2014 models, turbo vs non turbo

[suitcasejefferson]

Anyone know where to find information on the 2014 models? I keep checking the Chevy site, and they still have the 2013 Sonic as the only one available. Most everybody else has the 2014s out already. I'm wondering about changes in the car, price, options, etc. I will not be buying until probably January, so it will be a 2014.

Also, it will be an automatic. Can anyone tell me their opinion of the 1.4 turbo compared to the standard 1.8. I am NOT looking for performance, my V8 S10 gives me plenty of that. This will mostly be a highway cruising car. I have heard the turbo has better gas mileage, and that is good, but to me engine reliability and longevity are more important. Many turbo engines suffer in those areas.

 

[sonic24740]

well the 1.4 is lots better gas mileage... depending on driving habits you can get over 40mpg.. the 1.8 is around 30mpg

 

[sx sonic]

Here's what I found after searching "2014"
links: http://www.sonicownersforum.com/forum/factory-specifications/7657-2014-sonic-information.html
http://www.sonicownersforum.com/forum/chevy-sonic-owners-forum/6978-model-year-2014-ordering.html
http://www.sonicownersforum.com/for...1-2013-vs-2014-any-opinions-would-better.html
and here's a quote from the last link.

Just letting you know the changes and highlights of the 2014:


Changes

*Center-stack decorative trim changes for Chevrolet MyLink radio-equipped vehicles; hydrographic film is replaced with: Dark Argent Metallic paint on LS and LT; High-gloss Dark Argent Metallic paint on LTZ; and High-gloss Piano Black paint on RS
*"Power" rear door child safety locks replaced by "manual" rear door child safety locks on all models
*Remote trunk release now standard on Sedans only (Switch is located in same location as previous power child safety lock button)
*Power door lock switch added to driver's door near window controls

Highlights

*(PDQ) LT Promotional Package, includes (UF7) Chevrolet MyLink radio, (CF5) power sunroof and (T3U) front fog lamps; Requires (G7F) Deep Magenta Metallic exterior color; Limited promotional package available August 2013-October 2013
* (PDH) Fun and Sun Package, includes (LUV) 1.4L 4-cylinder turbo-charged engine and (CF5) power sunroof; available on LT and LTZ 5-Door models only
Click on the blue links to change image


Erica Tiffany
Chevrolet Customer Service

As for the 1.8 vs 1.4T there's a million post and threads about that. There's really only two sides on the matter "the 1.4t is superior in almost every way" or "the 1.8 is a fine engine".

There's been a few discussions about reliability of the turbo engine. They've been holding up great so far, as have most modern turbos.
here's one link I found after a brief search.
http://www.sonicownersforum.com/forum/general-discussion/7608-1-4-turbo-reliability-lifespan.html

 

[ShadowRS]

Ugh. Another one of these......


Usually I say get the stick and the turbo because it is better.....

But if you don't want performance, and you want an auto, and it sounds like you just want a little cheap commuter, just get the 1.8.

It gets decent mileage, provides ok power... blah blah blah.. its cheaper..
The 1.4 is more powerful, is quicker, and gives better mpg... but it essentially is up to you if you want to spend the money to upgrade.

Both engines are fine. There, the thread is done!

 

[suitcasejefferson]

Amazing the 1.8L four only gets 35 mpg in such a small car. My 2001 Malibu 3.1L V6 gets 30 mpg in a heavier car. Relatively speaking, it looks like there has been no improvement in mileage at all in 13 years. My former Honda Goldwing 1800 got over 40 mpg.

Thanks to those who took the time to post links. I was surprised that the turbo vs non turbo thread was locked. That would seem to be important information. My 35 years as an auto mechanic (admittedly very little experience with turbocharged engines) seems to indicate that turbo engines don't last as long, and that the more stress you put on an engine, by whatever means, will shorten the life of the engine unless it is beefed up for that extra power. A 1.4 that makes more power than a 1.8 is definitely going to be more highly stressed.

I am not looking for a commuter car, I'm looking for a touring car. It will be a replacement for my Goldwing motorcycle, and I intend to rack up LOTS of highway miles. Any new car, properly maintained (and I over maintain them) should last 250,000 highway miles.

 

[davecerv]

You know what, just get the 1.4
Or else you'll be wishing you had it...especially if you hang around this forum a lot since 90% of Sonic drivers here have the 1.4 engine. I wish I had clicked on this forum before getting my Sonic. I didn't know the real differences between the two engines. Yes the 1.4 is the better engine especially with the manual transmission, thats where the real difference is for mpg's. I still thoroughly enjoy my Sonic even though every now and then I wonder hmmmm what if I had the 1.4…
And then I'm like ahhh then why the hell does chevy put the 1.8 on the LTZ. The 1.4 should come with the LTZ standard already and the 1.8 standard only with the LS and either or with the LT.

But yes like ShadowRS said…There, the thread is done!

 

[Larry]

The auto isn't really a choice unless you can't drive a stick. My brother has an auto turbo and I have a manual. His feels so sluggish and doesn't shift until 3k so negates much of the mpg improvement you get with the turbo.

 

[ShadowRS]

If you are all all highway, then pick the stick and turbo.

 

[ShadowRS]

Also the turbo is proving to be a very stout motor....

The turbo use in this application isn't for all out performance like cars such as the Cobalt SS, WRX... Evo.... ETC... .Instead, this turbo is used to get more power out of smaller engine while retaining good fuel efficiency. I guess as they say, power of a v6 in a 4 cylinder.....

Basically, all this turbo is used for is for when you need it. Most of the time driving this car around, you most likely won't be on it. You'll be on the highway where the car will happily chug along. Also, the car was built to last AT LEAST the 100k warranty placed on it. I am sure it will go farther, as engine problems haven't really popped up with this car. It's pretty solid!

 

[Crazzyboy]

If you are all all highway, then pick the stick and turbo.

I bought my sonic for the exact same reason. I wanted a highway cruiser with decent room and mpg. The turbo has great power for the hills and gets great highway milage.

 

[ahtoxa]

The auto isn't really a choice unless you can't drive a stick. My brother has an auto turbo and I have a manual. His feels so sluggish and doesn't shift until 3k so negates much of the mpg improvement you get with the turbo.

It's still a choice. Get the manual and learn on it.

I bought a car like that in the past. Had very limited (read - no experience) seat time in a manual car. Went to dealer, bought a new manual car.

Drove home, stalled a bunch but was fine later. No big deal and the car is built to take the abuse. Get your theory right, understand how a clutch works, understand the do's and don'ts and there will be no problems with learning on a new car.

 

[ChrisJ]

Amazing the 1.8L four only gets 35 mpg in such a small car. My 2001 Malibu 3.1L V6 gets 30 mpg in a heavier car. Relatively speaking, it looks like there has been no improvement in mileage at all in 13 years. My former Honda Goldwing 1800 got over 40 mpg.

Thanks to those who took the time to post links. I was surprised that the turbo vs non turbo thread was locked. That would seem to be important information. My 35 years as an auto mechanic (admittedly very little experience with turbocharged engines) seems to indicate that turbo engines don't last as long, and that the more stress you put on an engine, by whatever means, will shorten the life of the engine unless it is beefed up for that extra power. A 1.4 that makes more power than a 1.8 is definitely going to be more highly stressed.

I am not looking for a commuter car, I'm looking for a touring car. It will be a replacement for my Goldwing motorcycle, and I intend to rack up LOTS of highway miles. Any new car, properly maintained (and I over maintain them) should last 250,000 highway miles.

While I cannot speak for your driving habbits we had a 95 Lumina with the 3.1 and before it took a dump due to cracked head and leaky intake I never saw more than 26-28MPG. I also had a 2006 grandprix with a 3.8 and that was more like lower 20s.

Now in a 1.8 auto Sonic I typically saw 33MPG and in my 1.4 turbo manual Sonic I never see less than 40MPG and often see over 41MPG.

Point being, for me with the same driving style there has been a vast improvement and even though the 1.8 does ok the 1.4 is a lot better on gas with more low end power albeit delayed at times.


S10 with a V8 provides performance? Maybe in guzzling fuel and going in a straight line but not much more...

 

[Swordsmith]

If I had it to do over I would get the auto. Yes, stock the auto tranny is a slug, but with a tune you can reset the shift points so its not bad... and it has M mode so when you really care when it shifts, it will do as you say. I've been driving stick for 32 years now, and the Sonic manual transmission is good... but all the reasons I prefer stick seem to be gone now.

The little turbo in the Sonic is a great idea, letting you drive around in a low power, cheap to operate car that is also, on demand, capable of being a decent powered but more expensive to operate one. Since even a spirited driver probably only pushes the car 10% of the time, this is a winning combination.

A tune doesn't change this dynamic, you still have the little 1.4 engine sipping fuel most of the time, it just moves the upper limit on power (and bad fuel efficiency) up higher.

 

[ChrisJ]

If I had it to do over I would get the auto. Yes, stock the auto tranny is a slug, but with a tune you can reset the shift points so its not bad... and it has M mode so when you really care when it shifts, it will do as you say. I've been driving stick for 32 years now, and the Sonic manual transmission is good... but all the reasons I prefer stick seem to be gone now.

The little turbo in the Sonic is a great idea, letting you drive around in a low power cheap to operate car that is also, on demand, caple of being a decent powered but more expensive to operate one. Since even a spirited driver probably only pushes the car 10% of the time, this is a winning combination.

A tune doesn't change this dynamic, you still have the little 1.4 engine sipping fuel most of the time, it just moves the upper limit on power (and bad fuel efficiency) up higher.

I think you're being a bit unfair with that statement. Lets compare it to a stock 1960s 6 cylinder camaro with a powerglide. The 6 speed auto even with stock programming isn't bad at all especially to a lot of older autos. I get your point, its not exactly what you would want, but to call it a slug is misleading IMO.

 

[Larry]

If I had it to do over I would get the auto. Yes, stock the auto tranny is a slug, but with a tune you can reset the shift points so its not bad... and it has M mode so when you really care when it shifts, it will do as you say. I've been driving stick for 32 years now, and the Sonic manual transmission is good... but all the reasons I prefer stick seem to be gone now.

The little turbo in the Sonic is a great idea, letting you drive around in a low power cheap to operate car that is also, on demand, caple of being a decent powered but more expensive to operate one. Since even a spirited driver probably only pushes the car 10% of the time, this is a winning combination.

A tune doesn't change this dynamic, you still have the little 1.4 engine sipping fuel most of the time, it just moves the upper limit on power (and bad fuel efficiency) up higher.

We both have a tune, trust me it's a big difference. And in mpg, big difference there too. We both agreed on this, driving each of them back to back several times. The difference is very obvious and he keeps telling me how he wished he got a manual.

 

[Danigonva3]

We both have a tune, trust me it's a big difference. And in mpg, big difference there too. We both agreed on this, driving each of them back to back several times. The difference is very obvious and he keeps telling me how he wished he got a manual.

Helloo

I need your help..... Can i install the rs fog lamps on a ls model¿????? Thankss

 

[ColonelPanic]

Helloo

I need your help..... Can i install the rs fog lamps on a ls model¿????? Thankss

Signs point to no.

Completely different front fascia on the RS compared to other trims.

 

[$ub$onic]

Helloo

I need your help..... Can i install the rs fog lamps on a ls model¿????? Thankss

Nope....

 

[Sonic]

Ugh. Another one of these..... There, the thread is done!

Agreed.