Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Chevrolet Malibu Chevrolet Malibu MPG-Real World Numbers
290 messages, Last post on Nov 30, 2009 at 6:59 PM
You are in the Chevrolet Malibu Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: e_net_rider (Sep 25, 2009 3:43 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: phil53 (Sep 25, 2009 8:55 am) |
|
|
Over the last month, with comparable driving patterns, the MPG numbers were: ____________DIC___Real__Error 2005_Base___29.4__28.4__1.0 2006_Maxx___27.1__24.7__2.4 A surprise for me in the bottom RHS corner. |
|
I have owned my 2010 Malibu 2LT 4 CYL for only 1 week. I compared/contrasted the Accord and Camry with this Malibu- the Malibu won hands down. On a trip just today on the interstate (200 miles), my MPG, going between 70-75 MPH ( and using Cruise Control), varied between 32-37. The interior quality and design on this car is outstanding. The safety features are second to none. This is the first 4 CYL. car I have owned in years- remarkable power for a 4 CYL- GM finally did this car right by making available the 6 speed automatic transmission. This car has to be one of GM's best kept secrets.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: john178 (Oct 16, 2009 6:03 pm) I have a fair idea of what might be causing low end MPG. It seems that this engine is relatively inefficient under acceleration. The figures I'm seeing on the DIC with normal traffic acceleration or going over a high bridge are much lower than numbers shown on the 4.0 V8 Aurora and my experience with Town Cars. Both of the latter would upshift much quicker. Both are much heavier cars too. There was an old rule of thumb that an engine was at its peak efficiency at the maximum torque RPM. I will have to find what that is for this engine and see if I can spot a correlation. I'm beginning to suspect that GM shortcut the process of working toward highest MPG by simply slapping a 6 speed behind an engine and the two are not well matched because of such an approach.
|
|
|
Replying to: packer3 (Mar 21, 2009 6:58 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: 07maxx (Oct 18, 2009 10:37 am) Want to ask you about the struts, since our cars are similar. I got a 2006 Maxx this summer, in addition to my two 2005 Base Sedans. Maxx is nice but in some respects I like the sedans more. One conspicuous difference is the cars' sensitivity to the road imperfections. Both my sedans flow over them, on the highway or local roads. Maxx reacts to the imperfections in a manner that makes both driver and passenger feel less comfortable -- "doesn't float over", that's how I'd put it. If I didn't have four years' experience with the sedans, I would not probably notice Maxx's way -- the ride is pleasant, in general. But the comparison makes me wonder about the cause and I did a bit of research on struts and shocks; from what I've read it is too early for me to change them: my Maxx is now at about 57K miles, and the shocks and struts are usually good till 80K -- which is right at about where your car is. So, how do you know that the "struts are shot"? Why did you decide to go with Monroe Sensa-Tracs? What do you expect to pay? (From what I've read, it's about $1200 -- is this right?) Anything anyone can tell me about the suspension, shocks and struts, will be appreciated. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: e_net_rider (Oct 17, 2009 6:16 am) Also, I was reminded there is a shift point at 50MPH. Prior to this vehicle, all 4 speed (with overdrive) and TCC lock would do the final change at 40MPH. Some would lock TCC before going into overdrive, others did the lock as the final change, so I'm not sure if the bump I feel at 50MPH is last gear or TCC lock. If anyone know the shift pattern of the AT6, please respond. It can be helpful in getting best mileage. But on the down side, it is programmed to force downshift and not free wheel till stopping. One of the things that I'm sure helped with the Aurora. The tire combination with aerodynamics, it seemed to roll forever, so with paying attention to lights and traffic I could get as high as 19MPG local driving. If I got caught in stop and go, bumper to bumper mileage would drop to 16 or 17MPG. Also there is the possibility that these Firestone FR710 dragged mileage down a bit. In part because the temperature dropped a lot overnight and the DIC was indicating 27# in the morning when we left. I thought it would warm up a lot during the day, but did not and DIC was indicating 30 to 31# after getting on highway. This could be why I was also unhappy with the handling, but the ride was quite smooth for a car of this size.
|
|
|
Replying to: e_net_rider (Oct 19, 2009 4:01 am) 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 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: malexbu (Oct 19, 2009 4:57 pm)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Chevrolet Malibu Chevrolet Malibu MPG-Real World Numbers
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Chevrolet Malibu
2007 Chevrolet Malibu Maxx
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
