevitable that electrification is part of it.

    That said, right now, the whole appeal to me of electrification is the possibility of saving my own money on gas.

    The govt will conspire to make electricity much more expensive over time and in the end will figure out how to get as much out of your pocketbook each month for electricity as they do for gas right now.

    That is where the outrage should be directed. Electrification's main success in cars would be to allow multifuels and mainly to reduce driving costs overall. The government will look at it as an opportunity to tax the shi-t out of it and rob you of that potential benefit.

    So the discussion of how much of the development of electric cars is subsidized to the point where economy of scale takes over it pointless and minor.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm indifferent to them building the plant or not, but if they don't build the plant, they should refund the customers their money.

    Totally agree with you. Back in the 80's washington state had a major Nuclear plant series being built. They stopped after 2 plants and scrapped the other 4 and were forced by the state to refund millions back to the citizens. Did not go over well with the power company but the people loved it and I agree that they should refund all of it.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm indifferent to them building the plant or not, but if they don't build the plant, they should refund the customers their money.

    Too early to say that.

    Duke plans to pursue the license and expects to receive it in 2016, spokesman Rick Rhodes said today. The company considers the project to be merely delayed, he added, with future construction there remaining likely. “Our philosophy at Duke is that you need a diversity of different types of fuel,” Rhodes said. “I think as a utility, and as a country, we have to have nuclear in our future.”

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    What I would be more concerned about the killing of coal with little to replace it. I am fine to replace coal but the fact is there are no real replacements for coal at this point. We are already short power in many areas and if the grid fails we will see a collapse like we did in 1993. A tree branch took out the grid that was already over loaded.

    Where are most of the electric cars targeted? Places already short on power.

    This talk of green energy has a long way to go before it can effetely and affordable replace coal. There are no wind mills and solar panels that can replace it no matter how much money you spend right now. It like the batteries for the Volt need more time and investment that is not wasted like so much already.

    Brittan now has some people trying to remove fossil fuel vehicles buy 2040. Nice idea but if there is no real replacement what are they going to do? If they make it so they can not bail they are screwed.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hyperv6, You are right about the power grid issues. The best thing to do is to upgrade and replace the grid, much of which dates back 30 or more years. Down here in FL, a lot of our electricity is generated from natural gas rather than oil or coal. That has led to lower electricity bills all around from my utility. We do need more natural gas and more nuclear energy just to get ourselves off of coal-generated power because coal is the least efficient hydrocarbon we have for power gereation. Green energy is nice, but it is probably not good enough (or cheap enough) for baseline power without subsidies.

    As for the Volt, even their new prices are too damn high. Remember when the Prius first came out? It was actually affordable then, and it is largely under $30K now. If the Volt were priced to match the Prius or Leaf, sales would probably take off quickly.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    CNG is being used to replace dirty coal as fast as possible. But even then we still need more power. Interesting is Washington State has huge wind farms and 25% of the time they are offline due to no room to store the power as we have an abundance of Hydro Power. We need storage farms that can hold the power generated by wind and solar and then transfer it to areas that need more power.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The key here is Coal is the cheapest and easiest fuel to find and use right not and the are cutting it off before we have a real alternative. CNG is cheap now but the price like oil can jump. The Oil line from Canada looks lost and that would be key to a steady cheap supply that will end up in China if we do not change the thinking. Not all of us are lucky to have damns for Hydro.

    Nukes are behind in building and many we have now are old and having issues to the point of many closures.

    Windmills just are not cutting it and solar is not cheap or practical in many places. Storage is not easy for the lack of better batteries.

    I am ok with green energy development but do not take the cheapest and most abundant energy away till you have a real replacement. The plants are not dirty anymore and we are no choking to death here. If you want to clean the air talk to China.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

      Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Deuce
      Deuce
      (38 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      The rivalry of the Chevrolet Camaro and Ford Mustang has been going for ages in the U.S. But now this fight has expanded into China.
      Automotive News reports that a growing group of Chinese buyers are being drawn towards to these models as the exude the no-apologies Americana attitude.
      "We're seeing the beginning of a muscle car culture here. Something that is uniquely American appeals to the Chinese consumer. The image that it relays to the automotive public is very positive," said James Chao, a China market auto analyst with IHS Markit.
      Sales of both models are small with Chevrolet only moving 2,000 Camaros since its launch 2011. Ford is doing slightly better with 6,200 Mustangs sold since its launch in 2015. In the first quarter, Mustang sales saw a 90 percent increase to 963 vehicles. Part of the reason for the slow sales comes down to the price. The Camaro starts about 399,900 yuan (about $58,000) - more than double of the base price of $26,900 in the U.S. The Mustang isn't that far behind, costing about $15 dollars less. Prices are increased due to a 25 percent import tariff on U.S. made vehicles, homologation and shipping fees, and Chinese buyers trending to splurge on higher-time models.
      But despite the low sales, the Camaro and Mustang are bringing buyers to dealers. These models act as eye candy to help draw shoppers into showrooms with the hope they'll purchase a vehicle, where it be the eye candy or something a little less exciting.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      The rivalry of the Chevrolet Camaro and Ford Mustang has been going for ages in the U.S. But now this fight has expanded into China.
      Automotive News reports that a growing group of Chinese buyers are being drawn towards to these models as the exude the no-apologies Americana attitude.
      "We're seeing the beginning of a muscle car culture here. Something that is uniquely American appeals to the Chinese consumer. The image that it relays to the automotive public is very positive," said James Chao, a China market auto analyst with IHS Markit.
      Sales of both models are small with Chevrolet only moving 2,000 Camaros since its launch 2011. Ford is doing slightly better with 6,200 Mustangs sold since its launch in 2015. In the first quarter, Mustang sales saw a 90 percent increase to 963 vehicles. Part of the reason for the slow sales comes down to the price. The Camaro starts about 399,900 yuan (about $58,000) - more than double of the base price of $26,900 in the U.S. The Mustang isn't that far behind, costing about $15 dollars less. Prices are increased due to a 25 percent import tariff on U.S. made vehicles, homologation and shipping fees, and Chinese buyers trending to splurge on higher-time models.
      But despite the low sales, the Camaro and Mustang are bringing buyers to dealers. These models act as eye candy to help draw shoppers into showrooms with the hope they'll purchase a vehicle, where it be the eye candy or something a little less exciting.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
    • By dfelt
      G. David Felt - Staff Writer Alternative Energy - www.cheersandgears.com
      National BOLT Lease Deal with 15,000 miles.
      According to CarsDirect web site, Chevrolet rolled out starting April 1st a national lease deal on the Chevy BOLT.
      Details of the Lease:
      $329 a month for 36 months with $3,809 due at signing with 15,000 miles of range per year. 
      This is a hell of a deal when you compare the normal lease deals are just 10,000 or for a bit more, 12,000 miles per year.
      Now if your in a CARB state like California or Oregon, you get an additional $2,250 off on the lease. Thus giving you a upfront cost of only $1,559, 15,000 miles and a monthly payment of just $329. Sweet deal for the LT. The premier is just a bit more $347 according to the local web site in Seattle.
       
    • By William Maley
      American automakers haven’t been known for building good compact vehicles. Previous attempts have faltered when compared to those from the likes of Honda, Mazda, and Toyota. But this perception began to change when Ford brought out the Focus in 2000. It seemed progress was being made in making a decent compact vehicle thanks to their European branch helping out. Seeing this, GM decided to follow the same path. They called in their Korean and European offices to help out with the development of a new model known as Cruze. The vehicle proved to be a massive improvement from the Cobalt as it got the basics right such as fuel economy and overall interior space. Yes, the Cruze was lacking in some key areas such as design and driving fun. But it was light years ahead of GM’s previous attempts at a compact vehicle.
      When it came time to work on the next-generation Cruze, Chevrolet knew they had a good starting point and only needed to make improvements to make the model a real contender in the class. Let’s see if that has panned out or not.
      Dare I say the new Cruze is a sharp looking compact? Yes, but to a point. It is clear that Chevrolet’s design team took a lot of inspiration from the Volt PHEV when working on the second-generation Cruze. The overall profile and certain lines of the Volt appear on the Cruze. The front end features Chevrolet’s new tiered-grille and a set of slimmer headlights. Where the Cruze’s design falls flat is in the back. It seems Chevrolet’s designers really couldn’t be bothered to do something special. There two ways you can fix this. You can either go with the Cruze hatchback which to our eyes looks so much better thanks to the longer roofline and tailgate, or opting for the RS appearance package which dresses up the back with a more aggressive bumper. The RS package also adds mesh grille inserts, and sporty looking wheels - 18-inch ones on our Premier tester.
      Moving inside, Chevrolet has put a lot of effort in making the Cruze a nice place to sit in. Many surfaces are covered with high-quality materials and feature some unique touches such as a curving character line on the dashboard. Making yourself comfortable is quite easy thanks to eight-way power adjustments for the driver and a tilt-telescoping steering wheel. The front passenger has to make do with manual adjustments. In the back, there is enough legroom for most passengers. Headroom is slightly tight if you decide to get a sunroof. One nice item for those sitting in the back is the option of heated seats.
      One area Chevrolet is using as a selling point for the Cruze is technology. All Cruzes get a seven-inch touchscreen with Chevrolet MyLink and compatibility with Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. OnStar 4G LTE with Wi-Fi also comes standard across the board. Our Premier tester came with the optional 8-inch touchscreen with navigation. MyLink has been a source of frustration in many of Chevrolet vehicles we have reviewed, but it seems they are starting to get its act together. Overall performance has seen a slight improvement with transitions into various functions being snappy. The navigation system still has some performance issues as it slows down when zooming in or out. Chevrolet has also fixed some of the bugs with their Apple CarPlay integration. We saw no issues of slowdown or apps crashing whenever we had CarPlay up.
      Under the Cruze’s hood is a turbocharged 1.4L four-cylinder with 153 horsepower and 177 pound-feet of torque. A six-speed automatic is the only transmission choice if you get the Premier. Anything below and you have the choice of the automatic or a six-speed manual. A diesel engine is coming later this year. The performance figures for the turbo 1.4L will not knock the socks off of anyone - 0-60 mph time of just over eight seconds. But you won’t think the Cruze is a slowpoke thanks the engine having a lot of low-end grunt. The vehicle leaps forward when leaving a stop and doesn’t feel that it is going to run out of breath. It doesn’t hurt Chevrolet has dropped almost 300 pounds from the new model. The six-speed automatic is quick to upshift to maximize fuel economy, but the same cannot be said for downshifts. It takes a moment or two for the automatic to go down a gear when you step on the accelerator.
      The turbo 1.4 comes with an auto stop-start system as standard. The system is quick to start the engine back up whenever you take your foot off the brake. One item that will irk some people is that you cannot turn off the stop-start system.
      EPA fuel economy figures for the 2017 Chevrolet Cruze stand at 29 City/39 Highway/33 Combined for the Premier sedan. Our average for the week landed around 31.2 mpg. The L, LS, and LT sedan get slightly higher fuel economy figures of 28/39/32 for the manual and 30/40/34 for the automatic.
      It seems most compacts are trying to outdo one another in terms of offering the best driving experience. So it is a bit of fresh air that Chevrolet has decided to skip this and make the Cruze ride like a bigger car. The suspension provides a cushy ride with most bumps being ironed out. Road and wind noise are kept to almost silent levels. Handling is competent in the class as the Cruze shows little body roll. However, the steering is too light in terms of feel and weight when driven enthusiastically.
      Chevrolet’s previous attempts at a compact vehicle have ranged from the punchline to a bad joke to something that can be considered at competent. But with the 2017 Cruze, Chevrolet put their heads down into making a compact that could stand tall among competitors. They have succeeded as the Cruze gets the fundamentals right and offers some distinctive traits that help it stand out from others such as the big-car ride and impressive amount of tech. Yes, it would be nice if Cruze was a slightly sharper in terms of design and the steering tweaked a bit to make it a bit more fun to drive. 
      Since I have been reviewing new vehicles for almost five years, there have been only a few vehicles that I keep thinking about to this day. Chevrolet has two to its name. The first was the 2014 Impala and the Cruze is number two.
      Disclaimer: Chevrolet Provided the Cruze, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2017
      Make: Chevrolet
      Model: Cruze
      Trim: Premier
      Engine: Turbocharged 1.4L DOHC VVT DI Four-Cylinder 
      Driveline: Six-Speed Automatic, Front-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 153 @ 5600
      Torque @ RPM: 177 @ 2000-4000
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 29/39/33
      Curb Weight: 2,978 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Lordstown, OH
      Base Price: $23,475
      As Tested Price: $29,195 (Includes $875.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Sun & Sound w/Navigation - $1,995.00
      RS Package - $995.00
      Enhanced Convenience Package - $865.00
      Driver Confidence II Package - $790.00
      Floor Mats - $140.00
      Wheel Lock Kit - $60.00

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      American automakers haven’t been known for building good compact vehicles. Previous attempts have faltered when compared to those from the likes of Honda, Mazda, and Toyota. But this perception began to change when Ford brought out the Focus in 2000. It seemed progress was being made in making a decent compact vehicle thanks to their European branch helping out. Seeing this, GM decided to follow the same path. They called in their Korean and European offices to help out with the development of a new model known as Cruze. The vehicle proved to be a massive improvement from the Cobalt as it got the basics right such as fuel economy and overall interior space. Yes, the Cruze was lacking in some key areas such as design and driving fun. But it was light years ahead of GM’s previous attempts at a compact vehicle.
      When it came time to work on the next-generation Cruze, Chevrolet knew they had a good starting point and only needed to make improvements to make the model a real contender in the class. Let’s see if that has panned out or not.
      Dare I say the new Cruze is a sharp looking compact? Yes, but to a point. It is clear that Chevrolet’s design team took a lot of inspiration from the Volt PHEV when working on the second-generation Cruze. The overall profile and certain lines of the Volt appear on the Cruze. The front end features Chevrolet’s new tiered-grille and a set of slimmer headlights. Where the Cruze’s design falls flat is in the back. It seems Chevrolet’s designers really couldn’t be bothered to do something special. There two ways you can fix this. You can either go with the Cruze hatchback which to our eyes looks so much better thanks to the longer roofline and tailgate, or opting for the RS appearance package which dresses up the back with a more aggressive bumper. The RS package also adds mesh grille inserts, and sporty looking wheels - 18-inch ones on our Premier tester.
      Moving inside, Chevrolet has put a lot of effort in making the Cruze a nice place to sit in. Many surfaces are covered with high-quality materials and feature some unique touches such as a curving character line on the dashboard. Making yourself comfortable is quite easy thanks to eight-way power adjustments for the driver and a tilt-telescoping steering wheel. The front passenger has to make do with manual adjustments. In the back, there is enough legroom for most passengers. Headroom is slightly tight if you decide to get a sunroof. One nice item for those sitting in the back is the option of heated seats.
      One area Chevrolet is using as a selling point for the Cruze is technology. All Cruzes get a seven-inch touchscreen with Chevrolet MyLink and compatibility with Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. OnStar 4G LTE with Wi-Fi also comes standard across the board. Our Premier tester came with the optional 8-inch touchscreen with navigation. MyLink has been a source of frustration in many of Chevrolet vehicles we have reviewed, but it seems they are starting to get its act together. Overall performance has seen a slight improvement with transitions into various functions being snappy. The navigation system still has some performance issues as it slows down when zooming in or out. Chevrolet has also fixed some of the bugs with their Apple CarPlay integration. We saw no issues of slowdown or apps crashing whenever we had CarPlay up.
      Under the Cruze’s hood is a turbocharged 1.4L four-cylinder with 153 horsepower and 177 pound-feet of torque. A six-speed automatic is the only transmission choice if you get the Premier. Anything below and you have the choice of the automatic or a six-speed manual. A diesel engine is coming later this year. The performance figures for the turbo 1.4L will not knock the socks off of anyone - 0-60 mph time of just over eight seconds. But you won’t think the Cruze is a slowpoke thanks the engine having a lot of low-end grunt. The vehicle leaps forward when leaving a stop and doesn’t feel that it is going to run out of breath. It doesn’t hurt Chevrolet has dropped almost 300 pounds from the new model. The six-speed automatic is quick to upshift to maximize fuel economy, but the same cannot be said for downshifts. It takes a moment or two for the automatic to go down a gear when you step on the accelerator.
      The turbo 1.4 comes with an auto stop-start system as standard. The system is quick to start the engine back up whenever you take your foot off the brake. One item that will irk some people is that you cannot turn off the stop-start system.
      EPA fuel economy figures for the 2017 Chevrolet Cruze stand at 29 City/39 Highway/33 Combined for the Premier sedan. Our average for the week landed around 31.2 mpg. The L, LS, and LT sedan get slightly higher fuel economy figures of 28/39/32 for the manual and 30/40/34 for the automatic.
      It seems most compacts are trying to outdo one another in terms of offering the best driving experience. So it is a bit of fresh air that Chevrolet has decided to skip this and make the Cruze ride like a bigger car. The suspension provides a cushy ride with most bumps being ironed out. Road and wind noise are kept to almost silent levels. Handling is competent in the class as the Cruze shows little body roll. However, the steering is too light in terms of feel and weight when driven enthusiastically.
      Chevrolet’s previous attempts at a compact vehicle have ranged from the punchline to a bad joke to something that can be considered at competent. But with the 2017 Cruze, Chevrolet put their heads down into making a compact that could stand tall among competitors. They have succeeded as the Cruze gets the fundamentals right and offers some distinctive traits that help it stand out from others such as the big-car ride and impressive amount of tech. Yes, it would be nice if Cruze was a slightly sharper in terms of design and the steering tweaked a bit to make it a bit more fun to drive. 
      Since I have been reviewing new vehicles for almost five years, there have been only a few vehicles that I keep thinking about to this day. Chevrolet has two to its name. The first was the 2014 Impala and the Cruze is number two.
      Disclaimer: Chevrolet Provided the Cruze, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2017
      Make: Chevrolet
      Model: Cruze
      Trim: Premier
      Engine: Turbocharged 1.4L DOHC VVT DI Four-Cylinder 
      Driveline: Six-Speed Automatic, Front-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 153 @ 5600
      Torque @ RPM: 177 @ 2000-4000
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 29/39/33
      Curb Weight: 2,978 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Lordstown, OH
      Base Price: $23,475
      As Tested Price: $29,195 (Includes $875.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Sun & Sound w/Navigation - $1,995.00
      RS Package - $995.00
      Enhanced Convenience Package - $865.00
      Driver Confidence II Package - $790.00
      Floor Mats - $140.00
      Wheel Lock Kit - $60.00
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)