Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Chevrolet Malibu MPG-Real World Numbers

1356710

Comments

  • mr_botsmr_bots Member Posts: 236
    40MPG is not impossible, I've hit 39.9 on more than one occasion, not by the computer but by dividing miles by gallons. These instances were also not going down hill or just 20 miles or so. One of the instances I can recall was going to uphill to Ruidoso and back (about 5 hour round trip)averaging about 70mph. This is also on the LS V6 model, it is very uncommon for me to get under 35MPG even when going 80mph.
  • malexbumalexbu Member Posts: 169
    That's very encouraging to hear -- I hope to hit this number myself
    then!..

    Did you notice that getting this high MPG is correlated to the weather
    -- temperature etc.?
  • mr_botsmr_bots Member Posts: 236
    The near 40mpg have all been on clear, warm days (85+ degrees). So that's with the A/C on most of the time.
  • walterquintwalterquint Member Posts: 89
    My car (Alero) has the same 4cyl as the Malibu. It's a fine engine. I have the 5sp, but I suspect the Ecotec works even better with the autotranny. I've hit 37mpg highway, but never 40mpg. The Malibu's autobox must be geared a bit higher in top gear than my stick.....a midsize 5-seater that gets 40mpg? Malibu rocks!! Is this car underrated or what??
  • gdubya2gdubya2 Member Posts: 32
    Just an update on my experiences over the past 11 months with my 2006 LS sedan. I have kept very complete and accurate records of fuel consumption from day one. The car now has 9234 miles on the odometer - as of its last fill up - and I have spent $799.10 on gas so far. I've averaged 30.177 mpg during those miles with a high of 40.12 mpg and a low of 23.38 mpg. I live in a suburban community so most of my driving is not stop and go city stuff. I have done one oil change myself, using Mobil One, and have had the tires rotated. That's it - no recalls, no warranty work, nothing! I absolutly could not be happier with any other car. I think it is such a great automobile for the money and would not hesitate for a second in recommending it to anyone. I have seen the photos of the 2008 Malibu and intend to go to the North American Auto Show in Detroit in a couple of weeks to take a look at it first hand. I am a little concerned that the new styling has lowered the roof heigth and will make getting in and out of the car more difficult - something I really do not like about my wife's Buick LaCrosse. I will post my impression of the new Malibu here after the show.
  • micwebmicweb Member Posts: 1,617
    That's awesome. I remember getting disgusted when I switched from a stick shift Ford Focus ZX3 (Zetec motor) to an automatic ZX3 (same motor version) and watching my mileage drop from an average of 30 mpg to 26 mpg with the same driving patterns - and as you know the Focus is much smaller than the Malibu. As a current owner of a fuel thrifty Impala, I have to take my hat off to GM's engineers for getting some of the best "real world" mileage out there.
  • malexbumalexbu Member Posts: 169
    Thank you for the update, gdubya2!

    I've been wondering about your results for that upcoming trip '"up
    north" in Manistee' (see post #100).

    Glad to hear from you and read your report with great interest.

    ,-- You=gdubya2 [ Jan 03, 2007 (2:08 am) ]
    |
    | Just an update on my experiences over the past 11 months with my
    | 2006 LS sedan... I've averaged 30.177 mpg during those miles with a
    | high of 40.12 mpg and a low of 23.38 mpg. I live in a suburban
    | community so most of my driving is not stop and go city stuff.

    Since you talk here about more than the fuel economy, I will also give
    a more or less comprehensive account of my experience with my two
    Malibus -- it is especially appropriate now, since the second one just
    turned one year of the ownership.

    [ Both cars are Malibu 2005, Base Sedan, with slightly different
    options ]

    I bought the first one in May 2005, right after checking it out by
    accident at a dealership -- just left my six-year old Bonneville there
    and drove off the lot in the new car. (Some surprise for the
    family later that day... :-)

    By the end of year 2005, we (the family) knew that that spontaneous
    purchase was a wise one -- Malibu had been really good to us, the
    amazing fuel economy included. And (every owner will know it) -- what
    a comfortable and practical car!...

    So, comes the end of 2005, I am in love with my Bu and so on December
    30th, when amazingly good deals can be made, I go to take a look at
    another dealer's lot and... the next thing I know, I call my wife --
    "Hey, I am at a dealership... I just bought another car... We'll talk
    later..." Mind you -- I am the only driver in the family at that
    stage...

    And so it happened that on January 3rd, 2006, there turned out to be
    two white Malibu's in my driveway, and every morning I needed to make
    a tough decision which one to drive... Thankfully, in the summer my
    daughter got the license and it became easier to make the choice. (In
    honesty, I bought the second car because I knew she'd need one within
    a year and after casually looking at some alternatives, including
    Cobalt, I didn't want anything but a Malibu for her. And I didn't
    want anything else for myself, either.)

    Here are the numbers for the cars (both are normally driven "more city
    than highway"):

    +---------------------+-------+-------+-------+
    |---------------------| Bu1 --| Bu2 --| Bu2* -|
    +---------------------+-------+-------+-------+
    | Odometer (miles) ---| 13664 | 13658 | 10917 |
    | Speed avg (mph) ----| 22 -- | 28 ---| 27 ---|
    | Speed high (mph) ---| 30 -- | 59 ---| 49 ---|
    | Economy low (mpg) --| 20.8 -| 21.0 -| 21.0 -|
    | Economy high (mpg) -| 29.2 -| 36.3 -| 34.0 -|
    +---------------------+-------+-------+-------+

    Why three columns for two cars? Because I wanted to exclude the
    largest distorting factor -- the June 2006 round-trip of 2741 miles,
    which was all highway (although in suboptimal conditions -- see my
    June postings). So the "Bu2*" columns is calculated with that trip
    excluded. The average and high speed in the table should give you the
    idea of my driving patterns.

    The table above is produced on the basis of the numbers I collect
    after each fill-up. Speed numbers are taken off the DIC, of course,
    with zeroing the reading after the read. Economy is calculated as
    "miles driven divided by gasoline purchased" -- the information shown
    by DIC is always way too optimistic (up to two MPG).

    | I have done one oil change myself, using Mobil One, and have had the
    | tires rotated. That's it - no recalls, no warranty work, nothing! I
    | absolutly could not be happier with any other car.

    I change oil to synthetic (Mobil One or Castrol Syntec) myself, at
    about 7500 miles passed. And I rotate the tires myself, too, also
    keeping my eye on the proper inflation.

    No recalls in my history, either.

    I had two very minor things taken care of under the warranty:

    * Bu1 had a rubber hit protector on the trunk arm fallen out -- the
    rubber was defective originally.

    * Bu2 had a slight scratching noise at low speeds (while cold) in a
    front wheel. It turned out to be the wheel bearing defect -- the
    dealer replaced it and all has been well since then.

    The total of time I spent at the dealership (not counting the
    purchases, obviously) is under one day -- i.e. for both cars together.

    | I think it is such a great automobile for the money and would not
    | hesitate for a second in recommending it to anyone.

    And so would I...

    Various people would want various things in their car, of course. We
    all want at least some minimum set of options. I know the value of
    ABS, for example, and want it in my car. The remote starter is a
    convenience which I appreciate more and more, but probably could live
    without (oh, wait... maybe not...)

    But apart from the minimum set of features, I want just two things in
    my cars:

    * Fuel economy.

    * Reliability and the minimum maintenance cost and effort. I hated
    spending hours at the dealer before I got my Bu1. I don't want to
    do that ever again.

    In this respect (as in all others, in fact), after more than 27,000
    miles combined in my cars, I couldn't be happier about them. (Thank
    you Chevy, again!)

    | I have seen the photos of the 2008 Malibu and intend to go to the
    | North American Auto Show in Detroit in a couple of weeks to take a
    | look at it first hand. I am a little concerned that the new styling
    | has lowered the roof heigth and will make getting in and out of the
    | car more difficult - something I really do not like about my wife's
    | Buick LaCrosse.

    I saw the photos as well, did like what I saw but have the same
    concerns. This car is *practical*. I love the space over my head, the
    ease of getting in and out, knowing that all the passengers are extra
    comfortable, and wouldn't change this practicality and comfort for the
    smoother roof lines. (I know what you mean talking about LaCrosse...
    And did you try the latest Pontiacs -- G6 and GrandPrix?... I don't
    think I'd enjoy riding in their back seats...)

    Some people find the current Malibu's design a disaster (see the
    "2008" discussion). That's fine with me -- I don't need other people
    to love my car. I am inside and I like what I see and what I feel.
    But I also noticed that my eye sort of has trained on Malibu's shapes
    over the time. When I see it -- the sedan or Maxx -- on the road, my
    heart jumps with joy -- it's such a neat car. When I walk around my
    cars, I find them beautiful. And hey, they are -- it appears that
    most of the photos of the current Malibus are taken from some
    ridiculous angles, ruining the image of the car -- the car "alive"
    makes quite a different impression on me than the pictures I usually
    see.

    Anyway, best wishes to Chevy and all us Malibu owners -- and thank you
    for listening!
  • gdubya2gdubya2 Member Posts: 32
    Thanks for the interest in my post. Unfortunately, my summer plans were altered when my father became very ill shortly after my July post(#100). He was placed under hospice care in early August and passed away October 30. I was his home care provider and as a result have made only one trip to Manistee since my earlier post. That was a quick trip to winterize the house and I did not concern myself with fuel mileage on that occasion. I do plan to track my fuel usage when I start to make frequent trips again next spring. I will post my results here.
  • kpugh2kpugh2 Member Posts: 20
    My wife drives a 2004 Malbiu with V6. Purchased new in NOv 03.
    Today the car has 57,744 total miles and pumped 2,108.26 gallons od gas. Average 26.9 mpg with average fuel cost of $2.03 per gallon.
    Average speed is in low 40's
  • csandstecsandste Member Posts: 1,866
    The old-timey ohv engine is being shamed into retirement with the new generation platform. Looking at that kind of mpg, combined with low low maintenance costs, I at least will miss it (of course I'm planning on keeping my Maxx for a very long time).
  • gohtrawgohtraw Member Posts: 2
    I did not see any posts by a fellow owner of the 2006 SS model. I wanted to know why so few people by the 3.9L V6. It is simply a better engine, more power, fine fuel economy at highway speeds, and it is smoother and quieter than any other available engine. Acceleration at any speed seems effortless with 90% of the 240 lb x ft of torque available from 2200 to 6000 rpm. It will probably have a longer life too due to the fact that it does not have to work too hard. The SS model also offers a ton of standard equipment at a far more affordable price than a Camry or an Accord. When I was looking at Malibu's I felt that the SS while not the cheapest, was by far the best deal. I got mine with a sun roof from just over 21k (haggled down).
  • gohtrawgohtraw Member Posts: 2
    The pushrod engine is probably not going to go extinct. It is cheaper to build and allows for more displacement in the same amount of space. This allows for longer strokes which creates most of all more torque.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    One (of two) problems with the Maxx SS is not the engine, which is definitely a nicer motor than what's in the rest of the Malibu line. It's the 4 speed transmission, which Chevy decided to regear with a very steep final drive ratio for the Maxx SS. Result is the motor's all wound up during freeway driving and the car uses way more fuel than it should.
    The other problem is the big wheel diameter, which hurts maneuverability as well as ride quality.

    The Malibu SS, apparently, is geared the same as the regular Maxx line. That combination seems to work much better.
  • shadow5599shadow5599 Member Posts: 101
    It's kinda funny, how many of us like the pushrod engine and it's simplicity, sound, power. Over in the Chevrolet Malibu vs. Toyota Camry vs. Honda Accord discussion, the Japanese fans have to continually talk about them as antiquated, noisy, old technology, etc. The fuel economy on a Malibu beats an Accord or Camry, not bad for "antiquated"

    They work well, they're simple, they get fantastic gas mileage, cheap to fix, very reliable, quiet. I guess all they can say bad about them is that they are an old design, which is true but not necessarily bad. Come on over, put in your two cents.
  • gonogogonogo Member Posts: 879
    The new Corvette has pushrods and it is a world beater.
  • ssanssan Member Posts: 5
    Maybe someone can help me. I own a 2007 Malibu Maxx LT V6, it has 4,000 miles on it and has had one oil change. I understand the car may still be breaking in but up to this point the best I have seen the car get is 19.9 mpg. The mileage is usually between 17-19mpg, this is a pretty even mix of around town and high way with maybe slightly more around town. It seems most people I talk to or read about get much better mileage than I do. On a recent 160 mile trip at 70-75 the whole way I averaged about 21.3. I have used the computer on the car and calculated trip mileage/gallons used, the results are usually identical. Is there something I can do? I have contacted the dealer and they seem puzzled/unwilling to help.
  • gonogogonogo Member Posts: 879
    On the long trip, lightly loaded you should get around 30 MPG with a Maxx. Not sure what the problem is, but the dealer should know what mileage the 07 Maxx should get.
    Are you saying they won't even look at it. Call GM customer service, the # is in your owners manual. I bet they will get someone to check it out.
  • shnoolshnool Member Posts: 1
    I just had to post this, and stir the pot... I test drove a corolla, before I bought my 2005 Malibu. The 2003 Corolla, at the same price as the 2005 Chevy (go figure), was cramped and small... I also know people aren't getting the EPA MPG of 38 out of them (more like 33-35 MPG)...

    Anyway, Happily, I am getting as-advertised MPG outta my Malibu. I get 33.5 to 34.6 MPG average for my commute. My average speed of 50 MPH (yep nearly all highway). Here is the interesting part... I live about 1100 feet higher than I work... So I get like 38-40 MPG going to work, and significantly less coming back.

    I guess I could consistently see 35-36 MPG outta this car if I had a flat road commute... But I am not complaining, this car is bigger, more comfortable, and has more standard options than the Toyota Corolla. Overall I am very happy.

    Oh, and for those who are also talking about it... I do have an occasional clunk in my steering, mostly in-parking lot steering. Hope mine isn't going.
  • gonogogonogo Member Posts: 879
    Go to your dealer, there is TSB 06-02-32-007 B dated 05-21-07 to lube the intermediate shaft and check for other rattles. 2004-2007 Malibu and Maxx
  • pulgopulgo Member Posts: 400
    Let's hear how many repairs are needed after 200k miles (which in all probability the Corolla would not need).

    Other than reliability I completely agree with the fact that the Malibu is much more comfortable to drive every day and due to the size and weight, safer too!
  • paopao Member Posts: 1,867
    04, 3.5L V-6 Maxx LT about to turn 100K should do it this weekend.....for reliability, nothing more than normal wear and tear items..wipers, tires, oil changes...did follow prescribed maintenance..and did go beyond changing out all fluids at 95K.....so very happy with reliability so far...
  • pulgopulgo Member Posts: 400
    I believe you.

    I had a 91 Chevrolet Caprice go to 280K miles with nothing more than excellent maintenance.

    But that is not the typical outcome.

    Based on everything I read and hear, the average Honda or Toyota is by far more durable and has less mechanical problems than the average Ford or GM (after a couple hundred thousand miles).

    There is always someone with a different opinion or experience and I respect that.
  • gonogogonogo Member Posts: 879
    I can't imagine anyone driving the same car for 200K, unless a salesman.
    My limit has been 120K, too much new technology to let go by after 8-9 years, things are moving very fast these days.
  • pulgopulgo Member Posts: 400
    Well, I drive 30k miles per year and it is very expensive to buy a new car every 4 years.

    I keep my cars for about 8 to 10 years and my personal experience with Japanese cars has been better than with American cars.

    Based only on my personal experience, the American cars I have had required replacing alternators, water pumps, starters, etc. before reaching 200k miles. Some of them cost several thousands dollars in repairs to poor quality engine gaskets, weak brakes, leaky axles, etc.

    All of this despite meticulous maintenance!

    None of my Japanese cars needed anything other than routine maintenance.

    My latest car I just sold after 6 years, a 2001 Echo did not even need a light bulb to be replaced. Only 1 set of brakes, 1 set of belts and routine fluid changes.

    For me, buying the wrong car could mean several thousand dollars in additional expenses.

    Of course someone that keeps his car for maybe 4 or 5 years and less than 100k miles this whole matter would be of little concern.

    Before purchasing my present 2007 Sentra y also considered a 4 cylinder Malibu. I test drove one and I liked the ride. But I also talked to my mechanic friend with 30 years experience at a GM dealership and based upon his advice and my own experience decided against the Malibu.

    I am sure that there must be quite a lot of GM owners out there with a different opinion and I respect that.
  • gonogogonogo Member Posts: 879
    Well here is the truth. When you pay people not working, a so called a job bank. Pay retired people a large check and pay there health care, little is left to produce a good reliable car.
    The bean counters cut corners every way they can to make up for the expensive overhead. The Japanese don’t have that burden, so they can produce a good car.
    I buy GM because I always have, they are easy to work on and parts are not that expensive. I have heard the Japanese parts are very high, but I don’t think you would know that, you don’t buy any.
    Until they straighten out this inequality, it will stay the same.
  • pulgopulgo Member Posts: 400
    Well, I do own a GM. It's a 98 Chevrolet K1500 with about 100k miles. I agree with you. Parts are inexpensive and I can do all the service work myself.

    I hope the next 100k are as uneventful as the first 100k.

    So far the only 2 unexpected things to gom wrong were a serpentine belt tensioner that disintegrated 50 feet away from a MIDAS and a rear axle leak that I fixed in my garage.

    I refuse to buy a Japanese truck simply because they are very expensive.

    But I sure like the new Toyota Tundra (only $ 41,000 plus tax).
  • timrick8timrick8 Member Posts: 3
    If not the current model, how about the coming 08?

    Somehow, I remember one of the Chevys I have rented has such a feature, maybe it's Impala.
  • clarencehollowclarencehollow Member Posts: 60
    My 2005 New style 4 cylinder Malibu I bought in November of 2004 now has over 53,000 miles. The car still performs like a champ, and I recently got 39.9 mpg on cruise at 70 mpg for about a 70 mile trip. Keep your hybrids, and rice burners - I got you beat: in price, fuel economy and more. The VOLT is what I want next - bring it to us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • pulgopulgo Member Posts: 400
    What is your real MPG over a full month or a year?

    A 70 mile trip means very little. It does not tell what the average Malibu owner may achieve over a longer period of time.
  • gdubya2gdubya2 Member Posts: 32
    At the end of January 2006 I took delivery of a new Malibu sedan with the 4 cylinder engine. Since then I have driven over 15K and recorded every gallon of gas purchased. I drive a combination of city and highway miles and usually fill up when needing 10 or more gallons. So far I have averaged 29.96 MPG for 15,196 miles driven with a low of 23.4 MPG (winter) and a high of 40.1 MPG. The MPG has improved as the car has accumulated miles. I now seem to be getting 30 to 34 MPG on most fill-ups but cold weather (I live in Michigan) has a effect on MPG.
  • pulgopulgo Member Posts: 400
    Yours is exactly the information needed by a prospective buyer. A tank or two are not really meaningful.
    Thanks for posting.
  • malexbumalexbu Member Posts: 169
    First, a brief self-quote, from message #93 here:

    ,-- malexbu [ Jul 04, 2006 (9:53 pm) ] ---
    | I just returned from a five-day round-trip. Here is what I've got:
    | * Distance: 2741 miles
    | * Avg. speed: 59 mph
    | * Fuel used: 75.47 gallons
    | * Fuel economy computer reading: 38.6 mpg
    | * Fuel economy real: 36.32 mpg

    | Was going through the terrible (North-) Eastern rains, pouring over
    | the roads from MA to VA this past week. Was climbing the great Smoky
    | Mountains in NC and TN -- mostly in the left-most driving lane, both
    | in the mountains and on the roads with the posted speed limit of 70
    | mph

    | 2005 Malibu Base Sedan.

    At the end of this August I had a similar trip -- only in my other
    2005 Malibu Base Sedan. This time I was driving my child to the
    college, going from Boston to Nashville with two passengers in and the
    car loaded to the gills, and then back with one passenger and not much
    stuff in. Since the load of the car was very different going in the
    two directions, I accounted for them as two separate trips, resetting
    DIC in the beginning of each one.

    I also included driving in and around Nashville in the first trip.

    Here are my results, with MPG shown by DIC and calculated as
    Miles/Fuel in the two last columns of the following table:

    --------------------------------------------
    Trip -- Miles -- Speed - Fuel -- DIC -- Real
    --------------------------------------------
    MA-TN - 1202 --- 58 ---- 32.9 -- 37.3 - 36.52
    TN-MA - 1142 --- 61 ---- 30.8 -- 38.6 - 37.05
    --------------------------------------------

    The car was performing flawlessly and provided all the comfort the
    family needed, with temperatures hovering in the 100 F vicinity in TN,
    and handling the Appalachian roads easily. The primary speed limiting
    factor was the fear of being pulled over by a cop, which almost
    happened in TN.
  • csandstecsandste Member Posts: 1,866
    I'm too lazy to look up the 'Bu base sedan. This is the 4 cylinder rather than the 3.5 six, right?

    I was lamenting the demise of the 3.5 but rented an HHR last week and was pleased with the engine (sure I had the high output, but I sure wasn't going to put premium in it). Think things should be just fine with the new Bu and the four cylinder.
  • malexbumalexbu Member Posts: 169
    Yes, a 2.2L 4-cylinder Ecotec -- and I love it.
  • ls6454ls6454 Member Posts: 11
    My 07 LS is averaging 34.2 MPG over 6000 miles.
  • clarencehollowclarencehollow Member Posts: 60
    Well let's see... the Malibu now has 60,000 miles and of that about 40,000 was highway. That's about 2,500 tankfuls JUST for the highway.My highway mileage has averaged around 35 to 38 over all. Not bad, and very real world to me. We just added an Altima.
  • jerrywimerjerrywimer Member Posts: 588
    First tank has returned roughly 25mpg (guesstimating slightly, depending on whether the salesman filled the tank with 45 miles on the clock or with 46 ;) ). This is mixed driving, stop and go, speed zones between 20 and 55 (me going up to 60) and trying to keep within the owner's manuals recommended 500 mile 'break-in' driving conditions. I anticipate easily breaking 30 when I resume my normal 90+ percent highway work route (31mi. one way, mountains of western NC).

    I'm glad to see I'm not the only one that had good experiences with the 04-07 Malibu's though. Somewhere around here (maybe even earlier in this topic) I have posted results from that car (2004 LT sedan 3.5l / 4 speed auto). The general gist, off the top of my head, was numbers ranging from 24mpg on the low side (heavy traffic during the holiday shopping seasons in Asheville NC) to just over 38 mpg on an all-highway trip to WV from western NC. Kinda makes me wonder if GM had decided to use the electrically assisted steering, if my 08 3.6l / 6 speed auto's numbers would've gone up another 1 or 2 mpg over wherever they end up. (It can't possibly all be attributed to the 3.5l pushrod for the 04, can it?)
  • wjtinatlwjtinatl Member Posts: 50
    I'm in the middle of a 1000 mile road trip with a 2008 Malibu LS with the 2.4L Ecotec. Picked the car up from National rent-a-car with 2400 miles on it. Halfway thru my road trip I'm averaging 27.8 mpg, mostly highway with he cruise set at 80 mph, no A/C. Western Georgia to Jackson Mississippi mean lots of Interstate (20), some elevation and little traffic. I think the MPG is good, not great. The 6-speed automatic should help as the 4-speed downshifts frequently on hills to maintain the set speed. Was hoping to see 30 mpg as I get 28 with 3.9L Impala's on the same trip. Any different experiences???
  • silver2005silver2005 Member Posts: 1
    Mine is a LS sedan with 38k miles. Computed mileage (not DIC) was 29.4 for one tank of 90% commuting at 65-75mph.
  • jerrywimerjerrywimer Member Posts: 588
    That mileage is pretty good for a midsized car, especially doing 80 mph. Run at the speed limits with the cruise set and it'll most likely go up 2 or 3 mpg, minimum. Avoid stop'n'go and leadfooting it to get around other cars and you may even see another 1 or 2 beyond that.

    Still, all told, the new model car is on the longer Epsilon platform and weighs more than the outgoing model. Compare the EPA numbers for the 04-07 sedans (shorter wheelbase) and the 04-07 Maxx cars (longer wheelbase, same as the new 08's) and you can see where I'm going with this..
  • beach15beach15 Member Posts: 1,305
    I ALWAYS got 37.0 mpg on my '07 1LT 2.2L rental highway cruising at 70-80 in my usual PA-->DE and back trip.

    Stop & go, it was low 20's, but still not that bad.

    That rental was a huge factor in us recently buying a new '08 Malibu 2LT 2.4L, and so far love the responsiveness and hugely improved refinement over the last gen, and only hope the mileage can somewhat compare. Probably won't pull close to the 40's, like the 2.2L, but never know.
  • beedublubeedublu Member Posts: 236
    My 04 Maxx LS with over 49K miles still averages 26 MPG just being driven back and forth to work and doing errands.

    This is for an even mix of local and long trips. The typical local trip is 8 miles each way, with maybe 10 stop lights and max posted speed limit of 45 MPH. Temps range from subfreezing to upper 80s. I use the remote start sparingly in the winter.

    My worst mileage has been around the 20MPG mark...that's in the dead of winter with lots of warm-ups, slush and snow and poking along at 20MPH or less. My typical long trip gets about 30 - 32 MPG, with the all-time best still being 35 MPG (I-71 & I-90 through Ohio, with a/c and cruise).

    Overall, I'm pleased, especially when I read posts in the Honda Accord forum where owners of the new 08 models have trouble getting more than the low 20s!
  • paopao Member Posts: 1,867
    04 LT here with 119K on it...still averaging 28 MPG on a 70 mile commute each day....30-32 on sustained highway speeds...and 25-26 around town.....
  • hickorychickoryc Member Posts: 25
    Purchased '04 MAXX end of 2004. Track every fill up. I consistently get between 27.5 and 29.5. Right at 50,000 miles driven. 6 cyl. Run Mobil 1 oil and filter from first oil change, which I always do myself. Driver's seat shows wear. Drove '96 Contour 220,000 before computer failed. Driver's seat looks like new. Commuter car. No complaints. Looking at a Tucson additional vehicle. Not looking to trade-in Maxx for several more years. :)
  • packer3packer3 Member Posts: 277
    I just leased an 08 Accord LXP 4cyl, because my 04 Malibu LS V6 20M miles lease was up and I looked at the new 08 BU nice car, however the experience I had with rattles, front drive, clanks and minor squeaks, but most of all the poor gas mileage in the city were I drive 2 miles of city stop and go ranged anywhere from 14 mpg to 16 mpg, well below the the stated number on the sticker, however straight highway was 33 mpg to 37 mpg which was outstanding. The gas mileage never improved from day one.
    The 3 year lease cost for a new 08 BU vs th 08 LXP was close to $75.00 a month more, side by side type of models, based on all that I wasn't about to take another chance, I've had the Accord for a month now and it's at 20 mpg.
    The lesson I learned is that you need to get a mpg car that meets the bulk of your driving needs, no matter what the car is..
  • hcchcc Member Posts: 1
    I have a brand new 2008 Chevy Malibu and it is getting between 17 and 18 MPG. It is a mix of city and hwy driving. The service dept tells me it will improve at 5 to 10,000 miles. I am very leery. Also the air conditioning only works on maximum. What do you think?
    It is the 4 cyl engine too. THis is worse than the 6 cylinder 99 Olds intrigue that I was driving.
    Thanks,
  • packer3packer3 Member Posts: 277
    I doubt the gas mileage will change, they told me that when I got my 04 BU. Leased the V6 and the city mileage never moved from 15/16 mpg stop and go in the city, straight highway however was up to 37 mpg. In the winter the mileage went down to 14/15 mpg in the city, that's typical of GM cars from my experience.
  • micwebmicweb Member Posts: 1,617
    The air conditioning should NOT only run on maximum. Some aircon controls are hard to understand, check your manual. My wife was running our Honda Odyssey in the "Defrost" mode (she left it on after needing it one time) not realizing that in the Defrost Mode the aircon is ALWAYS but DOESN'T show the little green aircon light glowing - and killing gas mileage.
  • hotrod1965hotrod1965 Member Posts: 21
    We have a 07 Maxx LT with about 25K on it. The longer we have had this car, the better the miliage has been. When new, it was getting 28-29 on the highway. Now it gets 29-32. I have found that at 75mph, it get around 28-29mpg, but at 70-72 mph, I get the 31-32mpg.
    Around town miliage is to hard to calculate. It depends on what around town driving we do. But typically, we average around 35mph and 25-26mpg on a tank of gas with mixed driving.
    Plus we can haul as much crap as a small SUV :)
  • au79enau79en Member Posts: 2
    I've had my LTZ (6cyl/6spd) for one month. I've filled it four times and have gotten 27.6, 25.1,26.4,25.0 over this period. The 25.x tanks represent a roughly 50/50 mix of highway and city driving, the other two were mostly highway. Not bad; my Mazda6S is a 6cyl and gets less, and it's only got 220hp (still a great care though).
Sign In or Register to comment.