Sign In Join 

You are here: [F] Forums / Hatchbacks / Chevrolet Malibu Maxx / Chevrolet Malibu Maxx End of the Line?



Chevrolet Malibu Maxx End of the Line?

70 messages,  Last post on Jul 21, 2007 at 9:42 AM

You are in the Chevrolet Malibu Maxx Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Malibu Maxx, Automotive News, Hatchback


Messages Page 5 of 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#41 of 70
Re: Would say normal transition of body styles [gmctruck] by lngtonge18
Jul 11, 2005 (5:17 pm)
Reply

Replying to: gmctruck (Jul 11, 2005 8:39 am)

I must say you are living in a false sense of security. Large old tanks have a lot of metal but little to no actual protection for the passengers. What built in protection could your antique 85 Volvo have that aren't offered today? Volvo pioneered the very crumple zones that you state can only do so much and that was why they were known as safe in those days. Your 240 only has the crumple zones to help protect you. It wasn't even designed to handle side impacts or offset impacts. If you were in those kind of accidents, you would be up a creek. Even in a head on collision, with no airbags to protect you, your head would most likely nail the steering wheel pretty hard. I find it interesting that people still cling to the idea that bigger is always better and don't understand that cars are supposed to crumple up to nothing in order to keep the passenger compartment intact. It has more to do with weight then exterior size and how well designed the structure is. Your old 240 weighs about 3300 pounds which would be at the same disadvantage as any other smaller car up against an SUV. In fact, your 240 would be at an even greater disadvantage due to the old structure that hasn't benefited from 20 years of advances. My "compact" Lancer weighs 3050. I'd take my slightly smaller much safer car anyday. It may be unrecognizable after a nasty crash, but I'm willing to bet I will have much less severe injuries then you would. It's designed to give up its life to keep me safe.
#42 of 70
Re: Would say normal transition of body styles [lngtonge18] by gmctruck
Jul 11, 2005 (6:20 pm)
Reply

Replying to: lngtonge18 (Jul 11, 2005 5:17 pm)

You haven't seen how a 240 is built the way I have. It has a built in steel roll cage and heavy steel bars in each door. There are no cheap plastic body panels like on the newer cars. Many injuries in car crashes are caused by the airbag deployment and not the accident itself. So having airbags is no guarantee that you won't be injured or killed in a crash. My point was that small cars don't always protect you in a crash even with airbags. So are you game for a demolition derby?
#43 of 70
Re: Would say normal transition of body styles [gmctruck] by juswheels
Jul 11, 2005 (6:27 pm)
Reply

Replying to: gmctruck (Jul 11, 2005 8:39 am)

With all respect.
   The safety advances in cars over the last 20 years are far greater than during the previous 75 years put together. It doesn't matter who pioneered them, the fact is, they are here. By current standards, your 85 Volvo is in the dark ages with regards to safety issues.
    
   The vehicle we were discussing received a 5 Star side impact rating from NHTSA, tying with Audi. Equipped with side curtain air-bags the driver would not suffer any appreciable injury. In a similar side impact with your 85, injuries, probably very severe, are guaranteed. That heavy steel is exactly what would impact your head. Even if the side of your car doesn't give way, You will !! No shoulder and lap belt combination can keep your head from impacting the steel in the side of your car.
 
   This same car also received a 5 star rating for front impact. I am very aware that air-bags aren't the entire answer and there have been injuries and even deaths from air-bags. However thousands have been saved. Air-Bag technology has been modified to reduce those tragic incidents. In a frontal impact you have less than 7/10 of one second to protect the occupants. Whatever you build into a vehicle MUST do it's job in less than 7/10 of one second. That's all the time you have and nothing can change that fact.
 
    With todays advances in safety, driveability, quality and yes, even value, it's no longer an issue of big vs small, just for crash purposes. Please remember one of the major vehicle safety issues is equipping a car so that an "average" driver can avoid a crash. Anti-Lock brakes, (another feature lacking on your 85) is just one such advance. Simply put, the behemoth is no longer needed, just to be safe.
    
   If you are "Taking Risks" when purchasing a vehicle, You will loose. The proper safety equipment is out there and very affordable. However it's up to you to find out and ask the proper questions. I have no doubt that you are completely satisfied with your 85, but hiding in the sand with 20 year old technology and telling others, that's the way to go, is doing them a great disservice.
#44 of 70
Re: Would say normal transition of body styles [juswheels] by gmctruck
Jul 11, 2005 (7:24 pm)
Reply

Replying to: juswheels (Jul 11, 2005 6:27 pm)

"Sorry, but hiding in the sand with 20 year old technology and telling others, that's the way to go, is doing them a great disservice."
 
Who's hiding in the sand... not me. If you think ABS is so great, I should let you drive my '99 GMC Sierra pickup on a bumpy road. Your eyes will pop out of your head when the ABS kicks in for no valid reason and the pedal goes almost to the floor as you pray to stop before hitting someone in front of you or blowing through an intersection. Don't take my word for it. Do a google search or go read the complaints yourself on the NHTSA website. I'm not saying that all ABS systems are bad, but I'm glad my Volvo doesn't have ABS. In fact, many new cars today only offer ABS and side curtain airbags
as an option and not standard equipment.
 
"Simply put, the behemoth is no longer needed, just to be safe."
 
You can keep believing that if you wish, but mass is mass and the bigger mass usually wins over the smaller one and time isn't going to change that. You remember that the next time you see a small car split in half after an accident. I'll keep driving my 20 year old Volvo until it quits which will probably be long after many newer cars have already gone to the scrap heap.
#45 of 70
Re: Would say normal transition of body styles [gmctruck] by mr_bots
Jul 11, 2005 (10:32 pm)
Reply

Replying to: gmctruck (Jul 11, 2005 7:24 pm)

Car's with crumple zones are actually much safer for the occupants then a car with out them. Essentially the strongest part of the car with crumples zones is the cabin, in a car w/o them, the weakest part is the cabin. I'd rather have the front of the car cave in, than the cabin. Also, the thin body panels don't really play a role in safety, all the needed support is underneath those thin pieces of aluminum in high-strength supports.
#46 of 70
Re: Would say normal transition of body styles [mr_bots] by rferd
Jul 12, 2005 (3:06 am)
Reply

Replying to: mr_bots (Jul 11, 2005 10:32 pm)

Hey guys, cut it out!
This is a chat room for discussing the MAXX. Perhaps you can get each other emails and have it out in private. This back and forth arguments about safety are interesting to a point, and that point has been reached. Get back on track.
#47 of 70
Re: Would say normal transition of body styles [gmctruck] by juswheels
Jul 12, 2005 (8:21 am)
Reply

Replying to: gmctruck (Jul 11, 2005 7:24 pm)

I know this is a Maxx forum and if this discussion is offensive to anyone, I apologize. I will make this my last word on the subject. I will also apologize if anyone felt my posts were disrespectful, because that was not my intention.
 
However, I stand by what I said. For the last 35 years I've seen the suffering and death caused by these crashes, firsthand and yes I've become passionate about this.
 
I am very aware that safety technology isn't the total answer but it's a wonderful tool that has evolved and changed considerably over the past few years. Advising others to the contrary is to say the least, untrue and a disservice to those who might tend to listen. Sorry to say, but I find that offensive. For that I do not apologize.
#48 of 70
Re: GM IS KILLING THE MAXX! [juswheels] by kurtamaxxxguy
Oct 17, 2006 (1:19 pm)
Reply

Replying to: juswheels (Jun 27, 2005 5:17 am)

The new Malibu '08 sedan which (according to one article elsewhere) the dealers "want today" seems influenced by the Chrysler 300 and the Toyota Echo. Chrysler supplies the smaller windows, Echo the raised rear deck line.
 
Good luck, Chevy.
#49 of 70
Re: GM IS KILLING THE MAXX! [kurtamaxxxguy] by meandmymaxx
Oct 18, 2006 (6:07 am)
Reply

Replying to: kurtamaxxxguy (Oct 17, 2006 1:19 pm)

I have a 05 Maxx and absolutely hated the front end, until the 06s came out and now from the front they look like everything else GM has on the road, so I kinda like the way mine looks now. It will be a crying shame when the Maxx is dead. It is a great looking car (except for the front on view) The Maxx blows the sedan right out of the water from a styling point of view. Versatility is 2nd to none with anything that even comes close in MPG. Comfort and convenience is outstanding. I had my Maxx in for the steering gear repair and they gave me an 06 Impala to drive. Nice car a little bigger, nicer dash, but other then that I will take my Maxx anytime.
#50 of 70
Re: GM IS KILLING THE MAXX! [meandmymaxx] by the_big_al
Jun 27, 2008 (3:16 pm)
Reply

Replying to: meandmymaxx (Oct 18, 2006 6:07 am)

I test drove a Maxx and really liked it, but my wife and I decided to go with an 04 Impala instead of the 05 Maxx because the price was the less with the Imp and it was a bigger car that got the same gas mileage. Although I did like what the Maxx had to offer... I just GM had a wagon in the Impala sized segment..... an no I don't want an Uplander. For now the Impala will have to do until we outgtrow it (not likely with only 1 kid right now) or the wheels fall off, so I don't plan on a new family vehicle for several years. Maybe by then the segments will have come full circle and there will be something similar to the Maxx out around 2015?

Messages Page 5 of 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

You are here: [F] Forums / Hatchbacks / Chevrolet Malibu Maxx / Chevrolet Malibu Maxx End of the Line?

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Learn More

2007 Chevrolet Malibu Maxx

2007 Chevrolet Malibu Maxx LT 4dr Hatchback Shown

More Pictures

DoMore

Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics
Advertisement