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
292 messages, Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 8:24 AM
You are in the Chevrolet Malibu Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
|
|---|---|
|
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)
|
|
|
Replying to: e_net_rider (Oct 20, 2009 3:45 am) 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.
|
|
|
Replying to: phil53 (Oct 20, 2009 8:27 am) 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...)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: malexbu (Oct 20, 2009 1:20 pm) 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.
|
|
|
Replying to: malexbu (Oct 20, 2009 1:20 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
