Last post on Feb 14, 2013 at 7:24 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
#31822 of 32000 Re: Lower price [anythngbutgm]
Feb 11, 2013 (8:14 am)
You're a bit behind the times, anything. This was posted on here a week ago. Even with that back seat, CR still preferred the LT model by a point to the new Fusion SE and several other much-talked-about models from other makers on this forum.
#31823 of 32000 Re: Lower price [uplanderguy]
Feb 11, 2013 (8:22 am)
To be fair, CR's Malibu was the priciest car in that class, a 1LT model over $26 grand.
The Kia they tested was in the high $21s, for reference.
Price cut sounds like a good idea. Though I think it also simply had more equipment (thus helping its score).
#31824 of 32000 Re: Lower price [uplanderguy]
Feb 11, 2013 (8:28 am)
A week ago? Article is dated Feb. 8th. that was Friday...
So, do you think it will help? According to cars.com the base price of the Malibu compared to cars that sell in similar amounts, like the Sonata and Optima is higher, while being down on Standard hp, city fuel mileage, while being a few ticks better on the highway. The price drop might make it a bit more of a bargain than the other 2 competitors.
#31825 of 32000 Re: Lower price [anythngbutgm]
Feb 11, 2013 (8:43 am)
OK, change that to "last week". I was wrong. I wish more folks on here could say that.
My gut feeling is that the Malibu was always discounted more at the dealership level than the others. But that's merely a hunch based on what I've experienced, and heard over the years.
The price cut is a good thing for the buyer, and as a buyer instead of a pretend auto executive, I think it's a good thing.
There is only one model below a Malibu LT, and that's an LS, which isn't fleet-exclusive like the Captiva and Caprice PPV, but I bet more go there than into retail hands. Merely a guess. I don't know much 'equipment' an LT would have. As has always been the case with GM, with a few exceptions, I think nobody pays sticker price. I haven't paid sticker price once in 32 years.
Funny, the Fusion Titanium (isn't that the uppermost model?) scored only 76, seven points below a Malibu LT. Now, you won't even see me defending the Malibu Eco, which scored a couple points below the Titanium. (They thought the Sonata Hybrid sucked too.)
#31826 of 32000 Re: Lower price [uplanderguy]
Feb 11, 2013 (9:19 am)
They didn't get good mileage from Ford's turbos.
The Ford hybrid scored very high, though. And price isn't bad - closer to the Malibu's MSRP than the Optima they tested.
I still say let 'em work out the bugs, and maybe wait for a Made in the USA Fusion, rather than getting a Mexican built one now.
#31827 of 32000 Panoramic Moonroofs - which GM models have one?
Feb 11, 2013 (9:41 am)
Expanding my car search, since I have yet to find the right car....
Which GM cars have a panoramic moonroof? Prefer something fuel efficient, and under $35k. For mostly city use.
On paper the C-Max was near perfect but I took the family to the auto show and all 3 of them said no. That back seat is a travesty.
#31828 of 32000 Re: Lower price [ateixeira]
Feb 11, 2013 (9:41 am)
Your post makes me wonder--again about CR's metholodogy at times--how the engine choice can make an eleven-point swing, out of 100, in the overall score of a car. I mean, it's still a Fusion.
#31829 of 32000 Re: Lower price [uplanderguy]
Feb 11, 2013 (9:42 am)
2.0T was coarse and mileage dropped.
They hate MyFord touch so that may have dragged the score down if the 1.6T model didn't have it.
Also, keep in mind this is the kind of magazine that determines what car you should recommend to your Aunt Edna - big tires = harsh ride and those get dinged, too.
#31830 of 32000 Re: Lower price [ateixeira]
Feb 11, 2013 (9:47 am)
They're commenting on styling now, you know.
#31831 of 32000 Re: Lower price [uplanderguy]
Feb 11, 2013 (10:17 am)
Hey, they liked the updated Traverse:
The only nit pick was fuel economy, but if you're familiar with their reviews, that's about as good as they get.