I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)

tjc78

Yes the newest Camry is definitely not as bad… who I am to judge anyway…. It’s not like the EQE Sedan is a thing of beauty

andre1969

I was actually liking the Honda Accord, even though I'm normally not a huge fan of those Aeroback body styles. But, the most recent version leaves me a bit cold. There's something just a bit generic and blocky about it. Still, with what little is left out there in mainstream sedans, that might be the one I'd lean towards.

With the way mainstream intermediates are dropping like flies, I'm actually surprised Dodge is hanging onto the Charger. At least, the last time I checked, a 2025 was in the works. I think a coupe was supposed to come first, as a Challenger replacement, and then a sedan soon after.

Speaking of the Charger, the other day I stumbled across a YouTube video, of a guy who's a used car dealer in South Carolina or something like that, who's preaching gloom and doom to the auto industry. Apparently Chargers and Challengers rank pretty high on the repo list. High enough, that he was joking that "R/T" stands for "Repo Tomorrow!"

andre1969

tjc78 said:

Yes the newest Camry is definitely not as bad… who I am to judge anyway…. It’s not like the EQE Sedan is a thing of beauty

What color EQE did you get? I just looked up some pics, and gotta say, I really like this color!

stickguy

I like the new Camry. And the rental accord I had was a nice cruiser. Got 40 mpg on a mostly highway and it was not the hybrid.

Camry or accord, reasonable price, very roomy, comfy, and the hybrids will average well over 40 in mixed driving. Perfect car for a ton of people.

ab348

andre1969 said:

tjc78 said:

Yes the newest Camry is definitely not as bad… who I am to judge anyway…. It’s not like the EQE Sedan is a thing of beauty

What color EQE did you get? I just looked up some pics, and gotta say, I really like this color!

That must be the color du jour for German automakers these days. Yesterday on my road trip I saw a car carrier heading west with a load of VW products, and up front over the tractor was a Golf/GTI looking really snazzy with good-looking black/bright wheels and a metallic purple paint job that really popped. I liked it.

sda

I have yet to own a Toyota, however, both of my sisters have owned multiple and they have been very reliable. The 2025 Camry is an improvement and I look forward to sitting in one to analyze the interior quality. I am disappointed with the current Accord interior features and quality, at least those that are not the top Touring model. I haven't had a chance to sit in a Touring. The lesser models have been cheapened with fewer features, and a lot of hard plastic in the rear seating area. The rear door cards are especially cheap looking, entirely hard plastic except for the arm rest. No rear seat a/c vent in any except the EXL and Touring. Not good for my doggies that ride with me from time to time.

ab348

Honda seems to have lost the plot in recent times, sadly. Their styling went from cartoony Anime-like to almost stodgy, and their interiors are very generic. They no longer seem to offer powertrains that are in a class by themselves either. However, based upon my road trip yesterday where it seemed every 5th car that blew past me was a bright metallic blue Civic, they seem to have that segment of the market cornered.

kyfdx

I agree with the Ioniq 6 assessment. Yeesh. In contrast, the Ioniq 5 is pretty decent looking

andre1969

Out of curiosity, I did a search on Cars.com for 2024 Honda Accords, in blue. Only 7 popped up in a 30 mile radius from me. They were all EX models, and all priced around $29-31K. Sounds like one heckuva deal, to me.

But good lord, they sure limit you on choice! If you get the blue, which is a dark blue, the only interior color choice is black! I know Honda always limited you somewhat, on freedom of choice, but this is ridiculous! And, a whopping six exterior color choices these days: Dark blue, black, dark gray, silver, pearl white, and red. Limiting your choices though, is probably one way they help keep costs down these days.

explorerx4

The Accord has fallen way down the list of new vehicle sales.
As of last month it was #11, the big caveat being the list did not include any GM or Stelantis vehicles which I guess report quarterly.

kyfdx

The new Accord only comes in two trims, this year.

Might have more choices in the Hybrid model

sda

I have noticed the Charlotte area dealers have primarily Accord EXs in stock and will discount somewhat. Hybrids are scarce and tend to have the price marked up.

uplanderguy

I bounced off my wife the other day, that I might try to buy a new Malibu before they're gone, based on the one I put 2K miles on in five days a few weeks back. I expected to hate the CVT, but I didn't at all. She didn't flinch. It would all be based on getting a good deal. There are far-more dealers at Chevy and Ford than Toyota or Honda, which in all honesty surprised me. I think the styling, although absolutely old, is pleasant in the American way. It used to be that you could count on Japanese makes having oddball climbing taillights, black plastic squares in the lower rear bumper corners, instruments in the center of the dash and nothing in front of the driver (I know, Saturn Ions were like that too). I think the majority of all that stuff is quite long over now, thankfully. I think the current Accord looks pleasant in a simple way, not terribly unlike the Malibu. Something that bugs me about most all sedans now is the way the top of the rear door cuts down so drastically. Don't like that.

stickguy

Advantage of being empty nesters. Only need the rear doors to make it easier to stash crap in the back seat. And make the front doors less unwieldy.

andre1969

uplanderguy said:

Something that bugs me about most all sedans now is the way the top of the rear door cuts down so drastically. Don't like that.

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks that the auto makers do that on purpose, to encourage people to make the jump to an SUV or crossover!

Realistically though, I think it's just an attempt to make them seem sportier and more youthful. In a way, they make me think of a modern version of some of the old 4-door hardtops, which would tend to have a more low-slung roofline than the more practical, upright pillared sedans. Sometimes the cutout for the rear doors would be compromised, compared to a pillared sedan.

How is your Cruze getting along, Uplander? Is it still holding up well? I'm normally a fan of driving something till the wheels fall off, as I don't like spending money frivolously. But, eventually it gets to the point that there's no harm in treating yourself!

Stylewise, I don't even think the current Malibu looks "old". Maybe "old" in the sense that it's been around for awhile now, but it's not like anything new has come out since then that, to my eye at least, makes it look outdated. But, I don't think the car designers have that capability anymore. I think when it comes to style, pretty much everything original has been done. You can only make a car look so sleek, aerodynamic, or whatever, and have it still be practical.

uplanderguy

My daughter has my '17, 93K miles, no issues. I'm driving her old '15 Cruze, 106K miles, no issues, but it was her college car and looks like she parked by feel. Paint is good for dark blue, and it's pretty quiet. Satellite radio that I couldn't have gotten in the Highlander Enterprise tried to rent me recently, LOL (I have to believe that it's available on higher trim levels). My '15 is a cheapy LS, non-turbo. It did recently get a new water pump and plastic coolant reservoir at the recommendation of the shop I went to. It starts and shifts just fine and has cold A/C which I've never done anything with. I bought this '15 at 19K miles coming off a lease, in 2017.

stickguy

Pretty sure the rooflines are the attempt to make practical sedans into stylish vehicles to make boring people feel cool.

What bugs me in Sedans now is going with oversized wheels and rubber band tires on what is basically still just a family car.

uplanderguy

I'm sure the rear door cut is due to sporty styling in someone's mind, but I still carry adults in the back seat.

My friend had a four-door '56 Packard, an enormous car. Its rear door was cut like that. I never failed to bonk my head getting in the back seat.

laurasdada

Had a rental Malibu in Sedona last fall. Seemed fine, did the job with great mpg.
Main memory is the distance from my left elbow to the door, I don't think I could rest my elbow on the ledge! Oh, the humanity.

sda

Does GM make the CVT in house? I agree, the Malibu is aging well and is a handsome sedan. I understand that it rides well and is quiet compared to much of the competition.

explorerx4

Saw a 79 Cordoba with the '300' option. Had to look it up to see what it was.

ab348

In rush hour traffic this afternoon, an absolutely minty late ‘80s/early ‘90s Jag XJ Vanden Plas LWB sedan in black with oyster leather interior, lots of shiny chrome, very striking. I can only imagine it spent most of its life in storage.

imidazol97

Seen on Sunday.

sda

Interesting history of Mercedes and Audi. No wonder the Audi 100 has MB styling cues. https://youtu.be/mKdSM34fD9Y?si=Me2NfhC8ZumU6YLE. Mom had a 4dr 71 Audi 100 LS Automatic in the same red as in this video. For English translation click on CC to enable subtitles, the the gear symbol (tools), Captions, autotranslate, English.

uplanderguy

I have no idea if GM makes the CVT in-house or not.

tjc78

@sda said:
Does GM make the CVT in house? I agree, the Malibu is aging well and is a handsome sedan. I understand that it rides well and is quiet compared to much of the competition.

I had a rental one not long ago. Nothing bad to say about it.

tjc78

@andre1969 said:
What color EQE did you get? I just looked up some pics, and gotta say, I really like this color!

It’s white over black. That blue is very sharp!

ab348

uplanderguy said:

I bounced off my wife the other day, that I might try to buy a new Malibu before they're gone, based on the one I put 2K miles on in five days a few weeks back. I expected to hate the CVT, but I didn't at all. She didn't flinch. It would all be based on getting a good deal.

I had a few of that last-gen Malibu as loaners or rentals. I like the exterior styling especially in the last few years after they changed the front DRLs from a frowny/angry look to a more friendly face. I imagine the top-trim ones from a couple of years back when they still offered the 2.0 Turbo engine were pretty good. What I didn't like so much were 2 things - the base 1.5 Turbo engine was adequate but nothing more. And the lower level cloth interiors in the ones I had were all black without any contrasting shades, which made the inside pretty gloomy. I don't know if they even offer any choice there now.

Maybe as a Corvette owner you can get some sort of friends and family deal on one. I saw one in traffic yesterday in a dark blue metallic paint that looked good.

uplanderguy

There is a new medium-to-dark-blue color for '24 that turned my head when I had my C8 at the dealer about six weeks ago. The 1.5 felt absolutely quicker than the same engine in our Equinox. I got no sensation when driving my rental Malibu recently, of increasing speed. Looked down and was doing 94 at one point. Often, I'd look down and was well into the eighties.

You know me, not a 'piler on', LOL. I always figure Toyota or Honda or Kia don't need my business.

stickguy

Given a choice for an “appliance” car I would rather have a 2.5 NA engine instead of a 1.5turbo.

ab348

uplanderguy said:

There is a new medium-to-dark-blue color for '24 that turned my head when I had my C8 at the dealer about six weeks ago. The 1.5 felt absolutely quicker than the same engine in our Equinox. I got no sensation when driving my rental Malibu recently, of increasing speed. Looked down and was doing 94 at one point. Often, I'd look down and was well into the eighties.

You know me, not a 'piler on', LOL. I always figure Toyota or Honda or Kia don't need my business.

I looked at the Chevy website and I think that was the color I saw yesterday. Given the limited choices available I think it's the best of the bunch.

I was wrong in thinking that black was the only interior offered. I guess it goes into all low-end rental or loaner cloth-seat models. But if you spring for the 2LT trim level, you can get a good-looking interior in "Light Wheat" and Dark Atmosphere (dark gray) leather that looks very nice. And to provide a service to you, I checked their inventory and they have a few in that particular color combo coming to dealers not too far from you in Greenville. So there...

imidazol97

Totally agree. The Cruze that my son drove since 2016 has 1.4L turbo. I have had it for 3 years. Yuk on the engine. My 2014 Malibu is 2.5 NA--great. I encouraged my son to buy 2.5 L NA toyota Venza (hybrid). Great.

Friend just showed me her "new" Buick Encore GX with a tiny 3-cylinder engine in a larger body than her Buick Encore it replaced with a 4-cylinder 1.4 Turbo. She has no idea it has a 3-cylinder. But the dealer did point out that it has a new logo pattern for the Buick Trishield and it has a heated steering wheel.

My 2.5 L NA is smooth in shifting. Cruze has turbo bog and run.

sda

From what I've read the GM 1.4 turbo is a dud in performance, gas mileage and durability. I think I read somewhere the engine was engineered by Opel which would be a shame. I thought it was engineered by GM Korea (Daewoo) which wouldn't surprise me.

uplanderguy

The 1.4 turbo used from 2011-2015 (2016 in "Limited" guise) is not the same engine as the 1.4 turbo used in the next-gen Cruze. Much-more reliable in the second-gen. On 93 fuel (which I've read a million places is better for a turbo long-term), I'd regularly get 43 mpg on a trip in my '17. Zero problems in 93K miles so far, anyway.

As I'd said, my '15 is not a turbo. It's rather slow, but there's nothing in the car that is making me feel it wouldn't easily go 150K miles.

Although my wife likes the C8 (drove it to school today), she doesn't care or comment on cars. When our '17 Cruze was probably a year old and getting some body work, we got a '16 Corolla as a rental. She said "This car feels like crap compared to the Cruze". It did do zero for me and closing the doors once you were inside resulted in a metallic echo. A car can have perfect reliability but if I don't like the car, or the way I feel when driving the car, I still don't want it. Purely subjective of course.

uplanderguy

Greg, thanks for your concern!

My C8 is a 2LT, but I'm probably too cheap to go for a 2LT in anything else.

I wonder if dealers will actually hold onto prices for these cars now that the news is out they are discontinuing them later in the year. Sort-of like people who bought '76 Impalas instead of '77's, '90 Caprices instead of '91, etc. Similarly, my friend worked for a Studebaker dealer in Akron and said that once the shutdown announcement was made in March 1966, suddenly they could sell as many as they could get their hands on, even holding out for price.

uplanderguy

The Malibu I rented struck me as a large car by today's standards....long and wide. I didn't compare dimensions to anything else, not that interested, but that was very apparent sitting in the driveway next to my great-nephew's recent company-car Hyundai sedan of some Hybrid model, not interested enough to have taken note of the model.

uplanderguy

Back to old cars, a friend told me that Adam posted about the '65 Impala the other day. I was thinking he found an original/low-mileage car, which I love.

I only breezed through this video once I saw a car with big white-lettered tires and Rally Wheels from later model years--things regularly seen at cruise-ins, LOL.

But Adam basically agrees that the '65 Impala is about a perfect Chevrolet. I agree. The interiors are nice, too. I think there's not a bad line on the car. The '68 Plymouth Satellite to my eyes is the closest thing to perfect styling from Mopar.

He mentions, and I agree, about the motor mount issue in '65-69's--apparently a cost-cutting thing that came back to bite them in the rear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_H-Jao27B8

andre1969

I remember comparing the Malibu to the Impala on interior specs awhile back, and being surprised to find out how close they were. I think the Malibu was actually slightly better in some dimensions.

I did a search, and found this info on a dealer's website...

2024 Chevy Malibu Interior Dimensions
The Chevy Malibu interior has up to 102.9 cubic feet of passenger volume, giving all five people the space and stretching-out room to feel comfortable on every drive in Tulare. You’re also going to get enough room for weekend getaways and summer road trips.

See the details on the Chevy Malibu interior dimensions below:

Front/Rear Legroom: 41.5 inches/38.1 inches
Front/Rear Headroom: 39.1 inches/37.5 inches
Front/Rear Hiproom: 54.1 inches/53.4 inches
Front/Rear Shoulder Room: 58.5/57.1 inches
Trunk Cargo Volume: 15.7 cubic feet

Oddly, the EPA rates it at 100 cubic feet of passenger volume, and a tiny 13 cubic feet of trunk space! I wonder if that was simply outdated info that was carried over from a hybrid model, or something? Although, while hybrids sometimes compromise trunk volume versus the gas-only models, I figured passenger cabin specs would still be the same?

I've heard that to calculate interior volume, the EPA simply multiplies shoulder room x headroom x legroom for the the front and back seat, adds them together, and divides by 1728 to go from cubic inches to cubic feet. And rounds off to the nearest whole number. They don't take hiproom into account, but hiproom numbers are a good indication of how much room the armrests take, I guess. Or, if a seat is really pushed back, how much the rear wheel wells intrude. Anyway, doing the math, I got 102.1 cubic feet of passenger volume.

That 41.5" of front legroom sounds a bit tight. But, my Ram is only listed at 41.0" and I fit just fine. The Charger is 41.8." I always thought of the '78-83 Malibu as sort of the benchmark of what a midsized car "should" be, room-wise, and I think they were rated 42.9". So I'm sure the Malibu is plenty big enough. And sometimes I wonder just how, exactly, they come up with those legroom measurements. I know they're some combination of seat height and how far back the seat goes. They probably don't measure it at the base of the gas pedal, since those can vary in length. Plus, some are suspended and some are hinged at the floor. Maybe they measure it from where the average person would rest the heel of their right shoe on the floor?

uplanderguy

I remember you being a tall guy when we met, but my inseam is 26", so legroom isn't a huge concern for me in the front seat!

This morning I watched a blogger review a '24 Malibu online, ten minute video, and he said the trunk was 15 cubic feet, but who knows.

andre1969

Yeah, I'm 6'3," and in pants I usually take a 34-36" length, depending on the brand, and how they're cut. So in the past, I did have to take legroom into account. But, with a lot of newer cars, even smaller ones, I think they do a better job of accommodating taller drivers than they did in the old days.

imidazol97

I like the seating height and feeling in my 2014 Malibu better than the 2016 Malibu of the 9th Generation when I sat in a new one at the dealer. It was like sitting on the floor, I recall the ATS or CTS had the same feeling for me when I sat in one at the CAdillac Buick dealer. I believe the Camaro and that Cadillac were on the same platform. But it was a low position.

The rear seat width got lots of criticism in 2013-4-5(6). I don't know if that improved in the next generation or not. I recall conspiracy theorists saying GM didn't want the Malibu 8th gen to cannabalize the Impala by making it too large.

I'm going to check the Camry when I get nerve up to go into a Toyota store hoping they have one on the floor. If something happened to the Cruze, I have that as one of my potential replacements.

andre1969

IIRC, the big complaint about the 2013 Malibu was legroom in the back seat. I think they redesigned the seats, making them thinner, or maybe hollowing out the seatbacks, to improve rear legroom in the later models. But, on the plus side, I do remember the front seats in the c2013 Malibu seeming pretty large and substantial, during a time when I swear they were starting to put compact car seats in bigger cars, to make them feel roomier.

I do remember the 2008-2012 Malibu seeming like it was a bit narrow in the back, but legroom seemed decent. I'm too lazy to look it up, but I think the '08-12 Malibu was on a somewhat lanky wheelbase for that class, too. Something like 112.3"? When the '13 came out, I'm pretty sure it was stubbier, like 107.8"?

Maybe there is something to that conspiracy theory, about making the 2013 Malibu a bit smaller, so they could justify the new '14 Impala. In my opinion though, there was always some overlap ever since the Malibu name was brought back for 1997. It seemed like the Malibu was the better choice if you regularly needed to haul around four fairly large/tall occupants, but if you prioritized 3 across seating, the Lumina, and Impala replacement, were better choices.

But then, when the 2014 Impala came out, it finally started feeling like a car that was purpose-built as a full-sized car, rather than a midsized car trying to pass off as large, which is how the W-body felt to me. I remember the first time I sat in a 2014 Impala, thinking that it was actually a worthy replacement for my 2000 Park Avenue! I believe the Park Avenue was still roomier overall, mostly in shoulder room, but I remember being impressed by the new Impala's legroom, both front and rear.

uplanderguy

I had an ‘11 Malibu. When I first saw the ‘13, the loss of legroom in the back really hit me in the face. I didn’t like the new styling either.

We’ve talked about this here before, but I really liked the ‘14 and later Impala.

fintail

Spotted a first gen Intrepid with a (assumed non-functional) hood scoop today, stay weird Spokane.

andre1969

When it comes to the FWD Malibu, I tend to think of the '08-12 style as "Peak Malibu," if there is such a thing. I liked how it had a long look to it, and the styling was pleasant to the eye. It was a bit narrow inside, for what I thought a midsized car should be, but I'd rather have a comfy 4 seater than marginal 5-seater. But, what's "marginal" to me might be just fine for someone else. It's just that I usually have the seat back as far as it will go, and I'd prefer the back seat position behind me to still be useable. A driver of more average height, or one who doesn't put the seat all the way back, would be just fine.

But, even a big back seat really isn't THAT essential to me. I think the only time I've even had three people in the Charger was when I drove it up to Pennsylvania for the Hershey show last year, right after I bought it, so that Lemko and Grbeck could see it. And they're both of more average height, so they fit just fine, one behind the other.

Back in early 2023, one of my friends stopped by to visit. He used to live in Maryland, but moved to Florida in 2022. He had a Charger for a rental, but it was a basic model. I remember trying it out, and with the seat all the way back, the only way I could fit in back was to have my knees sink a couple inches into the padding on the back of the front seat. However, the R/T model has hard-back seats, so I wouldn't have that same luxury there!

I really don't have a whole lot of experience with the final-gen Malibu, other than sitting in one at an auto show, but that was awhile ago. I do remember liking the final Ford Fusion when it first came out, but I seemed to lose my fascination with it pretty quickly. And when Chrysler came out with that 200C, that was based on the Fiat/Dodge Dart platform, I wanted to like it, but just couldn't warm up to it. So, among what passes for the last "domestic" midsized sedans, I'd probably pick the Malibu.

I do worry about those tiny, high-tech engines that rely on turbos and other tricks to get their power. They just seem like major repair bills waiting to happen. But these days, nothing's cheap, and if the Hemi in my Ram, or the Charger, went out on my, I'm sure I'd be in for some sticker shock! And I'm sure those little, high-tech engines are more durable than my mind has made them out to be.

andre1969

Even though I had a 2000 Intrepid and liked it, style-wise, I actually prefer the first-gen LH cars. I liked their seating position better, too. It seemed like the seats were a bit higher, and legroom was a bit better. My 2000 was kind of low, and while it didn't bother me at the time, I was only 29 when I bought it. I'm sure I'd feel different nowadays! And when I had it, several passengers commented on how low the front seat was, so I know it wasn't just my imagination.

ab348

I *almost* bought an ‘08 Malibu. The local dealer had 2 on their lot that appealed to me, both LTZ (or whatever they called them) top trim, one with the V6 I preferred, the other with the 4-cylinder, but trimmed really nicely, with dark blue metallic paint, light gray leather interior, sunroof and a really nice set of wheels that I really liked. But the engine scared me off, along with GM’s financial woes at the time.

xwesx

andre1969 said:

Even though I had a 2000 Intrepid and liked it, style-wise, I actually prefer the first-gen LH cars. I liked their seating position better, too. It seemed like the seats were a bit higher, and legroom was a bit better. My 2000 was kind of low, and while it didn't bother me at the time, I was only 29 when I bought it. I'm sure I'd feel different nowadays! And when I had it, several passengers commented on how low the front seat was, so I know it wasn't just my imagination.

Those first-gen LH cars were real lookers for the era! I don't think I've ever been in one, though.

uplanderguy

The auto press liked the '08 Malibu a lot.

tjc78

Love the first generation LH cars. If they had only been reliable…