Overseas Experience w/ Chevy Cruze Diesel?
 

I gotta admit, it looks as if the fat lady is finally clearing her throat and getting ready to sing - and we might actually see the Chevy Cruze diesel in this country.

Now the $128 ($64 adjusted for inflation) question - is this going to be another Olds 98 fiasco?

One reason for hope on my part is that it's using a GM license built version of the VM Motori 2.0 L inline 4 turbo diesel. Having had experience with their 2.8 L inline 4 turbo diesel in my Jeep Liberty, VM Motori can build some kick-a$$ diesels.

And one reason for great dread on my part is that it's using a GM LICENSE BUILT VERSION of the VM Motori 2.0 L diesel. Given past personal experience with GM products and their ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory (see Olds 98 above), let's just say I'm more than a little apprehensive.

Hell, just having GM associated with it in any way, shape, or form is reason for concern in my book.

I've heard that the diesel version of the Cruze has already been sold outside the U.S. for quite some time. Given that, have any of our non-U.S. forum members had direct experience with the diesel Cruze, such that you could enlighten us on it's strong points and foibles - ie, how's the fuel system set up - in-tank lift pump or vacuum system? - how good is the fuel filter, what micron rating? - any way to bypass that GD'd EGR system?

i want to think the foreign cruze's used a 2.8 which has lots more h.p. and better milage.but then we always get the watered down versions of everything so it is what it is.day late and a dollar short.they should have been out 10 yrs ago.vw has no problem selling their diesels over here.and on a side note.my 2000 jetta has been averaging 55 mpg over the last month and a half.they finally worked the blended diesel out of the system.so unless they can push up into the 60's i ain't buyin.

GM has been building diesel engines for years. IMHO its quite silly to still talk about a car and engine that no one under 30 has ever heard of, its ancient history.

I'd be curios to see if it really gets that much better mileage. I know someone with a Cruze Eco with a stick and he is averaging about 43 over the last 20k miles. Although what I have been hearing is that even though the Cruze with the 1.4T is rated for 87 from the factory, the use of 91/93 really improves the mileage and that little motor does well with the higher octane. So the price difference between 93 and diesel is a bit smaller than 87.

Probably so. It's a totally different company now since the meltdown. Just ask the old bondholders who were left with worthless paper. Could be a good car. Heck, any other diesel here could be better than VW. At least there would be some competition and choice.

As the saying goes, the devil is in the details. Notice what I was asking in the last paragraph - how's the fuel system set up? what kind of fuel filter? how's the EGR/emissions set up?

From my experience with the Liberty CRD, THAT'S the kind of things that can make or break a diesel vehicle, a reliable daily driver or a garage queen, regardless of how good the engine is.

DC cursed the Liberty CRD with bean counter engineering as far as the support systems. Let's take the fuel system -

Vacuum fuel system without a supply pump, only the built-in gear pump in the CP-3 injection pump. Fuel line quick connects that were designed to seal with pressure. A single fuel filter as the high point in the system that collected any air and starved the engine. A fuel heater in a plastic puck on the filter head that was always on - such that when it became uncovered by the air collecting in the filter head, it melted the plastic around the connectors, caused another air/fuel leak, and even caused a a few Liberty CRD's to CATCH ON FIRE!!! A cheap paper fuel filter that was 10 to 15 microns at best - where Bosch recommended 5 microns or smaller with their HPCR system - and tended to disintegrate in the presence of water - it actually put MORE junk into the fuel than it filtered out.

If I didn't reprime and vent off the fuel filter every 3 days or so, there would be so much air accumulated in it that the damn thing would actually MISFIRE when I drove it.

That's just the tip of the iceberg - I could sit here and write you a novel about all the other stuff DC cheaped out on and literally f####d up on this vehicle - at the time, the head of VM Motori USA even publicly carped that DC was giving their engine a bad reputation with the cheap a$$ way they'd set up this vehicle.

After less than a year, I was at the point of trading it off. If it hadn't been for the fact that the engine itself was so good - and literally the ONLY diesel available of this size other than MB and VW - and there hadn't been aftermarket solutions available, in large part borrowed from other diesel vehicle communities - I would have.

So, regardless of how good an engine GM is putting in the Cruze, what kind of engineering are they putting in around it?

Another note - from an article I found, GM is calling these diesels "newly developed GM Duramax engines". BULLCRAP. They're license built exisitng VM Motori engine designs, being built in Thailand.

I'm pretty sure they OK'd the Cruze for production in 2013...They build the Cruze locally to me...They might have just build a few test diesels recently. I thought I heard someone say something about that.

Last night I found a Chevy Cruze forum, that had some European and Oz members on it with the 2011 diesel version. What I read and pieced together didn't give me a warm fuzzy.

Apparently, the owners of the diesel version were saying that the service manual requirement for changing oil was 7500 kms - roughly 5000 miles - because of fuel washdown in the cylinders and dilution of the oil, and soot buildup because of EGR.

From the explanation, it looks as though to raise exhaust gas temp for DPF regeneration, GM is using extra post-combustion injections into the cylinders - instead of an auxilary injector in the downpipe post-turbo - which means EGT's out of the cylinders will be jacked up, which the turbo will be exposed to, and fuel economy will suffer as well.

From what I've read, Dodge and GM tried this approach on the 6.9 L Cummins and Duramax engines, and it didn't work worth a crap - fuel economy dropped by nearly 1/3 during regen, turbos ended up getiing cooked, etc - and that one of the reasons the newer Duramax's are doing so well is that they dropped this approach and went with a auxilary injector in the downpipe, that was only active when DPF regen was required - eliminating the fuel washdown and oil dilution problem, and lowering the EGT's in the cylinders, exhaust manifold, and turbo, also helping overall fuel economy.

Another item - one of the owners stated that if the DPf regen cycle didn't complete 3 times in a row, you had to take the vehicle to the dealer to have the DPF cleaned and the electronics reset. He also carped that he was without his vehicle for two weeks because the dealership didn't have the "special cleaning solution" required for the DPF. He mentioned that the delaership was going to give him a new DPF until they could get the "cleaning solution" in and service his old one, but backed out when it turned out the cost of a new DPF was over 6000 Euros.

Not looking good so far.

Wow. My head hurts. I guess I will hang on to my old stuff as long as I can.

Gleaned a couple more "oh by the ways" from that Chevy Cruze diesel forum -

The DPF regen cycle looks to be "hardwired" into the vehicle's software to occur automatically at regular mileage intervals. Two gents that kept track of when the DPF regen cycle kicked in - one for over 15,000 kms - found that it kicked in like clockwork every 1250 kms - 750 miles - or just over one full tank of fuel.

Another item - it seemed to be a common complaint that in cold weather - around 20's F - it often took upwards 15 to 20 miles for the engine to reach full temp - even with an active EGR system and cooler, and an aux heater in the system - while others reported they were up to operating temp in 2 to 3 miles in the same conditions.

Having a similar VM engine in my Jeep, I know what THAT problem is - faulty thermostat from the factory - that particular model thermostat doesn't seem to be very reliable or long-lived.

And if they put the fuel filter on the diesel in the same place as the gas version, gawd help'em - it's UNDER the rear of the vehicle mounted on the inside of the frame. Having to break out the jack and stands just to change out the friggin fuel filter?:rolleyes: