While my ECO was having PI-0935 performed, I was driving a Enterprise Rental (paid for by the dealership). The rental was a 2013 Cruze 1LT Automatic. Features included OnStar and the same radio I have in my ECO MT. The driver's seat was the manual 6-way seat. The 1LT had cruze control and steering wheel stereo controls. This is my impression of the 1LT after three days.
The single biggest improvement was the addition of two additional blower speeds. My ECO blower speeds are off, mouse breathing, sleeping cat breathing, mouse running for it's life, cat running for it's life. The 1LT had two additional speeds between the 2012's 3 & 4. Speeds 1, 2, and 3 were about the same. The 1LT's blower 6 was about the same as my ECO's blower speed 4. The 1LT's blower speeds 4 & 5 provided a really well positioned increments from 3 to 6. One other improvement in the instrumentation was the removal of the completely useless and misleading "Imperial" units. Metric and US are still available. Also, the Menu button switches modes faster. I did miss the digital temperature readout and the ECO's MPG 25/50/500 mile game display. I didn't expect the game display because as far as I know it's only on the ECO models.
Transmission: The automatic transmission was very smooth, but it was easy for me to confuse it and make it drop more gears than needed to accelerate. I ended up using the Manual mode most of the time while on the freeway. At stop lights the 1LT's transmission did not automatically shift to neutral. It appears GM had too many problems with roll back with this feature and has removed it from the programming.
Ride comfort: My ECO MT with the Goodyear FuelMax Assurance at 45 PSI was more comfortable and has a softer ride than the 1LT with its Firestones at 35 PSI. Better tires would really make a difference here.
Handling: Hands down my ECO MT handles better. I'm certain its because of the Firestones. I could feel them leaning onto their sidewalls during cornering; the Goodyears on my ECO don't lean onto the sidewalls nearly as much. Frankly if I had a car with these Firestones on it I wouldn't even look at Firestone when it comes time to replace the tires. Firestone would be well served to eliminate this tire from their lineup, especially as an OEM tire.
Fuel Economy: Coming from the ECO MT I found the fuel economy in the 1LT, despite my best efforts, to be lousy. Remember, I have been hyper-miling to some extent for the last 20+ years. I reset trip 1 to track my fuel economy.
IMG_20130418_160024.jpg (I have no idea why this is sideways.)
On this same commuting route I can expect to see 43-45 MPG in the same driving conditions (snow, slush, and ice). The Cruze's automatic transmission is hard to hyper-mile. You not only have to deal with the car trying to outguess you for gearing in full automatic, but in manual mode the car will not let you upshift if the resulting shift would bring the engine speed to below 1400-1500 RPM. I ended up having to think a lot more about how to get the car into the gear I wanted. Also, 2000 RPM in 6th gear (full auto and manual mode) is 55 MPH. 2000 RPM in my ECO MT is 65 MPH. I tested DFCO. It took twice as long to engage DFCO as it does in my ECO. This greatly changes the decision - neutral or DFCO - and tilts it more to the neutral option when attempting to coast. The 1LT slowed down a lot faster when in full automatic. In manual mode, it coasts a lot further and maintains speed for far longer, but still not as far or as fast as my ECO MT. Since hyper-miling takes practice and time to learn the particulars for each vehicle, I would definitely improve my fuel economy in the 1LT after a few months.
Bottom line: If I hadn't driven the ECO MT for so long I would have no problems driving the 2013 1LT Automatic. Although I strongly feel the ECO MT is by far the better car, for someone who does predominately city driving I would be more than willing to recommend the 1LT, especially if they're looking for an automatic transmission.
The single biggest improvement was the addition of two additional blower speeds. My ECO blower speeds are off, mouse breathing, sleeping cat breathing, mouse running for it's life, cat running for it's life. The 1LT had two additional speeds between the 2012's 3 & 4. Speeds 1, 2, and 3 were about the same. The 1LT's blower 6 was about the same as my ECO's blower speed 4. The 1LT's blower speeds 4 & 5 provided a really well positioned increments from 3 to 6. One other improvement in the instrumentation was the removal of the completely useless and misleading "Imperial" units. Metric and US are still available. Also, the Menu button switches modes faster. I did miss the digital temperature readout and the ECO's MPG 25/50/500 mile game display. I didn't expect the game display because as far as I know it's only on the ECO models.
Transmission: The automatic transmission was very smooth, but it was easy for me to confuse it and make it drop more gears than needed to accelerate. I ended up using the Manual mode most of the time while on the freeway. At stop lights the 1LT's transmission did not automatically shift to neutral. It appears GM had too many problems with roll back with this feature and has removed it from the programming.
Ride comfort: My ECO MT with the Goodyear FuelMax Assurance at 45 PSI was more comfortable and has a softer ride than the 1LT with its Firestones at 35 PSI. Better tires would really make a difference here.
Handling: Hands down my ECO MT handles better. I'm certain its because of the Firestones. I could feel them leaning onto their sidewalls during cornering; the Goodyears on my ECO don't lean onto the sidewalls nearly as much. Frankly if I had a car with these Firestones on it I wouldn't even look at Firestone when it comes time to replace the tires. Firestone would be well served to eliminate this tire from their lineup, especially as an OEM tire.
Fuel Economy: Coming from the ECO MT I found the fuel economy in the 1LT, despite my best efforts, to be lousy. Remember, I have been hyper-miling to some extent for the last 20+ years. I reset trip 1 to track my fuel economy.
IMG_20130418_160024.jpg (I have no idea why this is sideways.)
On this same commuting route I can expect to see 43-45 MPG in the same driving conditions (snow, slush, and ice). The Cruze's automatic transmission is hard to hyper-mile. You not only have to deal with the car trying to outguess you for gearing in full automatic, but in manual mode the car will not let you upshift if the resulting shift would bring the engine speed to below 1400-1500 RPM. I ended up having to think a lot more about how to get the car into the gear I wanted. Also, 2000 RPM in 6th gear (full auto and manual mode) is 55 MPH. 2000 RPM in my ECO MT is 65 MPH. I tested DFCO. It took twice as long to engage DFCO as it does in my ECO. This greatly changes the decision - neutral or DFCO - and tilts it more to the neutral option when attempting to coast. The 1LT slowed down a lot faster when in full automatic. In manual mode, it coasts a lot further and maintains speed for far longer, but still not as far or as fast as my ECO MT. Since hyper-miling takes practice and time to learn the particulars for each vehicle, I would definitely improve my fuel economy in the 1LT after a few months.
Bottom line: If I hadn't driven the ECO MT for so long I would have no problems driving the 2013 1LT Automatic. Although I strongly feel the ECO MT is by far the better car, for someone who does predominately city driving I would be more than willing to recommend the 1LT, especially if they're looking for an automatic transmission.