Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
There have been a number of comments concerning the 3.5L versus the foreign 3.6L. The 3.5L usually coupled with AT4 seems to get better mileage than 3.6L with AT6.
You are looking at Eurotec I4 with AT6 so I really have to wonder what changes are happening there when put in different vehicles. Depending what vehicle it is in, i've noticed differences in the horsepower rating. More so with the 3.6L.
I have to wonder if EPA pollution targets are involved. But at least, these engines look to be way short of 2015 mileage requirements.
You make some interesting points. ------ GM is sitting on a "CASH COW" with the Chevrolet Malibu, --- BUT they need to "tweek" the line. ---- The Malibu line should include a two door vehicle in the LTZ model, with a six speed manual trans, or a six speed dual manual trans, (similar to what is in the VW line), that can be shifted automatically, and / or with paddles on the steering wheel. ---- The FOUR CYLINDER engine needs to be refined. While it is adequate for the vehicle, is is NOT an automotive jewel. It DOES NOT compare to the four cylinder Honda engine. The four cylinder should have at least 200 hp and 250 hp with a turbo. ------ The exterior colors need to be improved. Black Cherry, and Dark Green should be included in the "line up." -------- They need to get rid of the Goodyear Tires. Put Michelin tires on the vehicle! The Four Cylinder Vehicle should have dual exhaust with a "slight rumble" in the two door LTZ vehicle.
Best regards. --------------- Dwayne :shades:
No argument in getting rid of GY tires. Any vehicle that comes with them should have a warning placard saying to expect needing changing them prematurely. GY, over the years, has been horrible about early wear, tread separation, and bad in several other ways.
Are you nuts? why the heck are some wanting a noisy exhaust. Is your mind stuck in the age of a kid when you pushed your toys around and made a noise with your mouth?
The 09 Malibu I had was very quiet and I appreciated that. The new Regals apparently have answered your wants and I find it annoying. Michelin tires too.
Gearing is sacraficing mileage. If anything, Malibu could adopt some of the nicer things of the Regal, like surface that are not so hard, a center armrest that works. And the whole GM line should adopt the speed sensitive wipers that was in the Malibu.
And they need to redesign the AC ducting so it does not blow in your face. You should be able to aim it high enough to go over your head removing the hottest air.
Paddle shifting/stick, etc., may work in some vehicles, but I've found it near worthless. First it is not like the old modification packages you could buy and install. They could bypass all the valving controls and when you commanded it slammed to the next gear. The GM systems are still computer controlled and have a big delay to make sure you will not damage tranny or engine. And to engine braking, forget it. These days gearing is such that you get little engine braking. Also with small engines there is not enough displacement to effectively brake. I infrequently cross a steep bridge high enough for the largest of container ships. Coming into the city, there is a 25mph exit. If you top the bridge and start down shifting, the engine will rev to 8000RPM and you still need quite a bit of brake to safely maneuver that off loop. With the 3.6L.
Grow up.
interesting comments on the engine block from China.....I love my 3.5L V6 in my 04 Malibu Maxx...with its AT4....with just under 185K on it...still getting 30-32 on the hwy and 24-26 City on good days!..BTW it came with OEM Bridgestones on it..which were the bottom of their product line....CTS has OEM michelins and the outback has continentals...but I am running Eagle GTs on the Malibu now abeit on 17 inche rims and very happy with them....
as far as 2 doors....he is spot on...and the malibu is targeted as a mid size entry for a family sedan....if you want two doors and a rumble in the exhaust...get a V-8 Challenger or Mustang!
The only logical reason I can think of them putting this on vehicles is that like you, many will try it, and at least learn that using a downshift of the tranny with these newer vehicles does little braking as does the engine with especially small displacement.
The concept of not having to remove hands from wheel is nice, but better used for other features such as AC, radio, etc control.
Such mileage, I'm tempted to say liar, but i know some vehicles have done better than these newest. I just can not understand the reason if improving mileage is part of the goal.
Look at this post.
http://www.egmcartech.com/2011/06/22/2012-buick-lacrosse-gets-303-hp-3-6l-v6-fue- l-economy-remains-the-same/
Fine if you are looking for more power out of an engine with poor gas mileage in my book. I find the 3.6 as it is adequately powered. Although shifting may seem odd to some and why they have come out with an update that makes mileage even worse to satisfy those who can not learn. Put it to the floor and it will go. I have not, but talked to cop who said he took one to 140MPH. I'm not sure I'd trust the stability at that speed.
And good luck with your life and those GY. There are very few that have done a good job of lasting without failure of some sort and I'd bet they are harder riding than the previous tire. But maybe because of your high mileage, they might make a fit, even if shortlived, to your well broke in suspension.
QUESTION: ---- Why do you find it necessary to personally attack me for my ideas? ----- I just shared some suggestions with regards to the Malibu Line of GM. Personally, I like the sound of a stock Mustang. I think it has a nice mellow tone! If you do not share my opinion, that is "ok" with me, but please do not tell me to "Grow UP!" ------ And I am NOT "nuts" because I like a mellow sound in the exhaust. ---- My stock V6 Camry has a slight rumble in the dual exhaust. ---- Best regards. -------- Dwayne :shades:
I upgraded the rims on the Maxx to a 17 inch aftermarket running 225/50/17s I beleive if memory serves me....have run thru a set of Avon, BFG, Michelins, and now the GY Eagles...If I had to rate them four in order would be the Michelins (65K), GY (20K so far), BFG (36K) and the Avon (30K) in order of comfort, ride, noise, and life span. I dont push the car so this is mainly a communter (100 miles daily) and weekend errand and hauler....Price wise the Michelins were 200 a tire while the others ran 130-150 each......I see another 20K on the GY at this point with normal tire rotation....usually I do it every 7500 miles or so......
Im still amazed at the mileage I get from my Maxx....but it gets regular maintenance and fluid changes....Im hoping to get 2 more years out of it for 10 years total..then looking to replace it with who knows what....Im sold on the hatchback.but sadly there are few options available on the market these days.....cheers!
I'm very happy with the Malibu's gas mileage.
tires: 28 psi
RUG 10% ethanol
10% a/c use
8500 miles
2010 LT1 6 spd I4
Avg speed since last reset a few months ago: 31 mph
The car's mileage has steadily climbed from 25.4 mpg for a typical tank spent mostly commuting to work when new, to now at 8000 miles, it is at 29.4 mpg for the same driving. In other words, I am smoking the EPA combined numbers and the car is only getting better as miles go onto it.
I will be adding 4-6 psi to the tires this weekend and may finish giving it the first coat of wax since I bought it 19 months ago.
I also am pleased with the 21.3 mpg I just recorded in my '96 Riv on a tank used to run around town. That car has no 4th gear and runs 600 added rpms anytime I'm doing more than 40 mph. 184k miles and no 4th gear since 163k. I spent 5 yrs enjoying 27.5 combined mpg from this car using RUG before losing 4th gear. That's why my expectations from the 1.3 liter smaller Malibu with 2 more gears is to get 30 mpg combined.
My '01 Silverado has 27k miles on it and the gas mileage is still going up on it. 4X4 ext cab with tow pkg and posi. Hitting about 19 mpg on a 65 mile mostly backroads trip this past month.
I have been really watching my Mileage these last few weeks, because I really wanted to see what is the best way to drive , to get the best gas mileage. I drive quite a bit and mileage is important to me.
I have found on a 20 Mile highway trip, I scored 44 MPG, Doing 72mph with cruise control! City was anywhere from 21 with A/C to 27 with No Ac and maintaining a somewhat moderate speed. On my very first tank of Gas, I had 372.9 Miles mixed. When I filled up the Tank took 11.8 Gallons, which came out to 31.60 MPG for a Mixed tank. This was way above my expectations! So Far I have 800 Miles on this baby in 3 weeks, and Im only on my 3rd tank of gas. In my minivan I would be putting in my 5th tank right about now, and it was a 22 gallon tank!
I will be Driving to Topeka Ks on Monday or Tuesday , which is a 80 mile one way trip, with only one Toll Stop. I plan to fill the tank before Leaving and when arriving to see exactly what I get on the highway with Cruise control set.
I will also be driving to Mexico City , Mexico in the next few months, and I will come back and share my Real World Mileage for both of these trips.
But you didn't tell us if it's LS (4 cyl.), or LT(Z) (6 cyl.) It makes a difference. 31.6 MPG sounds right. 44 MPG is, alas, a fantasy -- don't trust the computer. Fill up and calculate yourself.
2.4 L
6A
9250 miles
35 psi in tires
So far, highest range plus miles driven on a tank has been 532 miles.
Congratulations on your purchase! Welcome to the GM family! If you need anything please feel free to email me!
Christina
GM Customer Service
downshifting in maual mode. This car has never came close to mpg rating, highway or city. Level
highway with air off, only 28mpg. Dealer says it is within their limits. They replaced some part
in transmission, but didn't correct the problem. Dealer has stopped working with me on this,
not sure what to do next.
them to do a reflash of of the ECM.
Best,
Sarah
GM Customer Service
first gear with it is downshifting in manual mode, so stated in owners manual.
The dealer could find no problems with the car, ie error codes. Said the mileage should improve as it gets more miles on it. On the drive home 95%
highway it got 26.7mpg.
As far as mileage is concerned, don't hold your breath. I heard that same story. I've never gotten the advertised mileage (22/33) - or even close. The only time I saw 30 mpg on the highway was after the car had 60K miles and I had a tailwind with solid Interstate driving. Other than that, 28 mpg has been my absolute best. In mixed suburban/freeway driving, I get 20 to 22 mpg. If I stayed in town all the time, it would be down in the teens.
This is the first GM car I've owned, that I can recall, where I did not get the mileage advertised on the Monroney sticker. I get the same mileage on my Corvette as I get with the Malibu (if I don't hot rod it too much). It's got a 5.7L V8 and a 6M.
I don't know what my next car is going to be, but it certainly won't be a Malibu. And, if my wife holds firm on wanting a 4 door, it probably won't be a Chevy - unless they come up with something to compete with the 300, Taurus or Genesis real soon. Too bad, because I've got 3 bow ties right now and I have a good relationship with my dealer.
[P.S. Christina posted her contact info earlier in this thread. You just have to go back a few pages.]
To find the email address, everyone's name at the beginning of their posts is a linked text. If you CLICK on their name, a page will come up with some information. One of those info pieces is an email address--if the person chose to add it. The GM people have added theirs.
You must click on the name. If you just roll over it with the mouse a flyout window will appear with a small amount of information.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Looking forward to working with you,
Sarah
GM Customer Service
Of course, what else would he say to get rid of you easier?
I am more than happy with my 2005 and 2006 Malibus, including the MPG for my Base Sedans (Maxx MPG is not great, but I love the car anyway.)
Telling everybody who wants to listen: MPG does not improve with more miles on the car. (Maybe after 100K -- did they tell you to wait that long? )
Thank you phil53.
I've been seriously thinking about buying a Malibu of this generation before it gets shortened for 2013.
But with stories like this... and look at the posts at the Equinox forums on the I4 and V6 engine (shared with the Malibu) problems -- scary...
I think I'll stick with my Opel/Malibus of the sixth generation, thank you.
GM reps (Christina, Sarah):
I realize you have limited if any meaningful roles here (haven't seen a single case where your "offer of help" would help any car owner, but perhaps it did happen, somewhere, sometime). I'll still say this: if not for the over 3000 GM Card points I have, I would not buy another GM car (have had four so far). Not because I don't like mine (I love them) but because I've had my share of troubles with a 1999 Pontiac and don't want to live through that again (while the car was great when not in need of a repair.)
The possibility that, by some reviews, the current GM cars are not less reliable than Hondas or Toyotas doesn't mean a thing to me: you don't have the Japanese firms' reputation. You are starting from ground zero where you have put yourself more than once. Can't read owners' messages on Cadillac, Impala, Equinox and Malibu boards without shuddering. If the GM leadership still does not get it that for this company, pretty much every customer/owner loss is a much harder blow than for believed-to-be-reliable brands... well, what do I say? I say, "Goodbye GM", as others will do.
Read somewhere that there are no more American car manufacturers' dealerships in some areas of CA. Not surprised. That's your future, GM, for the whole country, with the reliability and attitude you keep showing.
Have a good day.
To me, highway driving means "no city driving." I don't expect to get the advertised MPG unless on a limited access highway, do not exceed 60 mph, do not drop out of 6th gear very often, do not have a headwind, am not overloaded with people/cargo, is not frigid weather and am not traversing very hilly terrain.
I have a 2008 Saturn Aura with a 3.6 and 6 spd. It is rated as 26 HWY, I can easily get 28 to 30 most of the time and once got 36.5 with a 10 mph tailwind on the turnpike through Ohio (flat). On many occasions where I have been driving at 60 mph, I have been passed by a 4 cly Malibu (one tail pipe) that went flying by me at 75 or more. I even remarked to my wife "I bet he isn't getting 32 mpg."
Before I bought the Aura with the 3.6, I drove a new 2.4 and liked it, but my wife insisted on the 3.6 because she wanted dual exhausts (hence the comment every time a 4 cyl passes me). I took the 2.4 on a 5 mile highway loop and got 34 mpg driving 55 mph, then zero'd the computer in city traffic and drove uphill 1.5 miles and got 22 mpg in traffic.
Yes, I know that I did not gas up to verify the computer. But If you like the car and are skeptical, take the car on a test drive under both city and highway conditions, and see the MPG prior to a decision.
It is more creditible to see posts where someone writes that they checked their computer average and found it overstated MPG by 2% for example, and that they then drove X miles on level interstate in both directions at a steady 55 mph and got 25 MPG before correcting by 2%. You can also correct for the affect on the odometer due to tire circumference as well.
But, you rarely see posts like that, and it leaves you wondering about the accuracy of the poster's statements. If they do not drive efficiently or can't do the math, their posts are worthless to those who read these forumns. And it is hard to tell who has reported accurately unless they lay sufficient groundwork in their post.
But on this I don't agree: " have been passed by a 4 cly Malibu (one tail pipe) that went flying by me at 75 or more. I even remarked to my wife "I bet he isn't getting 32 mpg."
You can find several posts I made on this forum a few years ago where I documented the MPG of my 4-cyl 2005 Bus. I was reporting getting up to 36 MPG, the car loaded, with A/C mostly on -- on several round-trips MA to TN, a 2200 miles loop. By the fuel purchased, everything measured meticulously.
So: those 36 MPG were at the speeds over 75 MPH (as you can imagine).
I have never observed the dramatic effect of exceeding 55 MPG. The MPG loss mostly happens at braking, accelerating and climbing. At a steady speed, 55 or 75 MPH, doesn't make a big difference with a well shaped modern sedan. Well, I'll admit the possibility of getting 37 MPG instead of 36 MPG, traveling over 1000 miles at 55 MPH instead of 75 MPH. Go use that if you want... not me, on the roads with the posted speed of 75 MPH: I was quite content with 36@75+
I don't expect much further improvement as 30 combined is way over the Malibu combined rating of 26. My '84 Camaro peaked at 60,000 miles and my '01 Silverado mpg is still improving at 28,900 miles and 10 years old.
My top off today showed 28.2 and includes 50% interstate and 50% city. The split would be 60/40 if I hadn't gone out to lunch each day. halfway home from the gas station the DIC showed a remaining range of 505 miles.
Plus, I really like the idea of 'buying American', as cliche as that may be. Yes, I know that Honda and Toyota make cars in the US, BUT - they take money out of the economy more than they put in. All their profits go back to Japan; they build in areas where they get tax abatements so they're not putting any money directly back in our economy and they pay less than the US manufacturers, so they drive down the wages of car builders everywhere and lower the standard of living. Just my humble opinion.
Furthermore, your assertion that GM does not have the reputation of Honda or Toyota shows that you are fairly young and are looking only at recent history. I would remind you that Chevrolet has been around twice as long as either of those brands and that Chevrolet was the top selling and most admired brand in the US for 52 years. I remember well when "Made in Japan" meant it was junk. Chevrolet is a cultural icon. You don't hear songs about Hondas or Toyotas. ("See the USA in your Chevrolet"; "Drove my Chevy to the levy"; ".. in the backseat of my '60 Chevy"; etc, etc.) I think GM is making a major come-back and deserves to be considered side-by-side with their Japanese competitors.
I'll get off my soap-box now....
And I have to add that I wouldn't claim that the MPG doesn't improve over the break-in period, which is 600 miles for Malibu. It may or may not, but I am not saying anything about it. But I wouldn't expect that a Malibu with 3K miles will be getting a consistently better MPG when it is at 6 or 20K, all things being equal, which includes the weather and driving conditions and patterns.
I do know 'how to drive efficiently'. I choose not to. That would drive me nuts. I'd rather walk. Quite frankly, if you drive 60 on the freeway/interstate around here, you're a road hazard and you'll get run over. At those speeds, you should stick to the side roads. But maybe that's a midwestern thing.
I should not have to practice 'hypermiling' or drive like an old lady to get the posted mileage. I drive the way I drive and I get the advertised mileage on my Corvette and my Avalanche. I got it on all 3 of my Yukons and my Chevy pickup. I think I got it on my Cutlass and my Bonneville (I don't remember for sure).
All that said, I do agree that highway mileage means no mix of city or suburban - strictly on the highway.
On the other hand, if someone does everything correctly and still gets substandard fuel economy, then they have credibility and deserve to be heard from. Hopefully, they will lay it out in their post so that readers can determine whether or not their claims have merit.
I will leave you with this link to how the HWY mpg test is conducted:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml
It is a 12.75 minute test done on a dynamometer between 68 and 86 degrees. According to the test graph, the vehicle starts out at 0, accelerates to 50, slows to 30 once and accelerates to 60 and ends at 0. There are some small fluctuations, but never exceeds 60 mph, and the average speed is 48.3 mph. There are other graphs that are worth looking at, including future tests like cold weather, air conditioning and high speed (80 mph).
This chart gives detailed test comparisons:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml
Hope this aids the discussion.
I've thought about this often. The cold air has slightly higher density but then summer time brings higher humidity in the air. In the "old days" the higher humidity was thought to help the mixture burn better--sort of like the impression that a car ran better when it was raining due to the higher humidity with the carbureted engines.
Summer time brings more alcohol in the gasoline at some stations and EPA required forumulations on fuel in some regions, which are thought to give less mileage. Now the gasoline probably has 10% ethanol whenever they can get by with it that high due to the government paybacks to big business companies farming the corn and making ethanol from the corn.
The biggest factor I think, is the transmission on the automatic cars I have. I can start out when the trans is garage cool and it takes about 5-8 minutes before the mileage reading gets to higher values. I believe it's the transmission oil giving more drag. I put Dexron VI in my car where it was supposedly compatible with the original Dexron IIIe. The VI is essentially a synthetic and has a thinner viscosity in my judgement at cooler temps, just like synthetic engine oil is more consistent in its viscosity. I think it made a small difference in those cold starts.
The difference in Dex VI affected the shift quality beyond the ability of my transmission to adapt by its computer control of shifts. So I drained and refilled with the original quality fluid.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Since September on it is 33.8 upto 35 HWY driving with sun roof open,
& int cold air circulation on, 60 to 70 mph.
I've had the car 8 months, 4,200 miles. I took it to the dealership. First they said to manually calculate the mpg and bring gas receipts.
They checked for codes, campaigns. Couldn't find anything. Didn't charge me anything, luckily.
Any ideas, GM customer service rep?
Thanks
14.25 is more accuracy than the DIC shows, so I assume you are calculating your MPG based on the fuel purchased, and since you are comparing with the 2008's numbers, which look just right, I believe that the horrible 14.25 is for real... Tough to bear, even with the city traffic lights
You might have done it already but I would try to do what I could do on my own:
1. Add a bottle of Techtron or a similar fuel additive to the tank, when fueling.
2. Open the air filter box, and clean everything I could reach with a vacuum cleaner.
Hard to predict the results but easy to do, so why not?..
I haven't read all the posts yet, but I saw a mention of reflashing the transmission. Any thoughts on that?
Still waiting to hear from GM customer service.
The '10 Malibu mpg numbers I now see are exactly twice what my '01 4X4 ext cab gets. The truck has exactly twice the displacement (4.8) and gets 15 on the way to the interstate and 18 on a 1200 mile trip. It has twice as many miles on it as the Malibu has. If I was getting 14.5 mpg from my Malibu, I'd be checking the rpms, taking it on a 40 mile hwy only stint with before and after top offs to verify.
The Malibu runs 1900 rpms at 70 mph.
The CTS4 with the 3.6L V6 6A is still not broken in and does nearly that good in around town/freeway driving. We're still not quite there on interstate. But I don't care. It's so much nicer and has the pep I really missed with the Malibu.
Your Malibu sounds like it got the same mileage as my '96 SC 3800 Riviera. It gave me slightly over 30 on trips and averaged 28 mpg on a 94 mile round trip daily commute. The 3800 gets 20-22 city.
The worst tank ever in my '10 Malibu was 25.4 mpg on the first tank.
My Cadillac CTS4 with the 3.6L V6 and 6A has only 1200 miles on the odometer and, with the exception of a road trip by my wife, it's getting about what I expected. I should be there once it breaks in.
Now, granted, the Malibu is no CTS, but I wonder if I wouldn't have done about as well with the V6 or with a different GM product.