You have saved this page | See all saved pages
Chevrolet Malibu
4972 messages, Last post on Feb 09, 2013 at 10:37 AM
You are in the Chevrolet Malibu Forum.What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Malibu, Sedan
#377 of 4972 Test drove a Malibu by hvan3
Feb 17, 2001 (7:33 pm)
Today, I was at the dealership. I test drove the 2001 Malibu LS. I have to tell you...it's a piece of junk! As soon as I turned on the ignition, the engine didn't sound "smooth". It was rough. I took it for a spin, and the freaking car constantly pulled to the right! Man, how in the world did the car pass quality assurance at the factory? Amazing!Once you own a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord, it's very difficult to give American cars a time of day. I thought GM cars were at least as good as Japanese. Unfortunately, I walked away disappointed.
My rule of thumb is not to buy American cars, but I do like American trucks. I'll go check out the Chevy Tahoe or Chevy Silverado. I know I wont' be disappointed.
#378 of 4972 t_h_x1138 by yurakm
Feb 17, 2001 (7:52 pm)
My wife and I have a Malibu with 3.1l V-6 and we like it much. And we rented a GA SE with 3.4l V-6 for about a month, while our Malibu was in body shop. So I can compare. And I disagree with you.
The 3.4l have much better torque. The single number for the maximal torque is misleading. Better to compare the whole torque curves:
http://www.gmpowertrain.com/engines_cartruck/other/34_torque.htm
and
http://www.gmpowertrain.com/engines_cartruck/other/31_torque.htm
As you can see, the 3.4l engine have an amazingly flat curve. It provides the level 200 lb-ft torque from 1800 rpm to 3500 rpm, with only slightly more between 3500 and 4500. In other words, provides more torque just above idle, at 1800, than 3.1l engine provides working hard at 3500-4000.
By the way, GA cruises at the 1800 rpm at the highway speed, 60-70 mph.
#379 of 4972 hvan3 by yurakm
Feb 17, 2001 (8:09 pm)
I agree with you: the 3.1l V-6 GM engine is noisy, especially while cold, and the noise is not pleasant. But it is very reliable nevertheless.Old push-rod technology. Have good low-end torque, but no torque above 4500 rpm. Good to excellent acceleration in city traffic, but only so-so on highways.
Malibu with the V-6 costs about the same as Camry or Accord with 4-cylinder engines, and is very competitive with them. Though, not with much more expensive V-6 cars by the same Japanese manufacturers.
As to concerning pulling right, something is wrong with the car. Either defect with manufacturing, or more probably the dealer did not prepare it right. E.g. one of tires was over / underinflated.
I had such a problem with 1988 Ford Taurus. It pulled slight to one side or another, depending on tire rotation. This stopped after I replaced all tires. But it was at about 110-120k miles, not with a new car, and one of its tires was of different type. Replacement after blow-up.
#380 of 4972 Torque curves and HP..... by t_h_x1138
Feb 18, 2001 (4:34 am)
Ya might want to look at those curves again....both are for the higher output version of the coresponding engine. Meaning those curves are not for the engines in the GA and Malibu's. And even if they were, its NOT a night and day difference, SLIGHT at best. Night and day would be comparing the 3.1/3.4 to the 3.8. Now really, its not that big when you come right down to it, and I have driven both for the about the same amount of time (had a Grand Am for 3weeks while our tracer was in the shop). Asking for any more power in either car, is just being greedy, lol, but thats just one opinion.#381 of 4972 AM radio problem by tomhamel
Feb 18, 2001 (5:50 pm)
Hi:Has anyone experienced a lost of reception on the AM portion only? I have a 99 Malibu with 45000 miles and suddenly it will only bring in a local station, and very fuzzy at that.
Thanks
#382 of 4972 Test drove one... by vocus
Feb 18, 2001 (11:12 pm)
I test drove a 2001 Malibu LS with 5900 miles on it at the dealership the other day. It was a nice ride and all, but I could not seem to get comfortable in the driver's seat. The back support just was not right, too prominent in the lower region. It had the leather seats, but no lumbar adjustment. Too bad, because I really liked it. Also, the rotors were shot too. I told the dealer he should have them replaced because it was a common defect. He just looked at me in awe. Some people..
#383 of 4972 Extended Warranty by hunt0694
Feb 19, 2001 (6:52 am)
I'm considering buying a third-party warrant from someone like 1Source. Has anyone had experience with any of them? Thanks for the help.#384 of 4972 2001 Malibu by krash610
Feb 19, 2001 (7:56 am)
Hi all,I'm looking to get a new 2001 Malibu.
But I have read some review from carreview.com and sites like that.
A lot of people complained about the brakes and the reliability of the car.
Is this true or have they resolve this problem?
#385 of 4972 to krash610. and yurakm ...I chose the 2001 Malibu by gearhead4
Feb 19, 2001 (12:24 pm)
I test drove the 2001 Malibu Sedan.It is quiet. The engine has good torque. The family fits in it well.
The one I purchased has the Preferred Equipment Group 1SB, the CD player and key less entry... every thing I could want. The best part is, it cost only $16000 after rebates.
I heard about the brake rotor problem, but also heard that $80 in after market rotors will fix it.
The intake gasket problem sounds scary. If they really fixed it, that good. If not, I know where I can get a two year extended warranty for $500.
Thanks four feedback!!!
gearhead4
P.S. By the way, our Navy Blue metallic paint looks great when clean!
#386 of 4972 extended warranty by aniazi
Feb 19, 2001 (1:11 pm)
I do have extended warranty from 1source so far their customer service is excellent and their ratings on the web sites are great too. But I haven't had any problem with my car yet. I got warranty bumper to bumper for $899 for 10 years/100K miles.To POST a message, please
Sign In.
Advertisement
Most Popular in Forums
Search Forums
Enter Keyword(s):
Learn More, Do More
Edmunds Community
Advertisement