Last post on Mar 07, 2011 at 3:52 PM
You are in the Chevrolet Malibu
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Camry, Chevrolet Malibu, Honda Accord, Car Comparisons, Sedan
#49 of 804 Used cars comparision
Mar 13, 2007 (7:37 am)
Ok, my 2 cents.
I went to our local auto trading site (Toronto) area and used their 'value finder' function for 05 Camry and Malibu. Here's what I got:
There are 19 2005 TOYOTA CAMRYS in our listings.
LOW MEDIAN HIGH
$15,900.00 $19,995.00 $23,999.00
There are 27 2005 CHEVROLET MALIBUS in our listings.
LOW MEDIAN HIGH
$4,250.00 $13,999.00 $15,995.00
So there's about 6 grand of difference. A brief inspection revealed that on average these toyotas listed have higher mileage.
I got a 05 Malibu LS for 15000$. it had 30000 km on it at that moment. When I look at used Camries with a V6 engine it looked like i could not do much better that 20-22 grand for the same or higher mileage.
Now. JD Powers gives 05 Malibu 4 stars in Overall Quality and Camry of the same year is something like 4 and a half. Half a point difference, and mind you 3 stars is 'average' so both are above average.
So...I beliewe Malibu has something going when it comes to used cars.
My prev. car - 05 Pontiac Vibe had only 2 stars but still sold for 13900 at 68000 km (!). And the low rating is there for a reason - the Vibe definitely lacked in mechanical quality.
Sure, if high resale value is the goal then Camry is your car. But if you want a car that you would keep for a while, i think there's enough data to say that Malibu is a cheaper option.
#50 of 804 Re: Used cars comparision [yury]
Mar 13, 2007 (7:50 am)
I found the same thing when I was looking. The Toys and Hondas were more $$ for less features and higher mileage.
Cost was of course a consideration but I am not going to give up quality or safety to achieve that. I drove all these cars and in the end there was NOT a great difference in quality or feel. As far as safety, the Malibu keeps great company! Been in the top few since 04. That is if you get one with all the airbags. You'll notice the Malibu scores better than the Camry and the Honda.
#51 of 804 Re: Used cars comparision [yury]
Mar 13, 2007 (8:22 am)
And the Vibe is a Toyota Matrix, not a true GM.
The Vibe is based on the Toyota Corolla platform and powered with Toyota engine.
Not a great car but you can see how the public is duped into thinking it's a fantastic car simply because it's made by Toyota. Depreciation rates arent always based on true quality, as some of us long term buyers who take advantage of those rates already know
More selling points for the Malibu for me is the fantastic fuel efficiency. Thats something GM has been know for. Also the use of galvanized sheet metal. I recall reading an article on how GM had excellent technology for making paint stick so well to galvanized metal.
And dont forget power! That 3.5 good ol reliable but yet high tech pushrod engine has amazing low end torque. Thats where most people will feel and need the power most, not at ultra high rpm's. The Malibu to me feels more powerful than the Camry or Accord. I believe the 0-60 number is 7.8 seconds but thats going by memory so I could be wrong!
It feels good and it sounds good
#52 of 804 Re: Used cars comparision [shadow5599]
Mar 13, 2007 (8:33 am)
yes, Vibe was a disapointment to me. Toyota's participation didn't seem to help
On the subject of efficiency...To be fair, the Vibe was better in the city, but obviously these 2 cars are so different. And yes that V6 drives so much better Vibe's 1.8 4 cyl was barely adequate, Malibu's V6 feels....liberating
#53 of 804 Re: Used cars comparision [shadow5599]
Mar 13, 2007 (8:46 am)
yes, 7.8 sec is the number i saw on various random sites when I googled it.
btw, supposedly G6 (GT, not GTP of course) is the same or only 0.1 sec less. G6 looks smaller to me and and has 220 hp as opposed to Malibu's 200. And, if memory serves, G6's max torgue comes on later rpm. And it's worse on gas.
Sometimes I don't understand the car makers. Why not give both cars the same engine and be done with it ?
#54 of 804 Re: Used cars comparision [yury]
Mar 13, 2007 (9:39 am)
As far as I know the G6 and the Malibu are the same car, same engine (3.5). It's possible that the electronic tuning is different resulting in more hp on the G6 but I always thought they were the same.
For the 04-05 Malibu 3.5 I found 200 hp at 5,400 rpm and 220 lb-ft of torque at 3,200 rpm.
This site says they're the same.
You may be thinking of the 3.9 which is 240 hp, and both G6 and Malibu have that available now.
#55 of 804 Re: Used cars comparision [shadow5599]
Mar 13, 2007 (9:55 am)
actually, you're right, i comared 05 Malibu and 07 G6
and the 0-60 data was i an not even sure from what year,
so scratch that
#56 of 804 Re: Used cars comparision [yury]
Mar 13, 2007 (11:16 am)
I've been impressed with the fuel efficiency. I've got slightly over 40mpg on the highway and almost 30mpg in the city. Those are based on Canadian or imperial gallons.
Once leveled off in speed on the highway it runs 110Km/hr (about 70mph) at about 1700 rpm. Thats low in comparison to other cars I know. Maybe part of having good torque at the low end.
#57 of 804 Re: Used cars comparision [shadow5599]
Mar 13, 2007 (12:48 pm)
That 3.5 good ol reliable but yet high tech pushrod engine has amazing low end torque. Thats where most people will feel and need the power most, not at ultra high rpm's. The Malibu to me feels more powerful than the Camry or Accord. I believe the 0-60 number is 7.8 seconds but thats going by memory so I could be wrong!
well, yes and no - pushrod engines will generally always have higher relative torque than the same size OHC engine - more reciprocating mass. Other the other hand, HP (which is the prime detriment of acceleration is a function of that torque applied over time - meaning that the more willingly and quickly the engine will gain rpm the more HP (and acceleration) it produces. The GM pushrods are antiquated and slow (and noisy) in this regard and therefore produce less HP and slower cars. Things like the Camry 3.5, Accord V6 or Altima 3.5 are all in the next county before a Malibu driver can even realize what's happening to him, a function of those great free revving engines they have. On the other hand, the higher torque available on the pushrod engine may 'feel' quick initially but flatten out substantially(acceleration-wise) during the time it takes the engine to gain rpms.
The most 'current' GM engine the 3.6 soon I'm understanding to replace the multitude of pushroods currently in the GM arsenal - it's about time! 252HP or so in a Malibu, should get those 0-60 times down into the 6s and also improve FE much like it is already doing in the Aura XR.
#58 of 804 0-60 and hp
Mar 14, 2007 (6:11 am)
i could never understand the how 0-60 numbers and max hp relates to real life.
The pushrod has the torque at 3.5 thousand rpm. Camry's V6 is surely overall more powerful, but it's max torque only comes on at 4500 rpm, which is significantly higher. I mean, yes, if it revs up freely it's good, but you still have about 1000 rmp to go in comparission with the pushrod.
Now...most of us need power NOW, i'e. as soon as possible...Hence the question, what's Camry's torgue at 3500 rpm (which seems pretty NOW to me , Malibu gets to that rpm real quick) ? If Camry's curve is beefy enough that would result in a better drivebility, if not, that engine will not be much more driveable that the pushrod....4500 rmp is too high for a comfy acceleration even in small 4 cyl engines.
Now the max HP. It tends to be somewhere at the redline. The question: when you drive to work, how much time you spend at the redline ? Yes, 0%. So, another characteristic irrelevant to our daily life.
0-60. We don't do 0-60 often in a single burst. It's more like speed up to 30 mph, enter the ramp, go though it (a few deconds), go a bit faster towards the end of the ramp, and then only give it a quick burst of throttle to get to 60-70 mph. So it's like .... 40-70 accel that we do in a regular basis. Plus highway passing that is entirely different ball game.
You know, one of the people I know got a diesel Beetle at some point. That thing has like....what 90 hp max ? But, the guy said he would smoke Civics all the time, and those are 110-120 hp.
So, my point is numbers are nothing, the power/torque curve is everything. Say the upscale Civics they make now are rated at 200 hp. But...at the redline which is real high. Who drives at 7000 rpm ? It's only useful on a racetrack.
So if someone says that this car feels faster that that car that,in my mind, is more valuable than numbers. Of course, that's subjective, so the ultimate thing is to go for a test drive....the difference in max values may be nullified or reduced greatly by all the other factors.
That's not to say that Camry and Malibu are the same. Camry may very well be better in real world as it is better on paper...The question how much better. In other words, think about it....maybe the manufacturers are playing us a little bit ? An average person looks at the figures first, right ? And if the car is fast enough on the test drive the decision is made. But, is it as much better as the figures suggest or only a little better ?