Chevrolet Malibu MPG-Real World Numbers

malexbu · October 2009

So, you put on 300 miles and could have calculated your real MPG for this trip quite accurately by fueling the car at the end and doing a simple computation. Instead. you rely on the known liar the DIC. From my own experience, and having read all the users' stories, your MPG for this trip was about 28 MPG. (29.5 - 1.5).

And how would you know that I am wrong?

Measure the mileage and fuel, then divide, at each fillup, you'll likely see the difference.

Of course, believing the DIC's reading is a pleasanter thing :-)

e_net_rider · October 2009

Mine is an '09 I4 AT6. And to date I find calculating the old way yields slighty better MPG, except my last fill which was about 1MPG less for 9.2 gallons. I can't explain except to wonder if the pump was off and certainly not the only time I've wondered about this place. Putting over 18 gallon in a tank that is 17.2 would seem pretty difficult even if I sucked the last bit as I rolled to the pump. I was pretty tired by time I got back so I did not fill, but will today and post back.

phil53 · October 2009

I also have an '09 I4 AT6 and I have experienced the same thing, as I believe I noted in a previous post. In my case, it does not matter which station I fill up at - and I have used several different brands and locations. So I don't think it's the pump, unless there's a conspiracy out there. I'm at a loss to explain why the DIC shows poorer fuel mileage than the calculator. If it were an occasional thing, I would just chalk it off to not getting it filled up to the exact same level from fill-up to fill-up. But it is consistent. Also, as previously noted, I have never gotten better than 29 mpg and I have seen as low as 17 mpg. Basically, I get about 4 to 5 mpg less than the EPA rating reflected on the Monroney. So I have been rather disappointed in the fuel mileage.
My other gripe (also posted previously) is the way the transmission hunts and takes so long to down-shift. I almost got hit two days ago because I started to make a lane change, but the transmission wouldn't downshift quickly enough. I had to dodge back into my own lane and wait a bit longer. Even then, I slapped the shifter into "M" and made a manual down-shift before beginning the lane change. Even manually, it takes way too long to complete the down-shift. Our old VW Beetle with the 90 hp turbo-diesel was better at "point and squirt" driving than the Malibu.
But I'm getting a bit off-subject here. Suffice it to say that, while there is much to recommend the car, on the whole, the fuel mileage and transmission have me looking forward to my next trade.

malexbu · October 2009

(All off topic below)

Basically, I get about 4 to 5 mpg less than the EPA rating... So I
have been rather disappointed in the fuel mileage... My other gripe
... is the way the transmission hunts and takes so long to
down-shift. I almost got hit two days ago because I started to make a
lane change, but the transmission wouldn't downshift quickly
enough.

When such things happen, do you care about the quality of internal
materials or how your car looks? (I don't think so :-))

This is one of the reasons that brought GM down, in my opinion.

Instead of polishing to perfection at least one practical model, they
went for what they thought was "pretty" with the new Malibu.

Most 2004-2008 Malibu's owners have been happy with their car, no
matter what others say about its looks. Many Impala owners have been
happy with theirs -- but in both cases, up to a point. Doesn't
appear that Impala is a reliable and comfortable vehicle (I'd be
scared to buy one), and the 2004-2008 Malibus might have been made a
bit better without dramatic changes, preserving their excellent MPG,
and making the already not-so-bad reliability even better.

"The car of the year", Malibu 2008, comes, impresses with the quality
of materials and ride... And then what happens?

Precisely:

Suffice it to say that, while there is much to recommend the car,
on the whole, the fuel mileage and transmission have me looking
forward to my next trade.

Silly GM! (I am not saying this happily -- it's just that I am
grieving the lack of my own desire to buy a new GM car...)

e_net_rider · October 2009

It does have its good points. That said, you have to start from the ground up to design a really good car, and that includes tires. To me, tires are likely the most important part of a vehicle. They control a lot of the quietness, the handling, and traction. It does not matter how good your brakes are if the tires don't do their job. I've owned a couple of vehicles that came with Euro tread designs and though I was unhappy with tread life I did not choose wisely when replacing them and went with American type treads. I always lost quality in one of the areas, usually traction and resistance to hydroplane. On one vehicle, a Regal, I replaced the original GoodYears with Michilen Weatherwise which was very similar to a Euro tread. They improved the ride tremendously and the wet/dry traction as well. I can not speak for snow country but it almost seems they are trying to sell more cars by disposing of them via bad tires.
Yes I'm old and tire technology has made some really good changes since the days of bias belts and fiberglass, but what tire they promote on a race track has nothing to do with everyday driving.

phil53 · October 2009

I don't disagree with your basic premise. However, the visual appearance gets people into the showroom. I would never have considered the old model because it did not offer the style and features I wanted. If Chevrolet had not remodeled the Malibu so extensively, I probably would have gone with the Altima - or a small CUV, such as the Rogue or Forrester. So, while the things you mention are very important, style and features are part of the overall consideration. By the way, I was complimented twice on the looks of the Malibu yesterday.

malexbu · October 2009

On one vehicle, a Regal, I replaced the original GoodYears with
Michilen Weatherwise which was very similar to a Euro tread. They
improved the ride tremendously and the wet/dry traction as well

This is very interesting; I am honestly at a loss about the tires'
impact on the whole experience. Yes, I realize that a tire should not
be worn out -- as a matter of fact, I rotate tires on my three Malibus
myself and carefully inspect them every time I do this (done just once
on my latest, 2006 Maxx).

At this time, I have three kind of tires on these cars:

1. (2005 Base Sedan) Sumitomo HTR T4 Ultra Premium Touring
2. (2005 Base Sedan) The oiginal Goodyear Eagle
3. (2006 Maxx) Front: Cooper; Rear: Continental

Switching between the cars often, I wouldn't be able to tell which
tires are better or worse -- from any perspective. I know which tires
are where, but only by my brain, not by my back or ear. Car #1 has been
driven in pretty bad conditions, rains and snow, and I have nothing
but praise to say for it.

But I would be interested in trying something else, when time comes.
Do you have a recommendation, what to try -- all season tire?
Michellin Weatherwise? Something else?

malexbu · October 2009

I don't disagree with your basic premise. However, the visual
appearance gets people into the showroom.

Impala: looks great. Sit in it, when you have a chance (I bet you
will not like it for a moment after any Malibu). Read the owners'
forums here at Edmunds (I bet you will not regret not having Impala to
care for).

So, the new Impala was, in a sense, a GM killer. Not a killer model,
a killer. The car that had to be almost like a tank, bulletproof --
the new hope for GM some five years ago, is such that even I, a GM
die-hard by today's metrics, won't buy it. But I much enjoy its looks
when I see one.

I would never have considered the old model because it did not
offer the style and features I wanted.

What specific must-have features did it miss, in your opinion?

Say, an MP3 port. GM could have added it to the old model at
next-to-zero cost. This is something I meant when I was saying, "make
the current model flawless."

When you say "would never have considered the old model", you know, of
course, better, but realistically, you don't know -- it would depend
on the presentation given to the car at the time you were looking to
buy a new one.

You probably won't have time and/or desire to read owners' reviews for
that generation of Malibu here and at Carpoint / autos.msn.com, but I
did read them again this summer before buying my third Malibu -- and:
Wow!... And this is the car GM decided to drop?...

When on the road, pay attention to how the 2004-2008 Malibus look: not
to their boxy shape (the appreciation comes with time), but at the
condition of these cars. Watching many such cars in driveways, on
local roads and highways, I can't help but notice in what great shape
most of them are. Some of that is, perhaps, due to the cars' internal
properties, but plenty, I want to think, is due to the care they
receive from their owners. They all look like loved ones...

Hey, I didn't like the shape of 2005 Malibu until I got my first one.
Now you should see me dotting over them :-)

By the way, I was complimented twice on the looks of the Malibu
yesterday.

I do enjoy seeing the new Malibu, and I liked its ride when I briefly
tried. But I equally enjoy seeing the old (2004-2008) Malibu. These
two seem to be cars for different buyers: the older is more
utilitarian, the new one for those who want "the other look". Should
the 2004+ model be available and legendary reliable, it would sell all
right, I think, even today. They should have worked on making it that
reliable!... They should have been replacing the flawed steering
columns free of charge for 100K miles, no questions asked. Etc. It
would be cheaper than what they ended up with. (They -- GM.)

I'd readily compliment you on the looks of your Malibu, though. Truly
hoping you'll be enjoying it, and if in a couple of years I'll see
owners giving it the review similar to what my generation has now,
I'll buy one, I swear :-)

e_net_rider · October 2009

It was either Tire Rack or Tires Plus that used to have a forum that could be searched by vehicle and learn of others experience. At the time I was looking for new tires on the Aurora, 235-60R. The oem was a GoodYear Eagle and possibly a few exceptions having Michelins. No one was very happy with the GoodYear, especially after they tried a different tire. Traction was felt not good enough on wet, noisy, and a harsh ride. Michelin was a popular repacement, not sure which model anymore, and thought to be much better concerning noise and ride. After going through all of the experiences, I narrowed it down to Pirelli or Khumo. The Pirelli was quite a bit cheaper than Eagle or Michelin, but the Khumo was over a $100 less per tire and had nothing but praise. I went with the Khumo and have to say I agreed with them. I had two other vehicles at the time and researched what was relative to them. Likely a Sable and maybe the Regal. One of the two vehicles had the same opinions of using the Khumo, but on the other the experience was totally negative. So it seems you have to match the tire to the vehicle.

I have heard some good things about Sumitomo and Continental and the Eagles on some vehicles, but to me the Eagles seem to have a stiff sidewall and without the proper suspension the ride could be harsh. Also passing that harshness to the suspension could beat it to death.

I will store your info in my mind, but not sure what changes might have been done to '08 and up regarding suspension. Since GM likes to use old parts, even from other models, it is likely they made no change.

e_net_rider · October 2009

I did not have a real close look at Impala, but they did have at least one upscale to them. The Malibu usescheap plastic for door liners. The other day, I pulled the latch and pushed on the door next to it. Snap! It cracked at the seam and won't pop back out. At least the Impala uses a plastic with built in padding, much softer to touch and likely better at sound deadening.

phil53 · October 2009

Beauty, as they say, is in the eye of the beholder. To me, the last generation Malibu was rather plain, to put it gently. The local Chevy dealer sponsors our Corvette club, plus I have 3 Chevies (Corvette, Malibu, Avalanche) that I take to the dealer for service. So I had plenty of opportunities to view the old one.
As for features, I'll admit that I never took a close look at the feature set on the old Malibu. But I do like the mp3 port. That is not a deal killer, however. What I do require are heated leather seats with an adjustable lumbar support. The leather is just a preference. And, I'll admit I'm spoiled, but those heated seats are awfully nice on a cold midwestern morning. (BTW - I'll stipulate that the '07 Malibu was available with those - although I don't think it offered a power passenger seat.) The adjustable lumbar, though, is a necessity, as I have a bad lower back. If I do not have proper support, even the 2.5 hours from here to DesMoines can be painful.
The other feature I don't recall seeing on the old model is dual zone climate control. Again, I've become spoiled, but it does allow my wife to control the temperature on her side - especially on trips where the sun comes beaming in on one side and not the other - so that we are both comfortable.
The old model also came with only a 4 speed automatic. I know I've ragged on the 6AT in the current model, but most cars in its class have had a 5AT for a while. And, given their history, there is no excuse for GM failing to produce a transmission that is equal to or better than their competitors.
All that said, I'm not trying to denigrate your car. You obviously like it very much and it evidently fits your wants and needs. And it probably fits my needs - just not my wants.

phil53 · October 2009

I'm not sure about Tires Plus, but I know Tire Rack has the features you're referring to. I find it helpful in researching tires.

malexbu · October 2009

I meant both pre- and post-2005 Impalas. Like the looks of both, find the seats very uncomfortable, have read pretty scare owners' complaints here at Edmunds.com.

As for the plastic, I am all for improving it, so that it doesn't break, at least. But honestly, haven't had any such problems with my cars. The inside feels much better than the upscale Bonnevile 1999 and not worse than the 2002 VW Jetta, both of which I had. My wife is *very* noise-sensitive; I asked her today, "Are our cars noisy?". "No", she said. That's the definitive judgment for me :-) Oh, and we have made several 2000-mile trips in one of the cars. Heavily loaded, often in 100F heat -- comfortably and with the up to 38.2 MPG over the trip (calculated by the fuel used). Beat this :-)

malexbu · October 2009

2004-2008 Malibus:

Leather -- available. Heated -- I think so, but I am too lazy to check. Lumbar support? Even my Base Sedans have it -- and it is *perfect*. The seats (cloth) are terrific (I am speaking with the experience of several 2200-miles trips.)

I live in cold MA -- the remote start takes care of cold mornings, frozen windows etc.

No dual zone climate control.

I love the transmission in my sedans (still getting used to Maxx's ways, though -- a different dynamics.)

Thank you for the informative exchange! I am looking at the new Malibu with a more interested eye for the second day now -- hope you'll be able to recommend this car in about two years -- my wants may change, too :-)

john178 · October 2009

Malexbu:

If you are considering the 2010 Malibu, let me offer several thoughts. I downsized from a Cadillac DTS to a 2010 2LT Malibu. I actually had no problems with my Caddy that had 60,000 miles on it when traded in, but wanted something with better gas mileage ( even though my Caddy got 26.6 MPG on the highway which I thought was great). I'm not going to try to compare the Malibu with my Caddy but I've got to say that I have nearly every option in the Malibu that I did in the Caddy., and cost me $20,000 less! Plus I have bluetooth and a sunroof in the new Malibu, options I didn't have in the DTS. Obviously the ride is not as smooth but it still is a wonderful riding car ( Malibu). I now wish I would have purchased an LTZ instead of 2 LT to get the leather seats and automatic climate control, which I get tired of adjusting the climate control knob- something I haven't been used to doing for some time! The 4 Cyl. 6 speed automatic gives me all the power I need, so I would stay with the 4 Cyl- and I as I said in a previous message getting 32-37 MPG on the highway. You won't go wrong with purchasing a new Malibu.

malexbu · October 2009

Thank you -- this is very helpful!

phil53 · October 2009

I did not realize that even the base Malibu had an adjustable lumbar support. Live and learn. I will say that the manual adjustment on the Malibu does not offer the range of adjustment offered by the power adjustment on my other 2 vehicles. Quite frankly, I could use a little more support than is offered by the Malibu. Still, some is better than none. Thanks.

e_net_rider · October 2009

I have to agree on the LTZ comment, but does that have seat memory? I miss hitting that button as I pull into a parking spot or prepare to drive off and I used the second button for nighttime settings of mirrors. Without that feature it is a damned nuisance trying to hit the exact spot I had previously chosen.
I don't see any difference between 09 and 10 that would give you the extraordinary MPG compared to others with the same setup.
Which tires came on yours?

e_net_rider · October 2009

Posting back about last fill. Slightly more than 240 miles I-95. Total mileage is 355.7. Average speed is 58MPH and DIC shows 28.8MPG. Actual fuel is 12.185 gallons and that works out to 29.2MPG. I just remembered it was quite cool that day and most of the way home I had turned AC compressor off but I also had seat heat on most of the time.
But now also wonder how much the lighting draws if it is on unncessarily since I run it in auto all the time.

john178 · October 2009

17 " Firestone tires are on my 2010 Malibu 2LT. I calculated this 32-37 MPG based on both what the trip odometer was reading, along with the math of last fillup, miles driven etc. This was calculated with the cruise control on for an extended time (1-2 hours) set at 72 MPH. As far as the memory seat positions, my 2 LT does not have this; not sure about the LTZ. I also wish the trip odometer had the number of gallons used. But- other than this- for a car in this price range, the standard features & options make this a well kept secret by Chevy.

e_net_rider · October 2009

I admit that for a Malibu it does have a few toys, but that is old thinking, especially by GM. At least in the Ford lineup, in the previous body style of Town Car, you could get nearly every feature of the Town Car as an add to a Marquis. One you definitely could not get, AFAIK, was the extra insulation for quiet ride.
To get seat memory it seems I'd have to move to a Buick or Cadillac.

I now see why you got over 30MPG (72MPH). The last few times I've hit the road, interstate, most places you would get run over doing less than 80MPH. There is one stretch of I-95 midway between Savannah and JAX that they enforce speed more carefully. Even with four lanes each way it often can not handle capacity and is accident prone so most set cruise at 79MPH.

yesamalibu · November 2009

After 17 months and 25,000 miles, I still love the Malibu more than any previous care I've owned (BMW 5 series, VW Passat, Mazda 3). It is not pretentious or expensive. It is very comfortable, roomy, even fun!

With the 4 cyl, 6-speed, I have gotten 30 MPG every tankful since the day I drove it off the lot. Every time. If you can believe the trip computer, it says that my around-town driving yields around 24 MPG, and my interstate driving yields from 33 MPG (doing 70 mph) to 43 MPG doing 55.

Great car. My first American car and I don't regret it at all.

phil53 · November 2009

I find that interesting. I'd love to know your secret. Right now, the DIC on my car is reading 20.9 and that includes a fair amount of interstate (freeway) driving.

pao · November 2009

are you resetting you DIC after each fill up?

jlbgator · November 2009

I am about to purchase a 2010 1LT but not 100% sure about the sunroof. First, does it open into the car or does it go up outside of the car? Second, is it worth having? Any problems with it. My previous Jetta had a sunroof and I liked it but often left it closed because of wind noise but I like the extra light. Don't like sunroof that tilt and open up instead of in.

phil53 · November 2009

Yep.

phil53 · November 2009

It tilts up and slides back. It is not exactly quiet, but it's a lot less noisy than the one in our 2000 Beetle. I almost never used the one in the Beetle because of the noise. On nice days, I occasionally use the one in the Malibu. I do like the extra light and visibility it affords.

john178 · November 2009

I just went outside to check this out myself- the sunroof goes outside, not inside the car. The sunroof was an $850 optio, and I have not experienced any wind noise. I actually purchased two new Malibus (family cars) because I liked the 1LT (without sunroof) so well I originally purchased (2010); the second was a 2LT with the sunroof (2010). For the money I paid for this car, I couldn't be happier. However, if I had to do it all over- I would forego the sunroof for the LTZ package- to get the automatic climate control and leather seats. There is not a lot of price difference between the 2LT and LTZ. My next car will be either another Malibu or the new Buick LaCrosse. Believe it or not there are many similarities between the two- even though a loaded LaCrosse is about $10,000 more than a loaded LTZ.

john178 · November 2009

Don't know about the seat memory for the LTZ, but on my 2LT, I have 17" Firestone tires.

ghulet · December 2009

....after the experience with (an admittedly older) a Saturn I had, I wouldn't buy another GM sunroof with the glass going outside. All hinges and the other metal ended up rusting, and after a while it leaked. That was really the Achilles' heel of that car. Don't know if GM has changed to using better seals or non-corrosive metals at this point, though.

ghulet · December 2009

I just checked.....no memory seat option (I've never seen it on any of its normal competitors either; this is generally Acura/Lexus/BMW/Cadillac/Mercedes territory), but the LTZ now has 8-way power driver's and 6-way power passenger's seat standard (last year, the power pass seat wasn't available).

e_net_rider · December 2009

Which engine and tranny?
If it is the I4, you might have a problem, unless you are driving really hard on city streets or really fast on interstate. You should get really good mileage if driving below 70MPH. But above that I'm not impressed. I stretched it out to 90 for a short time and the DIC was showing only slightly better than what you got. The V8 Aurora I had would get upper 20's at 70. 25-26 MPG at 80 and 23 MPG at 90, better than the Malibu at that speed and it still had plenty of acceleration at that speed.

phil53 · December 2009

I have the I4, 6A. I generally drive 75 on rural interstate (5 over), 65-75 on urban/suburban interstate (5 to 10 over). Around town, I usually drive at the speed limit to 5 over. Admittedly, I have a bit of a heavy foot. Most of my driving is a combination of suburban streets and freeway driving. I don't do a lot of urban stop and go driving.
Interestingly, I've generally gotten the EPA mileage on the Monroney with my other GM products (a Chevy pickup, 2 Yukons, a Yukon XL, an Avalanche, an Olds Cutlass and a Corvette). That's why I was rather surprised that I'm so far off with the Malibu. On my current tank, I'm below 20 mpg.

e_net_rider · December 2009

I would say that you have a serious problem.
Since I don't know how the DIC calculates mileage, does the fill and calculate with miles show a difference?
Assuming no, does the service engine light come on during the boot up? If it does, that does not mean no computer problem and also does not mean there is, but it is just not setting a code for the problem.
Eliminate external leaks from the tank to the engine. Sniff for gasoline also. You could have a leak near the top of tank and cruising you are sucking gas from tank. You might try a series of half fills to find out if mileage varies. Topping off the last one to get total gallons.
Ruling out external leaks, the fuel pressure regulator, used for some years now, is noted for leaking diaphrams allowing fuel to be pulled through manifold. This however should show up as a rich mix which the computer should then try to lean. and often sets a code for being outside parameters or other codes. Often the leaking diaphram is proved by removing vacuum line from it and checking for wetness (gasoline).
Beyond that, you will likely need a thorough diagnostic, unless you have equipment that can read the data from computer and you can interpret it.
With the degree of richness you imply by poor mileage it is likely the catalytic converter is damaged or will have a shortened life.
Good Luck.

pao · December 2009

my 04 Maxx LT sunroof operates as you describe....and I have had no problems with noise, leaks, or rust whatsoever.....it will be 6 years Feb 10 with 156K miles on it as of now....and still going strong...

gonogo · December 2009

pao you need to put that Maxx in the Smithsonian, best one they ever made.

phil53 · December 2009

The calculator generally shows a little less than 1 mpg better than the DIC. So I am actually getting better mileage than the DIC indicates, but not significantly so. I have had the car into the dealership and they say everything checks out OK. But I think they've only been looking at the computer, the timing and that sort of thing. I doubt they have gone to the extent that you outline. I am not seeing any codes, by the way. Thanks for those tips, though. It gives me something else to look at.

e_net_rider · December 2009

It is quite concievable that a sunroof could slightly impact MPG and maybe safety.
Cutting that hole in the roof will certainly weaken the roof, unless extra reinforcement is added. Sort of like the difference between a convertible and sedan. To make up for the loss of the bracing created by a steel roof, extra steel is added to stiffen the unibody.
Also, glass weighs more than steel. In the 60's Mustangs the Fastback weighed about 65# more because of that extra glass. Many preferred it though because the Mustang was quite light on the rear otherwise, but gas was also 5 gallon for $1.

yesamalibu · April 2010

Almost 40,000 miles so far. Light-footed driving. Here are my averages (not trip computer readout, but rather actual results):
55-60 mph: 39 mpg
65-70 mph: 33 mpg
75-80 mph: 29 mpg
city: 22 mpg
I never thought I'd own an American sedan. Japanese and German cars before. This is my favorite car to date.

malexbu · April 2010

The difference between 33@65 and 39@60 is pretty stunning: how did you measure that? Like, you drove 500 miles without leaving a given speed range?

yesamalibu · April 2010

I have a 100-mile-each-way commute, nearly flat the whole way. Never much traffic.
One week, set the cruise at 60. The next, set it at 65.
I took all the data over 40,000 miles, and those are my results.

e_net_rider · April 2010

This info sounds quite right for speed differences according to what I see on DIC instantaneous MPG.
But, since 6K it does not seem quite as peppy.

malexbu · April 2010

Thanks, very impressive. I'll try to drive slower and see if that makes so much difference. But my commute is short and I don't have such a good test bed.

And you don't think that the temperature differences are a contributor to your results?

nickz71 · April 2010

So we had a chance to take our 2009 Malibu LTZ 2.4L 6spd automatic to Florida and back from the S. Wisconsin border area. We traveled with 685lbs of passenger and luggage, going mostly between 72 - 78 mph ( occasionally stints of 80 in Georgia ), under varying weather and wind conditions. I had the tires at 34psi front/33psi rear cold 42 degrees when we left, warming up to 36psi frt/35psi rear through Illinois. As we drove the tires got up to 37-38psi frt/ 37-38psi rear and I left them at that pressure
for the duration of our 10 day trip.
I usually fueled up when down to 1/4 tank, but topped off 7-8 gallons twice for the 10 stops for fuel. The grand total for 2,942 miles was 80.68 gallons or 36.465mpg. This included the drive up and down the Tennessee mountains, two 30-45 minute traffic stop and go situations through construction and the infamous Chattanooga after work drive. We also made two round trips from Anna Maria, to Sarasota in city excursions, and few more grocery runs and shopping trips into Bradenton. So this was the AVERAGE for the entire trip.
I CALCULATE each tank full and obtained a high of 39.1mpg on one leg of the trip. Our car had 14,604 when we left and 17,546 at the gas station in town when we arrived and filled up for our last tankful. We understandably got the lowest mpg when we had some head winds, but only had some limited low/tail winds on our return through Illinois. I also tried to alternate tier 2 name brand premium with regular fill ups. I also filled up at least twice with the cheapest truck stop gas we found along the way when we needed to refill. So I have no conclusive evidence of one gas performing better than another. I try and use tier 2 fuels as much as possible since they are usually the same price in our area as no names, but supposedly contain fuel system and combustion chamber detergents. Who really knows?
So we are well pleased and find our Malibu LTZ gets better than listed mpg. Around town we get 20 -26 mpg ( lower for winter-stop and go, etc) and 28 - 34 mpg combined when including occasional interstate 40 to 70 mile runs for my wife's shopping trips.

We're happy , and comparing this to our 2005 Malibu Maxx LT with the 3.5L it is somewhat better, but for a V6 that Malibu Maxx got within 2mpg of the above figures. We owned the Maxx for 4.5 years and wished they still made them. The 3.5L 200hp V6 was a great engine and GM seemed to have had the push rod design really refined for performance and mileage.
Well, hope this wasn't "too much information". :-)

pao · April 2010

great review...but have to agree..still wish they made the Maxx...my 04 LT is still running strong with almost 163K on it...I still get 24 in the city and 30-31 on the highway at 70MPH......will let it run till the wheels fall off it that is for sure....

malexbu · April 2010

2009 Malibu LTZ 2.4L 6spd automatic... 685lbs of passenger and
luggage, going mostly between 72 - 78 mph... under varying weather
and wind conditions.

... 36.465mpg. This included the drive up and down the Tennessee
mountains ... the AVERAGE for the entire trip....

... a high of 39.1mpg on one leg of the trip...

Great results and a great review!

For comparison, quoting here my post # 243 (Base Sedan 2005, 1100
miles for each leg of the trips, and the likely comparable driving
conditions and mode):

| +-------+-------+------+
| |__When_|__Where|__MPG_|
| --------+-------+------+
| |_08/05_|_MA-TN_|_36.6_|
| |_______|_TN-MA_|_36.8_|
| +-------+-------+------+
| |_08/08_|_MA-TN_|_36.6_|
| |_______|_TN-MA_|_37.4_|
| +-------+-------+------+
| |_09/05_|_MA-TN_|_38.2_|
| |_______|_TN-MA_|_37.8_|
| +-------+-------+------+
|
| The bottom line: 38.2 MPG, the highest so far; 37.8 MPG with the car
| fully loaded, going over mountains easily.

Looks like we are comparable :-)

So I have no conclusive evidence of one gas performing better than
another. I try and use tier 2 fuels as much as possible since they are
usually the same price in our area as no names, but supposedly contain
fuel system and combustion chamber detergents. Who really knows?

Watching my MPG very carefully, I've never been able to detect its
dependence on the gas brand (while I prefer Shell due to its
detergent).

We owned the Maxx for 4.5 years and wished they still made
them. The 3.5L 200hp V6 was a great engine and GM seemed to have had
the push rod design really refined for performance and mileage.

Having now owned Maxx 2006 LT for about seven months and 2,000 miles,
I agree. What an enjoyeable and practical car, and so well made
(knock on the wood)!..

Well, hope this wasn't "too much information".

That was just terrific -- thanks!

malexbu · April 2010

Hope your Maxx's wheels hold on for another 100K miles -- the day it
goes, will be a sad one on these forums... Take good care of your now
legendary Maxx! :-)

john178 · April 2010

Sounds like you did your homework on your MPG averages. As stated in an earlier post, I traded my 2006 Cadillac DTS in on a 2010 Malibu 2LT, and calculated up to 37 MPG on the highway, with cruise control set at 72 MPH. The three options I now wish I would have are the automatic climate control, leather seats, and odometer reading showing how many gallons of fuel used between fillups- all of which the LTZ has- I believe. Is this last option included in the LTZ? Chevy (GM) hit a homerun on this Malibu.

pao · April 2010

I guess I have the high mileage maxx on the forum now....I know there are a few others over 100K now.....but most are beginning the trade in now......hoping for another two years with it and 200K.....needs tires and brakes now.....so another set gone....this will only be the third brake job....as Im getting about 50-60K between pads now.....and this will be my third set of tires....this last set only lasted me 32K (BFGs)....the michelins before made it over 65K...so back to them i go

malexbu · April 2010

Interesting about the tires -- I've long wondered about the brand differences. These BFGs and the old Michelins -- were they rated for wear comparably? 32 and 65 Ks is way too much difference...

And for the brake pads: do you use the OEM Delcos or some other brand?

Chevrolet Malibu MPG-Real World Numbers

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles