So GM of all people is giving us a diesel, 6-speed manual hatchback

z31maniac wrote: And? None of the people who cry for these types of cars will buy new, so it will be a flop and we won't see another one for decades.

Dreamers on this forum? Yeah, you're probably right. But one thing about a lot of diesel buyers is they often do care about maintenance and therefore will buy new to ensure they know 100% of the vehicle history. I know that was pretty much the #1 reason I bought my TDi new vs. used.

mazdeuce wrote: Price matters a LOT to the buyers in this segment. The engine premium has to pay for itself in fuel savings. All of the people I know who buy new diesels are good at math.

Yes, but again - a lot of the guys and gals who buy diesels just like diesels better. I saw this quite a bit on TDiClub. Quite a few members absolutely hated VW and didn't really care for the actual car (Jetta or Golf), but wanted a diesel so they lived with it. I remember a few years ago when it looked like Honda was threatening to sell a diesel car in the US. The forum was half-giddy with anticipation - "Finally!" they said, "a diesel engine with a reliable car wrapped around it."

Maybe it'll be better. Look at the 2015 models: The diesel MSRP is $5465 more than the eco model. The diesel is rated at 27/46, the eco at 28/42.

Doesn't seem like a good value.

GM is like the corporate king of actuarial science, as has been proven by many controversies of the past. I imagine the diesel will be priced juuuuuust where it needs to be in order to justify a look.

Since we're talking about operating expenses, don't diesels require more frequent (and larger volume) oil changes?

irish44j wrote: Color everyone here VERY interested, just as soon as they can find 5-year-old used ones

If this had been a year ago, we'd likely have bought one. Or at least drove one as one option when shopping.

In reply to Ian F:

When my sister owned a TDi beetle the all I could think was "what a fantastic motor in a horrible horrible car". So I guess I see where you're coming from.

kb58 wrote: Since we're talking about operating expenses, don't diesels require more frequent (and larger volume) oil changes?

Larger volume: sometimes. A lot of the newer, smaller diesels don't have massive sumps anymore and gassers have tended to gain oil capacity in recent years.

Frequency: nope, most of the newer cars recommend similar change intervals for both. IIRC, the VW TDIs recommend 10k mile changes.

ProDarwin wrote: The average gas engine from 30 years ago should go 300k without much issue, but I don't see many make it there.

The '86 VW that I have has around 380k on it and the insides of the engine look phenomenal. The engine wasn't why I stopped driving the car.

We almost NEVER see any actually worn-out engines if the car had fuel injection...

In reply to Knurled:

I wonder if direct injection will change that?

pointofdeparture wrote: Mind. Blown. I knew the Cruze hatchback was coming, but didn't expect a diesel. And today they confirmed the diesel will have a manual option.

It doesn't matter. The crowd that insists that this is the perfect car will refuse to buy it new.

If it's like the current Cruze diesel sedan, it won't be priced at a point where it makes sense to buy one over the gas model.

Nick (Bo) Comstock wrote: In reply to Knurled: I wonder if direct injection will change that?

How so? If anything, DI should be even better for engine life since there should, in theory, be ZERO cylinder wash and the oil should stay a lot cleaner as a result of that and the gases near the rings being mostly air instead of combustion byproduct.

That's theory, anyway... Diesels are also direct injection and run extremely lean by design and they turn oil into one of the nastiest substances to pollute a vehicle.

Knurled wrote:

Nick (Bo) Comstock wrote: In reply to Knurled: I wonder if direct injection will change that?

How so? If anything, DI should be even better for engine life since there should, in theory, be ZERO cylinder wash and the oil should stay a lot cleaner as a result of that and the gases near the rings being mostly air instead of combustion byproduct. That's theory, anyway... Diesels are also direct injection and run extremely lean by design and they turn oil into one of the nastiest substances to pollute a vehicle.

DI engines can carbon the intake ports because no fuel to wash 'em down like before, crankcase oil will bake on the ports and valves. Needs a separator/ catch can.

fasted58 wrote:

Knurled wrote:

Nick (Bo) Comstock wrote: In reply to Knurled: I wonder if direct injection will change that?

How so? If anything, DI should be even better for engine life since there should, in theory, be ZERO cylinder wash and the oil should stay a lot cleaner as a result of that and the gases near the rings being mostly air instead of combustion byproduct. That's theory, anyway... Diesels are also direct injection and run extremely lean by design and they turn oil into one of the nastiest substances to pollute a vehicle.

DI engines can carbon the intake ports because no fuel to wash 'em down like before, crankcase oil will bake on the ports and valves. Needs a separator/ catch can.

Yeah, I was hinting at the carbon deposits in relation to lack of maintenance that most consumers give their cars. A properly maintained engine will last forever, carb or injected. Hardly no one maintains their cars properly.

fasted58 wrote:

Knurled wrote:

Nick (Bo) Comstock wrote: In reply to Knurled: I wonder if direct injection will change that?

How so? If anything, DI should be even better for engine life since there should, in theory, be ZERO cylinder wash and the oil should stay a lot cleaner as a result of that and the gases near the rings being mostly air instead of combustion byproduct. That's theory, anyway... Diesels are also direct injection and run extremely lean by design and they turn oil into one of the nastiest substances to pollute a vehicle.

DI engines can carbon the intake ports because no fuel to wash 'em down like before, crankcase oil will bake on the ports and valves. Needs a separator/ catch can.

Not all of them do that. Just a few.

Also, there is borewash with DI engines- it's impossible to avoid.

Devilsolsi wrote: At least here in MD, Diesel tends to be about the same price as regular guess, if not a tiny bit cheaper.

Maybe in your part of MD. But move a couple counties west and it becomes 20-30 cents a gallon more expensive than regular.

alfadriver wrote:

fasted58 wrote:

Knurled wrote:

Nick (Bo) Comstock wrote: In reply to Knurled: I wonder if direct injection will change that?

How so? If anything, DI should be even better for engine life since there should, in theory, be ZERO cylinder wash and the oil should stay a lot cleaner as a result of that and the gases near the rings being mostly air instead of combustion byproduct. That's theory, anyway... Diesels are also direct injection and run extremely lean by design and they turn oil into one of the nastiest substances to pollute a vehicle.

DI engines can carbon the intake ports because no fuel to wash 'em down like before, crankcase oil will bake on the ports and valves. Needs a separator/ catch can.

Not all of them do that. Just a few. Also, there is borewash with DI engines- it's impossible to avoid.

Toyota thinks they solved this 10 years ago. It just filtered down to the new 3.5 and I only know this because I bought one and it was in the brochure.

http://wardsauto.com/technology/toyota-advances-d4s-self-cleaning-feature-tacoma

mazdeuce wrote: Price matters a LOT to the buyers in this segment. The engine premium has to pay for itself in fuel savings. All of the people I know who buy new diesels are good at math.

This. Keep it reasoanble (low 20k) and it'll sell well.

In reply to Huckleberry:

It's a heck of a lot simpler to prevent the buildup in the first place.

BTW, the rash of upcoming PFI-DI engines isn't to fix that problem, it's to fix a fuel pump flow limit to power problem.

Sorry about the tangent to the diesel discussion

Bobzilla wrote:

mazdeuce wrote: Price matters a LOT to the buyers in this segment. The engine premium has to pay for itself in fuel savings. All of the people I know who buy new diesels are good at math.

This. Keep it reasoanble (low 20k) and it'll sell well.

Problem is, it won't be reasonable. Saw the commercial for the hatch, and in the fine print at the bottom of the screen the price was 29K equipped as shown! (don't you just love modern HDTV) Pretty sure the first ones on the lots will be loaded to the gills. A brown base trim manual diesel 6 speed will most likely still be a unicorn..

Did someone say low production numbers? Now I'm interested. Make a higher performance version with good seats and I'll start to get itchy.

I just built one on the Chevy site and it looks like the manual hatch only comes in the LT trim level (second highest). With all the boxes ticked including special paint, it came in at $25k, or about $4k over base. And my guess is with the traditionally generous domestic incentives, we will be seeing them on the lot cheaper than that. Not sure where the diesel will end up but I will likely be checking out the gasser against the new Civic hatch.

Nick (Bo) Comstock wrote: A properly maintained engine will last forever, carb or injected. Hardly no one maintains their cars properly.

Carbureted engines will, without doubt, wear out more quickly, because of inconsistent fuel mixture and excessive rich running.

If anyone cares the 2012 1.4T that I purchased used in 2012 just passed 110k miles, I've invested in one set of tires, 20 Dexos oil services, and three warranty claims.

110k on one set of pads, rotors, shoes and drums. I have averaged 30 mpg for 4 years of service and would consider buying a new one.

Good job GM!

In reply to Knurled:

A properly tuned and maintained carb engine can last just as long as an injected one. We may just have to disagree on this.

Tolerances were looser back when carbs ruled the world, combine that with the general publics lack of properly maintaining and keeping the carb tuned and engines didn't last. Not to mention the vast improvement in materials and manufacturing.