I couldnt find it anywhere i was wondering if the chevy cruze diesel is a duramax engine.

I don't think that the actual engine choice has been officially announced yet (even though there are driveable prototypes out there already) but it's very unlikely to be a "Duramax" branded engine.

It'll likely be a one off small displacement diesel manufactured solely by GM and it'll probably carry some goofball "ecodieselrainbowfarter" name or something, not the Duramax brand that most people associate with big pickup trucks.

I've been known to be wrong.

With glitter exhaust injection, and genuine unicorn hide seat covers.

Isuzu already makes a 3.0 turbo diesel in a small truck over seas. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isuzu_D-Max

I think I remember a 1.4L 4 cylinder TD mentioned for the Cruz when it was first introduced. Possibly based on the Vauxhall/Opel engines. Very popular in Europe for their power and efficiency.

No matter what the engine ends up being this is a GREAT moved by GM. Finally the masses will be introduced to diesel efficiency in a small car.

No matter what the engine ends up being this is a GREAT moved by GM. Finally the masses will be introduced to diesel efficiency in a small car.


Can't agree more...I'm sure fuel economy for the Cruze Diesel will surpass 50 MPG.....I was looking at purchasing a NG powered Honda since local prices for fuel is around $1.25 a gallon, but I'll give GM a couple of years for the Cruze Diesel. Until then my 2007 Focus will provide enough fuel savings to keep my truck

Here is a link I found regarding the Diesel Cruze

http://www.bnet.com/blog/electric-cars/diesel-renaissance-a-2013-chevy-cruze-diesel-could-outdo-the-prius/4799

Another link
http://www.carbuzz.com/news/2011/8/19/Rumor-2013-Chevrolet-Cruze-Diesel-To-Get-50-MPG-7704409/

I saw this a few weeks ago and wondered why GM has changed it's tune. Lutz said Diesel cars was not viable or cost effective within GM's future products.

It doesn't help that EPA wants to squash Diesels out of existence!

Meanwhile, the Jetta TDI sells at full sticker for the past decade.

Bring on the Cruze Diesel!

Looks like its getting the in use in Europe 2.0 TDI.

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f13/gm-confirms-2-0l-cruze-diesel-engine-built-buyers-seeking-performance-105194/

"Charlie Klein, director-global mass, energy and aerodynamics at GM, tells Ward’s at an industry conference the auto maker thinks a diesel Cruze will be a hit because it will use the automatic transmission favored by Americans."

Hmm - Auto transmissions typically consume alot of energy in small displacement engine applications. I would like to know VW's market penetration stats for manual TDIs.

However, GM actually has had far more efficient auto trans behind (under) 4 cyl cars way ahead of the offshores. Early 90's 4 cyl camrys & accords with autos got the same MPG as full sized 3800 V6 GM cars. Pretty pathetic.

I think GM will be surprised by the demand by diesel enthusiasts for manual trans cruze.

I was considering a Golf TDI in the stable around 2013 but now the Cruze has my interest (with a manual trans of course)

If a manual is available that would be great, but I would consider the auto if it gets 50mpg....

I wonder if they could do "power on demand" or run very lean at highway speeds?

As far as I know, it will be auto only.

As far as I know, it will be auto only.

That's what " Diesel power" mag said too.

lutz's comments were not towards diesel enginesbut the epa's steps to over regulate. this should be good car, especially with crap with the volt.

Just a few short years ago Lutz was so quick to dismiss Diesel as part of GM's future -- I was like huh? are you insane? Throw an RV class Onan Diesel generator under the hood of a Chevy Volt and there is your recharge system!

Looking forward to hearing news of when the Sonic gets the same Diesel option. that is a really nice car to drive, but the base engine will likely struggle with 4 people in the car. I drove the turbo version and has respectable low end. A TD Diesel stick in a Sonic would be a high MPG car!

I may consider trading my Gold TDI in for one of these..... I would really prefer a standard though(more-so because I like driving them).

typical, its alway been available with a manual in europe

[QUOTE=coldfusion;4445142]Just a few short years ago Lutz was so quick to dismiss Diesel as part of GM's future -- I was like huh? are you insane? Throw an RV class Onan Diesel generator under the hood of a Chevy Volt and there is your recharge system!

Exactly! It kills me how the diesels are so quickly dismissed! This is a great move for GM!

This is all crap! The Jaguar XJ6 TDvi is a decently-large 4000# car with a 3.0L twin-turbo diesel V6, 275 HP @ 4000, 600 TQ @ 2500, 50 MPG highway, 0-60 in 6 seconds, with a 6-speed automatic. Real-world testing proved it could do 49.1 MPG at 77 MPH.
The Cruze better be capable of far more than 60 MPG with an automatic, or there's something extremely wrong with the engineering.
I read that article bashing GM's automatics for seeming to be 15% behind manuals, but that's misleading. You can't use percentages. All automatics must always have at least 1 built-in hydraulic pump, which must generate at least 150 psi. That will always take x amount of HP, which will always take x amount of fuel. The less HP the engine makes, the larger the percentage lost to the pump. So we can't use percentage, unless they start factoring it, and who wants to get into algebra?
Even with the same HP loss to the trans pump, the Cruze is still 3/4 the weight, with 2/3 the displacement. As such, it better not need the same amount of fuel to do the same speed.

This is all crap! The Jaguar XJ6 TDvi is a decently-large 4000# car with a 3.0L twin-turbo diesel V6, 275 HP @ 4000, 600 TQ @ 2500, 50 MPG highway, 0-60 in 6 seconds, with a 6-speed automatic. Real-world testing proved it could do 49.1 MPG at 77 MPH.

Where is that shown? Most data I dug up with a few quick searches this morning showed about 26/43, with many "real world" reviews from people that owned the thing complaining about dismally lower numbers.

I wouldn't be too up beat about the new diesel especially the lighter versions. Diesels used to have the name of strength because the engines were very strong. But now they are following the same way as the gas engines. They are cutting everything back.

Years ago if you purchased a diesel over here in the UK and you did regular oil, filters and cambelt changes, the engines generally outlasted the bodies they were in. But now they are as bad as the gas burners. If something goes wrong, it's quicker, easier and cheaper to pull the engine and swap it out than it is to effect any repairs.