Need separate option for Cruze Eco
February 3, 2012 2:55 PM 
Subscribe
Subscribe
We don't like to get into tracking the various trim levels that manufacturers offer. Often those are marketing distinctions rather than meaningful distinctions. We're trying to keep things very simple so that someone who doesn't know the distinctions between all of these different options can just find Chevy Cruze. We talk a little more about it here: Why don't you track more vehicle details?
It is often a marketing distinction, but with the Cruze Eco, its a significant difference. I'll go down the list. Compared to all other Cruze trims, the Eco trim has:
1. a lower grille shutter that closes at higher speeds to reduce drag
2. a lip spoiler that makes the car more aerodynamic and reduces drag
3. a ~220lb weight reduction
4. skid plates underneath the car to reduce drag
5. taller gearing on the manual transmission in 5th and 6th gear
6. suspension is lowered 10mm to reduce drag
7. low rolling resistance tires
8. forged aluminum 17" wheels to reduce rolling weight, which are 21lbs lighter than the base 16" alloys
9. a unique front fascia and air dam to reduce drag
All factors combined, the Eco trim with the Manual transmission gets 28mpg city, 42mpg highway, while all other trims get 25mpg city, 36mpg highway.
All of these factors combined should indicate that the Eco trim is not just a marketing distinction and is significantly different from the rest of the Cruze trims.
Yeah, I'm taking a look at the page here that lists the Eco along with the other trim levels: LS, 1LT, 2LT, LTZ, and ECO. And I just don't think those distinctions are right for Fuelly. I get that they're meaningful distinctions with some serious differences, but we can't get into tracking the trim level of every model out there. We just don't have the resources for it, and allowing them into the main directories would end up being very confusing for people.
You're welcome to call your Cruze a 'Cruze Eco' and track it on the site. It just won't be listed in the public browsing that way.
I just figured it would be worthwhile to differentiate cars that have significant differences between trim levels. Fuel economy on the LS, 1LT, 2LT, and LTZ will the same, with the Eco the only trim standing out.
You already do this on vehicles such as the Honda Civic. You have specific sections for the plain Civic and the Civic Si. Isn't the Si just another trim level? Last time I checked, it is, and the difference in fuel economy compared to the standard Civic is about 2-6mpg depending on what year you're looking at. What makes it so special compared to, say, a Cobalt and a Cobalt SS? Simply the number of people who own one on fuelly?
For example, as of 2012, there's a Honda Civic Hybrid available. The difference between this model and the other Civic models should be obvious, yet there isn't a section for it. What will you tell people when they request one The difference isn't great enough between models?
It would appear that the "browse all cars" section of this site is of very limited use and having developed websites in the past, I can't imagine it would be too difficult to add "Cruze Eco" similar to the way you did "Civic Si."
Here's a fun fact: there are 2x more Cruze vehicles registered on this site (223 exactly) for 2011 and 2012 than there are Honda Civics and Honda Civic Si combined (92).
It just doesn't make sense to me.
For example, as of 2012, there's a Honda Civic Hybrid available. The difference between this model and the other Civic models should be obvious, yet there isn't a section for it.
You can use the filter controls at the top of the page to limit the listing to Civic Hybrids if you want to. It's a different engine altogether.
The Cruze Eco has the same engine as any Cruze. I understand your view--you'd like to see how that trim level performs on its own. Unfortunately we can't track every potential level of detail that folks want to see.
What happened to the customer being right? We your customers would like you to add a trim option for the Chevy Cruze ECO, due to it being the high mileage option for the Chevy Cruze. Is this a fuel tracking site? Take the 5 minutes to add it to the drop down.
You're both new here and might not be aware of our site history. We've had debates here in the past about how much detail to track and where we draw the line. At one point we had diesel Jettas as a separate model, and after some debate we decided to keep them together in a single model and rely on the filter controls. And that idea of keeping things simple and consolidated has been a guiding principle for us on decisions like these.
Chevy doesn't list the Cruze ECO as a separate model on their website. It's a trim level. And we don't add a new model for a trim level unless there's a significant difference from the standard model. We don't want to add any model distinction that anyone wants—the directory would become out of control fairly quickly. I just haven't seen the case made. Maybe there's a great reason to break with our system in this case. We can discuss it here.
I sincerely appreciate you talking about this instead of just closing up this thread. Thanks for that.
Well, lets make it simple. Go to the 2012 Cruze, and find every Eco manual transmission model you can find, then calculate the average fuel economy. You'll find its somewhere around 39mpg.
The average for all 2012 Cruzes of any trim is 32.6mpg, a 6.4mpg difference. While that in itself is significant, what's even more significant is that the current 32.6mpg listing includes the Eco models as well. Take them out of the equation, and I can almost guarantee you the difference will be at least 8mpg. For the purposes of a fuel tracking website, 8mpg is certainly significant.
It doesn't have to be an entirely new model. I can see where that could turn into a slippery slope and as an IT systems engineer, I can see where best practices need to be followed and lines need to be drawn.
The golden combination here is the Cruze Eco with the Manual transmission. The automatic version, while being rather uncommon, doesn't pull the same fuel economy numbers. Could there be added an option in the drop-down for "ECO MT" in the engine choices? It should be a fairly minor change, but would still allow for some kind of distinction.
I'm not trying to make your lives more difficult. I just strongly believe that the Cruze Eco MT deserves some kind of distinction.
With the Jetta diesel you can easily filter by diesel engine. There is no easy filter for the ECO unless you add it as a body style option.
We're definitely planning to add an option across all vehicles for selecting automatic or manual transmission. That's been on our to do list forever. So we're not going to go down the road of adding a special model for transmission differences, because a blanket auto vs. manual feature will take of that eventually.
Any system that has rules is going to have friction where those rules exist. People are going to want those rules changed no matter where we draw the line. The passion for this change is there, I see that. I know that you really want it. I'd like to be able to add for it you, but you have to see things from our perspective as well. I'm trying to find a way to change our rules so I can make this happen and I just don't see it yet.
Our current rule is: we don't add a new model distinction for a trim level without a significant difference. A significant difference might be a completely different engine. (eg. Civic vs. Civic Si. The Si has its own Wikipedia article.) We not only manage the Cruze section of the site, but every other section as well, so we need to have rules that apply across all vehicles.
The new rule I've heard proposed here is: split the trim into its own model when you have at least 6-8 mpg difference from the base model. That's a tough rule to use going forward because it's very difficult to prove that. Mileage can be all over the map based on driving style, geographic location, and a bunch of other factors. Basing a rule on mileage is going to be very difficult for us to follow.
There is no easy filter for the ECO unless you add it as a body style option.
That's true, and there simply can't be an easy filter option for every aspect of a vehicle that people want to compare. It might be nice to see how spoilers affect mileage, but we can't have a "spoiler" filter—it's too narrow of an interest. We're serving a very wide audience and we have to make decisions based on that.
Customers? Is there a pay option now?
If you add manual/auto transmission that covers the issue for me.
BDC, yes I am a customer. In case you hadn't noticed they are getting AD revenue. If they treat their customer the way it appears you would treat your customers they would not get much AD revenue, as their customers would leave.
I pay Google nothing, I am sure that they consider me to be a customer.
No one is paying here, but yes we do make money with ads and we do take customer service seriously. We want to work with people so they're happy using Fuelly. We know it's not possible for it to work out that way 100% of the time. It's a balancing act and we're always trying to improve.
Well, you're given an opportunity to improve here. What more proof do you need? You have the numbers recorded in your very own website.
I went through the 2011 model Cruzes since the 2012 sample size is fairly small. I calculated the average of all of the Eco models, Auto and Manual, and then calculated the average of all other models, or models that weren't specified regardless of what fuel economy they posted. Here's what I discovered:
Cruze Eco average recorded fuel economy: 37.3
Cruze non-Eco average recorded fuel economy: 28.8
I used the best of my ability to differentiate which was an Eco and which wasn't. Its typically very easy to tell apart an Eco from another model due to the unique forged aluminum wheels only available on the Eco.
The difference in average recorded fuel economy is 8.5mpg between Eco models and non-Eco models. If you took out the automatic Eco models, that Eco average would be even higher, but I digress.
How much more of a case needs to be made? 8.5mpg is no minor difference. I think its safe to assume that being able to separate the Eco from the non-Eco models, or being able to separate the automatic from the manual transmission would make the numbers your site is producing much more accurate.
8.5 MPG is a good difference. I tried to explain why we can't base a rule on mileage difference. Someone might have a Cruze 2LT. Through careful driving they also get > 8.5 MPG difference. Should that be added as its own model as well? I don't think so. We don't want to get into adding every trim level for every model. It would make the directory sprawl out of control very quickly. So while you see adding the ECO as an opportunity to improve, I see it as a step toward making things worse.
If we can come up with a solid rule that makes sense going forward and wouldn't degrade the quality of the listings we can do it. Until then I'm going to have to say no.
>I pay Google nothing, I am sure that they consider
>me to be a customer
They do not, to Google we are resources.
Google/facebook/etc's customers are actually the advertising agencies, not us. Their business is selling our browsing to the agencies as it were.
Take a guess as to what will happen if someone might drive a Cruze Eco carefully? Actually, its been done; 64.4MPG. +27.1mpg over my average.
http://green.autoblog.com/2011/08/25/2012-chevy-cruze-eco-gets-64-4-mpg-in-48-state-9-564-mile-drive/
That "point" can go both ways, but I can guarantee you that nobody will be getting 64.4 MPG out of a non-Eco. They chose the Eco instead of a 1LT, 2LT, or LTZ with a manual (which by the way are very uncommon) if not flat out rare.
If you want help making a solid rule, you have people here willing to help. You don't seem to be asking for help though; you seem to be repeating the same thing, that you won't add this as a separate model.
I get it, I really do, which is why I changed the wording in my last post from "new model" to "separate" and "differentiate." Is there any way to allow a separation between the Cruze Eco (+8.5mpg over non-Eco average over 151 vehicles), Cruze LS (only model with a 1.8L N/A), and Cruze 1LT, 2LT, and LTZ? All technicalities aside, you stated very clearly in another thread here that this is a fuel economy site (not a cost of ownership site), so for the purposes of fuel economy tracking, there are 3 types of "Cruze" that are different from each other.
Why hasn't an option been considered for trim level as a drop-down menu? You have it for engine - which for 95% of the population is useless and confusing. Will people really know the difference between "Flex L4", "Gas L4", and "Gas?" That information isn't even in the window sticker of a new Cruze and is more difficult to obtain for you than trim levels would be.
Sure, it would be more work, but am I the first one to come here with this kind of problem, and will I be the last?
We're not going to add a trim level option. I disagree that people know their trim level better than the type of fuel their vehicle uses. Fuelly is a small operation—two guys working on it part time. We have to structure the site in a way that we can manage.
I understand why you're disappointed that Fuelly can't be everything that you can imagine it could be. There are other options out there. The EPA has a fuel-tracking site, and they use much more detailed vehicle listings. That might be a good alternative for you.
My personal feeling is that the engine info is useless & confusing, but I'm not going to go ranting about that one again :-)
PB, not to jump into this fray since I don't have a dog in the fight so to speak and I am tremendously appreciative for all that you and Mathowie do for us here on Fuelly but I do have a question / suggestion on this thread. Would it be possible to add 1.4LTurbo as an engine option? It would seem that this would allow the Cruze Eco crowd to filter within the model as they are asking without breaking out the manuals and automatics and maintain the Fuelly policy of not adding superfulous trim lines that confuse the membership at large and exponentially expand the vehicle lists to the point of being unmanageable.
I am not trying to jump into your business by any means and again I really appreciate the site and all your hard work. It just seemed to me as I read this thread that possibly this would keep all parties happy and not create a new rule or additional workload for you and Mathowie. In effect it would be like the difference between a V6 and an I4, both are gasoline engines but may have significant fuel economy differences due to horsepower and application variances. Is this workable for you?
Thanks again,
bates
No, we don't track any sort of engine displacement size or turbo at the current time. We can't make an exception for a single engine. That would solve the issue at hand in this particular case, but would open up hundreds of other cases.
Why don't we track engine displacement size for all engines? Why not track whether or not an engine has Turbo? We've covered this ground quite a bit in the past. The FAQ has more info: Why don't you track more vehicle details?
We simply can't track every potential dimension that folks want to track. And people want to track all kinds of things. We're trying to be a general interest site for people who might not be car enthusiasts. That's going to frustrate the enthusiasts. But in the long run, we feel like getting the general car owning population to track their fuel economy is more important than pleasing car enthusiasts. Yes that means less data to sort on, but it means more data to look through because we believe it means more people will be tracking. It's all trade-offs and we feel like we're at a good balancing point right now.
I invite you to go down the street, find a sample size of 100 people, and ask them what engine they have in their car, then ask them the trim. Chances are, they'll walk to the back of their car and say "oh, I have a Malibu LTZ, it says so on the badge." It won't be "oh, I have a I-4 2.4L 4-cylinder engine. The general public is quite ignorant with regard to general mechanics.
Let me know if you need help with this when you decide it will be worthwhile. This site/idea is large and significant enough to where it will be increasing very quickly in popularity. I don't see it going away; you guys are doing something nobody else is for free and that's special, especially with fuel cost trends.
At some point in the future, people will want to differentiate between things like this, because 8.5mpg as an average is huge. I'm not going to pursue this any longer as I can see its not getting me anywhere, but I will leave you with yet another post a fellow Cruze Eco owner made on a forum where I discussed this very issue, as my closing statement:
"I agree there should be something separating them to let people know the difference in fuel economy. As my fuelly shows I get awesome mpg but I have actually herd people say "ohh wow you get really good FE but when I go on fuelly they are not rated that high" I dnt want ppl thinking I am just bragging and making up numbers that are high when they ask me how my FE is. When you look at my #'s compared to the cruze they are really high, but if you break them down into eco vs non eco there is not as big of a difference, so people are more inclined to realizing the ecos to get impressive FE.
I personally only got this car as a comutter and for the FE and thats it, I have an 07 vette for fun. Every penny I save on fuel can go towards fun parts for the vette. I had a 97 tdi that got amazing mileage before my cruze. I new I wanted to replace it with the best FE car I could get. So if I would have just looked at fuelly I would prolly not have gotten a cruze. But because I reasearched the **** out of this car I knew it was exceptional for FE. I was looking at new tdi's as well but then found the cruze. I went for the cruze because I got an amazing deal as I worked for my dealer all through college.
So for people like me where the biggest factor is FE, having a separte spot on fuelly would be very helpful
Ryan"
>I invite you to go down the street, find a sample
>size of 100 people, and ask them what engine they
>have in their car, then ask them the trim. Chances
>are, they'll walk to the back of their car and
>say "oh, I have a Malibu LTZ, it says so on the
>badge." It won't be "oh, I have a I-4 2.4L 4-
>cylinder engine. The general public is quite
>ignorant with regard to general mechanics.
Whereas if you do exactly the same thing in the UK, they'll almost certainly know the fuel type & displacement without having to look (but probably have no idea about the other stuff). Simply because displacement used to be how the annual tax was calculated (and a standard question on car insurance applications).
I was very surprised when I was in the states and I found that people didn't know the displacement of their own cars (but they simply had no reason to know it).
Fair enough PB, I understand and appreciate your position. Thank you and Mathowie once again for all you do for us users of Fuelly, I am truly thankful and appreciative of all your hard work.