It's OFFICIAL:- Walkinshaw $50,000 Holden Cruze is SLOW

[Sorted]

This modified Holden Cruze can't keep up with the established hot-hatch favourites.

Walkinshaw Performance Holden Cruze
Vital statistics
Price as tested $50,000
Engine 1.4-litre turbo 4-cyl
Power 180kW and 310Nm (claimed)
0 to 100km/h 9.5 seconds

Subaru WRX
Vital statistics
Price as tested $39,990
Engine 2.5-litre turbo 4-cyl
Power 195kW and 343Nm
0 to 100km/h 5.9 seconds

Volkswagen Golf GTIVital statistics
Price as tested $42,490
Engine 2.0-litre turbo 4-cyl
Power 155kW and 280Nm
0 to 100km/h 6.9 seconds

reference canbera times http://canberratimes.drive.com.au/ne...831-2545p.html

We thought the equipment was wrong, so we tried again and again, eventually extracting a time of 9.5 seconds. The standard Holden Cruze SRi-V completes the 0-100km/h dash in 9.6 seconds

That’s a lot of money to trim 0.1 of a second: $20,000 for the modifications, including $6000 for the turbo kit.

Convinced something was wrong, we phoned a media colleague who had tested the WP Cruze before us. But he, too, got a slow time: 9.4 seconds for the 0-100km/h dash (when the car was on sticky semi-slick racing tyres). While I was on the phone, our resident test driver had one last go in the WP Cruze – and extracted a 9.0-second time But the clutch had to be dumped at 5000rpm and the tyres spun smoke for the first half of the run. Given that such acceleration would be deemed a burnout by the law, we did not count this time.

For the record, at Drive we normally don’t left-foot brake (in automatics) or do anything other than accelerate as fast as is possible legally – and reasonably.

To put the WP Cruze’s repeatable and legal 9.5-second acceleration time in perspective, it’s slower than a Toyota Camry.

Even the disregarded 9.0-second time is slower than a Camry (8.6 seconds for the regular four-cylinder Camry and 7.8 seconds for the Camry Hybrid). It’s a good thing the giant Walkinshaw Performance logos are barely visible on the Cruze’s matte white wrap, because as it stands this car is not doing much for WP’s image.

Walkinshaw Performance says its Cruze is about ‘‘performance, not pose’’. I’d be rethinking that motto.

About time the offical testing methods of Drive don't go in Holden's favour

[Rodge]

Motor got a 8.5 seconds for the 0-100 k.p.h. for the little 100 Kw Suzuki Swift Sport that costs $23,990 and got 4th out of 18 cars in their bang for buck contest, (Sept 2012 Issue),...then there's the Toyota 86 at 6.96 seocnds for $29,990. Either of these would be no brainer far better alternatives and much cheaper to boot.

Puts the Walkingshaw Cruze in more pesepctive.

[Jason[98.EL]]

the pic you posted on farcebook shows it better

[Nova 8]

Pathetic, if it fits they should just stuff a sidi 6 in it.

[RAPID_BA]

Must get massive heat soak. Surely a turbo setup would yield better than 0.1sec 0-100 over the stock car.

[GTP-RPD]

We had a top of the range hatch (SRI 1.4 pertol turbo I think) with us at work for 3 days so we could test drive it. I took it for one of the days and in all honesty it was one of the worst cars I have ever driven. How the ******* do people buy these things. IMO the engine felt like you had to send it an email and wait for it to respond before you got moving. The interior was claustrophobic and not intuitive and the experience of the whole thing was BLAH.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Sorted

This modified Holden Cruze can't keep up with the established hot-hatch favourites.

Walkinshaw Performance Holden Cruze
Vital statistics
Price as tested $50,000
Engine 1.4-litre turbo 4-cyl
Power 180kW and 310Nm (claimed)
0 to 100km/h 9.5 seconds

Subaru WRX
Vital statistics
Price as tested $39,990
Engine 2.5-litre turbo 4-cyl
Power 195kW and 343Nm
0 to 100km/h 5.9 seconds

Volkswagen Golf GTIVital statistics
Price as tested $42,490
Engine 2.0-litre turbo 4-cyl
Power 155kW and 280Nm
0 to 100km/h 6.9 seconds

reference canbera times http://canberratimes.drive.com.au/ne...831-2545p.html

We thought the equipment was wrong, so we tried again and again, eventually extracting a time of 9.5 seconds. The standard Holden Cruze SRi-V completes the 0-100km/h dash in 9.6 seconds

That’s a lot of money to trim 0.1 of a second: $20,000 for the modifications, including $6000 for the turbo kit.

Convinced something was wrong, we phoned a media colleague who had tested the WP Cruze before us. But he, too, got a slow time: 9.4 seconds for the 0-100km/h dash (when the car was on sticky semi-slick racing tyres). While I was on the phone, our resident test driver had one last go in the WP Cruze – and extracted a 9.0-second time But the clutch had to be dumped at 5000rpm and the tyres spun smoke for the first half of the run. Given that such acceleration would be deemed a burnout by the law, we did not count this time.

For the record, at Drive we normally don’t left-foot brake (in automatics) or do anything other than accelerate as fast as is possible legally – and reasonably.

To put the WP Cruze’s repeatable and legal 9.5-second acceleration time in perspective, it’s slower than a Toyota Camry.

Even the disregarded 9.0-second time is slower than a Camry (8.6 seconds for the regular four-cylinder Camry and 7.8 seconds for the Camry Hybrid). It’s a good thing the giant Walkinshaw Performance logos are barely visible on the Cruze’s matte white wrap, because as it stands this car is not doing much for WP’s image.

Walkinshaw Performance says its Cruze is about ‘‘performance, not pose’’. I’d be rethinking that motto.

About time the offical testing methods of Drive don't go in Holden's favour

This smells.

I suspect there may have been a problem with the Cruise.
I would wait until there is another independent test on a different vehicle.

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by flappist

This smells.

I suspect there may have been a problem with the Cruise.
I would wait until there is another independent test on a different vehicle.

not much of a comparo when the other two cars have much bigger engines

The car itself also looks bigger than the others.

Originally Posted by mac_man_luke

sounds like the turbo was too big for it.

sounds like it

"In reality, the result of the engine overhaul is chronic turbo lag – in a car that previously didn’t have it – and extra performance that’s difficult to tap into."

they don't know how to drive it.

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by aussie muscle

not much of a comparo when the other two cars have much bigger engines

I think the reason it was compared with the other two was due to the price

I also just read this:-

You can’t buy it at a Holden dealer. First you must buy the car, then take it to WP for the modifications. It’s worth noting Holden warranty does not cover any of WP’s modifications or replacement parts.

[superfly]

Originally Posted by aussie muscle

not much of a comparo when the other two cars have much bigger engines

The car itself also looks bigger than the others.

True but the WRX is $10K cheaper! Plus it has AWD. You'd have to be desparate and feel like wasting money to get the Cruze.

I doubt the Cruze is any bigger than a WRX.

[Fiesta_Man69]

Originally Posted by superfly

True but the WRX is $10K cheaper! Plus it has AWD. You'd have to be desparate and feel like wasting money to get the Cruze.

I doubt the Cruze is any bigger than a WRX.

Spend $5K on a decent exhaust, intercooler and basic ecu remap and WRXs run anything from 200-220kW atw and 4.5 0-100 times. All up $47K. Still cheaper than the Daewoo.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by flappist

This smells.

I suspect there may have been a problem with the Cruise.
I would wait until there is another independent test on a different vehicle.

Your right they are really bad figures, not that im a walkinshaw fan but it really hurts thier image so why would they release it?

[mac_man_luke]

sounds like the turbo was too big for it.

[Sorted]

From Car Advice:- http://www.caradvice.com.au/187848/w...-cruze-review/

Meanwhile, torque-steer is (surprisingly) largely absent. This is mainly due to the late arrival of boost and good suspension setup. As a result, it’s very easy to drive the tuned Cruze around town and although you’ll have to get to 4,000 RPM before the party starts, power still comes on progressively, which all but eliminates sudden torque-steer.

[Fiesta_Man69]

So the Cruze with 180kW was 0.1 sec quicker than the 100kW normal turbo Cruze to 100kmh?

What am I missing?

[malazn mafia]

Cruize Walkingslow.

[HULK EF]

Originally Posted by malazn mafia

Cruize Walkingslow.

Cruize Walkinfaster...

[SteveJH]

The Walkinshaw Cruze isnt make by Walkinshaw, an article I read said it was done by Horsepower Factory in Melbourne.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by SteveJH

The Walkinshaw Cruze isnt make by Walkinshaw, an article I read said it was done by Horsepower Factory in Melbourne.

Walkinshaw got HPF to develop the upgrades. Its then sold under the Walkinshaw Performance banner.

[DJM83]

It happens when you fit a Turbo that's far too big. And that price, they are dreaming.

[ZH For Me]

So, from what I've gathered from this, the WP Cruze stinks. Can't say I'm surprised though. From the sounds of it, the general ideology that the turbo is too big for the engine (Probably be better off fitting one of those ebay electric "superchargers", to be frank) sounds like its ringing true. When you factor in the price tag that makes hemorrhoids seem frightfully appealing, and, in my opinion at least, it seems like this is a giant flop.

On the upside, at least its living up to its name; Walkinshaw Cruze? Walkin sure seems more appealing than driving this piece of **** Cruze.

[Ford_The_Win]

What a joke! My EL Falcon is quicker than that, and it cost 1/10th of the price! Pathetic!

[duaned]

Perhaps Walkinshaw can plumb the turbo in instead of trying to save a buck! Tighta$$es!

[kaniSS]

What a flop.... "Flop" I love that word...

[Iggypoppin']

So what is the point of this car? It doesn't do anything good and is way too expensive...is this a troll from WP?? Is Tom suddenly going to jump out from behind some bushes and yell "Gotcha!"?

[Mr Hardware]

Tom ain't jumping out from behind anything these days....

[tex]

Walkinshaw do have an idea, I'm with flappy, I reckon (hope)the test car had issues. Or someone stole the turbo

If not, wtf was Walkinshaw performance thinking releasing a motorcar package delivering such woeful bang for buck.


What power/ torque increase do they claim?

[PepeLePew]

We've been lucky in Aus having a bunch of high profile factory associated tuners/modifiers that actually do the job.....if this is true is shows up WP for what they are, a slap it on and sell it outfit who've just been lucky to date with other platforms.....certainly doesnt say the donor is a piece of junk.

IF this is all accurate.

[DJM83]

Stick with V8 crumblydoors seems they actually do do a good job on them.

[XP6]

Holden lying about power figures?