Sign In Join 



Chevrolet Malibu vs. Toyota Camry vs. Honda Accord

636 messages,  Last post on Nov 25, 2009 at 8:46 AM

You are in the Toyota Camry Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Toyota Camry, Chevrolet Malibu, Honda Accord, Car Comparisons, Sedan


Messages Page 57 of 64
1
...
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
...
64
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#561 of 636
Re: bvdj84 [bvdj84] by dmathews3
Jul 03, 2009 (7:22 am)
Reply

Replying to: bvdj84 (Jul 03, 2009 6:04 am)

The Equinox is NOT a SUV which has a frame. This is a crossover which is built on a car unibody and can come with either FWD or AWD in which a SUV comes with 4 Wheel drive and gets a whole lot worst gas mileage. This is a replacement for the Trailblazer SUV which was discontinued last fall.
#562 of 636
Re: bvdj84 [bvdj84] by butch100
Jul 03, 2009 (9:22 am)
Reply

Replying to: bvdj84 (Jul 03, 2009 6:04 am)

GM can't build a good 4?, I guess you've never heard of the Cobolt SS, it's 260HP 4 blows any Honda 4 completely out of the water. Also faster than the Accord V6 as well..
#563 of 636
Re: bvdj84 [butch100] by dmathews3
Jul 03, 2009 (9:46 am)
Reply

Replying to: butch100 (Jul 03, 2009 9:22 am)

Right, and for an extra $500 GM has a stage 1 kit that bumps that up another 30 HP for a total of 290hp and all under warranty.
#564 of 636
Re: bvdj84 [butch100] by thegraduate
Jul 03, 2009 (1:23 pm)
Reply

Replying to: butch100 (Jul 03, 2009 9:22 am)

I can turbocharge my Snapper and give it more horses but it doesn't make it any more than a really fast lawn-mower engine.
 
Personally, I'm not even close to being in the market for one of these cars, but do love the smoothness of the Honda 2.4L. Engine power nonwithstanding, its a fantastic engine, at least it is in the 2003-2007 Accord, which I happen to drive. Delivering 36+mpg on every trip at 75mph, and takes an 8 second run to 60 MPH.
 
I haven't driven a current GM 2.4L so I can't testify to how smooth or not it may be, but I did want to mention that horsepower isn't the only way you classify a "good 4."
#565 of 636
Re: bvdj84 [butch100] by bvdj84
Jul 04, 2009 (7:30 am)
Reply

Replying to: butch100 (Jul 03, 2009 9:22 am)

Honestly, I would not feel safe in a cobalt. It would simply crumble in an accident.
People looking for an Accord, are less likely to be looking at a Cobalt. Though, you may have more power in the Cobalt, the Accord and Cobalt are 2 different cars all together. Differences are greatly noted.
 
I have to agree, the 06 Accord 4cyl is a great engine, no race car, but had confidence, quality, power. You have to understand I came from this engine, to the GM 4cyl, and it is simply NIGHT and DAY difference. My 06 Accord would blow the my 4cyl GM engine away. Got better mileage too. But, then again people getting an Accord are not out looking to race a Cobalt either. I would never dream of racing my 06 Accord 4cyl. I truly babied that car. Atleast, if I did push my Accord to feel it pull a bit on the interstate, it didn't feel, sound like it was straining as the GM car does.
#566 of 636
Re: bvdj84 [bvdj84] by butch100
Jul 04, 2009 (8:10 am)
Reply

Replying to: bvdj84 (Jul 04, 2009 7:30 am)

All cars are designed with "crumple zones" that will help dissipate energy in a crash. It's tough to compare Cobolt/Accord as they are totally different classes of car. Cobolt is an A to B basic transpo. where the accord is gotten to damm near the size of an Impala. It's a much nicer car than the Cobolt but for a lot more $$$ too..
#567 of 636
Re: bvdj84 [butch100] by thegraduate
Jul 04, 2009 (8:28 am)
Reply

Replying to: butch100 (Jul 04, 2009 8:10 am)

The Cobalt gets a 4-star rating for the driver from the NTHSA, 3-stars on the side impact, with Side Airbags.
 
How about we talk about the Malibu instead of the Cobalt?
#568 of 636
Re: 4-bangers [vanman1] by tlong
Jul 04, 2009 (9:11 am)
Reply

Replying to: vanman1 (Jun 23, 2009 6:37 pm)

No fun if it has no power. They are fine for compacts but in a mid-size loaded up, forget it!
 
Disagree. I have a 2007 Mazda 5 (a micro-minivan, same platform as a Mazda 3). I also have a 2005 Acura TL, which is a 6 cyl. Guess what - the Mazda is more FUN to drive, as it is agile and has very tight steering. The Acura is a powerful highway cruiser and accelerates great (if you like that automatic lag when you punch it). But the Mazda is FUN.
#569 of 636
Re: bvdj84 [dmathews3] by elroy5
Jul 04, 2009 (9:50 am)
Reply

Replying to: dmathews3 (Jul 03, 2009 9:46 am)

If all you want from an engine is horsepower, you can get that at a low price. If you want refinement, power, smoothness, reliability, and efficiency, you will have to look a lot harder, and probably pay a little more. Fun is defined differently also. Some see light weight, tight steering, firm suspension, and a responsive gearbox as the attributes they require for "Fun". Some are even more demanding, and want power to go along with all the rest. The 7th gen Accord V6 is a great package that has all these qualities. I know past Malibu models have not been refined, agile, or very powerful. I find it hard to believe GM has suddenly learned how to get all these things right with one model. Maybe they have, but I seriously doubt it. Previous Malibus were good, when new. They aged quickly however, and the lack of refinement, and quality showed up in short order.
#570 of 636
Re: bvdj84 [elroy5] by bvdj84
Jul 04, 2009 (11:03 am)
Reply

Replying to: elroy5 (Jul 04, 2009 9:50 am)

Nice response! I agree! Exactly, that puts the fact on whether or not the New Malibu's guts are any different than the previous Malibu model? Is it magically better? Only time will tell. You can put on a pretty face, but when the soul is lacking, well it'll surely uncover itself later on.
 
There are many new models arriving, look appealing. But, all lead to that very same question. I am not convinced the whole package is there yet.
 
 I would love to compare these cars in say 5 years from now, see all their records, how their holding up. I would actually say, during the 5yrs, push a them a bit.
It would be an interesting look on how they stand up to time.
 
That would be a test for GM, to design a car that doesn't have silly parts going bad early in the game. I have already had a new catalytic converter replaced at 15,000miles, on my 08 GM. Oh, ya, and a window switch because I could not roll my windows down... Twice! I have had about 3 rentals, kept one for a week, others for 2 days or so.

Messages Page 57 of 64
1
...
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
...
64
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

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
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics
Advertisement