Article Comments - 2008 Chevrolet Malibu First Look, First Drive, and Full Test

106 messages, Last post on Mar 30, 2008 at 2:11 PM

You are in the Chevrolet Malibu Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Malibu, Sedan

First Look: 2008 Chevrolet Malibu - There's more to the new Mailbu than just the sheet metal and the low-sheen plastic. Even the proportions look significantly better thanks to a wheelbase that's a whopping 6 inches longer than the outgoing Malibu (now the longest in the class). From nose to tail, the Malibu measures 3 inches longer than before, and this visually pushes the wheels to the corners of the car and gives it a stable look. These dimensions should also provide GM with the means to make tangible improvements in ride quality and handling compared to previous efforts. (more)

First Drive: 2008 Chevrolet Malibu - he new Malibu shares the same basic chassis as the well-received Saturn Aura, and this means the expected MacPherson strut front suspension and multilink independent rear. It differs from the Aura only in tuning, really. Chevrolet says it used a new tuning philosophy for the Malibu, and as far as we can tell, this means the car now slots between the mushy Camry and the sporty Accord. (here)

Full Test: 2008 Chevrolet Malibu LTZ - The new Malibu jumps smack in the middle of most consideration lists. It might even sell well to the lost generation in California. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 10 of 11: 1; ...; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; Prev; Next; Last

#90 of 106 Great Job Chevy! by georgecavalier Dec 03, 2007 (4:46 pm)
I'm a GM guy so my opinion might be a little biased. I am planning on purchasing a new car in the spring. My choices are a bunch of GM's, a handful of Fords and one Dodge. I must say that the Malibu is high on my list. Inside and out the car looks awsome. Performance, despite the numbers, should be great especially in the low end where GM cars (that I've driven) seem to shine. I can't complain about the lack of a navigation system since I think its more fun reading a map. I can't wait for a test drive. So far I only have two gripes about the car. 1). I have to agree with one of the posters about the tail light design. It definately looks like a Diamante and should be restyled, possibly like the Cobalt coupe to give it distinction. 2). I don't like how you have to at least buy an LT2 to get a V6. It and the LTZ are slightly out of my price range (unless discounts negate this). They should make the V6 optional even on the LS. The 4cyl sounds competitive but I'd rather the V6. The Impala LS has a standard V6 for around the same price (maybe even less with discounts) and gets almost as good MPG as the 2.4 liter (even better than the 3.6). The Impala is an outdated snooze box (except SS) compared to the Malibu (which I would still buy over it hands down) but it does pack value. Chevy needs to stop intershowroom competition and redesign the Impala into something different, hopefully with RWD Anyway, I apologize for rambling off topic. Replies to this message: csandste (Dec 04, 2007 8:39 pm)
#91 of 106 Drove Malibu LTZ and was highly impressed by critiquedude Dec 04, 2007 (9:47 am)
I drove a Malibu LTZ on Friday, Nov. 30, and was highly impressed. I've never owned a GM product, and am in the market for a good midsize. I drive a '95 Lexus ES300. The external looks and the interior of the LTZ are both very good. Exterior is the best I've seen in a long time, with the 18" wheels and low profile tires. Chrome around the windows is a little too blingy for me, but overall goes with the upscale look. Tiptronic shifters worked well, engine and tranny were both smooth and responsive. The only thing I'll point out is that Edmunds was dead on with being critical of rearseat legroom. I actually went straight for the rear before sitting in front! It's true, there isn't much. The seatback cut-outs don't work well, they're too narrow. And I'm just a 6' 0" guy. Other than that, the car is a beaut. Stereo sounded great as well. Ergonomics and appeal of the dual cockpit design simply spank anything else that I've seen. AC outlet in rear was a nice touch. Ipod jack should have been placed in the console instead of in the center stack, IMHO, but at least it's there. Pricing: I told them I wasn't buying that day no matter what. They believed me, no push, but did tell me they'd sell it to me that day (last day of month) for invoice, which Edmunds said was like $26,666, MSRP of mid 28. I think it only had options of sunroof and the rear power outlet.
#92 of 106 Malibu Rear Lights by albook Dec 04, 2007 (4:03 pm)
I have heard a lot about the rear of this car. I think it looks nice. I kind of like the Accord's lights better, and these are a bit plain, but they are clean and don't look as generic as the Impala (last gen Accord wanna be) or the tacky looking Colbalt (which doesn't even come close to the Civic/MAzda 3). After such a fault in the malibu before it, Chevy can't get a 100% right off the bat. But it looks to be getting a 97. Just think how good it will be after a 2012 year remodel!!!!!
#93 of 106 Re: Great Job Chevy! [georgecavalier] by csandste Dec 04, 2007 (8:39 pm)
Replying to: georgecavalier (Dec 03, 2007 4:46 pm) I may have coined the Diamante=Malibu analogy, thought c-pillar and rear end looked like one. That's before I actually saw the Malibu. To me, it's much better looking in person than the original pictures.
#94 of 106 Camry and Accord by albook Dec 07, 2007 (4:32 pm)
If you truly believe sales numbers define the best in any given case then what's the point in having the capacity for free thought. What!? Accord sporty? Did they not drive the last gen model? And the Accord is slower than the Camry, which has styling directly geared toward sporty. I do like the Accord so much better than the Camry.
#95 of 106 vs camry & accord by caaz Dec 12, 2007 (3:22 pm)
I've been buying japanese and German since the 70's. My only 2 questions is this. Will the mailbu still be solid in 10 to 15 years when and if it has 180,000 plus miles on it, like anybodys been able to do with a cam-cord. And, will it get anywhere near the fuel economy that the cam-cords have always gotten? If so, i would love to support the u.s. automakers and buy. Replies to this message: csandste (Dec 12, 2007 5:21 pm)
#96 of 106 Re: vs camry & accord [caaz] by csandste Dec 12, 2007 (5:21 pm)
Replying to: caaz (Dec 12, 2007 3:22 pm) I've had good fuel economy with the old 3.5 ohv engine in the 'Bu, over 30 highway. I had the same engine in a rental HHR this summer and it averaged high 20's in mixed driving, over 30 on the highway. I'd expect the new 'Bu to do just as well since aerodynamics are better.
#97 of 106 Performance Junkie - Anyone Else? by ejdavid Dec 24, 2007 (6:32 am)
Guys and Gals, The only thing I want to do right now is stiffen up all the steering bushings. First and formost are the top front struts, and next would be steering rack bushings, if there are any? Anyone have experience smartening up this numb steering? It was easy to do with little more then harder bushing in my Mark 7. BACKROUND I recently rolled my sport package equiped 2007 2.8 CTS when the spare tire failed. I decided the heck with fancy cars with big first year depreciations. The settlement was enough to buy a Like New 2005 Malibu with $10k left to further lavish on my restored 1991 supercharded Lincoln Mark 7. SURPRISE The Malibu is a much more powerful and capable car then I expected. First, the pushrod 3.5 is Way better then the dual overhead cam continuous variable valve timing aluminum everything "High Content" GM unit. Where the caddy hit 70 mph, the Malibu does 75. Further, the Malibu 4 spd tranny is WAY more responsive then the Caddy 5 speed. And don't even mention fuel economy! Hot rodding around the mountains here in N. Georgia I never get less then 25 mpg with the Malibu, v 18 with the Caddy. However, the Malibu steering sucks. The HANDLING is way above most Front Drivers - running at the limit it pushes wide but does not unsettle the chasis or chunk the granny 205 tires. It is something easily upgraded, but I can live with the current set up. It is much harder to live with the numb steering. Anyone worked on this issue? PS: I have heard rumors the new Malibu now gets the High Content 3.6 with the same tranny but one more gear. I hope things have improved in the last year. First, I did not get the 3.6 Caddy because if felt and sounded like it should be powering a large wood chipper rather then a Cadillac. The 2.8 was refined but, as I found out, real wimpy. Fuel economy? Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to spin all those cams, chains, 12 extra valves? I AM on the list to drive the new Malibu, but am not holding my breath. In the mean time, there is not a naturally aspirated BMW six cylindar auto ever made that will outrun this Mallibu. With stiff and sticky 215 tires up front and 205 in the back, they will not get away from me in the corners either!
#98 of 106 Malibu tops Accord- again by albook Dec 30, 2007 (3:48 pm)
In feb issue of Mototrend, Malibu is tested against Camry, Accord, and Altima. It loses only to the Camry. This proves how far GM has come. Malibu beats out brand new Accord- again- which beat out Camry in another test, so the three must be interchangeble. Replies to this message: tir (Jan 01, 2008 5:22 pm) albook (Jan 01, 2008 9:06 pm)
#99 of 106 Re: Malibu tops Accord- again [albook] by tir Jan 01, 2008 (5:22 pm)
Replying to: albook (Dec 30, 2007 3:48 pm) what you have is 3 very competative designs we just had our choices expanded by the fact that GM has decided to compete in the sedan market, judging from some of the comments some folks are having a hard time adjusting to that. Replies to this message: albook (Jan 01, 2008 9:06 pm)