Riveting. Can’t wait to have the blinds pulled back on my eyes that have yet to see a car that has been in production for years already.

Wonder if they will advertise its eco-boost engine?

A4, How did you get years? Not trying to spread misinformation, are you?

And how about that 40 mpg. Seems pretty high.

This article SHOULD be from 11/17/2007 and be talking about the 2009 Cruze being released in early 2008.

The car that will put the Civic, Corolla, 3 and Sentra in the grave. GM won;t be able to build tem fast enough. Everyone has been waiting for the next high quality compact from the General to replace the aging yet wildly successful Cobalt. Here it is everyone.

GM. AN American Revolution

Expect it to pick up where the Cobalt left off. Class leading fuel economy, world class reliability, quality and a vehicle that will live up to General motors reputation for quality that will last many hundreds of thousands of miles an never have a single problem.

Be American. Buy American. Buy GM. An American Revolution

OK MONTHS, jesus H, sorry I don’t wikipedia the Cruze production schedule for foreign countries before i try to make a point, which was made either way with either time frame. douchebag.

and it has been more than a year, so suck it.

GM really needs to ensure that this U.S. cruze has a nice interior; if not I don’t think you’ll see people shifting over from their civics and Fits/Jazz to jump into this. 40 mpg is nice but Fit has 33mpg and Civic has 34mpg highway. With a nice interior and ample standard features the Cruze will definitely be a contender!

This might be a little late getting to the US market, but with that kind of mileage, I think the folks at Honda and Toyota should be getting a little worried right now.

Sorry you cannot take the truth. Years means more two or more.

This site is infamous for misinformation. Because anybody can say anything w/o having to look the others in the eyes they stretch everything.

Do agree that it should have been here last year.

EITHER WAY DICKHEAD, MY POINT REMAINS THE SAME, GET THE FVCK OVER IT

worried? That’s all you think they are? You’re in for a major surprise.

The Civic and Corolla are already also rans next to the Cobalt and the Cobalt isn’t on par with the Cruze. The Honda and Toyota are toast and they will need to give those pieces of sh1t away to get any of them off the lot.

Civic and Corolla = Lot-Rot.

Be American. Buy American. Buy GM. it is your patriotic obligation

Where this Daewoo will be build here or there? Does anyone has an idea? NMOFGM need not reply.

GAY4 has something to say about every ****in car that shows up on this site, how a ****in pathetic tool, just like my son.

Built in the States.

The next-gen Civic, Corolla, Sentra, etc. will blow this car into the weeds in about 15 minutes. GM always makes the mistake of benchmarking to current-gen Asians during design, so when the production car hits the street four or five years later, it’s instantly obsolete.

NMOFGM: Have a friend or loved one duct-tape you to a chair or plank immediately.

GAY4 has something to say about every foockin car that shows up on this site, how a foockin pathetic tool, just like my son.

Trust me, the Cruze will not out sell the Civic or the Corolla. And Quality? GM is not made of Quality. They fall apart in 3 to 4 years. 100,000 mile warranty. Problems don’t start till 150,000 miles on all cars. Maybe it will get better quality. But i have to see it to believe it.

just hearing this REALLY pisses me off. I mean, we’ve heard about this car for nearly two years now. It’s replacing one of Chevrolets best sellers. But they have the nerve to sell it around the world for nearly two years, before they even put it on show in the states? No, not on sale but on SHOW, like its a new car, even though it’s been nearly TWO years. What the hell kind of changes do they need to make? Strengthen the damn bumper? Change the color of the tail lights?

As you can tell, this really frustrates me. And I don’t believe it will even be that good of a car- from what I’ve read in other countries, it’s not. Also, understanding that this is a replacement for the Forenza, not the Cobalt…

Cruze is being made in 7 plants world wide with US produced vehicles selling throughout N.A.

Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, South Korea
Elizabeth, South Australia, Australia
Halol, India
Lordstown, Ohio, United States
Shenyang, China
Saint Petersburg, Russia
Rayong, Thailand (from 2010)

Hmm, hopefully the new competition will get 40 mpg. That will greatly reduce our oil usage in this country.

And to the teenager, I was over it the second you showed your immature comment.

Hopefully these morons at Garbage Motors can hold onto this Cruze name this time. An indication of a model that actually succeeded like the Civic and the Corolla. Unlike the sh*tty Cobalt and Cavalier

^^^ and Vega and Nova

Borat, this car wasn’t developed by Daewoo. They just got it first for some reason.

-iluvamcars

Cruze=Turd

Now I don’t want it to seem like I’m picking on GM because virtually every manufacturer is just as guilty… but over the course of 2 decades they will have gone from the J-Body cars which were available in 5 different brands (don’t forget the Cimarron!) in 5 different body styles and at least one engine option to this- one brand, one style, one engine.

And just think… we’re going to be the last ones on the planet to get all this. At least they didn’t have the nerve to call it the Choice.

johnny- More engines will be coming and a hatchback is underway for 2012 or so. Plus, its good it is only in the Chevy lineup. Its platform is used by other names and will be used by Buick, but your right, no badge engineering, just platform sharing.

-iluvamcars

The Cruze better be offered in a two-door (coupe) body style as well, just like the current Cobalt is (and the Civic). There aren’t many small two-door coupes (not hatchback) on the market, so Honda currently dominates with its cool looking Civic two-door.

@ iluvamcars, how do you know? You work for CIA (GM sister company)?

Any report will tell you otherwise.

-iluvamcars

Just go to Wikipedia, Borat.

-iluvamcars

I’d rather have it show up late in the US with bugs sorted out than be introduced at the same time as Europe and require a quick updates

The ones I’ve seen look pretty good in person (esp darker colors) and the interior does as well

Biggest problem I have with this car is that they changed the name of my Cobalt to Cruze, the dumbest name for a car I can remember.
If they felt compelled to change names yet again I wish they had gone with Nova.
I am not crazy about the styling, the cloth on the dashboard, and the craptastic base 1.8L engine.

This car is very dissapointing. I have 2,000 GM Card Points just waiting to be used. I was hoping to use it on the next version of the Cobalt, not a freaking Cruze.

im thinking the same thing as DenverGuy, work out the bugs over seas before bringing it to the market that really matters…. and its not like they are trying to outsell the civic or corolla, just take potential and current honda/ toyota owners.
Steve, the base engine is what it is, a base engine.. it’s there to claim the MPG rating and advertise a low entry price, im sure there will be a 2-door coupe with the same 2.0T in the Cobalt SS in time

My base engine currently (Cobalt) has 155HP. Do I really want a 138HP engine is a supposedly improved car?

Depends what is important to you.

40 mpg is pretty impressive to somebody who cares about MPG and is quite an improvement.

If you care about performance get a bigger engine.

It doesn’t come with a bigger engine. Thats one of the problems.

@ iluvamcars, it was a joke.

it is pointless to read articles in this website or leave a comment because abusive and demeaning personal attacks to other blockers.

It is taking too long for this model. They need it on the lots now, not in the third quarter of next year! I thought, at least initially, the delay had primarily to do with needing funds for the retooling of manufacturing plants. Buy can that be an issue anymore? LLN, can we get some investigative reporting to figure out what the delay is about? I hope this issue is merely left-over slack from the way old GM operated.

Either way, I agree with the comment made by TomF that GM seems to have historically benchmarked competitors’ existing models so that, by the time theirs is introduced, the vehicle seems ready for a refresh. I’m just saying that it could be missing some of the latest wow-features and looks of models introduced shortly after. The competition has had a while to determine how they will top it.

Side note: I don’t agree with TomF’s assessment that “the next-gen Civic, Corolla, Sentra, etc. will blow this car into the weeds in about 15 minutes.” A bit excessive.

GM sure takes forever to release cars.

As a point was made earlier, no compact GM product tends to maintain its name for longer than a decade. Its like they kill the name so hard that a new product must have a new name. On the contrary with the Corolla being a Corolla for over 40 years.

@ NMOFGM….i’ve driven the Cobalt Coupe. It was the worst car I’ve ever had the pleasure of driving (for the exception of a 97 Cavalier Coupe).

You have to give him credit(NMOFGM), he gets everyone going. This car, along with the Volt are already “Old News”. Gm cannot build a small car…. period. The best 2 cars GM has made in the last 5 years are the G8 and the Vibe(Toyota). Sadly both gone

One thing to keep in mind is that 95% of the buying population still doesn’t know this car even exists. I have fun scouring the internet looking for car news, as I’m sure most on here do, so I knew about this car a long time ago. Making the wait seem longer. But the majority of the poulation seriously won’t know about it until they sit behind one at a traffic light and read the badge. “Yeah honey, it was called a ‘Cruise’ or something. I think it’s made by Chevy.”

GAY4 IS A FAG!

Hey everybody,not to rain on your parade,but Ford SUCKS! How about those death transmissions in the Ford mini-vans?

In the old GM the vehicle teams were told to pick two features, say mpg and interior sound level, and make them “wins” and beat the competition. Then they would pick 5 more, interior, powertrain, etc. and make them level with the vehicles in its competition set. This caused the cars to be behind the competition when the new competition came out.

Why did they do this? Because they could not make a profit if they put too much money into the vehicle due to their higher costs (UAW, US built, etc). You know, the beancounters.

If you have listened for the last year you would have heard GM saying they are now going to be the best in every category. You can see that in the products that have been coming out for the last couple years.

I have heard the Cruze has been delayed because it was not a winner in every category and they are quickly making revisions.

Anyone with a basic knowledge of automotive engineering knows that all of GM’s claims for fuel ratings are pure BS. They don’t take into account for any real world driving. It wouldn’t suprise me if they did their fuel rate testing on only the engine and on a dyno.

Ic3m4n – When I owned a 2003 Impala I was actually getting the fuel economy that it was rated for on the hwy. 40 imperial miles per gallon while driving 120kph (75mph).

^^^ i call your bs. driving downhill doesn’t count. that pos had a combined rating of 22mpg. Ic3m4n has a point and a good example would be what they tried to pull with the volt 200+ mpg rating before the EPA stepped in and told em to use the correct testing standard, which yielded a 48mpg rating.

This car looks like crap its already in Australia as the Holden cruze, in the flesh they look boring and cheep.

yea downhill and with a strong tail wind. all manufacturers are notorious for inflating there mileage ratings. GM has to be the worst of all manufacturers though. Like superman pointed out the Volts MPG is prime example. The new Camaro is another, the list could go on and on.

Superman – It was not driving downhill. I was driving 100 miles one way to work. The 3.4L engine in that Impala was awesome. I was knocking back 40 imperial miles per gallon on the highway with it which is what the car was rated for. It was a mostly flat drive however. If I was putting my foot into it and hitting 130 kph then it would dip down to 38 imperial miles per gallon. I personally don’t care if you believe me or not, but really why would I have any reason to lie about it.

On Average, I was filling my car up every two days at 720 km’s (450 miles) on the tank with the gas gauge still registering approximately 1/4 of a tank of gas left. The 2003 Impala had a 64.4L tank or 14.18 gallons. The general fill up and I can confirm this as I still have all my receipts for tax purposes from 2005 -2007 when I owned the car show an average 51L to fill up or 11.2 imperial gallons. If you divide 450 miles by 11.2 imperial gallons it equals out to 40.17 miles per gallon Imperial.

^^^ dude, what are you canadian? the imperial gallon is 20% bigger than the u.s. gallon; hence your 40mpg(imp) claim. but so what? given that the impala was rated at 29 mpg hwy, and you got 33mpg (u.s.) while feathering it on a straight road is no big deal. i have a g35 rated at 26 mpg hwy, and ive done 32mpg on a 60 mile trip many times. so what’s your point, anyone can squeeze more mpg outa their car if they drive it carefully. douche.

Superman – I said initially Imperial mile per gallon. Please read more carefully. And yes I am Canadian. What are you talking about feathering??? The is 20kph more than the posted limit (120kph or 75mph). If I was going the speed limit I probably would have got 44 or 45 mpg. I am by far not at all a gentle driver on vehicle you jackass. How fast driving when you got 32mpg american in that G35. I am guessing probably not 75mph. I am guessing 55.

Superman – just so you know that also was not a once in a while average per trip mile per gallon rating. That is the average my impala got all the time on the highway for the entire time I owned it. I put 210,000kms on in 3.5 years or so you can understand it 131250 miles in 3.5 years. And I have all receipts, including fuel receipts and liter logs for it since I was running my own business at the time and I need for tax purposes.

superman- I’m pretty skeptical that you own a G35. After reading your post, the only thing you seem suited for is labor and nothing tactical or involving any intelligence. ajm11 was replying to an earlier post that said gm vehicles don’t get reported fuel economy, and thats why he was posting those numbers. And then call someone a douche for… what?

Hate to stop this intelligent discussion but GM does not make up the MPG numbers displayed on their website or window stickers. They, like all vehicles sold in the US, get the numbers from the EPA (government group). The EPA runs the test procedures on vehicles.

jayjc08, no comment. you prove once again that you are retarded. i’ll send you my 06 g’s lugnut for you to eat on.

ajm11, your 3.4 v6 put out only 180hp and you are rejoiced that it did 33mpg hwy. my v6 puts out 300hp and i can get nearly the same mpg as many times. i think that about sums up this conversation. have a nice day.

Too bad we won’t see the LNF SS version. With the demise of the Cobalt, I believe it’s the end of the line for this engine.

Cobalt SS engine lives on in something. Sorry I can not remember which vehicle it was.

I’m a bit confused. G35 is rated 17/24. Is someone actually claiming they get 33? Thats wonderful. You really are superman.

Yeah, I’ m thinking they probably should have named it the Nova that way Chevy would have all their iconic names back on their cars that made them great in the first place.

Superman – Nothing against your G35 as I know they are nice vehicles. But I really highly doubt you were getting anywhere near 32 or 33 american miles per gallon on the hwy all the time with that. As for the horsepower figures of 180hp vs 300hp. I really could not have cared less about how much power my car had at the time. I bought what I was looking for at the time. A vehicle that was comfortable, got good gas mileage on the highway as the only time the car ever went into the city was to get oil changes, the brakes done and new tires. I also was specifically looking for an OHV engine car as I was sick of spending $1,000 Canadian every year on timing belts. I also knew very well, that putting 45,000 miles or 72,000km’s a year on a vehicle would mile it out fast and it would be worth nothing when I was done with it. So why would I spend probably close to 3 times more for a G35 so I could put 135,000 miles on in 3.5 years and have it be worth nothing afterward. That would make no sense at all.

Wow, as a current owner of a 2006 G35 i must say i’ve never gotten 33mpg,,,,Nothing even close to that….I wonder what I’m doing wrong? Maybe superman can give me some pointers on how to drive more efficiently?