If you hate diesel think about this.Its hard to compare a 1.4 liter turbo to a 2.0 liter turbo. If you just want to compare gas vs. diesel you would have to compare the Chevy Cruze diesel to its cousin the Buick Verano turbo. Both share the same platform and both have a 2.0 liter turbo but one is gas and the other diesel. The Chevy Cruze starts at $25,695 while the Buick Verano Turbo starts at $29,105. Thats a $3,410 savings. Verano gets 30MPGs while Cruze gets 46MPGs+. Now diesel looks better.
Diesels don't make sense in some cars. However, they work very well in Mercedes passenger vehicles since they, arguable, make the best diesels. Also, you're going to be paying for premium gas w/o the diesel so the delta for gas to diesel isn't much. There isn't much premium for the diesel car over the gas one either.
I don’t think these diesels are worth much after the cheating scandal. Also I don’t typically resale my cars… I drive until 300,000 miles (until car starts falling apart). Comes to 6 cents / mile which is a nice bargain
That's because they're calculating the payback using the combined fuel economy. If they solely used the highway mpg, the payback would be quicker, but it would also be unrealistic.
Funny, you actually brought up Consumer Reports as if it were an unbiased source, weird :p Now if you could stop joking for a second I'll draw attention to a valid source. Car and Driver were able to get only 27 combined from a 1.8 liter Civic, thats less than the real world city numbers for a Cruze Diesel. Don't believe me? Well a Canadian couple recently obtained near 55 MPG, the car being completely unmodified.
Here is the problem and it is spelled out in this video. Why American car companies don't get this is beyond me. EVERY vehicle available with a diesel (Except full size trucks) requires the purchase of some sort of a premium package to go with it. Totally defeating the purpose of the diesel to begin with. Why not just make the engine an option in EVERY trim line? VW is doing it right and that's why they will beat all in sales on diesel in the US.
you are getting a bigger engine with more power and better fuel economy. eco has 1.4 liter turbo engine. This has a 2.0 liter turbo diesel. for $4000 more dollars youre getting a bigger, more powerful engine. the turbo diesel has 13 more horsepower but more importantly 116 more ft-lbs of torque. If they put lets say a 1.4 liter turbo diesel the MPGs would be much greater than the Cruze eco.
Most of the world buys gas powered passenger cars, not diesel. Europe is unlike other parts of the world. Many Europeans get tax benefits for driving diesels, not because its a smarter, more economical fuel. Europeans have also had different emissions regulations. Many Europeans diesels simply cannot comply with our emissions standards. They can be made complaint, but you'd end up with a car that's less fuel efficient, less reliable, and that is $4,000-$8,000 more than a gas powered car.
Diesels depreciate more slowly than gas-engine cars, and depreciation is a bigger expense than fuel for most drivers. So CNET is wrong if it thinks the Cruze TD will only be $50/year cheaper to own than the Eco gas-engine model. There are only three things wrong with the Cruze TD that I can see: 1) because it weighs 3475 pounds, I don't think it will achieve those MPG numbers in the real world; 2) nearly all reviewers complain about the cramped rear seats; and 3) no manual transmission option.
Being that diesel cost about $.30 more per gallon...nah I will pass. BTW, wondering why your groceries cost so much lately? Pay attention to the cost of deisel. And no outrage from consumers...cause they think it only affects big ole nasty truck drivers....so who cares, right? With more diesel cars on the road, maybe somebody will get pissrd off and say something. I hope anyway.
I really don't see the point in buying a diesel sedan. They're more expensive to buy, more expensive to maintain, and diesel fuel is more expensive than gas. Yeah you're getting 33mpg, but you can do that in a Ford Fiesta. The only benefit I see in buying a diesel is if it's a truck and you need the 800lbs of torque.
so looks like not a good choice buying this one as compare to eco. unless you do lot of hwy driving. i highly doubt they will sell a lot. i can see buyers comparing to normal eco and prolly deciding on going with eco. ummm
Don't forget this car also takes DEF, adding to the cost of the already higher cost of diesel! I'll admit DEF is pretty cheap but the whole point of cars like this are to save money on fuel...I just don't see the point.
He never said past $30,000. My point is a 2.0 liter turbo diesel Cruze is a better buy than a Buick Verano 2.0 liter turbo gas. Both have similar equipment.
The reason they came out with the Cruze Diesel is because they had a european one with had a diesel and petrol engine option, so they brought it to the US
Honda Insight (45, close enough), Ford C-Max (58), Scion iQ (60), Mazda3 Skyactiv (58), and probably others I just can't get them off the top of my head
No...You didn't... I mean the EX-L, not EX, which has the exact sameengine as an LX. My neighbor has an HF from 2012 and he only got 45hwy when he was hypermiling, that included cutting the engine at 60mph, he's 63, so don't think he was tearing down the freeway, he was far from that. Motortrend hasn't done the Cruze Diesel for MPG yet, but they've estimated at least 42. Consumer Reports reviewers think parttime 4WD is a bad thing, & that comfort beats reliable, believe me, See 4runner review
C-Max Hybrid only gets 40 highway, they changed it from 47 because everyone knew they were lying, same price. Scion IQ gets 37 highway, the Mazda Skyactiv diesel probably can get 58 highway, but the gas only gets 39 highway. Most diesels get better mpg during consumer tests like Car & Driver and Motortrend, but I do agree 25k is not exactly cheap, I would go for a cheaper, nicer, better combined mpg Jetta.
A '12 civic hf or lx... Consumer reports tested them and got 47 and 49 mpg hwy, respectively...the cruze diesel they tested tied with the hf at 49 in their tests...the cruze diesel is a waste of money IMO
They may think that when rating their cars but I'm not talking about that, I'm talking mpg here which they seem to give accurate numbers on...and your neighbor may have different highway conditions than us, my mom has a lead foot and still managed 43 mpg hwy on the same 38 mile route that my aunt got 49.7...sure the cruze diesel may get a little better mpg at lower speed highway driving that the civic hf may but it's not significant enough to justify buying it over a cheaper civic hf or lx
It was near 1000ft above sea level and rained once, rest of the trip was sun, he actualy was about to buy a diesel after he found out it had better mpg, but he hasn't officially paid off the car. He told me he'll probably buy one in mid-June. I don't know if you're miscalculating, your car is modified, or you're just from a country where the emission rules are different, thus not putting a bunch of smog bullshit on the car which, in turn, worsens mpg. I dunno, 50 sounds like a bit of a stretch.
I'd like to know the difference in observed mileage, not the EPA numbers, and then look at long term costs. Gas engines generally do worse than EPA numbers in real world driving while diesels usually do better.
Will or does? No spare tire?!?! Come on! Chevy is responsible for people in the US hating diesels, I will stick with the companies that have been selling them in numbers even in the US (Benz, BMW and VW)
The Cruze is a globally developed car, it isn't just a Daewoo product. And the diesel isn't a Fiat engine, it's a VM Motori engine and VM is co-owned by GM and Fiat. but yeah Dave is a dope.
You are lying. I am from Europe and my family owns a diesel. Hybrid technology is a newer and better technology than diesel. Since diesel is only good for highway cruising and carrying loads. Also in real life hybrids get better gas mileage as well. check the Honda insight review from mpgomatic for example. It is a 23K car and 46.5 mpg AVERAGE i.e. COMBINED consumption. This is equal to about 5 liters/ 100 Km vs a 1.5 L Renault Clio diesel's 5.5 liters/100 Km in real life. It is %10 difference.
You don't know the real reason why those people promote diesels. They are mainly Europeans and they want to sell their cars in the US and they do this because they believe American car companies can't produce decent diesel engines. So don't try to reason with them their motivation is more political than practical.
My father had three diesel cars during the late 70s early 80s. We had a Peugeot 504 sedan and wagon, then later a VW Rabbit. They were awful slow, smelly vehicles. The Peugeot's where terrible cars, they were constantly in the shop for something. The VW was only marginally better. Today diesel cars are too expensive, They need to offer the engine in lower base trims. Even with VW one has to buy a mid range model to get diesel.
If you take a loan like, oh I don't know, everyone does, you'll still be paying the same amount for the car per month, and a Cruze will sip at about 54.7mpg if you consistently go 50mph-ish. By comparison, Car and Driver only squeezed out 29 mpg combined. Talk about exaggeration, plus, once Americans realize the superiority of diesels, the price of diesel fuel will go down, the price of the cars will go down.
I agree it's priced a lot higher, However, I think judging the price by mileage alone is dumb... the biggest change is the diesel It makes 264ft lbs of torque, the fun to drive factor just went waaaay up
The ideal cruze is lowest traction 0.7g, extreme tail flick, extreme slide, 20-100 l/100km, over 100 l/100km by leader board requests to do. From Database gm record
My Chevy Cruze Eco's computer always under estimates the amount of fuel used and therefore the computed mileage figures, which are based on the fuel use, are exaggerated by about 10%. In spite of this it appears I get about 38 mpg when at 65 mph in my automatic transmission car.
By 50 mpg you are referring to a diesel which is an expensive car in the first place, and considering that diesel duel is more expensive in many states than premium. you are saying that you actually choosing a more costly alternative which will not be able to pay itself within the life time of the car. In a simple comparison. it will take about 50 years to even out a Jetta diesels ownership cost to Cruze Eco ownership cost, with more $3000 difference in price. :)
First of all cr's road tests are very accurate, we have verified their mpg claims in a '12 civic lx rental where we got 49.7 mpg in 38 miles of hwy driving Secondly you're talking about the civic EX that car and driver tested, in the HF that they tested they got 34 mpg, 7 more than the EX
They need to get some Diesel Hood Ornaments that have been sitting in a GM warehouse for 30 years that were used on Oldsmobiles in the 1980s and put them on this car. Note the use of the term Delta (as in Delta 88 Diesel) at 2:24 .
We were at speeds between 50 and 60 most of the time due to some light traffic (lower speed=more mpg) and the traffic also allowed us to draft off of other vehicles, and then there were only two of us in the car and one bag in the trunk...maybe all of that helped us... And we're also at sea level (we live on Long Island NY)
Just love your reviews. I am looking at new cars and have test driven the VW diesel, which I liked. I am driving a hybrid now and like you stated you have to do a lot of driving to actually just break even.
Crap review. Mine gets mid to upper 50 mpg highway. Basic running around is in the 40s. City.. mid 30s. I guess you just have to know how to drive a car
The review and to be fair the EPA ratings and fuel savings estimates don't take into the fact how much more you'll save if most of the driving you do is on the highway. In that case it would make much more sense to get one over a gasser.
I found a new Cruze Diesel for $21,900. Such a good deal, but I know that it will never pay for itself.
They cost less than 10k now
If you hate diesel think about this.Its hard to compare a 1.4 liter turbo to a 2.0 liter turbo. If you just want to compare gas vs. diesel you would have to compare the Chevy Cruze diesel to its cousin the Buick Verano turbo. Both share the same platform and both have a 2.0 liter turbo but one is gas and the other diesel. The Chevy Cruze starts at $25,695 while the Buick Verano Turbo starts at $29,105. Thats a $3,410 savings. Verano gets 30MPGs while Cruze gets 46MPGs+. Now diesel looks better.
GM's laughing at VW.
hahahaha im laughing too.
me too haha
Give it some time and gn will be in the same place as vw
Who would buy a diesel sedan that isnt european in the US?
coalie roller uhhhh, VW Dieselgate changed that FAST
Me and it’s the best.
Diesels don't make sense in some cars. However, they work very well in Mercedes passenger vehicles since they, arguable, make the best diesels. Also, you're going to be paying for premium gas w/o the diesel so the delta for gas to diesel isn't much. There isn't much premium for the diesel car over the gas one either.
MB costs $50,000. The chevy is only $25,000 base
He didn't calculate the resale value that's where you earn it back
I'm thinking about buying one they are less than 10k now
I don’t think these diesels are worth much after the cheating scandal. Also I don’t typically resale my cars… I drive until 300,000 miles (until car starts falling apart). Comes to 6 cents / mile which is a nice bargain
the EPA is biased against diesels, that fact is known. the payback will be much faster than 101 years (i.e. never lol), probably more like 10.
That's because they're calculating the payback using the combined fuel economy. If they solely used the highway mpg, the payback would be quicker, but it would also be unrealistic.
Nah... Love my Chevy trailblazer but at 15mpg, I'll take the 50mpg on longer trips any day.
Funny, you actually brought up Consumer Reports as if it were an unbiased source, weird :p Now if you could stop joking for a second I'll draw attention to a valid source. Car and Driver were able to get only 27 combined from a 1.8 liter Civic, thats less than the real world city numbers for a Cruze Diesel. Don't believe me? Well a Canadian couple recently obtained near 55 MPG, the car being completely unmodified.
Here is the problem and it is spelled out in this video. Why American car companies don't get this is beyond me. EVERY vehicle available with a diesel (Except full size trucks) requires the purchase of some sort of a premium package to go with it. Totally defeating the purpose of the diesel to begin with. Why not just make the engine an option in EVERY trim line? VW is doing it right and that's why they will beat all in sales on diesel in the US.
you are getting a bigger engine with more power and better fuel economy. eco has 1.4 liter turbo engine. This has a 2.0 liter turbo diesel. for $4000 more dollars youre getting a bigger, more powerful engine. the turbo diesel has 13 more horsepower but more importantly 116 more ft-lbs of torque. If they put lets say a 1.4 liter turbo diesel the MPGs would be much greater than the Cruze eco.
Most of the world buys gas powered passenger cars, not diesel. Europe is unlike other parts of the world. Many Europeans get tax benefits for driving diesels, not because its a smarter, more economical fuel. Europeans have also had different emissions regulations. Many Europeans diesels simply cannot comply with our emissions standards. They can be made complaint, but you'd end up with a car that's less fuel efficient, less reliable, and that is $4,000-$8,000 more than a gas powered car.
Diesels depreciate more slowly than gas-engine cars, and depreciation is a bigger expense than fuel for most drivers. So CNET is wrong if it thinks the Cruze TD will only be $50/year cheaper to own than the Eco gas-engine model.
There are only three things wrong with the Cruze TD that I can see: 1) because it weighs 3475 pounds, I don't think it will achieve those MPG numbers in the real world; 2) nearly all reviewers complain about the cramped rear seats; and 3) no manual transmission option.
GM should bring over the Cruze Wagon next.
Being that diesel cost about $.30 more per gallon...nah I will pass. BTW, wondering why your groceries cost so much lately? Pay attention to the cost of deisel. And no outrage from consumers...cause they think it only affects big ole nasty truck drivers....so who cares, right? With more diesel cars on the road, maybe somebody will get pissrd off and say something. I hope anyway.
I really don't see the point in buying a diesel sedan. They're more expensive to buy, more expensive to maintain, and diesel fuel is more expensive than gas. Yeah you're getting 33mpg, but you can do that in a Ford Fiesta. The only benefit I see in buying a diesel is if it's a truck and you need the 800lbs of torque.
MAKE THE VIDEOS LONGER!!!
so looks like not a good choice buying this one as compare to eco. unless you do lot of hwy driving. i highly doubt they will sell a lot. i can see buyers comparing to normal eco and prolly deciding on going with eco. ummm
Don't forget this car also takes DEF, adding to the cost of the already higher cost of diesel! I'll admit DEF is pretty cheap but the whole point of cars like this are to save money on fuel...I just don't see the point.
unless its more reliable , diesels are supposed to last longer ....
He never said past $30,000. My point is a 2.0 liter turbo diesel Cruze is a better buy than a Buick Verano 2.0 liter turbo gas. Both have similar equipment.
No REALLY impress with this! And i would be concern if there is a low end torque lagg in MY diesel, Golf TDI is the way to go diesel! :)
VW Jetta. Real world is just at the 46 mpg. Little more money and get the Passat real world just under 49 mpg
Europeans understand how diesel is so great. Pretty much all of their cars come with a diesel engine optional.
Where I live diesel is typically .10 cents per litre cheaper than gasoline, sometimes better sometimes worse.
A turbo + a diesel...in an economy car. Maintenance should be fun as it closes in on 100k miles.
Schertzing ..... you just do not want to betray your last name. Stop being a hater.
So sick of hearing about this overpriced pos! Why would you pay $25k for a chevy this small!
GM converted an oldsmobile gas engine to run on diesel. that's why they were so bad
And another American diesel car that will quietly fade into the dustbin of history
The reason they came out with the Cruze Diesel is because they had a european one with had a diesel and petrol engine option, so they brought it to the US
buy a golf diesel,get done with it.If you have some brain.
lol transition music fades in as cooleys rambling fades out.
why dont they put Deisel in a car thats actually fun to drive
What new cars deliver 50 mpgs in america for thousands less?
doesn't make sense financially here in america at least
Am i the only one who enjoys driving my jetta tdi?
Too many diesel reviews Cooley !!!! ... I hate it
Hahahahaha! He took over a CTS-V!
Honda Insight (45, close enough), Ford C-Max (58), Scion iQ (60), Mazda3 Skyactiv (58), and probably others I just can't get them off the top of my head
30k for a Cruze? Thanks, but no thanks.
This car is way too expensive! You could get an Acura ILX Hybrid which does similar MPG numbers but is a LUXURY BRAND
A top trim Cruze goes for 31k... You can buy a CLA for that!!
No...You didn't... I mean the EX-L, not EX, which has the exact sameengine as an LX. My neighbor has an HF from 2012 and he only got 45hwy when he was hypermiling, that included cutting the engine at 60mph, he's 63, so don't think he was tearing down the freeway, he was far from that. Motortrend hasn't done the Cruze Diesel for MPG yet, but they've estimated at least 42. Consumer Reports reviewers think parttime 4WD is a bad thing, & that comfort beats reliable, believe me, See 4runner review
C-Max Hybrid only gets 40 highway, they changed it from 47 because everyone knew they were lying, same price. Scion IQ gets 37 highway, the Mazda Skyactiv diesel probably can get 58 highway, but the gas only gets 39 highway. Most diesels get better mpg during consumer tests like Car & Driver and Motortrend, but I do agree 25k is not exactly cheap, I would go for a cheaper, nicer, better combined mpg Jetta.
A '12 civic hf or lx... Consumer reports tested them and got 47 and 49 mpg hwy, respectively...the cruze diesel they tested tied with the hf at 49 in their tests...the cruze diesel is a waste of money IMO
They may think that when rating their cars but I'm not talking about that, I'm talking mpg here which they seem to give accurate numbers on...and your neighbor may have different highway conditions than us, my mom has a lead foot and still managed 43 mpg hwy on the same 38 mile route that my aunt got 49.7...sure the cruze diesel may get a little better mpg at lower speed highway driving that the civic hf may but it's not significant enough to justify buying it over a cheaper civic hf or lx
It was near 1000ft above sea level and rained once, rest of the trip was sun, he actualy was about to buy a diesel after he found out it had better mpg, but he hasn't officially paid off the car. He told me he'll probably buy one in mid-June. I don't know if you're miscalculating, your car is modified, or you're just from a country where the emission rules are different, thus not putting a bunch of smog bullshit on the car which, in turn, worsens mpg. I dunno, 50 sounds like a bit of a stretch.
I got up to 60 mpg
drive in the city much?
I'd like to know the difference in observed mileage, not the EPA numbers, and then look at long term costs. Gas engines generally do worse than EPA numbers in real world driving while diesels usually do better.
Will or does? No spare tire?!?! Come on! Chevy is responsible for people in the US hating diesels, I will stick with the companies that have been selling them in numbers even in the US (Benz, BMW and VW)
The Cruze is a globally developed car, it isn't just a Daewoo product. And the diesel isn't a Fiat engine, it's a VM Motori engine and VM is co-owned by GM and Fiat.
but yeah Dave is a dope.
You are lying. I am from Europe and my family owns a diesel. Hybrid technology is a newer and better technology than diesel. Since diesel is only good for highway cruising and carrying loads.
Also in real life hybrids get better gas mileage as well. check the Honda insight review from mpgomatic for example. It is a 23K car and 46.5 mpg AVERAGE i.e. COMBINED consumption. This is equal to about 5 liters/ 100 Km vs a 1.5 L Renault Clio diesel's 5.5 liters/100 Km in real life. It is %10 difference.
You dont live in the U.S. then!
You don't know the real reason why those people promote diesels. They are mainly Europeans and they want to sell their cars in the US and they do this because they believe American car companies can't produce decent diesel engines. So don't try to reason with them their motivation is more political than practical.
My father had three diesel cars during the late 70s early 80s. We had a Peugeot 504 sedan and wagon, then later a VW Rabbit. They were awful slow, smelly vehicles. The Peugeot's where terrible cars, they were constantly in the shop for something. The VW was only marginally better. Today diesel cars are too expensive, They need to offer the engine in lower base trims. Even with VW one has to buy a mid range model to get diesel.
If you take a loan like, oh I don't know, everyone does, you'll still be paying the same amount for the car per month, and a Cruze will sip at about 54.7mpg if you consistently go 50mph-ish. By comparison, Car and Driver only squeezed out 29 mpg combined. Talk about exaggeration, plus, once Americans realize the superiority of diesels, the price of diesel fuel will go down, the price of the cars will go down.
I agree it's priced a lot higher,
However, I think judging the price by mileage alone is dumb... the biggest change is the diesel
It makes 264ft lbs of torque, the fun to drive factor just went waaaay up
The ideal cruze is lowest traction 0.7g, extreme tail flick, extreme slide, 20-100 l/100km, over 100 l/100km by leader board requests to do.
From
Database gm record
My Chevy Cruze Eco's computer always under estimates the amount of fuel used and therefore the computed mileage figures, which are based on the fuel use, are exaggerated by about 10%. In spite of this it appears I get about 38 mpg when at 65 mph in my automatic transmission car.
By 50 mpg you are referring to a diesel which is an expensive car in the first place, and considering that diesel duel is more expensive in many states than premium. you are saying that you actually choosing a more costly alternative which will not be able to pay itself within the life time of the car. In a simple comparison. it will take about 50 years to even out a Jetta diesels ownership cost to Cruze Eco ownership cost, with more $3000 difference in price. :)
First of all cr's road tests are very accurate, we have verified their mpg claims in a '12 civic lx rental where we got 49.7 mpg in 38 miles of hwy driving
Secondly you're talking about the civic EX that car and driver tested, in the HF that they tested they got 34 mpg, 7 more than the EX
True but Diesel buyers usually go for the long haul. But I agree 100% the average person isn't going 20 years with a car.
They need to get some Diesel Hood Ornaments that have been sitting in a GM warehouse for 30 years that were used on Oldsmobiles in the 1980s and put them on this car. Note the use of the term Delta (as in Delta 88 Diesel) at 2:24 .
mic at 3:14 under mirror visor, noticed because of the video going in depth about their video production
We were at speeds between 50 and 60 most of the time due to some light traffic (lower speed=more mpg) and the traffic also allowed us to draft off of other vehicles, and then there were only two of us in the car and one bag in the trunk...maybe all of that helped us... And we're also at sea level (we live on Long Island NY)
30K for this, give me the 2013 Toyota Camry Hybrid XLE.
Check your facts, the Renault Clio Diesel was never tested by MPG-O-Matic. However, Honest John has tested it and they got 47mpg highway.
A lot like you, really
So this has exactly 100 more ft lbs of torque than my 2007 TSX and yet, it takes a full second more to get to 60?
In real world, all diesel sedans do, the EU states that most diesels get city mpg in the mid 30s at least
AE 6 parts from their database know as D grade cars with D segment.
From
Their database
Just love your reviews. I am looking at new cars and have test driven the VW diesel, which I liked. I am driving a hybrid now and like you stated you have to do a lot of driving to actually just break even.
Name one other car besides a Prius that will get 46 MPG on the highway for under 25k.
Review the BMW 435i xDrive Coupe when its out! It's a whole new series and it'll b good to review!
Thats 42 mpg highway and it's only 2k cheaper, and this is still better equipped
People are dumb.
Why does that State Farm ad always make me laugh.
Makes no sense.
It would be nice to kno what type of transmission they're usin! Not bad I like
Name one diesel car that gets more than 30 mpg in city regardless the price of it :)
wait WHAT??? How can a car not have ABS on all wheels?
Good job
So your telling me the base Chevy Cruze don't have 4-wheel ABS? lol
7rd
5rd
LOL
The Cruze will get 50.9 mpg real world on the highway...
You can easily get 50 MPG on a turbo diesel like this one.
DEF and DPF should be the first things you remove!
Diesel for life! Thank you GM American finally no more jetta
remember that you get all of the options installed.
Cruzin in the Cruze ❤️ Instagram: Alexandra_cruze
Crap review. Mine gets mid to upper 50 mpg highway. Basic running around is in the 40s. City.. mid 30s. I guess you just have to know how to drive a car
The review and to be fair the EPA ratings and fuel savings estimates don't take into the fact how much more you'll save if most of the driving you do is on the highway. In that case it would make much more sense to get one over a gasser.
Can it roll coal
+Sean Bowling NO because it has a soot filter
.
Delete it they sell kits
I'll be buying this car very soon!
all cruzes have 4 wheel ABS
Do one on a 370 Z Nissan
brian cooley, you're awesome
nice CTS-V at 5:17 ;)
Very true, well said