You are here: Forums Classic Cars What Will Be a Future Classic?

What Will Be a Future Classic?

588 messages,  Last post on Sep 06, 2009 at 3:54 PM

You are in the Classic Cars Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright

What is this discussion about? Future Vehicle, Coupe, Convertible, Sedan

Messages Page 57 of 59 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#560 of 588 Re: Defending the Malibu ? [guss] by texases Jan 27, 2009 (7:02 am)
Replying to: guss (Jan 27, 2009 6:02 am) I agree, Malibu wasn't a bad car. The article was about how it shouldn't have gotten a 'car of the year' type of award.
#561 of 588 Re: Defending the Malibu ? [guss] by andre1969 Jan 27, 2009 (7:29 am)
Replying to: guss (Jan 27, 2009 6:02 am) I had a 2001 Malibu for a rental once. I didn't really like it, but it seemed okay for a rental car. The 3.1 V-6, which was up to around 170 hp by that time, was good for, say, a 0-60 launch, but didn't like higher-speed passing on the interstate. It was too plasticky inside for my tastes, and I think there was a squeak and rattle here and there. I also remember that when I closed the trunk lid, I could see the rear seatback jiggle.   When I bought my 2000 Intrepid in November 1999, I looked at a few Malibus they had on the lot (it was a Chevy/Dodge/Isuzu dealer). They also had a 2000 Dodge Stratus that I looked at, and a couple 2000 Impalas. I liked the Stratus. It was about the same price as the Intrepid, but better equipped (sunroof, alloy wheels, a few extra things inside, etc). But I preferred the Intrepid's size, plus it had an engine that was both more powerful (200 hp versus around 165) and more economical (20/29 versus something like 19/27). I also didn't like the fact that the Stratus used a Mitsubishi 2.5 V-6, although in retrospect, I hear that turned out to be a pretty decent engine. I remember the Malibu just seemed cheap in comparison to either of those two, although the ones on the lot were a couple thousand $ less. The only Impalas were loaded LS models stickering around $25-26K, and they just didn't seem worth it to me. Plus I didn't like the Impala's cramped back seat (I don't care what the published specs say, it's CRAMPED!), high beltline, or interior design. I know a guy who drives a Dodge shouldn't rag on GM's interiors, but I swear the Intrepid, and Stratus, had much nicer interiors than the Malibu or Impala! Funny how these days it's just the opposite. GM has really gotten their act together with interior quality, while Mopar started slipping.   I think for 1997 standards the car was a giant leap forward, especially compared to cars like the Chevy Lumina and the Corsica. And by 1997 standards, it probably stacked up well to the foreign competition. The Camry, which was new for 1997, seemed cheapened compared to the 1992-96 model. I think the 1994-97 Accord was a bit nicer than the Malibu...but it's not like it blew it out of the water or anything.   But suddenly, it was 1998 and a new, improved Accord came out. Then we got a new Camry and Altima for 2002 and yet another Accord for 2003.   GM has a habit of doing that...coming out with a car that seems as good as what the competition is offering, maybe even better in some respects, but then suddenly the competition redesigns and improves, and GM is left with a has-been. It happened with the first Saturn S-series. Happened with the 1997 Malibu. The 2008 Malibu seems like a nice change, but I hope it's not just a repeat of this cycle. Replies to this message: fintail (Jan 27, 2009 8:34 am) xrunner2 (Jan 27, 2009 4:23 pm) Mr_Shiftright (Jan 27, 2009 8:45 am)
#562 of 588 Re: Defending the Malibu ? [andre1969] by fintail Jan 27, 2009 (8:34 am)
Replying to: andre1969 (Jan 27, 2009 7:29 am) I always thought the Malibu was benchmarked on the 1994 Accord and to a lesser extent the Camry of the same period. The bad part about that is that the Camry was renewed in 1997, and a very new Accord was introduced for 1998. Simply benchmarking the current models of the competition is never a good idea - by the time the Malibu hit the street, it was indeed a has-been. And then GM made the thing for way too long, in a fit of arrogance and shortsightedness.   I remember a Malibu rental from that time too...the "hot" light was on the whole time, the radio didn't work, and the materials seemed pretty cheesy. Replies to this message: xrunner2 (Jan 27, 2009 4:23 pm)
#563 of 588 Re: Defending the Malibu ? [andre1969] by Mr_Shiftright HOST Jan 27, 2009 (8:45 am)
Replying to: andre1969 (Jan 27, 2009 7:29 am) You hit it right on the head. Detroit is always designing against the competitors LAST model, and no sooner do they do so successfully, then the competition rolls out the next generation, vastly improved. A good older example of this was the Cadillac Allante, which was designed against the already totally obsolete Mercedes 560SL.
#564 of 588 but..... by guss Jan 27, 2009 (12:37 pm)
at the time I think Motor Trend broke their Car into Import Car of the Year and Domestic Car of the Year. I agree the Malibu did not deserve an award, but in the context of 1997 it was one of the best new domestic offerings.   What else was substantially new that could of beat the Malibu? The Chrysler triplets Cirrus,Stratus,Breeze were not better,and Fords Contour/Mystique would probably be tied with the Malibu.   Would the C-5 Corvette have been out by then ? If so, then mistakes were made. Replies to this message: kyfdx (Jan 27, 2009 12:44 pm) andre1969 (Jan 27, 2009 12:50 pm)
#565 of 588 Re: but..... [guss] by kyfdx HOST Jan 27, 2009 (12:44 pm)
Replying to: guss (Jan 27, 2009 12:37 pm) 1997 was first year for C5
#566 of 588 Re: but..... [guss] by andre1969 Jan 27, 2009 (12:50 pm)
Replying to: guss (Jan 27, 2009 12:37 pm) The Chrysler "cloud cars" came out for 1995, as did the Contour/Mystique, so neither of them would have been eligible for "Car of the Year".   The Pontiac Grand Prix and Buick Century/Regal were new for 1997. I have more respect for those cars than I do the 1997 Malibu. But other than that and the C5 Corvette, I don't think there was really anything new on the domestic front.
#567 of 588 Re: Defending the Malibu ? [fintail] by xrunner2 Jan 27, 2009 (4:23 pm)
Replying to: fintail (Jan 27, 2009 8:34 am) I had a 1995 Accord. I test drove a 1998 in Feb,1998 and traded in 95 immediately. The 1998 V6 EX or LX was great improvement over a very excellent 95 model. Every mfr was and still is chasing the Honda "standard".
#568 of 588 Cobalt SS by hpmctorque Feb 19, 2009 (10:22 pm)
I read that Chevy will discontinue the Cobalt SS. This is another example GM killing a model after they finally get it right. The SS, which is available as a sedan for '09, in addition to the coupe which was introduced in '08, is generally regarded as the best Cobalt model, by a wide margin.   This begs the question, then, of whether the Cobalt SS will one day be a collectible. It's fast, handles well, and relatively few of them will have been made before it goes out of production. Replies to this message: Mr_Shiftright (Feb 20, 2009 8:28 am) corvette (Feb 20, 2009 10:59 am) oregonboy (Feb 20, 2009 12:18 pm) Mr_Shiftright (Feb 20, 2009 12:55 pm)
#569 of 588 Re: Cobalt SS [hpmctorque] by Mr_Shiftright HOST Feb 20, 2009 (8:28 am)
Replying to: hpmctorque (Feb 19, 2009 10:22 pm) Well it's an "interesting" car, and it goes like stink, so my feeling is that ANY car that goes fast will be somewhat collectible to someone, just for the fun value.   But the Cobalt SS does not possess a number of important traits that any "strong collectible" should have---a) loved when new by many people b) prestigious or iconic image; c) interesting or attractive styling. The only attribute it DOES have is "performance or interesting engineering".

Messages Page 57 of 59 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Classic Cars What Will Be a Future Classic?