Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2000-2011 Chevrolet Malibu

1141142144146147239

Comments

  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaPosts: 1,540
    I was at my dealer today getting the Intrigue serviced. Intersting - they had no Malibus at all, nor any brochures. They did have a bunch of Daewoos though, the Epica, Aveo and maybe an Optra (not sure of that). I sat in an Epica in the showroom and it was getting a lot of attention from a few older buyers, surprisingly. The sales guys were talking it up but I had to resist the urge to shout out "don't buy it - it's a Daewoo!". The interior seems nice but as Dindak says it's all flash - plastichrome, petrowood, etc. Can't say it appealed to me especially knowing it's a Daewoo.

    2011 Buick Regal Turbo, 1968 Oldsmobile Cutlass S Holiday Coupe

  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    yeah but its a nice interior. who gives a rip where its made?
  • dindakdindak Posts: 6,632
    Ya, and a whopping 155 hp I-6. Whoopee!
  • I know this is probably one of the more mundane subjects, but I just test drove an '04 Malibu and it's an irritant I've seen with other cars I've looked at, notably the older Saturns. What is with the seats ending just after where your rear end stops and your thighs begin? I'm used to car seats stretching almost to the back of my knees. I don't know if there's some ergonomic reason why some of these cars have such short seats, but after a 10 minute test drive, I had decided on the seat alone not to consider the Malibu. Otherwise, I thought it was a pretty decent car, good acceleration with the V6, pretty roomy, etc.
    I commented on it to the salesman, and he said he's had several other people mention the same thing, so I don't think it's just a personal idiosyncracy.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    verona 155hp, 2.5 litres......62 hp / litre
    malibu 200hp, 3.5 litres......57hp / litre

    the verona is nicer looking, significantly cheaper and for those that like the more plush, better crafted interior.......

    value for the dollar, isn't that always your argument? the verona starts a hair over 14 grand. 6 cyl. power and smoothness for the price of a 4.....sound familiar? i borrowed that point from the GM fans.

    and the front end of the verona doesn't resemble a mutant killer guppy.

    the verona / EPICA is a GM product...I would think you would be fine with it? A well built car, good price, stylish, good value. Sure its a little short on go juice....but many of you have said sedan buyers don't care or look at what's under the hood anyways......built in Korea, no issues there.......
  • the car would cost more, because they would have to spend more materials on building longer seats. Be happy that car had a seat at all
  • logic1logic1 Posts: 2,433
    You are getting value for the prices mixed up. The Verona is a value at 16. It is certainly not a value at the price of the Malibu. The Malibu is by far the better car and competes at a higher price.

    You put out hp per litre as though that is a significant factor. Yet you ignore mpgs, and the size and weight of the engine. The 3.5 litre is actually a smaller, lighter engine, allowing a better front rear weight balance and a lighter car.

    Bringing the old Daewoo design here is a good idea. But the design is definitely compromised and should be replaced soon with something on the epsilon platform.
  • bporter1bporter1 Posts: 229
    most people don't know whether the engine in their car is OHC or OHV , and most do not care. What they do notice is quality, either real or perceived. That perceived quality is what GM is striving for,and I think that GM dropped the ball in not putting in an OHC engine in the Malibu. I know and have heard all the arguments for and against, and personally I like the OHV engines, but GM is the only automaker that still embraces this technology, whether it be old or not.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    Veronas advertised here for a slow as 14,589....that's closer to 14 than 18. Cheapest malibus I've seen are 18,500. Grand Prixs are cheaper.

    "The 3.5 litre is actually a smaller, lighter engine, allowing a better front rear weight balance and a lighter car"

    I'm not sure you actually have proof of this. The 6 cylinder verona is inline and doesn't hog space like a v engine. The v engine is more complex and may infact weigh more. Plus, I don't know if the Verona engine is aluminum, someone should check that.

    some snippets from edmunds.....on the verona

    "All trim levels come with a 155-horsepower inline six-cylinder engine. The all-aluminum, dual-overhead cam 24-valve power plant also generates 177 pound-feet of torque at 4,000 rpm for strong acceleration at low speeds"

    "Passenger room is also in abundance as the Verona measures up to the Camry in nearly every interior measurement. The Verona isn't an eye-catching standout but it does offer a smooth power plant, a roomy interior and some premium features"

    "What it does provide is a solid alternative for buyers who want a comfortable, feature-laden family sedan without spending the money necessary to get an Accord or Camry"

    suzuki Verona - Curb Weight: 3307 lbs

    "and with 177 lb-ft of torque, it accelerates quickly from a stop"

    and isn't that what many of you have said is most important....in town accelration from stoplights....

    edmunds does also say it won't challenge the established class leaders, but they don't say the Mali does either.

    not reading anything negative here....my visual inspection of the verona confirms its got a very nice interior for the price.

    now what does edmunds say about the malibu

    "2004 Malibu delivers excellent value but it still lacks the performance and refinement of the class leaders."

    "Down on power compared to its competitors, lackluster interior"

    "The interior still doesn't have an upscale feel"

    "but it proves to be more than adequate during typical driving. There's plenty of punch off the line and the power doesn't let up much from there on out. The power delivery is consistently smooth, but its rough sound keeps it a step below the Accord and Camry in the refinement department"

    etc.

    i would have posted the links here but there were far too many. edmunds has many spec and review pages for these two cars.

    My point here is not to rag the bu, but to point out that the Verona is quite a good car, and as a competitor, internally within GM, it may actually be better suited for a lot of folks. I get that feeling some of you feel because its not a home grown car you have some bias against it. When you compare the cars as a whole, and not focus on where the car comes from, the Verona may be the better purchase choice.

    Plus the Verona has a better warranty.

    perhaps this is more suited to sedan comparisons....."Dueling Chevys-Epica/Verona vs.Malibu"
  • vcjumpervcjumper Posts: 1,110
    155hp 6 cylinder and only 177lb feet, that competes with the 4 banger Camcords (and is what Edmunds compares it with). The Edmunds article criticizes the midrange power of the Suzuki motor. Does anyone know a of a current lower powered 6 cylinder motor? It does have a pretty nice interior.

    The Malibu 3.5L OHV smokes both those numbers and Edmunds compares it to the Camcord 6 cylinder motors. Now if only I could see the Malibu in a darker interior more often than the too light gray I see all the time.
  • dindakdindak Posts: 6,632
    hp / litre? If that's criteria for buying a car then I must have missed something.

    Epica has a fake feel to it, much like it's Hyundia / Kia cousins. Yes, nice looking interior I suppose, but it's cluttered and seems to be trying too hard to be luxury. The cleaner interior of the Bu is much preferred as is the 45 hp. Sure Epica / Verona is a good value but so is the Malibu and I prefer it in every way even with a shorter warranty.
  • buy anyways, the Verona was built to compete with four-cylinder models..it is a value because at this price, most midsize cars are four cylinders..and the Inline 6 (which provides the same liters and horsepower rating) is made to compete with those 4 bangers!! its a solid car for those not wanting to spend more....also, it accelerates well (even though not much midrange punch) due to its pretty high torque rating for only 2.5L....

    and yes, the Verona HAS an all-aluminum engine
  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaPosts: 1,540
    Anybody who would believe that a Suzuki anything is superior to any equivalent model from GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, etc.: drop me an email. I've some some nice Arctic tundra that would make a fine summer home. ;-)

    2011 Buick Regal Turbo, 1968 Oldsmobile Cutlass S Holiday Coupe

  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    for the dollar it stacks up fine.....

    i doubt the sebring stratus twins would be more desirable.....talk about a dud.

    i'm just saying.....y'all are using the 'value' card in praising the merits of the malibu, and also saying things like ultimate performance isn't an issue and the performance of the malibu is good enough for the sedan buyers. You're saying its about it being a value choice.

    And what I'm saying is that the Malibu is quite possibly not the winner in the value department.

    So the Malibu is not the winning performer and it doesn't win the value challenge, especially within its own walls. Grand Prixs and Veronas are better value buys.

    So then we fall to styling and comfort and the Malibu doesn't take the cake there either. Especially styling.

    Just making some points. I just want to know the one segment of the mid size sedan market where the Malibu excels and is the leader in class.
  • rwisemrwisem Posts: 96
    What with all the talk about the Malibu being boring in looks, I was surprised by an incident this morning - I swear this happened just as I relate it.

    I had stopped at 7-11 on my way to church. As I went back to the car, an attractive woman young enough to be my daughter asked me how I liked the Malibu. I told her I liked it fine and she said "it sure is a beautiful car". She was driving a Pontiac Vibe.
  • Anyone who has a complaint about the styling should look at the New Beetle, the new Mini Cooper, and the new T-bird, then set a new Malibu next to 1964 Malibu. I'm just surprised that Chevy isn't offering a 40th anniversary edition. Bet it's in the works.
  • dindakdindak Posts: 6,632
    As you yourself have said, value is a relative thing. Further it must accompanied by taste and not everyone will find the Verona/ Epica attractive just like you don't find the Malibu attractive.

    Personally, I know nothing about Daewoos. They were sold here for about a year or two before they went broke and you rarely see one on the road. The combination of flash, lack of power and the unknown don't strike me as a value. While Malibu may not be the best value on 4 wheels, I do think it's a better value than what the other 4 major car companies offer.
  • vcjumpervcjumper Posts: 1,110
    Isn't the Malibu much better suited to 4 passengers than the other car with SUV size headlights/GP?
  • although i've only had one suzuki vehicle, i was quite impressed with the reliability. i had a '92 geo tracker(a rebadged suzuki sidekick). over 8 years of ownership, i racked on 185,000 miles with few problems. aside from brakes and tires, i think the only nonroutine maintenance things i replaced were the water pump and the catalytic converter. my father used to buy GM-cadillacs and chevy blazers and suburbans. those vehicles were throwing rods and having transmission problems after only 30,000 miles. i now have a ford ranger, 3 years old, and wish suzuki made a pick up truck. perhaps the american companies have improved quality over the last 10-15 years, but i'd still go japanese, assuming the prices and option levels were comparable.
  • regfootballregfootball Posts: 2,166
    "While Malibu may not be the best value on 4 wheels, I do think it's a better value than what the other 4 major car companies offer."

    I can dig that answer. Fair enough.

    I haven't tested the GP back seat so I don't know how useless it may be. I would assume the GP is a superior car from a dynamics standpoint as well as a powertrain standpoint.
This discussion has been closed.