Cavalier. Cobalt. Cruze. For the past three decades, GM’s “C” compacts provided American shoppers with an affordable small car for its customers. And for the majority of those thirty-odd years, those vehicles weren’t very good. The Cruze, unquestionably the best of that bunch, met its final end for North America on Friday when the last example rolled off the assembly line at the Lordstown, Ohio plant which produced the model since 2011. Cause of death: superior competitors and the ongoing death of sedans in every size and at all price points.
Introduced for the 2011 model year, the Cruze, like the third generation Focus and re-introduced Dart, debuted as a world car developed by an overseas subsidiary that had more experience building modern small vehicles than its American equivalent. With an assist from Opel and GM Korea, the car boasted competent driving dynamics and a solid interior. The first generation represented a substantial improvement over the Cobalt and it arrived just when GM needed a boost in the compact segment. It was a reassuring sign that the bailout money would be spent on worthwhile products that could resonate with customers and keep thousands of factory workers off unemployment.
The Cruze debuted with two engines: a naturally aspirated 1.8 liter Ecotec four cylinder and a 1.4 liter turbocharged Ecotec four. Both engines had 138 horsepower. The 1.4 boasted an additional twenty three Ib-ft of torque over the 1.8 liter. A turbocharged diesel was also offered, which positioned the car as a direct competitor to the TDI Jetta.
That 1.8 powerplant was arguably the greatest weakness of the first generation Cruze. Virtually no one recommended it. Otherwise, the Chevy was legit. The car was commended for its crisp handling, smooth highway ride, and overall refinement.
The interior was equally praised for the upscale atmosphere it brought to the segment. Here is what Car and Driver had to say about the Cruze when it first reviewed the sedan in late 2010:
“Cabin surfaces and fit and finish are both best in class, easily matching or exceeding what you’d get in a VW Jetta or a Mazda 3. The vanilla headliner, the glossy-black dash inserts, the faux brushed-aluminum accents, the blue backlit gauges—all are warm, inviting, and expertly grained. The center stack is sensibly organized; there’s a real hand brake between the seats; and the free-floating shade over the instrument nacelle would look fine in a Lexus. In fact, the only nasty surfaces are the squalid black-plastic inserts at the base of the C-pillars, possibly obtained from a DIY recycling center in Zanzibar.”
Chevy debuted a second generation model for the 2016 model year. Once again, the platform came from Opel, and it was also an all new architecture. The exterior evolved beyond the relatively anodyne looks of the previous generation towards something a bit more passionate.
General Motors also decided to give America the option of purchasing the hatchback model. The Mexican built variant is arguably the best looking Cruze money can buy, but I highly doubt it won over many conquest buyers.
For the second generation model, Chevy finally ditched the 1.8 liter and made the 1.4 turbo the sole gasoline engine option. A diesel is still offered, this as a 1.6 turbocharged unit that boasts 240 Ib-ft of torque and some impressive fuel economy numbers.
Unfortunately, GM’s cost cutting resulted in an incredibly low rent interior. The center stack, door inserts, and pretty much any location below the arm rests don’t measure up to its predecessor or the competition in general.
Reviewers generally liked the second generation Cruze for its excellent highway ride and well engineered powertrain. Was that enough? Obviously not. I suspect my alternate universe counterpart also wrote a postmortem on the Cruze of his Earth, which debuted to rave reviews in 2011 while developing a reputation for unbeatable reliability. On his planet and ours, three factors lead to the demise of Chevy’s small car (and others): the long term memory of customers burned by GM’s older products, shifting consumer preferences toward utility vehicles, and the Japanese segment leaders. Honda, Mazda, and Toyota never faltered with their sedans while GM offered mediocre vehicles that couldn’t compete. The Cruze was at least ten years too late.
With the impending demise of the Cruze, new models embody the ethos of pre-recession GM: they’re the vehicles you buy if you’re willing to compromise a bit for a rock bottom price.
The fact that a refreshed model arrived just before its cancellation is a sign that the Cruze probably wasn’t axed until very recently. Ford’s discontinuation of its own sedans likely gave the company a bit of cover to do the same. Whatever the cause, Chevy’s last compact offering brings back ugly memories of the worst moments in the history of the American auto industry. The closure of Lordstown Assembly is the result of bad decisions that occurred in the past finally catching up with the company. Customers won’t be impacted by the absence of the Cruze because more compelling alternatives are available from the Japanese. That is cold comfort for the laid off workers who will be out of a job once the plant fully shuts down next week.
Related Reading:
Curbside Rental Service: 2014 Chevrolet Cruze LTZ -This Isn’t Quite So Easy by Jason Shafer
COAL: 2017 Chevrolet Cruze Premier – Lost In A Sea Of SUV’s by Mdlaughlin
Editor’s Update: Toyota’s new 2020 Corolla, now available in sedan (above) as well as hatchback versions, with either conventional and hybrid drive, has a sales target of 250,000. Ed Laukes, head of marketing says: “the decline in car sales has not been as severe in several key regions — notably Southern California, Northern California, Florida and other markets in the Southeast — where Toyota’s lineup still fares well.
The problem for the Cruze was that, although dramatically better than its ancestors, it still wasn’t as reliable as its competitors. The chart below is from the TrueDelta website; a site which tracks car reliability by using quarterly owner repair reports. It compares the reliability of a Honda Civic to a Chevrolet Cruze. It seems that as the Cruze ages, it’s reliability suffers more than the Civic’s. I should note however that the Cruze data is arguably questionable because of….small sample size.
https://www.truedelta.com
I don’t think these results for the Cruze are unique to this model or to GM in general. I have been a lifelong booster for the American auto industry, but have put my own money into Asian cars for my last 2 new purchases.
This has become my impression of most American vehicles over the last 20 years or so – the better ones are OK for several years but then the cheap components start failing and thus begins the regular cash infusions. The American industry has been unable or unwilling to invest in higher grade parts that will not show their benefit in happier customers and better resale for 10+ years. Which is a shame.
My 99 Town & Country was a far more satisfying vehicle for family use than my 96 Honda Odyssey. But with both of them at around 200K on the odo, the service experience could hardly have been more different. Ok, it would have been with a Windstar instead of the Chrysler, but you get my point.
The modus operandi for the US industry has been to make something that looks good initially (either design, function, or price) and works for a while, then when the failures start to happen more often, sell the customer a whole new car.
The successful Asian makes have generally been more about selling a quality piece from the beginning and when the customer decides it’s time for another car, he/she will have been pleased by the quality/reliability/durability of what they have so they will come back for another.
I’m not sure what the Europeans are doing 🙂 but for the meat of the market I dare say the Asian method is the winning formula for both consumer and producer.
The Asian model is increasingly the way to go as the populace becomes more conscious of saving the environment – it just makes sense to buy a product which won’t need to go to recycling/landfill as soon.
Especially if it’s likely to need fewer trips to the dealer for repair along the way. It’s win/win for the customer.
I would imagine that the Cruze will carry on the (not so) proud tradition of becoming yet another COTR (cockroach-of-the-road) in the same “GM cars run badly longer than other cars run at all” manner as its predecessors.
With that said, I’m sorry to see it go, particularly the rather sharp hatchback version (with the diesel, if you please). Not to mention what will surely be a devastating effect the Lordstown assembly closure will have on the Youngstown area.
I did not realize Chevy Cruze production was ending in March, I thought it had a few more months. While I do like the styling of the 2nd Chevy Cruze I agree that some of the interior leaves me scratching my head especially the hood release handle. Also, the so-so reliability has me a bit concerned though the car is probably going to be a cockroach even if everything around the powertrain is falling apart.
I have two coworkers that have the first gen Cruze Both have had spectacular engine prob;ems. One was under the powertrain warranty, the other not. These cars do not age well. Too bad. I think they look very nice.
After reading that Car&Driver test in 2010 I was tempted to add the Cruze to my list of possible new cars in spite of my experiences with 2 different small GM cars. I owned a Vega and a Pontiac J2000, and while both were decent cars, both were pretty uninspiring cars compared to the Japanese competition.
(BTW, subsequent tests of the Cruze by Car&Driver were not favorable.)
When I started to see the new hatchback on local streets I was again tempted until I asked current Cruze owners about the car. NONE would risk a recommendation, and all said it spent way too much time at the dealer getting problems rectified.
As far as I am concerned, GM AND the workers at Lordstown are/were responsible for the poor reputation these and the small cars that preceded them were saddled with.
” I owned a Vega and a Pontiac J2000, and while both were decent cars, both were pretty uninspiring cars compared to the Japanese competition.” Really, Howard? Decent cars? Compared to what? Deadly sins 1 and 2….On the other hand, if you consider them decent cars, you must have been a stickler for maintenance, like me. But even with proper maintenance, GM cars will and never did even meet up to decent, but we knew no better because they were all we had!
The last two years of the Vega were decent years. They’d fixed the problems that made them a DS. Same with the J2000
CR data shows the reliability of second-gen Cruze is much improved over the first generation. (Chart from April 2019 issue)
And here’s the chart:
Once more, with feeling
All that suggests to me is that the second-gen Cruze will have similar bad marks once it reaches the age of the first-gen in that chart.
As the Chevy Cruze goes, so goes GM.
A leased Cadillac STS-V was my last American car. The Caddy was a great car when it wasn’t in the abominable dealership (I tried three of them, they all sucked). Supercharger pulley-twice, transmission wiring harness, rear axel bearing, etc. Each repair taking 3 weeks (waiting for parts) after waiting a week or more waiting for “an appointment”. Pontiac $h!tbox for a loaner. Meanwhile GMAC collected its payment right on time. I turned in the car at the end of lease and they promptly “lost it” for seven months while claiming I still had it. I sent them their own time stamped photo six times.
Four Porsches and one Audi later, my teenage daughter is getting a nice new Toyota.
Some years ago I was on a flight with a broken entertainment system. I’d brought along a library book, “Guts” by Bob Lutz (another very apposite rhyme: putz), and though his disagreeable blowhard personality oozed noxiously forth from every page, it was either that or boredom, so I read the book. One of the things that stuck with me was his mention of unnamed persons within GM who considered the first Cruz excessively good and vowed to “correct back to center” with the next one.
I suspect the unnamed person was Bob “quality is overrated” Lutz himself, too chickenshit to admit it in his selfgratulatory book.
I will never understand GM. The reason it could never compete in the “small” car field is that they never had a truly competitive product. They simply didn’t care, and this led to their belly-up thing.
One would like to think that humans can learn from past failures. But nooooo, not GM. With the Cruz, it had a chance to start all over again, and this time give real value for money.
But yet again, they didn’t. They did the same, tired old shtick: “We know our last cars were crap, but this new one is the bee’s knees.”
And again they produce crap.
They ALMOST go it right with the Saturn, but………………….
They got the dealer experience right, absolutely. But I never found Saturns any better than their mediocre GM cousins…
Based on all the marvelous articles over the years here at CC, it appears 1969-1972 was when GM should have had a vision about the future with the opportunity to correct course. It would have taken a few years or even decades, but it could have stemmed the bleeding. Instead they’ve become the Hyundai of 1995 – the value brand, where you’re willing to accept subpar because of price. I know of no one who aspires to a GM product except maybe the Corvette, and that will end as gear heads age and disappear.
I half agree with you, but would suggest that GM in 2010 was much like Chrysler in 1978 – both companies had reached a point where they were no longer even capable of building a first rate, competitive product, only neither realized it at the time.
My fear after the bailout was that where Chrysler in 1980 had brought in lots of new blood and tackled some very basic organizational issues, GM was still mostly run by natives schooled in a broken system. Mary Barra has been a pleasant surprise and has done more with what she had to work with than I thought she could. But the result has been adequacy instead of the breakout successes that were required.
I agree with Jim Klein’s views stated above. I suspect limited long term durability/reliability of their cars was/is part of the GM business model by design. As too FCA. And Ford to a lessor degree.
I feel like the problem is not that GM’s motives were inexplicable, but rather that they were entirely too clear: don’t make the small cars too desirable so your salespeople can try to upsell customers into something bigger and more profitable. In the ’70s, “bigger and more profitable” chiefly meant the C-body Impala/Caprice and the G-body Monte Carlo; today, it’s trucks and crossovers. Either way, the small car, whether Vega, Chevette, Citation, Cavalier, Cobalt, or Cruze, was basically a loss-leader, the one strippo model you have on the lot so the local law doesn’t get on your case about your “Priced from only $XX (one at this price)” ads.
There have been American small cars that had their strong points even if the net results weren’t great (e.g., first-gen Neon). There have even been mediocre ones where you could at least see some coherent product development logic — for instance, the Horizon/Omni and FWD Escort/Lynx had decent underpinnings for their time, but in U.S. form were compromised in disagreeable ways to try to make them palatable for consumers who expected floaty plasti-chrome land yachts. Most of GM’s efforts in this segment have had a strong aura of, “Make sure no one who can afford better buys this car on purpose,” and that’s awful hard to overcome.
(I agree with Phil and Dave that Saturn recognized half the problem — viz., dealers being profoundly disinterested in selling you a C-segment car — but only the half.)
My comment got caught in spam limbo for no reason so trying this once more:
Good riddance. It took Chevy 40 years to field a competent one and it’s merely an ancestor to the 60s Kadett. Every (sub)compact created domestically between them are predominately responsible for destroying the reputation and perception of Chevrolet and GM as a whole. The Cruze was too little too late, it’s pitched by an ad campaign where real people go “like, this isn’t what I expected from a Chevy”.
You want to talk about anomaly’s in the automotive world, it’s small cars in the US. Every wave from domestic manufacturers were born out of scares, be it recessions, fuel spikes, or the rise of imports. They never saw the forest for the trees with their executions and sank massive amounts of capital into rushed cars that proved to be unprofitable, and in the interm periods of stability sold as bargain basement penalty boxes. Meanwhile the import brands that were unsuccessfully emulated ended up growing their models exponentially larger in size generation after generation to greater and greater success, and beyond that SUVs and Crossovers.
I currently own a 2017 Cruze and owned a 2013 Cruze before giving it to my daughter. I can say that both generations had their unique attributes.
The 1st gen Cruze handled like it was on rails, and the shifter on the automatic had a “manual” mode that would actually hold the gear and not down/up shift regardless of what you did to the gas pedal. It was really fund to drive.
The 2nd Cruze has a transmission with a mind of its own, it will no longer hold a gear. I hate the auto stop/start. It works seamlessly, but I don’t think its a good idea with a turbocharged engine where hot spots are prevalent. And for some reason, the tires are skinnier than the previous generation. All in all, a good freeway cruiser.
Many cars offer both start-stop and a turbocharger. I imagine most manufacturers figured out how to mitigate it. Then again…
The one in my 2016 Cruze Premier was pretty seamless, IMO. It felt a lot smoother than the first iteration of BMW’s 2.0-turbo stop-start system, which I sampled in a 2015 X3 xDrive28i and a 2016 328i. However, if you let your foot off the brake, it would start the engine again and not turn it back off for the duration of that stop. Whereas the 2018 Malibu 1.5T I drove would engage stop-start multiple times per stop.
I hate the auto stop/start. It works seamlessly, but I don’t think its a good idea with a turbocharged engine where hot spots are prevalent.
While at the Detroit show in January, I checked out a Cruze hatchback. They finally got it right, just as they killed it. The 2019 Cruze has an “off” switch for the auto stop/start.
My concern with auto stop/start and a turbocharger is the engine stopping, and oil pressure to the turbine bearings going to zero, while the turbine is still spinning at a brisk pace, at every stop sign and traffic light.
Kyree/Steve,
Should I expect the engine in my Cruze to last when the owner’s manual states I should change the spark plugs at 60k miles instead of 100K miles like every other vehicle I have owned in the last 20 years? I know much has changed with oils and metallurgy during this time, but should I hope that the engine will last?
I know hope is not a plan, so I will continue using Mobil 1 and Dexos full synthetic oil in hopes that will make a difference.
Should I expect the engine in my Cruze to last when the owner’s manual states I should change the spark plugs at 60k miles instead of 100K miles
I have seen shorter replacement recommendations for platinum plugs from time to time recently. For my car, VW recommends new plugs at 80K. In the great scheme of things, plugs are cheap.
The Cruze is dead. So the story goes. We’ve got a couple dozen sedans left on our lot; and I suppose no more are forthcoming. We also have about a half-dozen hatchbacks that just arrived a few days ago. Those are built in Mexico, and I assume that plant closes soon, too, if it hasn’t already; most buyers prefer the sedan by a 10:1 ratio. No diesels, though. Diesel Cruzes were hard to sell. It’s hilarious reading comments about how much better the hatchback and diesels were, the actual buyers didn’t seem to think so. Speaking of diesels, the new Equinox is offered with a diesel. Think they sell at all? Equinoxes fly off the lot, but not diesels. I think part of the problem with selling diesels, and I noticed the same problem at FCA, is diesels are only offered in high trim models. Same goes for the Colorado mid-size pickup, but there are a few buyers. The same cannot be said when it comes to full-size heavy-duty trucks. It’s about a 50/50 split along the commercial market, but for the high trim consumer market it’s tough to find a gasoline unit.
Just my observations, after reading how “superior” the diesel Cruze hatchback is. The car nobody buys.
Darn, I seem to always to catch models I’m interested in between when they are offered and it doesn’t line up with when I want to buy them.
I was interested in the Cruze Hatchback, only offered since 2017, but now its being discontinued…I’m a hatchback buyer, and I’d like to keep my current car another 5 years, and wonder by then what I’ll be able to buy…since the domestic makers are abandoning cars…except for the Mustang, and I really don’t want to buy a Mustang to get a hatchback (but maybe I’ll have too by then?)
I was likewise interested in the Malibu Maxx they made from 2004-2007, but again wasn’t ready to buy when they were offered. I liked the idea of a midsize (though some people called it a wagon, it was still a car and wagons are equally scarce as cars (though plentiful as SUVs…but I’m different in wanting a car rather than an SUV).
I guess the same problem exists at Ford…the Focus is going away too…so the only choice for car buyers will be foreign.
It is almost as if now the domestic manufacturers are saying “Uncle”…we really can’t make a competitive small car, so we won’t even try..back when CAFE was first imposed…but we’ve instead seen 40 years of attempts (not sure how serious they were, some like the Cruze and the Focus finally seemed to be OK, only to be cancelled now, albeit because nobody wants to buy them). Wonder what will happen during the next cycle of fuel price increases (or even shortages?)
The Cruze diesel is another example of a car people claimed they wanted, but when they arrived, those same buyers were nowhere to be found. Then, too, GM did themselves no favor by pricing it poorly.
It reminds me of the original mild hybrid Malibu. Fuel mileage wasn’t a dramatic improvement, but the price was only an extra $800. People bought those. At least until the good old GM greed kicked and they upped the price to around $2500. Guess what? Suddenly, everyone quit buying Malibu hybrids and the option was quickly ended.
I have had at least 6 VW TDI’s. Sold my 2014 Passat TDI back to VW for more than what I paid for it two years ago during the “Dieselgate” fiasco.
I’m done with diesels (I looked at a cruze TDI but didn’t like it). With D2 @ <15 PPM sulfur, it's $0.70 per gallon more than RUG so it's not making economical sense to keep driving a TDI.
No announcement was made that the MEX plant, where Cruze hatch is built, was closing.
Re. the first-generation model: the silver one you found has aftermarket front and rear bumpers, aftermarket front and rear lights, and black aftermarket logos. Actually, the rear lights might be the ones they used in the Asian markets, but they didn’t come on any North-American-spec model.
Re. the second-generation model: I briefly owned a 2016 with every option offered, including the RS package, Premier trim, the Sun & Sound Package with Navigation, and the Driver Assistance Package II. It was Kinetic Blue, just like the one in your picture. My impression of it was that it didn’t feel nearly as solid and Germanic as the first-generation model, and that was a sore-spot. My best friend has a 2017 Volt on the same D2XX platform as the gen-2 Cruze, and it feels a lot more solid.
Also, China got its own version of the second-generation Cruze. It had a unique bodyshell with a slightly more-cohesive front and rear end. I believe it may also have had a longer wheelbase than the ROW version.
Mom bought a 2017 Cruze RS Hatchback new when she got tired of getting in and out of her 2011 Camaro Convertible. She pretty much bough the one I would have had I been in the market at that time for a new car. She seems happy with the car – only routine maintenance so far. I enjoy driving the car from time to time.
The spelling of the name did not suggest intimations of glory, but more an attitude that buyers would be too bereft of education to care. Or, perhaps, it amply reflected the smarts level of those who designed it, for it was a dull and also incompetent machine. Twitchy, over-boosted steering, inexpertly matched turbo and auto, styling that carefully selected from each rival’s dull points, an interior of ok-ness but just this side of gaudy.
All of which may still have been irrelevant to an indifferent consumer base and great and lasting success may have come, except for one thing: in Australia, it was a pile of extremely smelly crap. I add the caveat that the majority of ours came from the massive former Daewoo now GM factory in Sth Korea, known to amongst the world’s worst for quality, but it’s still GM’s lack of care yet again.
The trade hates these cars. A friend recently traded in her very optioned-up, endlessly troublesome 2012 model for a new Korean. With about 60K miles and aircon not working (again), a few lights lit, she was offered $3,000 for it. On querying this price with my dealer mate, he said “Not worth a cent more”. She had paid nearly $30,000.
I can’t imagine why Holden is collapsing month by month and will inevitably be gone.
Perhaps whatever remains of GM could begin by at least having to faith to name it’s cars properly. Though, granted, the Chev Nearly Competitive mayn’t fly too far.
i dont know……most here are saying that the car and the ones before it cavaliar, cobolt are crap, yet i consistently see these cars on the road lasting longer than same year imports. these and other sedans are gone because of the SUV craze. the other reasons stated dont really hold up with most who are just looking for a car. I,ve owned 1997 cav and its was really good, i got rid of it because i sat too low in it(much like the Camaro). so put the car down all you want………………….but you’ll stiil see them outlast most imports and even newer cuv and suvs. Same goes for other GM products like Buick and Pontiac and Olds. sure the interiors are crappy and cheap but the cars keep going and going and going…..
Whatever the reason for the withdrawal of the Cruze, Focus, Dart and other Big 3 saloons, it’s one huge indictment of the Big 3 that they cannot build and/or sell a credible competitor in this market sector, even with worldwide technical input. America still buys Corollas, Golf, Elantras and many others, and with the dealer networks and home team advantage the Big 3 should be up there.
I have a ’12 Korean built one and have no build quality issues in 60,000 kms.
I have a number of reliability issues. 2 years ago, the coil pack failed triggering the CEL, made it to the repair shop on 2 cylinders. Last summer, hottest on record, I had multiple failures in one day. Dash lit up like a Christmas tree, CEL, ABS, you name it, and the transmission locked into what I assume was 4th gear (it could have been 5th or 6th, and moving the lever in manual mode did nothing!)
The car would barely move due to being stuck in high gear. Not wanting to cook the torque converter, I had it towed in. Both front wheel sensors for the ABS had failed, and the code scanner revealed an issue with the gear lever (really!!), even though that trans problem resolved itself after sitting for an hour. They ordered a new gear lever, but I never went back for it. No issue since.
The A/C totally sucks, even with yearly recharges it needs to be in recirc to be effective in the super hot summers Korea has had the last few years. There is no reserve capacity like the fabled GM systems of old.
Also, the Check Engine Light comes and goes but it runs fine, so no craps given.
All in all, not totally happy, but it is what is . My choice was between this and a Samsung SM3 (I WILL NOT drive Hyundai or Kia, just because).
I also don’t like paying $150+ bucks for an oil change (VS my $50) just because a car happens to be an import, so that was off the list as well. I’m not kidding, no matter if it’s Ford, Toyota,BMW, Audi, Honda, or whatever, they spread your cheeks out in this country for routine service.
The car appealed to me because it’s a “half-size” up from it’s Elantra-K3-SM3 competition, being larger and heavier. I like the heavy “feel” of this car, and I hear tell the G2 version lacks this.
Also, an anecdotal observation, the G1 versions like mine are all over the place here, but the new ones, nary to be seen.
Still, it’s by-far superior the car it replaced, a Daewoo Lacetti (or is it Forenza, or Optra,or Nubira or Buick Excelle?) That one was sold under more names than a cheap Chinese appliance.