Chevy Malibu Maxx
to discuss the Chevy Malibu Maxx. To start, here's some news from Edmunds' News Headlines. If you come across any more news on this upcoming wagon, please post it here. Thanks for your participation! ;-)
Revka
Hatchbacks & Wagons Host
Revka
Hatchbacks & Wagons Host
Tagged:
0
Comments
Top speed is dependant upon tires usually especially in the case of the Malibu Maxx SS.
So if you know what type of tires are on your vehicle we might be able to answer question. There are 2 different types of tires available. Both tire sizes are P225/50R-18 so you need to look at the brand and style. The standard tire is Goodyear Eagle LS-2 M+S all season with top speed limited to 115 or 118 MPH. I think the other tire is Bridgestone Potenza which is a high performance tire for summer only. I know that Malibu Maxx SS with that tire has a higher top speed limit but I don't know what it is - someone else might though.
I drove an Malibu SS with the Potenza tires for a week a few months ago when we had a little ice/snow and I can confirm that it is a tire better suited for summer
By the way Feb 2006 C/D mag has review on Malibu Maxx SS.
p.s. if you got a nice discount due to the 'high' miles when you bought the car, you might not want to stir the pot!
http://www.cardesignnews.com/news/2002/020821opel-signum/index.html
In addition to the Maxx, the British magazine CAR has a small article on the Vectra wagon, which uses the stretched Signum/Maxx wheelbase, and provides a traditional wagon overhang. It will rival Volvo's for spaciousness.
Any interest in a large Malibu wagon?
Revka
Hatchbacks & Wagons Host
Thanks for your comments!
Revka
Hatchbacks & Wagons Host
Imagine a stretch limo version of the old Honda Civic.
Also, there appears to be zero cargo space. The rear headrest almost touches the back window.
The Opel front looks like Mercury's Mountaineer. Styling overall is OK, but the huge blind spot and lack of cargo space would nix it from my list right off the bat.
-juice
I am married, no kids. My wife and I like to go out with friends. I frequently drive with clients on business. I live in Chicago where parking space is a precious commodity. When I travel long distance, I fly. On the weekends I like to put my bike in the car and drive to one of the many outlying bike paths. My bike cost almost two grand, so I like to keep it in the car, not on a rack exposed to flying debris.
The Maxx provides exceptional space for four adults without having too large a parking footprint. As Odman's link points out, the rear seats will fold flat, meaning plenty of room for me to lay my bicycle in the back (or haul a good sized piece of furniture, etc.).
With the large rear window and side mirrors, I fail to see a problem with visibility. I already own a car with the ecotec engine, and would not hesitate to buy a Maxx with one.
Far from being a stretch Civic, I see the Maxx as a good mix of SUV and sedan. Plenty of SUV like passenger comfort and storage flexibility. Sedan like size and economy.
I understand GM hopes to sell about 70k Maxxs per anum. I think there are 70k people like me out there.
Guess I'd have to get in one to be sure.
-juice
I think he's smoking some good stuff! ;-)
-juice
-juice
Looks aside, as they are totally subjective, it better come in at closer to the $15-18k range if it wants to have a prayer of getting a foothold. Why on earth would you select that over the Subaru Legacy L wagon on the low end which you can have for $19k or even better the GT wagon for $24k nicely loaded?????? OR if you like that look you could just get the Mazda P5, Matrix/Vibe, or other little wagon clone.
I would not produce that car. There is no reason to select it over a variety of BETTER options. Just different is not better. Only better is better. The Maxx is not better.
First, this is not the Malibu wagon. GM is discussing a possible wagon. This is a mid-size hatch designed for maximum -- thus the name -- interior space.
Second, note I said mid-size. The other cars you describe are compact. This is a car that will compare in size, weight, and features not to the cars you list, but to the CamCords, Mazda6, Passat and Taurus. All these cars are priced well above the range you feel the Maxx should come in.
The idea behind the Maxx is to provide a comfortable environment for car buyers who want a car designed not for young families or carrying a lot of cargo, but for carrying several adults comfortably. In other words, a car alternative to a Grand Cherokee.
Of the alternatives you list, maybe the Matrix/Vibe can fit four adults comfortably, but that whiney little engine and the compact car suspension sure would make all but the shortest trips a chore for people in the back.
Of course the ultimate test will be to see how the NHTSA classifies it. We could eventually link this discussion up to the Hatchbacks board if it becomes a real issue. Talk later.
Revka
Hatchbacks & Wagons Host
Perhaps I am reading too much into the design concept, but I think what GM actually is attempting to mimic some popular SUV features in a sedan-like vehicle.
The point has been made many times here that most people who buy SUVs do not drive them off road and do not carry loads of plywood around. What they really want is a vehicle that allows them to sit higher off the ground with plenty of leg room.
By pushing the wheels out further than in the sedan and moving the rear seat back, the Maxx will really be comfortable for every one.
It is hard to categorize. It is bigger, and should be nicer than the typical hatch, does not offer the same cargo eating features as a wagon, and is more sedan-like inside than most of the current cross overs.
Manufacturing flexibility is finally reaching the point where we observers cannot keep up with category naming.
1) MOST small cars (Protege, Civic, Vibe, or whatever) can carry 4 adults just fine AND carry cargo. If you put 4 people in the Maxx there is no cargo space. Not even for 4 sets of golf clubs. The rear seats are basically in the trunk to give the illusion of having a bigger car. Thats fine but then you have no trunk.
2) If you want a mid sized car, and the car in the picture is bigger than it actually appears, then you can just get one. Camry, Impala, Accord, Legacy, or whatever. There are plenty of mid sized cars that can carry 4 people with room to spare.
3) The price is just too high. Well equipped Accords, Camrys, and even the new 6 run about $20k. To under cut that popular segment then you need to come in at between $15-18k MAX.
In this case I think that GM is confused more than I am. There is no market for a mid sized car with a small trunk, questionable sytle, and price tag that competes with established cars.
The Maxx will have better rear seat space than the Camcords and 6, and much better than the econoboxes you site. It will also have a midsize ride and handling, again, much better than the econoboxes.
I have a mid-size sedan and do not use the trunk for much of anything. When I do need storage space, it is to carry large items, such as my bike (which will never go on a rack outside of the car) or when I bring large ticket items home from the store.
The Maxx with its hatch back and fold down seats will accomodate such things far easier than a mid-size sedan and than an econobox.
When I look at the interior of the Maxx, I see GM taking the interior of an SUV and putting it into a safer, more practical, economical, and better driving sedan. So many people are saying this country should get away from SUVs. I expect some SUV people will look at alternatives. I doubt many will want to go from a Trailblazer to a Vibe though. The Maxx may be more to their liking.
Revka
Hatchbacks & Wagons
It can act like a Sedan when I want to take colleagues or friends around. And it can act like an SUV when I want to go camping and biking.
Plus, it has the advantage of mid-size sedan ride and handling and mpg.
There are many vehicles of that design here. See the Renault Megane, Peugot 307, Honda Jazz, Fiat Multipla, Audi A2, Benz A-Class, etc.
They are designed to have 4+ seats and a little cargo room. It is the perfect alternative to the minivan for small families. The seating is upright, visibility is pretty good (you can see over the small hatches). Entry is much easier than hatches of old, you don't have to step down.
The success in europe is because of the increase in space and visibility over a small hatch, minivans are too big and expensive, wagons are too long.
I think it's going to be a hard sell in North America.
I was a passenger in a few Multipla taxis in Rome recently, and really liked the lay out.
A mini-van and a wagon are not quite what I want. A sedan based vehicle will get much better mileage than an SUV.
Most people will opt for the mini-van or wagon. But 70 or so thousand many urban people might see the Maxx as a good alternative.
As for the lack of trunk space, it is my understanding that the rear seat will be adjustable fore/aft, like a minivan, so you can either have maximum legroom or maximum trunk room.
1) What does the Maxx do differently?
2) What does the Maxx do better?
3) Is the Maxx priced low enough to attract people?
1) The Maxx does not have what most people would call classic good looks. It does have a sliding second seat with allow you to increase or decrease trunk space or leg room as needed. That attractive but not enough to get more than a tiny niche market to buy it. You cannot slide seats but you can fold or remove seats in most minivans, fold in wagons, fold and slide in small SUVs.
2) Its different but not really better. Its good to have options. The Mazda 6 and Camry are different and thats good enough. Will being different be good enough to get people to buy the Maxx. My prediction is no.
3) It needs to be priced really low to attract people. The price can only go higher if there is a market. The Aztek may not have failed if it was priced between $18-22k loaded where it should have been.
In other words, if Toyota came out with a larger Camry-based Matrix/Vibe type "tall wagon", would that be a good idea?
Is a Matrix/Vibe 'different but not really better' than a Corolla?
Would a larger Camry-based "tall wagon" be 'different but not better' than a Camry?
I think the concept of a 'larger than Matrix/Vibe' 'tall wagon' is certainly viable. Maybe the Maxx won't be successful due to the "baggage" of the Chevrolet and Malibu name, but I think there is a niche in the market for this type of vehicle.
Would you expect to pay more for the "tall wagon" version or the sedan version of the Camry?
I don't see that the design breaks any new ground. Looks like a 5 door hatchback, just maybe a little taller than usual. Like a modern Saab 9000, but smaller and with less cargo space.
Camry has gotten taller over the years, and the Ford 500 will do the same. The Maxx doesn't seem to stretch the height much more than those.
What's funny is that Saab has left the hatchback arena. Coincidentally it'll share a platform with Saab.
SUVs have lots and lots of cargo space, plus a nice flat roof usually with a rack for extra capacity. I don't see the Maxx as a suitable substitute for an SUV for those specific reasons.
And GM should change the name. When you say "Malibu" I immediately think of $15,000 rental cars, poor resale, so-so reliability, etc.
Call it just "Maxx". Then offer a turbo version and call it the Mad Maxx. :-)
-juice
1) I'm never opposed to diversity in the automotive world.
2) I like GM. I have my GM card earning pretty much maxed out.
The problems:
1) I'm opposed to THIS concept vehicle. The goal of a concept (other than the usual flash, techno, possibility) is to explore a niche. To do this you need to:
a) have a niche to market. Kids love sports cars but you dont market sports cars to kids. A better market is like Buick aimed at my mom (60yo). That works.
b) Its also the place where demand and quantity demanded come into play. The demand for the Ferrari Maranello is high but the actual quantity demanded is low....yet price is high because demand is high. If you have low demand and are in a niche market than price will not hold because people will not buy. The Aztek lesson GM should have learned. You need to target a market and make the vechicle they "NEED" to have over other choices.
So why does this apply here? The demand for the Maxx will be low. It will be even lower if the price is high....so price has to be low....but its going after a niche market. The arguement is circular. As I see it the market will be people who dont have kids and want a few extra inches in the back seat......The niche the are going after is covered pretty well so you have to have that "something" people want. It there is nothing special about the Maxx other than a few extra inches of leg room in the rear the 10k people a year in the US who want it will buy it and then it will fall off the map. As far as tall Camry's and such.....The Camry, Accord, and even Buick Regal wagons have been done. The Camry and Accord wagons did not sell well as they came along during the upswing in SUV and, to some degree, minivan sales. They also had clunky broken lines and were pretty ugly, which never helps. If there was a Camry and/or Accord wagon now it would probably be a fair seller at best and not worth the development cost. Yes they would be different and not really better....but you cant really compare established brands with new ones anyway. If that were the case then Huyndai would rule the market right now.
The wagon market is growing but Subaru, Volvo, Audi, Saab, and other are already there. The Mazda 6 will be the new hot one on the block too. So the Maxx is not a wagon? Ita a tall car? Sure. Same principle applies. Why would Toyota build another tall Camry? The already make the RX300 and Highlander. Honda has the CRV and the Pilot. Subaru offers the Forrester, Impreza in various versions, and the Legacy based things like the Outbak and the Baja. The niche may be saturated for "tall cars". If Toyota were to build a tall Camry, it would just be different without the looks and AWD of the other (RX300 and Highlander) options. Just different.
2) I like GM but I'm not loyal to any company. Even with all the rebates and all my GM dollars I still got a Mazda Protege ES as my daily commuter. I dont want to see GM make a horrible mistake with the Maxx. If the are going to go after than niche it has to be with:
a) price. Its gotta be cheap relative to others because they are not established in the niche. Niche buyers are pretty loyal so why would they switch?
b) content. It better have AWD, 200+hp, and/or all the other goodies that come with the others in that range. Thats unless it comes in at closer to $18k in which case you could get away with less.
There needs to be a reason to select the Maxx over an SUV (GM offering included), mini-SUV, wagon, tall car, and other stuff thats out there already and made.
Does not mean you should not like the Maxx. Just means I dont like it and think. I used to like the close to 300hp SVO minivan (based on the Montana) that GM used to show. The one with the 18in rims, lowered, with all the boy racer ground effects. I loved that thing and hoped they would make it but I knew it would not happen. If I were in charge the Maxx would not happen until I could build something that had a fighting chance in the market.
I still don't agree that the Maxx has absolutely no chance in the market, but I will grant you that it is highly dependent on the price. Obviously, it will be more attractive at $18-22K than at $30K. However, I would expect it to cost more than the regular 4-door Malibu, just like a Matrix costs more than a Corolla or a Highlander costs more than a Camry, or a PT Cruiser costs more than a Neon, etc...
As someone mentioned above, it's sort of ironic that Chevrolet is making a 5-door and Saab is not. This car seems better suited as a Saab.
I still like the idea of taking some risks. Sometimes you strike out, like the Aztek, and sometimes you hit it out of the park, like the PT Cruiser.
I guess I want to see them push the envelope a little more than they did with the Maxx. It's just a tall hatchback.
Look at the Murano, for instance. It's got style, space, big-league power, and a unique feature (CVT). You need all of those to compete at the $30k level.
-juice
Regal/Impala: for the rental set. In the mid-size fleet there is no better rental than the Regal LS.
The minivan in general: Its bigger than a station wagon and smaller than a full size van. Its a pot of gold.
The SUV: made for people who dont want to be seen driving a minivan.....the Explorer et al. are basically minivans.
The mini-SUV: its looks cooler than a Civic/Corolla. Its a little bigger than a compact car but smaller than a real SUV. Its that pot of gold again.
I do have to admit I was shocked at the sales of the Beetle and PT.
Car makers are looking for the next big thing, the next segment to explode. Right now it's actually luxury SUVs, believe it or not. The RX300 is Lexus' biggest seller, and Lexus lead the luxury segment on its back.
Everyone is looking to crossovers to be the next big thing.
-juice
I agree with juice above - everyone is looking for that next 'segment buster', like the new Chrysler Pacifica, the Honda Element, or the new Nissan Murano, that aren't quite SUVs, aren't quite wagons, aren't quite cars.
Buyers are also addicted to rebates, but I hate them. For instance, in MD, you pay sales tax on the full amount before rebate. So with a $3000 rebate, you pay $150 extra in state sales tax. It's dumb, just lower the freakin' price!
-juice
Right now they have some financing incentives, but not zero percent, and no rebates at all.
-juice
The Big Three, particularly GM, pad prices (including invoice prices) in order to allow huge incentives later. This is especially easily seen in the difference in pricing in the Matrix and Vibe.
This does help those who cannot otherwise come up with a down payment, though.
Autoweek had a funny little tidbit about SoCal dealers stuck with leftover Lincoln Blackwoods. For the $53 grand or so MSRP, they would throw in a FREE Mercury Cougar! Both leftover 2002s. The funny thing is the dealer still made a 1-2 grand profit.
Now THAT is price padding! Jeez!
Any how, the Blackwood is an important lesson - you have to offer utility, period. Cadillac is selling Escalade EXTs at huge profits while Lincoln had to swallow huge losses with the Blackwood. Guess which one has a functional midgate and 4WD, and which one doesn't?
Malibu Maxx should have AWD and lots and lots of cargo space and utility. Make a roof rack standard, with cross bars. Offer a tow package option. Hopefully they can avoid $3000 cash back.
-juice
Thats about what I was getting at. I want it to work but I have not like the press I have seen on the Maxx. GM needs to make a vehicle that has a fighting chance. Just throwing out ANOTHER tall wagon is not going to work. Off the top of my head:
Volvo has 2: XC90 (on the way); and the Cross country.
Subaru: They are all tall wagons but the Outback, Baja, OBS, and Forester reall look like tall wagons.
BMW: The 2 X5 variants are supposed to be SUVs but are basically tall wagons.
DC: Pacifica (out soon), the ML series
Toyota/Lexus: Matrix, if you want more of the SUV look you can go with the RX350 (and its bigger brother) or Highlander.
Honda/Acura: The Pilot is supposed to be an SUV but its also more tall wagon (and its really big), if you want tall minivan you can go MDX, or smaller in the CRV.
GM: also has their own version of the Matrix (Vibe). I think the Vibe tops out at about $19k so if they made a bigger Vibe for say $20-22k it would have interesting...if thats what the Maxx is then why is under Chevy?
DSM: has the Outlander which looks pretty cool on paper and undercuts the Forester/Outback in price. Its definately a tall wagon.
Nissan/Inf: Has the Murano under Nissan and the bionic cheeta thing (I forget the name) under Infinity on the way. Both are tall wagons. The Maxx actually looks a little like the Murano.
There are simply too many choices in that range. Giving it a 3.5L V6 (perhaps a bored and stroked H6 from the Subaru), AWD, roof rack, stability control, ABS, full power package all standard would set it apart to some degree if the price was right. Leather, wood trim, towing package, and a fancy sound system would be nice options. If they could offer a loaded model with everyting for around $30k it would work. I think it would hammer the middle of the segment and get a nice foothold. I think down scaling the Maxx would be a huge mistake. If they want to do that they should release a cheaper FWD (less content) version under Pontiac as a bigger Vibe. Chevy does not need any more down scaling of its reputation.
It's getting crowded, so they have to find a way to stand out, or noone will even notice it.
-juice
-juice
The Maxx rear seats are designed to either fold flat, roll up, or possibly to be removed all together. Racks are always options in cars like the Maxx.
The idea is to have a car with a roomy rear seat for two adults that can then be reconfigured to near cargo van interior.
Nematode, most of the vehicles you discuss in #41 are going to compete with the Cadillac SRX. I just do not even follow the argument at all.
Then your argument becomes even more confused. A few posts up, you said the Maxx should be less expensive. Now you are saying it should be more deluxe. The Maxx is meant to be a varient of what will be Chevrolet's mid market car. Mid market today is approx 18.5 to 28 or so (you can pay in the 30s for a maxed out Passat, but few do). The Maxx will probably come in the middle, as Chevrolets always do.
More than likely, the most expensive Malibu will be a Sedan SS model with a supercharged V6. Another Chevrolet tradition.
-juice