I thought we determined the Astra and Cruse were both the same platform.
Anyone own a Chevy Cruze yet?
- Thread starter Popinski
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
I thought we determined the Astra and Cruse were both the same platform.
The latest "Astra J" is built on the same compact FWD platform as the Cruze. The previous generation "Astra H" (which is what your Astra is) was built on an earlier, unrelated, compact FWD platform. The only thing that the two compact FWD platforms share is the usage of the same Greek alphabetic designation to denote that they are both compact FWD chassis. The latest chassis is not an evolution of the earlier one.
I thought we determined the Astra and Cruse were both the same platform.
The latest "Astra J" is built on the same compact FWD platform as the Cruze. The previous generation "Astra H" (which is what your Astra is) was built on an earlier, unrelated, compact FWD platform. The only thing that the two compact FWD platforms share is the usage of the same Greek alphabetic designation to denote that they are both compact FWD chassis. The latest chassis is not an evolution of the earlier one.
Originally Posted By: css9450
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Lumina II is the nice name for it. I also called it a Chevrolet Imposter.
LOL You're the guy I was referring to!
He may have been unto something, LOL! You know there was a Citation II and a Mustang II.... ha haha!
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Lumina II is the nice name for it. I also called it a Chevrolet Imposter.
LOL You're the guy I was referring to!
He may have been unto something, LOL! You know there was a Citation II and a Mustang II.... ha haha!
Originally Posted By: rshunter
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
I thought we determined the Astra and Cruse were both the same platform.
The latest "Astra J" is built on the same compact FWD platform as the Cruze. The previous generation "Astra H" (which is what your Astra is) was built on an earlier, unrelated, compact FWD platform. The only thing that the two compact FWD platforms share is the usage of the same Greek alphabetic designation to denote that they are both compact FWD chassis. The latest chassis is not an evolution of the earlier one.
I know all that. What's your point?
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
I thought we determined the Astra and Cruse were both the same platform.
The latest "Astra J" is built on the same compact FWD platform as the Cruze. The previous generation "Astra H" (which is what your Astra is) was built on an earlier, unrelated, compact FWD platform. The only thing that the two compact FWD platforms share is the usage of the same Greek alphabetic designation to denote that they are both compact FWD chassis. The latest chassis is not an evolution of the earlier one.
I know all that. What's your point?
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
I know all that. What's your point?
The same as it has always been, that your answer to Popinski was incorrect.
Popinski: "OK.......so I guess no one on BITOG owns a Cruze yet...."
Audi Junkie: "Well, Astra, same thing."
No offense is intended, but I don't get why it's so hard to understand. I think it was blatantly obvious to everyone else from my very first post, unless I've started writing in Greek without realizing it...
"Not really, the Saturn Astra was built on the old Delta platform. The Cruze is based on the new Delta II platform. One is not the same as the other."
I know all that. What's your point?
The same as it has always been, that your answer to Popinski was incorrect.
Popinski: "OK.......so I guess no one on BITOG owns a Cruze yet...."
Audi Junkie: "Well, Astra, same thing."
No offense is intended, but I don't get why it's so hard to understand. I think it was blatantly obvious to everyone else from my very first post, unless I've started writing in Greek without realizing it...
"Not really, the Saturn Astra was built on the old Delta platform. The Cruze is based on the new Delta II platform. One is not the same as the other."
That's incorrect because the new Cruze is based on the new Astra.
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
That's incorrect because the new Cruze is based on the new Astra.
Yeah, but you don't own the new Astra. You own the previous generation, which means you don't own a car that's the "same thing". Now do you get my point?
That's incorrect because the new Cruze is based on the new Astra.
Yeah, but you don't own the new Astra. You own the previous generation, which means you don't own a car that's the "same thing". Now do you get my point?
GM always comes out with loaded models first, then the cheaper models after the first year or so. Also, they don't usually do rebates on new models like the ones that have been out for a while. I think the price will come down after the first year or two in what you will actually pay (factoring in incentives). It may be worth the wait. The economy version with even better gas mileage will be coming out soon. I suspect that will be a good bit cheaper. I sat in a Cruze and there is a lot of room (leg as well as headroom) for the front passenger and driver.
Any car that is a first year make is always super expensive and comes in loaded configurations.
Toyota Venza first came out, no rebates or offers and a high sticker price. New Mustangs came out and the same thing. After a year the production costs drop, price drops, and rebates/offers become available.
Toyota Venza first came out, no rebates or offers and a high sticker price. New Mustangs came out and the same thing. After a year the production costs drop, price drops, and rebates/offers become available.
The new Cruze and the Astra maybe be based off the same platform, bt they are still pretty darn different vehicles.
So I don'ty think the statement "Astra...same thing" is correct - OP saked about the Cruze, not about 'similar' vehicles.....
So I don'ty think the statement "Astra...same thing" is correct - OP saked about the Cruze, not about 'similar' vehicles.....
Originally Posted By: rshunter
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
That's incorrect because the new Cruze is based on the new Astra.
Yeah, but you don't own the new Astra. You own the previous generation, which means you don't own a car that's the "same thing". Now do you get my point?
I didn't say I owned a Cruze. I own an Astra, which is the same as a Cruze.
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
That's incorrect because the new Cruze is based on the new Astra.
Yeah, but you don't own the new Astra. You own the previous generation, which means you don't own a car that's the "same thing". Now do you get my point?
I didn't say I owned a Cruze. I own an Astra, which is the same as a Cruze.
Originally Posted By: grampi
Bottom line: the Cruze is way overpriced. Base should be $14-$15K, loaded $18-$19K max.
A totally stripped Mazda 2 is $15k. Surely you can admit the Cruze is a class above and should command a higher starting price.
Bottom line: the Cruze is way overpriced. Base should be $14-$15K, loaded $18-$19K max.
A totally stripped Mazda 2 is $15k. Surely you can admit the Cruze is a class above and should command a higher starting price.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: grampi
Bottom line: the Cruze is way overpriced. Base should be $14-$15K, loaded $18-$19K max.
A totally stripped Mazda 2 is $15k. Surely you can admit the Cruze is a class above and should command a higher starting price.
I am still puzzled as to why members of this forum (and many consumers) refuse to accept the fact that cars do cost more today then they did in the past. Economy cars that cost more than $20k are common, and consumers need to learn to accept that price due to the significant improvements in safety, emissions, available features and efficiency. Also, in general, Americans need to stop equating small cars with "cheap." A smaller car should not automatically command a lower price. In America, we really need to start adopting the idea of a "premium subcompact."
Originally Posted By: grampi
Bottom line: the Cruze is way overpriced. Base should be $14-$15K, loaded $18-$19K max.
A totally stripped Mazda 2 is $15k. Surely you can admit the Cruze is a class above and should command a higher starting price.
I am still puzzled as to why members of this forum (and many consumers) refuse to accept the fact that cars do cost more today then they did in the past. Economy cars that cost more than $20k are common, and consumers need to learn to accept that price due to the significant improvements in safety, emissions, available features and efficiency. Also, in general, Americans need to stop equating small cars with "cheap." A smaller car should not automatically command a lower price. In America, we really need to start adopting the idea of a "premium subcompact."
My MiL is like 70-ish. In her day, all cars were big. You paid extra for the Buick or Olds trim over the Chevy....basically the same vehicle.
I had to explain to her now that the bigger models cost a lot more money.
I had to explain to her now that the bigger models cost a lot more money.
Originally Posted By: The Critic
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: grampi
Bottom line: the Cruze is way overpriced. Base should be $14-$15K, loaded $18-$19K max.
A totally stripped Mazda 2 is $15k. Surely you can admit the Cruze is a class above and should command a higher starting price.
I am still puzzled as to why members of this forum (and many consumers) refuse to accept the fact that cars do cost more today then they did in the past. Economy cars that cost more than $20k are common, and consumers need to learn to accept that price due to the significant improvements in safety, emissions, available features and efficiency. Also, in general, Americans need to stop equating small cars with "cheap." A smaller car should not automatically command a lower price. In America, we really need to start adopting the idea of a "premium subcompact."
If they build it...We will come!
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: grampi
Bottom line: the Cruze is way overpriced. Base should be $14-$15K, loaded $18-$19K max.
A totally stripped Mazda 2 is $15k. Surely you can admit the Cruze is a class above and should command a higher starting price.
I am still puzzled as to why members of this forum (and many consumers) refuse to accept the fact that cars do cost more today then they did in the past. Economy cars that cost more than $20k are common, and consumers need to learn to accept that price due to the significant improvements in safety, emissions, available features and efficiency. Also, in general, Americans need to stop equating small cars with "cheap." A smaller car should not automatically command a lower price. In America, we really need to start adopting the idea of a "premium subcompact."
If they build it...We will come!
Originally Posted By: The Critic
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: grampi
Bottom line: the Cruze is way overpriced. Base should be $14-$15K, loaded $18-$19K max.
A totally stripped Mazda 2 is $15k. Surely you can admit the Cruze is a class above and should command a higher starting price.
I am still puzzled as to why members of this forum (and many consumers) refuse to accept the fact that cars do cost more today then they did in the past. Economy cars that cost more than $20k are common, and consumers need to learn to accept that price due to the significant improvements in safety, emissions, available features and efficiency. Also, in general, Americans need to stop equating small cars with "cheap." A smaller car should not automatically command a lower price. In America, we really need to start adopting the idea of a "premium subcompact."
Very well said. Everything costs more today.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: grampi
Bottom line: the Cruze is way overpriced. Base should be $14-$15K, loaded $18-$19K max.
A totally stripped Mazda 2 is $15k. Surely you can admit the Cruze is a class above and should command a higher starting price.
I am still puzzled as to why members of this forum (and many consumers) refuse to accept the fact that cars do cost more today then they did in the past. Economy cars that cost more than $20k are common, and consumers need to learn to accept that price due to the significant improvements in safety, emissions, available features and efficiency. Also, in general, Americans need to stop equating small cars with "cheap." A smaller car should not automatically command a lower price. In America, we really need to start adopting the idea of a "premium subcompact."
Very well said. Everything costs more today.
Last edited:
I agree, the Cruze is overpriced for what you get, I would rather have a Camry or Accord which are much better. Sure, the Cruze looks good...... but there are better cars out there.
Quote:
A smaller car should not automatically command a lower price.
Doesn't a smaller car use less materials to manufacture than a bigger car ????
Quote:
A smaller car should not automatically command a lower price.
Doesn't a smaller car use less materials to manufacture than a bigger car ????
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
Quote:
A smaller car should not automatically command a lower price.
Doesn't a smaller car use less materials to manufacture than a bigger car ????
Yeah, we all know that material costs are the biggest expense in building a car, right? WRONG!!
You happen to pick the one and ONLY area of expense where a small car has a very slightly lower cost, but consider all the other fixed expenses. The labor man hours, the R&D, the engineering, the infrastructure expenses, EPA certs, the crash testing and verification...ALL of them are the same for a small car vs a larger car with a bigger profit margin. None of the real costs in building a car are any different between small and large cars, the materials used are like 5-10% of the total equation. Only someone who doesnt understand the real costs of building a car would think that "materials" outlay is in any way a major factor in the final price..it, isn't!
Quote:
A smaller car should not automatically command a lower price.
Doesn't a smaller car use less materials to manufacture than a bigger car ????
Yeah, we all know that material costs are the biggest expense in building a car, right? WRONG!!
You happen to pick the one and ONLY area of expense where a small car has a very slightly lower cost, but consider all the other fixed expenses. The labor man hours, the R&D, the engineering, the infrastructure expenses, EPA certs, the crash testing and verification...ALL of them are the same for a small car vs a larger car with a bigger profit margin. None of the real costs in building a car are any different between small and large cars, the materials used are like 5-10% of the total equation. Only someone who doesnt understand the real costs of building a car would think that "materials" outlay is in any way a major factor in the final price..it, isn't!
- Status
Similar threads
