Topic: First Drive: 2016 Chevrolet Malibu

[Autos_Editor]

It's the Malibu you weren't expecting.
Read More...

[tooscoops]

for the price, i think it's a nice rig.

the styling doesn't do it for me, and i don't like that there is no normally aspirated engine choice, but whatever. that's just me being stubborn.

i would think it will sell quite well... they need to start actually selling the car based on it's merit, not just that it has the wifi option.

[Wildsau]

Great review. I'm not in the market, but this car would be intriguing if I were. I'm surprised to see it has become the #2 best-selling car in its category, considering I haven't seen a single on on the road here in Edmonton. I get that three months of sales aren't a lot of cars overall, but you'd think you'd see at least a couple of them by now. I like it.

[carcrazed]

"its turning diameter of 11.5 metres is a bit too wide for quick u-turns"

Taxi drivers aren't going to like that.

I saw one in my area recently.  It looked pretty big as it was driving by and caught my eye.

The teen driver features are pretty interesting; I'd consider this car if I had a teenage driver in my household, but that's more than 10 years from now.

One other thing, they increased the wheelbase by 101mm, but it only resulted in 33mm rear legroom increase and reduction in trunk size?  Where did the rest go?

[EV Dan]

Unfortunately, we didn’t get a chance to drive the new Malibu Hybrid which borrows much of its technology from the Chevrolet Volt and claims a fuel consumption rating of just 5.0 L/100 km in combined city/highway use. We’ll leave that for another test drive.

This is the only part about Malibu that I find interesting. Otherwise small turbo'd DI engines are indicative of these "end of ICE" days when a value priced car has to be the best in FE since the car maker needs to sell V8 trucks and SUVs too. It comes at the expense of long term reliability, since lots of these budget cars' buyers are not accustomed to the idea of having to use quality synthetics and will take the cars to the same quicky lube places as they always did.
Now the hybrid is reportedly designed with the Volt powertrain bits and pieces and a smaller battery. I'd definitely look at it if shopping for a "prius".

[theonlydt]

Sounds like a major upgrade on the last one, which honestly was a POS.

My review of the last gen would have the following components:

"Picked up from the rental counter"

"No rear legroom"

"Noisier than Cruze"

"Intrusive stop/start"

"Uncomfortable seats"

"POS"

"POS"

"POS"

etc etc

[ArticSteve]

Tiny displacement turbo, direct injection and stop/start.  What's not to like UNDER warranty.

[tooscoops]

thats what i meant to ask, thanks for reminding me!

so the start stop... i would assume they have something in place to keep the pumps going and such? i'd hate to cruise off the hwy with the turbo going, come to a stop at the end of the off-ramp and have the engine shut off, so the turbo is still spinning away without lubrication...

[JRM]

It's still a Malibu, this time with disjointed styling and tiny rear windows.  No thanks.

[Neromanceres]

Unfortunately, we didn’t get a chance to drive the new Malibu Hybrid which borrows much of its technology from the Chevrolet Volt and claims a fuel consumption rating of just 5.0 L/100 km in combined city/highway use. We’ll leave that for another test drive.

This is the only part about Malibu that I find interesting. Otherwise small turbo'd DI engines are indicative of these "end of ICE" days when a value priced car has to be the best in FE since the car maker needs to sell V8 trucks and SUVs too. It comes at the expense of long term reliability, since lots of these budget cars' buyers are not accustomed to the idea of having to use quality synthetics and will take the cars to the same quicky lube places as they always did.
Now the hybrid is reportedly designed with the Volt powertrain bits and pieces and a smaller battery. I'd definitely look at it if shopping for a "prius".

From the reviews I have read the Hybrid is supposed to be the best driver of the bunch.  Faster than the 1.5T, better weight distribution, 182hp and a whopping 277lbft of torque.

I now have a 2017 Volt.  The Malibu Hybrid has a very similar powertrain setup.  Should be a hoot to drive.  And will yield impressive fuel economy.

[Ace]

Nice vehicle, shame there won't be a 5 door hatch or wagon. Not everyone wants a CUV !!!!

[safristi]

you are in Kansas now ToTo  at the rental counter again wait for a TORONADO Classic...


 much improved but so is damn near everything these DAZE.....except the quiet reflective life worth living.Well priced and with GM's usual penchant for DISCO-COUNTS will sell decently in a sea of competitors

[Frontier1]

Already seen quite a few on the road, looks dam good.  Would seriously consider if I was in the market for a mid-size.  Not afraid of a GM product at all.

[Solstice2006]

for the price, i think it's a nice rig.

the styling doesn't do it for me, and i don't like that there is no normally aspirated engine choice, but whatever. that's just me being stubborn.

i would think it will sell quite well... they need to start actually selling the car based on it's merit, not just that it has the wifi option.

If I was in the market.  I would certainly take it for a test drive. 

Pros:

They finally are pricing cars a bit better.
I like the styling, many Impala cues.  Including a better steering wheel. 
Weight reduction is nice to see.  Especially with GM!
No CVT.

Cons:

I agree lack of NA engine as an option kind of sucks.  But that's where the MOST of the market is going. 
Nothing I see that says it will win a mid-size sedan comparo....

[Sir Osis of Liver]

for the price, i think it's a nice rig.

the styling doesn't do it for me, and i don't like that there is no normally aspirated engine choice, but whatever. that's just me being stubborn.

i would think it will sell quite well... they need to start actually selling the car based on it's merit, not just that it has the wifi option.

If I was in the market.  I would certainly take it for a test drive. 

Pros:

They finally are pricing cars a bit better.
I like the styling, many Impala cues.  Including a better steering wheel. 
Weight reduction is nice to see.  Especially with GM!
No CVT.

Cons:

I agree lack of NA engine as an option kind of sucks.  But that's where the MOST of the market is going. 
Nothing I see that says it will win a mid-size sedan comparo....

How about 2nd? And that was with the 1.5L.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2016-chevrolet-malibu-vs-2016-honda-accord-2016-mazda-6-2016-toyota-camry-comparison-test

[mixmanmash]

thats what i meant to ask, thanks for reminding me!

so the start stop... i would assume they have something in place to keep the pumps going and such? i'd hate to cruise off the hwy with the turbo going, come to a stop at the end of the off-ramp and have the engine shut off, so the turbo is still spinning away without lubrication...

So, on a turbo car, once your foot is off the gas, the turbo spins a lot slower and fairly quickly.  It's no different than putting the car in park and shutting it off.    Wouldn't need an electric oil pump or water pump.

[Solstice2006]

for the price, i think it's a nice rig.

the styling doesn't do it for me, and i don't like that there is no normally aspirated engine choice, but whatever. that's just me being stubborn.

i would think it will sell quite well... they need to start actually selling the car based on it's merit, not just that it has the wifi option.

If I was in the market.  I would certainly take it for a test drive. 

Pros:

They finally are pricing cars a bit better.
I like the styling, many Impala cues.  Including a better steering wheel. 
Weight reduction is nice to see.  Especially with GM!
No CVT.

Cons:

I agree lack of NA engine as an option kind of sucks.  But that's where the MOST of the market is going. 
Nothing I see that says it will win a mid-size sedan comparo....

How about 2nd? And that was with the 1.5L.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2016-chevrolet-malibu-vs-2016-honda-accord-2016-mazda-6-2016-toyota-camry-comparison-test

Thanks for the link. Will read it detail during some downtime.  Read the last page.  Nice to see Mazda is still up there. 

And when I said comparo, I meant an Autos.ca  comparo..

[dirtyjeffer]

for the price, i think it's a nice rig.

the styling doesn't do it for me, and i don't like that there is no normally aspirated engine choice, but whatever. that's just me being stubborn.

i would think it will sell quite well... they need to start actually selling the car based on it's merit, not just that it has the wifi option.

If I was in the market.  I would certainly take it for a test drive. 

Pros:

They finally are pricing cars a bit better.
I like the styling, many Impala cues.  Including a better steering wheel. 
Weight reduction is nice to see.  Especially with GM!
No CVT.

Cons:

I agree lack of NA engine as an option kind of sucks.  But that's where the MOST of the market is going. 
Nothing I see that says it will win a mid-size sedan comparo....

i'd give it a test drive before writing it off...i wasn't keen on a 2.0T in the 4000 lb Sorento, but the sales person suggest i try it before writing it off as inadequate (i was pretty much sold on the V6)...it's awesome...all the torque down low so if you give 'er a bit, you do it without having your engine screaming like you're some Fast & Furious wannabe...i don't regret getting the smaller turbo engine one bit...in fact, i'm glad i did...the longer highway drives provide savings at the pump too.

[Solstice2006]

^ I did say I would take it for a test drive.  Having said that, I have always preferred NA over turbos.

And with the Sorrento, turbo 4 vs V6 on the highway is only 0.5L difference.  But the V6 is more capable.  And not to derail the thread too much.  But I have more faith in domestics naturally aspirated engines vs turbos. 

[dirtyjeffer]

^ I did say I would take it for a test drive.  Having said that, I have always preferred NA over turbos.

And with the Sorrento, turbo 4 vs V6 on the highway is only 0.5L difference.  But the V6 is more capable.  And not to derail the thread too much.  But I have more faith in domestics naturally aspirated engines vs turbos.

i'm not familiar with the GM's turbo engines, but i'd figure they should be decent enough...and the only thing the V6 does better is tow...if you don't need the vehicle to tow, everything else about the blown 4 is better...fuel economy (when not giving it the beans all the time), and everyday drivability as it makes its power in the lower to mid range, not near red line...it has a torque curve similar to a diesel.