Oldsmobile

Oldsmobile Cutlass Cruiser Wagon

No photo yet

The official data lists 17 versions of the Oldsmobile Cutlass Cruiser Wagon (1984–1995), in the United States and Canada. Each market publishes its own figures, measured on its own test procedure.

At a glance

Years in the data
1984–1995
Markets
United States, Canada
Engines
2.5 L to 4.3 L
Fuels
Petrol, Diesel
Lowest consumption (United States)
9.0 L/100 km (EPA)
Lowest consumption (Canada)
12.2 L/100 km (5-cycle)

What was the Oldsmobile Cutlass Cruiser Wagon?

The Cutlass Cruiser was a midsize station wagon in Oldsmobile’s Cutlass family. In 1984, the wagon moved to the front-wheel-drive A-body platform used by the Cutlass Ciera. This gave the Cruiser a place in Oldsmobile’s midsize car range, with a wagon body for passengers and cargo.

Generation and place in the Cutlass range

The generation covered here is the second, from 1984 to 1985. Its move to the A-body platform brought the Cruiser into the front-wheel-drive Cutlass Ciera family. The Cutlass name was one of Oldsmobile’s best-known model families.

Engines and power

US versions had petrol and diesel engines from 2.5 L to 4.3 L. The Canadian version used a 3.1 L petrol engine.

How economical was the Cutlass Cruiser Wagon?

The best combined US EPA rating was 26 MPG, with a lowest stated consumption of 9 L/100 km. The Canadian 3.1 L petrol version is rated at 12.2 L/100 km on the NRCan five-cycle test. WLTP or NEDC results in Europe, EPA figures in the United States and five-cycle results in Canada use different procedures, so these figures are best read within their own markets.

Questions and answers

When did the Cutlass Cruiser move to the Ciera platform?

The wagon moved to the front-wheel-drive A-body platform in 1984.

What engine types were available?

US versions had petrol and diesel engines; the Canadian version used a 3.1 L petrol engine.

What was its best listed fuel economy?

The highest combined US EPA rating was 26 MPG. The lowest stated US consumption was 9 L/100 km.

Cutlass Cruiser Wagon second generation (1984–1985)

Model codes: A-body · References: en.wikipedia.org

United States 16 versions

Model years sold in the USA, from the EPA and the Department of Energy (fueleconomy.gov). MPG on the EPA test; litres per 100 km = 235.215 ÷ MPG.

Years and versionEngineFuelGearboxDriveConsumption (combined)CO₂
1985(FFS)2.5 LPetrol3-speed automaticFront-wheel drive22 MPG (10.7 L/100 km) EPA251 g/km
1985(FFS) CA model3.0 LPetrol3-speed automaticFront-wheel drive17 MPG (13.8 L/100 km) EPA325 g/km
1985(FFS) CA model3.0 LPetrol4-speed automaticFront-wheel drive18 MPG (13.1 L/100 km) EPA307 g/km
1985(FFS)3.0 LPetrol3-speed automaticFront-wheel drive17 MPG (13.8 L/100 km) EPA325 g/km
1985(FFS)3.0 LPetrol4-speed automaticFront-wheel drive19 MPG (12.4 L/100 km) EPA291 g/km
1985(FFS) CA model3.8 LPetrol4-speed automaticFront-wheel drive19 MPG (12.4 L/100 km) EPA291 g/km
1985(FFS)3.8 LPetrol4-speed automaticFront-wheel drive19 MPG (12.4 L/100 km) EPA291 g/km
1985CA model4.3 LDiesel3-speed automaticFront-wheel drive26 MPG (9.0 L/100 km) EPA243 g/km
19854.3 LDiesel3-speed automaticFront-wheel drive26 MPG (9.0 L/100 km) EPA243 g/km
1984(FFS) · (FFS) CA model2.5 LPetrol3-speed automatic–23 MPG (10.2 L/100 km) EPA240 g/km
1984(FFS)3.0 LPetrol3-speed automatic–17 MPG (13.8 L/100 km) EPA325 g/km
1984(FFS) CA model3.0 LPetrol3-speed automatic–17 MPG (13.8 L/100 km) EPA325 g/km
1984(CAL,FFS) · (FFS) CA model3.8 LPetrol4-speed automatic–19 MPG (12.4 L/100 km) EPA291 g/km
1984(DIESEL)4.3 LDiesel3-speed automatic–25 MPG (9.4 L/100 km) EPA253 g/km
1984(DIESEL) CA model4.3 LDiesel3-speed automatic–24 MPG (9.8 L/100 km) EPA264 g/km
1984(DIESEL) CA model4.3 LDiesel4-speed automatic–24 MPG (9.8 L/100 km) EPA264 g/km

Versions outside these generations

Canada 1 version

Model years sold in Canada, from Natural Resources Canada fuel consumption ratings (5-cycle test).

Years and versionEngineFuelGearboxConsumption (combined)CO₂
1995Station wagon: Mid-size3.1 LPetrol4-speed automatic12.2 L/100 km 5-cycle281 g/km

Official figures are measured on standard test procedures and differ between markets. Your consumption depends on how, where and in what conditions you drive.