Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
You address the powertrain down the road and at best you'll see an "Update" of some sort in the back of the magazine, one pager at most.
Car makers should launch the fastest model first, always. Sell only the 3.9l with the 6 speed, car mags will rave about it. Doesn't matter if dealers only have lesser versions to sell, the car will be Hot and people will be buying.
Tepid review, tepid demand.
-juice
Not really. It works out to ~62.9 ft/lb per liter, which is pretty good for a 2-valve per cylinder engine running on 87-octane fuel.
Displacement in itself is not very important. Neither are the number of cams and valves, the material used for the block, etc. All of these are only means to an end. There are really only six things that matter: acceleration, fuel economy, refinement, production cost, maintanance costs, and durability.
Acceleration and fuel economy are diametrically opposed (as one gets better, the other gets worse, everything else being constant), but consider the 3500 in the Malibu: It gets the car to 60 in about 8 seconds, but has fuel economy that is as good as a 4-cylinder Camry.
Refinement is neither particularly good or bad. Compared to my '03 Accord it's nothing special, but it's not bad either. It's better than my '98 GP.
Production and maintanance costs are about as low as you can get, and GM's cast-iron V6s last nearly forever. I don't know how anyone can go wrong with this engine. It won't please "checklist" buyers, but that's about it.
My biggest complaint: I'd like to have a 5-speed auto instead of a 4-speed. I've got a 5-speed auto in my Accord, and I really like the closer ratios, especially on the highway. The downshift from 5th to 4th on hills is nearly imperceptible.
The 3500 is reportedly very refined and my brother has been in a Malibu and said the engine is beyond quiet. GM (and now Chrysler) has learned to make OHV engines quiet and refined just like the OHC motors. It's time to move on. Harping on the 3900's low displacement per liter is pointless. The Altima has similar hp out of 3.5L, that is barely smaller than the 3900. .04L is very small, especially when you spread that out over 6 cylinders. The difference comes down to millimeters so those of you who can't own an OHV engine because of its specific output numbers are being silly.
But...if Grand Am is supposed to be sportier, it should get the big engine. Even if they only build one press car as a test mule, to produce the numbers. Keep in mind it has a longer wheelbase than the Malibu and will likely be heavier, and slower.
For production, sure, build the 3500s.
-juice
GM has for two decades largely ignored their passenger cars. Lets look at the car Grand Am is set to replace, the Grand Am. This car has been redesigned once since 1993 (was it 1999) and even that was an evolutionary update more than a ground up redesign. Its ancient in this marketplace, and sorely outdated. While other companies rework their cars every couple years, giving constant minor updates and improvements, the Grand Am has largely been ignored since the current version was introduced. The only real change has been the introduction of the Ecotec engine, replacing the 2.4L Twin Cam engine.
GM did not have years of evolution in their small mid size car to improve on in the G6. They literally had to start completely from scratch, and engineer a vehicle without having taken any of the intermediate steps the competition has in their vehicles.
In this respect, I think G6 looks a LOT better. The exterior design is not as radical as people would like, but that will help it to continue to look fresh. You don't see Honda making its family cars look like Firebirds for a reason. Staying a little mroe conservative with clean lines will let the styling last longer, and the car will not look dated in a year or two. Pontiac may have finally learned this lesson! The style of the G6 is good because in 4 years, it will still look good, not some kind of ribbed plastic sick joke.
The interior is lightyears ahead of the Grand Am, and IMO is also an improvement on the Malibu (although that could be debatable). Maybe its not up to Accord standards, but its not far behind anymore. The latest version of the Accord isn't as nice as the prior version, with some noticeable areas of decontenting by Honda to lower its price. Its also become known for a number of rattles inside. Its still a very nice car, near class leading (the leader is probably the Passat) but G6 is not an embarrassment in comparison either.
The engines are also a vast improvement, whether or not you personally like OHV engines. Nobody should consider the 3500 simply a larger 3400 because it is much better than those engines. More power and efficiency, along with smoother operation. It essentially competes with the 4 banger Camcords and Altima, and in comparison to those engines fairs well. It gets equivelent mileage and has more power.
The 3900 is not out yet, so its not fair to compare it to a V6 Camcord or Altima. On paper it looks competitive, but there is certainly more to how an engine drives than the HP number printed in the manual. Also, that HP number in the manual is not always even correct. Its not beyond auto companies to misrepresent the power of their engines. Performance on the road is what counts, and we simply have no idea how a 3 valve per cylinder OHV engine with VVT will hold up against a DOHC VVT engine.
Essentially, G6 is not a class leader, but it is an impressive step by GM in the right direction. This cal and the Malibu have come a far way from the cars they are replacing. If GM can bring them as far for their next redesign, they might be class leading.
Also remmeber, these cars are not the final product of Bob Lutz's reorganization in GM. Both cars had been started before Lutz's arrival, and he has made changes on both but had to live with some aspects of them. They represent GM in transition, but not the final product. So I would caution anyone disappointed in these cars not to totally right off GM yet as being complacent because these cars still are not the culmination of GM's changeover. I think the Zeta platform RWD cars are the true test to see whether GM has brought itself up out of the basement and is on the rebound for the long haul.
~3300 lbs. for the Malibu, vs. ~3425 for the G6. That will cost a couple tenths on the way to 60. Test drive a Malibu with a teenage girl in the front seat, and the G6 will be about that fast. Or you could test drive a Maxx, if you don't mind being seen in one. ;-)
Thanks for the link bigdaddy! I see that the GT has a lower final drive ratio than the base model (3.29 vs. 3.05), so this may get some of the acceleration back at the expense of fuel economy.
No real big suprises, other than the lack of rear headroom (36.5"). I won't be sitting back there, so it doesn't really matter to me. :-)
GM has made nice improvements to the pushrod. The pushrods are now made of lighter, thinner material. The older pushrod engines had heavier pushrods and were more susceptible to "valve float" at higher rpms and you can hear a "thud thud" as the engine revs. The newer pushrods are thinner, lighter and have coatings which enable them to operate with less friction. As a result, the engines sound a lot more refined.
If you want a burst of high end speed on freeways, a high revving OHC engine is preferable. But for most city driving, the torque of the 3.9L v6 which is available at low revs is great. Also, unless you live on freeways and there's no traffic (how often is that?) you're more likely to be in the 1,500 to 3,500 rpm range where the pushrod gets most of its power.
In my Acura, when I'm driving in city traffic, I stomp on it when the light turns green, it revs to 4,000 rpm screaming in first, then it hits second gear, VTEC kicks in and the car accelerates a little too much, and then I have to ease up on the throttle otherwise I'll pick up way too much speed to stop for the next light.
I prefer the low end torque of the pushrod engine for city driving. Easy step on gas, good low end power and then I can ease up.
Furthermore, the engine is easy and cheap to fix b/c you don't have to replace multiple cams to look inside. Instead of paying a mechanic $600 for an easy fix, you can do it yourself in halfan hour with cheap domestic parts. What's not to like?
Why would anyone want a 4 banger with less HP and torque when they can get a 3.5 v6 pushrod of the same size and price in a car?
I'm really interested in the 3.9L DoD v6. 240HP is all you need in a FWD car and with that kind of low end torque and a 6 speed it should be fun to drive.
The Malibu has a rocker button on shifter knob for which really is just another method for you to manually select lower gears and save space on console for more storage.
The base G6 SE1 doesn't have either, it's shifter has one lower position (6 position vs. 5 for the G6 GT and Malibu)
The G6 SE1 and GT have similar transmission (4T45E - same as Malibu) but a different final drive ratio so the GT will feel a little quicker. I believe the trans gear ratio on G6 GT is same as you have on the Malibu Maxx (which is different from Sedan)
The GT also has a full-function traction control system which applies brakes in addition to the engine torque reduction method used on G6 SE1 and Malibu.
How do you know this? The GT was _supposed_ to have this feature, but the info given to dealers doesn't mention anything about it.
I apologize if dealer info might not be complete yet.
I wonder if Pontiac is planning to phase out the GP next.
Here's the link - click on print book, then model and you can pull up the current specs.
http://eogld.ecomm.gm.com/NASApp/domestic/vehiclesel.jsp?year=200- - - 5®ionID=1&divisionID=7
--Robert
Can anyone get pontiac.com to load? All I get is a plain white page. Looking at the page source, its loading some JavaScript code in the HEAD tag and then bailing out. No /HEAD tag, no BODY...
Nope.
It appears that it was a sever problem on Pontiac's end; it's working fine now.
-Andrew L
Also Pontiac believes that production starts on August 9th. http://fleetnews.gmcanada.com/news_flash/en/eng_production_schedu- les.html
The News article says this -
"At the same time, the plant is building pilot models of the G6 and undergoing renovations. "
Out in August is when regular production will be produced.
-juice
Here is an article that has it both ways. Says May 26th ended a pilot run of few hundred saleable cars AND "Job 1" is in August. Guess we can have our cake and eat it too. ;-)
http://www.autoweek.com/specials/galleries/a3/images/5.jpg
Both look decent, though.
-juice
do you think the 3.9 liter will be available by august next year?