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
Hatchbacks Chevrolet Malibu Maxx Chevrolet Malibu Maxx Traction Control
27 messages, Last post on Jun 17, 2008 at 10:39 AM
You are in the Chevrolet Malibu Maxx Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
Replying to: kurtamaxxxguy (May 15, 2006 4:59 pm)  https://www.mygmlink.com/pdf/go2content/manual/US/en/chevrolet/2006malibu.pdf Not sure about your technical questions but I know who to ask!  I will see what he has to say and post back.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: e2helper (May 15, 2006 5:04 pm) BTW wrt other question, I meant "final drive ratio" change
|
|
|
Replying to: kurtamaxxxguy (May 15, 2006 10:38 pm) Given the scenario where one driven wheel is on glare ice and the other driven wheel on the same axle both system will attempt to 'capture' the potential run away wheel. NW7 - or engine only traction, attempts to do this by limiting engine torque (potentialy up shifting) to the axle. Note that this affects both wheels - relying on only the mechanical differential to 'split' the power to each wheel. Here's where LSD (limited slip differentials) would come into play. This is also the reason why ETS can be beaten by Driver's Best Efforts - depending upon the skill of the driver. NW9 - or brake and engine traction, attempts to do the same as NW7 - but additionally it can clamp down (apply the individual corner brake) on the run away wheel. Since the brakes are under direct control of the ABS units, this action/response is much faster than the request/command manner in engine control. This is why NW9 is always better than NW7 and is generally better than Driver's Best Efforts as well. There was more but I think that covers your question.. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: e2helper (May 18, 2006 3:49 pm) As the Maxx/Malibu does not have a limited slip differential (as part of any option I know of), NW7 would be useless in the glare ice senario, while NW9 would do just fine. IMHO, Chevy should put the SS motor and the NW9 traction control in an upper level Malibu with a standard (not "SS" class) final drive ratio (perhaps the LTZSS). One then gets a more powerful, more advanced engine, the same or possibly slightly better fuel economy, and more horsepower for passing. But I'm not a GM engineer any more so my opinion doesn't count for very much. 
|
|
|
Replying to: kurtamaxxxguy (May 18, 2006 5:05 pm) Too early to talk about that though 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: e2helper (May 18, 2006 9:54 pm) Does the MAXX live? 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kurtamaxxxguy (May 19, 2006 7:16 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: shadow5599 (May 19, 2006 5:47 pm) Chevy could do what Saab did with the sport Combi, which is a Maxx with a sleeker hatch (no little "trunklet", just a smooth curve); round off the hatch a bit and it would look sleeker. As for Saab version, rides hard, has horrible reliability, costs a lot more...no thanks.
|
|
|
Replying to: kurtamaxxxguy (May 20, 2006 10:06 am) |
|
|
Replying to: e2helper (May 18, 2006 3:49 pm) I live in Northern MN. One of the reasons I bought the 2004 Maxx LS was for the traction control. Is it possible to replace the NW7 (which it sounds like all 2004 Maxx's have) with the NW9? If so any idea of a possible price for parts and/or labor? I have owned the car for two years, bought it new. No problems yet and am pushing 30,000 miles. It has been a great car for my wife. It won a "silver" rating for crash protection last year, I believe. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Hatchbacks Chevrolet Malibu Maxx Chevrolet Malibu Maxx Traction Control
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2007 Chevrolet Malibu Maxx
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
