Last post on Feb 09, 2013 at 9:37 AM
You are in the Chevrolet Malibu
What is this discussion about?
Chevrolet Malibu, Sedan
#4522 of 4972 the new commercial
Jun 11, 2005 (6:21 am)
hello, i own a 2005malibu and i was wondering if anybody saw the new line of commercials from chevy. it compares MalibuLT vs. CamryXLE. and i have to tell you the Malibu is a better value. and it also compares the Cobalt to Corolla, and i also own a Corolla. and i have to admit there are some stuff on the cobalt that the corolla doesnt, anyway i like my CorollaS. both my cars are 2005s thanks Tiger
#4523 of 4972 Re: Catastrophic failure of both front suspension springs - Chevy Malibu 99
Jun 11, 2005 (10:03 pm)
GM and/or the dealership since I believe a catastrophic failure of such an essential component to a car, with only a little over 100,000 miles on it (mostly highway), is simply unacceptable and dangerous.
100,000 miles is alot of miles-regardless. So-how long should a car maker be liable for a car it produces? I can't believe so many people can't accept the fact cars need repairs when you start to chalk up the miles. After 60,000 miles it is not unheard of to have the following happen; strut replacement, water pump, timing belt, (if applicable), brake calipers, etc. It's very unreasonable to ask for compensation on a car that has 100,000 miles on it. Maybe car makers should be responsible for the life of the car? GIVE ME A BREAK!!!
#4524 of 4972 Re: Catastrophic failure of both front suspension springs - Chevy Malibu 99
Jun 12, 2005 (6:51 am)
Is it reasonable or not, but manufacturers are responsive for safety-related defects for the life. Not only car manufacturers: the tobacco companies, the companies that used asbestos, etc. This is the law of country.
#4525 of 4972 Re: Catastrophic failure of both front suspension springs - Chevy Malibu 99
Jun 12, 2005 (8:51 am)
I agree with Chuck1. Although I feel that two spring failures in such close proximity is a bit odd, I would hate to see car makers sued because wear items (even if safety related.) give up the ghost after 100,000 miles.
#4526 of 4972 Re: Catastrophic failure of both front suspension springs - Chevy Malibu 99
Jun 12, 2005 (12:35 pm)
This is not a sound reasoning position. Then I guess car makers should be responsible for brake pads? Those are one of the most important safety item cars have! You know, some people don't get their brakes fixed until they hear the metal against metal. Should they be liable for those cars as well?
#4527 of 4972 Re: Catastrophic failure of both front suspension springs - Chevy Malibu 99
Jun 12, 2005 (12:42 pm)
" I would hate to see car makers sued because wear items (even if safety related.) give up the ghost after 100,000 miles.'
Thanks...some people would make the case that at 100,000 miles this cars useful life is 50% over. Some would even say that it has only another 50,000 miles left. I can't possibly see how a car maker could be held liable. You could make a case that EVERYTHING on a car is safety related. Heck, if your mirrors crack or somebody knocks them off in a parking lot four years down the road, you can't change lanes safely. Or if a tail light bulb goes out, how will they see your intent to change lanes? While I believe both of those parts going out is suspect, just pay for the repair and forget about it. Also, take those old parts and throw them out...they will just collect dust in garage!
#4528 of 4972 Re: 98 ignition switch anti-theft system [joe3891]
Jun 13, 2005 (7:34 am)
this anti-theft system is wearing me out. can you please send me a copy of the pdf also.
#4529 of 4972 Re: 98 ignition switch anti-theft system [deb14]
Jun 13, 2005 (8:49 am)
Sorry for the confusion, the PFD in msg #4503 was for the A/C controller repair, the title is misleading.
Jun 15, 2005 (8:59 am)
hello, i have a 2005malibu base sedan and it has over 3100 miles on it, when do i get is serviced? my dealer keeps changing it from 5000 to 3000 miles evertime i ask them the driver info center(DIC) is not saying anything. I NEED SOME QUICK HELP! thanks, Tiger
#4531 of 4972 I'd get the your oil change indicator fixed...
Jun 15, 2005 (9:33 am)
the GM indicator is quite sophisticated and dumping the oil at 3K is seldom called for except for dealers and quick change places that like to make money. I had my first oil change at 6000 miles and the indicator said I had about 20% oil life. I suspect that the 4 cylinder might crank more than the 3.5 liter and require more changes-- 6 cylinder ohv GM engines are REALLY easy on oil.
The computer will measure how many times you start the car, how warmed up the car is, how many times you floor it to pass and all sorts of other sophisticated stuff. The old adage was that a single start up at zero degrees puts much more wear on an engine than a 500 mile trip in the summer.
I'm using Pennzoil dino which is a group II+ basestock along with a ST filter. I suspect pushing the ST passed the 7000 mark might be stretching things a bit, although my engine has the bypass in the block. If I was using a low end Fram I'd be afraid to push things passed 4K, if I had a higher end Purolator along with synthetic I'd run things right to the end of the oil change cycle. The ST filter is Champion about like half of the AC Delco branded units but with a little less filtering area-- so far it's non-E-Core but that's coming and I have no problems with that.
I've had about 30 cars and only a handful died of engine problems and those were because of overheating. Usually it's other things that make me ditch the car, that's why Quaker State and Pennzoil put 250K guarantees on oil related engine failures with 4K changes.