Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
2000-2011 Chevrolet Malibu
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Also, does anyone know any good aftermarket websites for the malibu???
Thanks!
For my experience with my '98 malibu check message # 4586. However the '04 is a completely new car. Good luck with it.
SOME 1997-1998 Malibus are involved in this recall.
Post the last 8 digits of your VIN (should start VY or V6) and I'll see if your car is involved.
GM sends notices out, if they have your address. It's not the most accurate system, but it's probably the best they can do.
At seven years old (almost eight) - some people would make the argument that your car is approaching the end of it's useful life and to think about getting rid of it!
He/she should get rid of that car if they can afford it.
Thanks for any help
Wxman
2005 Malibu LT w/remote start
If you do take vehicle to dealer to program make sure you take them both fobs because sometimes to reprogram they need to do them all again.
Initially, I was concerned about why this car had been on the dealer's lot for almost a year. However, after driving it for over a week and putting almost 600 miles on it (now at 1012), I've decided not to worry about it because the car is performing fine. Likewise, if yours is performing well, I wouldn't worry about why it went unsold for a year---just enjoy it.
By the way, after a 145 mile round trip to see a football game this weekend plus four days of commuting and errand running, my Malibu averaged 28 MPG. This is great, especially considering the fact that my old car would've averaged about 23 MPG for the same type of driving. At today's gas prices, the savings from getting five extra miles per gallon ain't pocket change!
What kind of mileage are you getting from yours so far?
The '06 Impala looks to me like it'll be a great car. Enjoy it!
BTW, since my average speed is considerably less than 150 MPH, I'm glad my LS did NOT have that silly spoiler! But a car with full air bags, enough V6 horses to light the tires, plus great gas mileage if you drive without lighting the tires, plus a pretty decent basic audio system, plus a backseat comfortable enough to take a nap at lunchtime, makes me a happy camper.
I don't know how the DIC calculates mileage, but I'd like to find out. It seems to be pretty accurate so far.
My commute is about 40 miles round trip, with a mix of 2-lane highway, interstate highway, and city streets. Speed varies depending on the traffic, so gas mileage varies also. It'll be interesting to see what my next fillup yields since there won't be a 145 mile highway trip this time. According to the DIC, I'm averaging 27.1 MPG so far on this fillup.
I agree...the level of equipment you get on this car for the money is outstanding. Mine doesn't have the spoiler, either, which is fine with me. I've never understood why car manufacturers think that 4-door sedans need spoilers. :confuse:
So far, I'm very pleased with this car's ride, handling, performance, and fuel economy. I'd encourage anyone shopping the Camry and Accord to take a serious look at the Malibu. It just might surprise them.
But it isn't going to describe the details of how the fuel economy display is calculated. That would only be found in the specifications for the electronic module's software
2005 was 24/35
2006 now 24/32
Is there a new final drive ratio, transmission change or engine modification?
Or did EPA change their test?
Of note, found in the description of testing in the 2006 Fuel Economy Guide, is that the EPA takes their lab results (they apparently use dynamometers vice actual road tests) and then apply a 15% reduction factor "to better reflect real world driving conditions for the average motorist" (their words). I don't know if this was the case with their 2005 Fuel Economy Guide, but I do recall last year the complaints from drivers claiming that the EPA published numbers were overly optimistic.
On the other hand, I would hazard a guess that the numbers that manufacturers submit might themselves be slightly conservative- the PR nightmare of manufacturers' submitted numbers not being repeatable in EPA tests is probably not something they wish to have to contemplate. For example, the Chevrolet Impala 3.9 is rated at 19/27, though I've already seen one owner write he's gotten 27.6 with a mix of 25/75 city/highway, this on a motor that's still being broken in. Hardly a scientific survey, I know. Still, I'll bet the real world numbers of the Impala 3.9 might turn out to be a bit better than the 19/27 published number would suggest.
Finally, I see some revisions in the other direction for '06. For example, Buick's Lacrosse (3800) had an EPA rating of 20/29 for 2005, but for 2006 they show 20/30. Has the car changed year over year? Probably not. But 30 mpg is a psychologically important number that is nice to be able to show on the window sticker. Perhaps there is a certain amount of politicking that goes on between manufacturer and the EPA, though they'd both probably bristle at the suggestion.
Sorry for the long post!
I looked closely at the specs of the 2006 and 2005 Malibus and could find no changes. It makes sense Chev would not want the Malibu to be more economical than the Cobalt.
The EPA estimates for hybrid vehicles have been shown by CU to be completely invalid - as much as 40% too high.
on the 2006 Malibu w/4 cylinder has changed from 2005.
2005 was 24/35
2006 now 24/32
Is there a new final drive ratio, transmission change or engine modification?
Or did EPA change their test?
Chevy cleaned up the appalling emissions on the '05 Malibu and the "highway" mileage took a slight hit as a result. I have long been considering a Malibu 4-banger but did not like the "minimum legal standard" emissions on the engine in that car - it got a "3" out of 10 rating on the EPA pollution score. The version of this year is up to a "6" so it is much cleaner, and matches the pollution from the Cobalt and Pontiac G6 versions of this engine.
BTW, the Pontiac G6 gets the 2.4 version, which loses 1 mpg on the city rating but picks up 2 mpg on the highway end of things - despite being bigger. I supect they use a lower final overall gear ratio to drop the rpm a bit, the 2.4 has more torque. Although I would prefer a Chevy, I will look at the Pontiac to see what it's like - it's a bargain at $18k, and may - may - have sportier handling since it is from the Pontiac line.
Overall mileage on the 4 banger still beats the base 6 cylinder, and handling should still be better - Consumer Reports liked the handling on the 4 cylinder version slightly better than on the 6 cylinder version. In the near future GM will probably phase in the variable valve timing version of the 6, which might further narrow the mileage gap.
BTW, I find Consumer Reports a better guide to actual mileage. Since their driving is heavily biased towards city cycles, it is overall much lower than the EPA scores, but their 150 mile trip and pure highway cycle readings are more in line with what I see on my freeway commute.
Finally, the 2.4 used in the Pontiac G6 runs on regular, vs. the premium recommended for this version of the engine in the HHR and Cobalt SS (non-supercharged edition). It would be interesting if the HP and torque figures given for the G6 version are based on using regular, the HHR based on using premium, and otherwise there are no differences - in otherwords, change your gas and you'll change your performance.
With respect to the 2.4 liter's better mileage, I wonder if the the variable nature of it's cam timing allows it to run more efficiently at cruise (and for that matter, is the cam phasing sophisticated enough that it takes into account more variables than simply RPM- e.g. it's ideal phasing at cruise, 2500 rpm might be different than 2500 rpm under acceleration).
I hope you're right about the Malibu getting the V6 with VVT in the near future. It sounds like a superior engine, good as the current Malibu's V6 is. Interestingly, the Malibu's V6 has almost nothing in common with the new generation VVT V-6's (think I read it shared only valve guides!).
I wonder if much advantage is gained (with respect to variable valve timing design) with having separate camshafts for intake and exhaust, as is the case with DOHC engines. With OHV engines having a common camshaft for both intake and exhaust, by design they must vary together rather than independently. I've seen several journalists describe the VVT system in the new generation GM OHV V-6's as "rudimentary". Not sure why they should describe it in these terms. Also of note is that Ford's Duratec 2.3 liter 4 cylinder, as well as their Duratec 3.0 V-6 have only variable intake valve timing. Perhaps little is to be gained by varying the exhaust valve timing. Or perhaps it is only a question of cost, and/or cost/benefit ratio.
I think you have to look at the results. The 2.4 with vvt on the HHR is rated at the same mpg as the 2.2 on the HHR without vvt; the 2.4 on the G6 vs the 2.2 on the 'bu; the extras horsepower with similar mileage on the Mazda3's vs. the Focus. This stuff seems to work, if you can get past the extra cost of the engine design (which is why the Focus, an "ordinary" economy car, doesn't get it, but the "premium" Mazda3 does).
Maybe the hiway mileage change is a combination of these two factors. Chevy engineers might think "Hey, if we lose 1 mpg on the Malibu hiway rating due to emissions changes let's take 2 more off so the hiway mpg is below the Cobalt."
Thanks in advance.
This morning I drove to work in my trusty Silverado, and decided to call AAA to tow the car from the local (huge) dealer to the (very small, owner knows me by my first name) dealer where I bought the car. I retrieved my keys from the local dealer service advisor, and while I was calling AAA, started up the car, and slowly pressed the brake pedal all the way to the floor! :mad: While I was waiting for the tow truck, the service manager came by and told me that he had driven the car yesterday for 2 miles and had not noticed any brake problems. When I told him that I had just felt the brake pedal go down to the floorboard, he told me that if you press the brake pedal hard enough, it will always do that! :confuse:
Since I had already determined that I was NEVER getting any vehicle more advanced that a skateboard serviced by this dealer, I decided to just walk away before I broke something.
Anyway, my Malibu has been towed to the original dealer, and since I'll be in Las Vegas for a conference all next week, they'll have plenty of time to fix it.
BTW, I haven't even made the first payment yet, and I really love this car!.
Oh well, :lemon: down, and :lemon: :lemon: :lemon: to go....
Thank you, I feel better know.
The dealer hasn't been able to replicate the problem, and it hasn't recurred, but a friend told me that the ABS systems can cause brakes to act in unexpected ways, particularly at lower speeds. Anyway, I doubt it means the car is a lemon, but keep pressing until you get a proper explanation. The Honda dealer told me the same thing, that the pedal is supposed to go to the floor if you keep pushing it, but it only happened that one time and hasn't happened to me on other ABS equipped cars. I don't think the service techs have gotten a hand on this little problem, which is apparently not unique to Chevy.
BTW, I noticed that the Ecotec Malibu comes stock with disc/drums front/rear, but ordering it with ABS gives it 4 wheel disc brakes, which is a $440 option, if I recall.
The switches for the rear door windows do not illuminate at night.
The mirror switch used to select the left or the right mirror for adjusting does not illuminate either. The actual 4-way adjustment button does illuminate.
Is this the same as everyone elses, or do I have a problem?
Thanks
Wxman
I must say I was suprised..I am a foreign car fan..I put about 900 miles on it...got it with 8,000miles..The first thing I noticed was How smooth and quiet it was, thought this is a GM prouct?, It got excellent MPG. the steering did not bog the engine, or make the PS pump whine at all. all in all very quiet..although I can't imajine having the smaller engine in this car, the V6 was very adequate, but nothing special.. but seems perfect for this car..the readout was interesting on MPG and stuff, but It was poorly organized..the sterio was awesome for a rental unit...but again the readout and functions were not...the interior seemed solid, despite a rattle under the steering colum, the seat design was a little weird, but the seat sructure seemed great, along with a power height ajuster...both visors had problems, one wouldn't stay in any given position, and the others mirror flap had no tension...the center armrest was not centered when closing it (probably due to heavy use) the car itself seemed perfectly weighted, the doors had a quality sound, the engine was quiet, No glove box light? the styling at first was a turnoff, but it grew on me, this car was dark Navy Blue w/tan interior...side mirrors were akwardly shaped, and not body colored....this car had traction control which I do not know if it ever activated...I did use the button _+ shift a few times, but It really adds nothing to making this car fun to drive...
I I thought the side windows were a bit akwardly framed, with to much thick rubber, and was not a smooth look..seems it may not age well...I thought the front end was kind of bold looking, with the chrome bars...not bad though...the back end is a little different...maybe they should eliminate the rear chrome a bit...My biggest suprise with this Malibu was Its smooth Engine-Tranny-Ride. No drivetrain vibration...seems like a good platform, if they only made it a bit more edgy looking, I really didn't like the styling of the sides of the exerior, it jsut didn't have that finished look..to a lesser degree the rear end also...Hopefully GM keeps up on the Quality, because this is sure not the GM of the 80's 90's, But it's nothing special because imports have been doing it for over a Decade..but this car actually got me to question the Media baby's...Accord and Camry...But GM cars also seem to be Just adequate..I would love to by a GM car, this one was sure a step in the right direction...hopefully not to late for GM.......2week rental experience...Sean