Come on Chevy, really!!

[GearheadSS]

Originally Posted by Frank in MD

So this is what GM is aiming for, not bad? Ha, forget Chevy Runs Deep, we've broke new ground....

Chevrolet, it's not bad!

Here's the deal. This segment is filled with low $20k entry level mid size cars. That's what the majority of all of these models will be. The majority will not be the loaded out models. So, they're all going to have their pros and cons and when it really comes down to it, they're all going to be pretty boring and uninspiring because that's just what you get in a $23k mid size sedan. That being said, the entry level Malibu is very nice, imo. It's a huge improvement over the same entry level 2012 Malibu. It has more amenities, aluminum wheels and better styling.

I'm going to bet that MOST of you all that are criticizing this car, have not even sat your butts in one yet. Always trust your ass when it comes to your opinion on a car, not what some biased sellout car mag has to say.

Let's face it, if we all listened to what those car mags said, we'd all be driving Mustangs.

[Richy_Rich]

I got more fun out of this picture than I did that article...

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by papawattz

I just received my new motor trend and read the comparo for best family sedan and was like, what the hell! Last place, sixth out of six cars ! Now I know the new Malibu has been out for a few months and have seen one in person.My first impression was, a little to busy, some Camaro styling cues that were not needed, but overall nice materials and built well. But it wasn't until I seen this car compared with the 5 other carsWOW, Chevy really dropped the ball on this one! I advise you to read the article if you can, to really see where I'm coming from. It was the heaviest, by about 200 plus pounds, the most expensive, the smallest, one of the slowest AND the worst fuel economy Why the hell would anyone even consider this car? I'm a pretty diehard Chevy/GM guy, and I can tell you right now, I would not buy this car! If I was in the market, it would be the new Fusion, sorry it is just hands down a better car. Chevy needs to fire everyone who was a part of this design and development Come on, you no the rules to building a bread and butter family sedan to make money on? First, solid and reliable, second, good mainstream styling, third ,good performance and efficiency and last price it at or below the competition chevy failed at three of the four? How do plan to succed Leave the over the top styling to cars like the Camaro or Corvette! DUMBASSES

For people that base their opinions on one magazine or another this was a pretty damning article.

But if you look at some of the reasons they hang the Malibu it is like they are simply saying, "hey GM we think it's too heavy and has less rear seat room so you are last. See we are sooooooo much smarter than you."

The new Malibu is based on the architectural bits that give us the Regal. The Regal has generally received favorable reviews. In fact I'm not sure why it wasn't included in this test other than it's a few years old now. You can get a nice Regal Turbo for about the same price as an LTZ.

Now for the pricing, I suggest you go and price each of these cars out. When I've done that, they all top out at $34,000 or so. The Accord Touring package is over $34,000.

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

The 2.0T is where it's at in the new Malibu. If you want better fuel economy, get the eco. It gets 37mpg highway. It's not a bad car at all. They're MUCH better than the outgoing model.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Frank in MD

Sorry, I disagree. Why can't Chevy build a real hybrid and not this Malibu Eco thing? It gets less MPG than the regular line of Nissan Altima which gets 38 MPG. This is the Malibu Hybrid fiasco redux and will be equally dismal selling.

Because real Hybrids aren't profitable. Sorry, but Hybrids are an exercise in losing money. It's really that simple.

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

lol, y'all are funny. Talking about fuel economy. Between the Malibu, Altima, Camry, Fusion, Sonata and Accord with the base 4 cyl. engines, only the Altima has a significant advantage in mileage. All of the others are within 1mpg or the same as the Malibu. Some 1 better, some 1 less.

So the base 2.5L in the Malibu is right in line with most of the competition out there and it's probably more powerful than most.

Not to correct your work, but the Accord shows 36 in their website, plus two on the Malibu.

Originally Posted by Bonanza7

Typical for GM for decades. They start to get something right, and the something in their culture just won't let them keep it going. They blow it, usually on the small stff, but the small stuff adds up to a big stuff. Small example, but an irritating one: no USB connector. Can't work my ipod through the radio. My cheapest of all Hondas has that. Half the price of my Camaro. They have a suicidal wish at GM.

Soooooo you didn't buy the connectivity package in your Camaro and they have a suicidal wish? Really?

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

Well I got the information right from the EPA's website. Go ahead and believe MT if you want.

You are using facts to argue an opinion about someone elses opinion. Stop that

Originally Posted by pgustavson

I rented a 2011 Malibu, not sure of the engine, but I thought the Cruze I later rented was nicer and better performing. But, overall it was an OK car.

The 2011 would have been the old 2.4L 169 HP engine. We had an '08 LTZ. Actually a really nice car. Just needed a newer IP IMO.

Look, this is an opinion in a magazine. A magazine that by their own admission liked the 2013 Malibu in previous evaluations.

Are there things about it that could be improved? Sure. I hated the IP the first time I saw it back in 2010. I thought it quite ugly. Still do in fact. The rounded HVAC vents on top of the center stack are really what ruins the interior. I'd look for a quick redo of that. The feature along the IP and into the doors? That just looks bad and realy only robs you of space. The belt line screams Saab 9-3 to me.

That being said, the Fusion in person looks like crap. It's a nice Aston Martin Grill on a blown up Fiesta. I really loved it in pictures, but in person it make you think it was photo shopped.

And both the Honda and Nissan have CVTs. Anyone like a car with a CVT? I hate it. I hated it when I had one of GMs first efforts on Saturn years ago and hated them on the last Altima I drove.

I got to drive in a mid size evaluation a year and a half ago that included the new Malibu, and the previous versions of the Altima, Camry and Accord. In that drive we had some interesting back roads around the proving grounds. Simply, the Altima drove badly because of the CVT and the Honda and Toyota were the most unsettled cars you could imagine driving. Everything about them was crap from a handling standpoint. Maybe they made the new versions a lot better, I haven't driven them. But they had a lonnnnggggg way to go. Even the old Malibu handled better than the Camry and Accord.

There that being said, it is only MYYYYY opinion. That doesn't make it fact either. And it doesn't mean GM is failure. It's a really nice car and frankly the big hit in this segment is the loss of 4" of wheelbase which translates right into the back seat.

Go drive one. Everyone on this sight goes Ape Poop when someone picks the Mustang over a Camaro and most of those people have never even driven a Mustang. They are nice by the way. So why go nuts on this comparison condeming GM?

[AZCamaroFan]

I noticed a couple other things. The Malibu finished 6 out of 6 , but the Toyota Camry finished FIFTH! I also noticed the writer's they quote i have never heard of.
The Malibu is better looking than the other cars and the interior styling is a lot cooler. Main thing that bothers me is that the tested price is by far the highest.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Go drive one. Everyone on this sight goes Ape Poop when someone picks the Mustang over a Camaro and most of those people have never even driven a Mustang. They are nice by the way. So why go nuts on this comparison condeming GM?

Thinking for ourselves? Research? First-Hand experience before condemning?

What are these things...

[ROBOSSRS]

Originally Posted by papawattz

I just received my new motor trend and read the comparo for best family sedan and was like, what the hell! Last place, sixth out of six cars ! Now I know the new Malibu has been out for a few months and have seen one in person.My first impression was, a little to busy, some Camaro styling cues that were not needed, but overall nice materials and built well. But it wasn't until I seen this car compared with the 5 other carsWOW, Chevy really dropped the ball on this one! I advise you to read the article if you can, to really see where I'm coming from. It was the heaviest, by about 200 plus pounds, the most expensive, the smallest, one of the slowest AND the worst fuel economy Why the hell would anyone even consider this car? I'm a pretty diehard Chevy/GM guy, and I can tell you right now, I would not buy this car! If I was in the market, it would be the new Fusion, sorry it is just hands down a better car. Chevy needs to fire everyone who was a part of this design and development Come on, you no the rules to building a bread and butter family sedan to make money on? First, solid and reliable, second, good mainstream styling, third ,good performance and efficiency and last price it at or below the competition chevy failed at three of the four? How do plan to succed Leave the over the top styling to cars like the Camaro or Corvette! DUMBASSES

Save your money, don't buy Motor Trend . I don't buy any of those rags anymore. Hod Rod is the only one I buy.

[ShnOmac]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

Thinking for ourselves? Research? First-Hand experience before condemning?

What are these things...

Don't go spewing that uncommon sense around here......

[DaBears]

Originally Posted by willhe64

I had a 2010 Fusion AWD sport. It was a great car. Needed a truck though so I traded it on a 2011 Silverado.

I'm curious as to the gas mileage in the AWD fusion?

[KMPrenger]

I think the new malibu is a good car, but thats just it. It seems to be OK or good but not the best in any particular area or overall. Its just an "all around" decent type of car.

To me, it is an attractive car, but I feel it could have been a bit better....a bit more changed from the last version which I also thought was attractive.

I do like the interior and I feel it is equal or better than the others, but again its not perfect. I really like the style of dash used in the Equinox, the SRX, and ATS.

Engine performance is OK, but not better than the others and certainly no wow factor...same goes with the mileage.

So you can see where I'm going with these. Again, its an OK car but I'd likely consider the Fusion over it unless what Number 3 says is true and they do look like crap in person...but with the right trim/wheels I can't see how it would look bad. I have seen one on the road and thought it was nice.

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

But what's important to understand is that the mid-sized segment is HIGHLY, STUPIDLY, UNBELIEVABLY competitive. So in order to declare any "winner"...you have to split hairs.

So very true...all of these cars are nice cars...they HAVE to be.

It just sort of feels that Chevy maybe should have shot a a bit higher in some areas b/c the car, although being all new, feels like last years model compared to some of the advantages of its new competitors.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Frank in MD

BTW, Gearhead, the Honda you put into that is a V6 engine.

and you did not include Altima or Passat.

Or the 1.6 Turbo Fusion, and the Passats ancient 6 cylinder should be replaced by a new small displacement turbo 4 and the Avenger/200 are basically in their last model year (13).

[Frank in MD]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Because real Hybrids aren't profitable. Sorry, but Hybrids are an exercise in losing money. It's really that simple.

Technically you're correct, hybrids aren't going to make you any money. Having said that, neither will the eco malibu, nor eco impala for that matter. They'll never sell enough of the eco to be profitable, so the question that should be asked is; why buck the trend if neither is going to turn a profit?

Most manufacturers that want to remain competitive will have a competitive hybrid model however. This isn't just about profitability though, a clear example are mid size V6 models. There is no money in those either. Chevys outgoing V6 Malibu had a lower than 20% take rate, so also unprofitable. I understand the new 2T will be less expensive, & more efficient than the V6 it replaces, but I'm willing to bet the replacement mill still won't be profitable. Does that mean we should not have something in the segment that competes though?

Or.... should we just build our meat and potatoes mid-size cars since that's where the profit remains? After all if we know we can't compete in other model segments of the mid-size market, shouldn't we just experiment and just maybe we'll trip over a winner?

Doesn't make sense when you say it that way, right?

[shaffe]

The thing that pisses me off most about the 13' mailbu is that the previous generation looked so much better IMO.

The ass end of the 13 mailbu is one of the ugliest things on the road today IMO. Few friends of mine have Mailbus and they are fantastic cars, I just dont like how they styled the 13'

[PAUL SS]

Motor Trend Never did like that rag.

[papawattz]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

I'm not questioning the manufacturers city/highway estimates? I was just talking about MT's ACTUAL MPG's driving the six cars! And I don't beleive everything MT writes, it's just one of my many sources of info on new cars/trucks.