Topic: First Drive: 2016 Chevrolet Malibu

[theonlydt]

This whole thing just reads like a commercial, rather than a test drive.

GM has done little to convince me that this car will be anything other than complete pump. I deliberately downgrade from a Malibu to a Cruze when I'm renting if that's what I'm offered. The Cruze is quieter, more comfortable and drives better. Have GM really turned that all around with this one?

[Noto]

This whole thing just reads like a commercial, rather than a test drive.

GM has done little to convince me that this car will be anything other than complete pump. I deliberately downgrade from a Malibu to a Cruze when I'm renting if that's what I'm offered. The Cruze is quieter, more comfortable and drives better. Have GM really turned that all around with this one?

So you go from an older model to a newer one and you expect the older one to be quieter and drive better?

By your own logic, the upgrades to the Malibu will likely match those that the Cruze platform received and may very well surprise you.

[theonlydt]

This whole thing just reads like a commercial, rather than a test drive.

GM has done little to convince me that this car will be anything other than complete pump. I deliberately downgrade from a Malibu to a Cruze when I'm renting if that's what I'm offered. The Cruze is quieter, more comfortable and drives better. Have GM really turned that all around with this one?

So you go from an older model to a newer one and you expect the older one to be quieter and drive better?

By your own logic, the upgrades to the Malibu will likely match those that the Cruze platform received and may very well surprise you.

If I had the choice between a 2013 Malibu and a 2013 Cruze I would take the Cruze, despite being a class lower. Given that the 2013 was a brand new 8th gen (new for 2013MY) for the Malibu and for the Cruze was a very light facelift of a car that had been introduced in 2009 I would fully have expected the Malibu to be better. It was not.

I'll try this one - I end up trying most cars sometime through their run, but I'm allowed to to be skeptical of what GM is capable of.

[ArticSteve]

No matter how great GM makes the "Malibu" it's .... DOA.  They have consistently degraded the name plate as all previous Maliboos for decades have been sh*t boxes with next to zero residuals.

[Neromanceres]

where can I buy this FLEET RENTAL?

You won't be able too. Not for a couple of years at least.

GM is going to continue to produce the old Malibu and call it the "Malibu Limited" and these will be specific for fleet sales.  The new Malibu will be retail only for a couple of years at least.

[Noto]

I'll try this one - I end up trying most cars sometime through their run, but I'm allowed to to be skeptical of what GM is capable of.

Allowed?  Sure.

...and I applaud you for having an open mind in "trying" the new one.  That said, don't later close it by being skeptical of GM's capability when you suggest that the Cruze is acceptable (at least more-so).

Anyone on here that follows my post (i.e. reads anything since I post everywhere...) would tell you that I am NOT GM-slappie, and to the contrary, a hater-boi.

...but I'm at least open to GM's newer products.

[newf1946]

Not convinced of the durability of the turbos. I tend to keep a car for close to 300,000km and a 6 cyclinder or strong 4 cyl would probably be more durable. Also after trying 3 different cars with 2 L turbo have found that especially in the city their mileage is well below what I expected.

[Noto]

Not convinced of the durability of the turbos. I tend to keep a car for close to 300,000km and a 6 cyclinder or strong 4 cyl would probably be more durable. Also after trying 3 different cars with 2 L turbo have found that especially in the city their mileage is well below what I expected.

[PJ]

Not convinced of the durability of the turbos. I tend to keep a car for close to 300,000km and a 6 cyclinder or strong 4 cyl would probably be more durable. Also after trying 3 different cars with 2 L turbo have found that especially in the city their mileage is well below what I expected.

Yep that's what you hear a lot.  However there's no reason to believe that a small highly boosted engine will have the same durability as a larger non boosted engine.  The more stressed a part is the greater the wear and the chance of failure. 

Only time will tell but I'm not a fan of over boosted undersized engines in cars for the purpose of fuel economy.  Especially since it rarely achieves the claimed mileage. 

[dirtyjeffer]

you should see what Kia/Hyundai do their engines at the test facility in Ann Arbor...i would imagine many other brands torture their engines just as much...it's pretty impressive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNPB3RtHN2M

[mixmanmash]

you should see what Kia/Hyundai do their engines at the test facility in Ann Arbor...i would imagine many other brands torture their engines just as much...it's pretty impressive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNPB3RtHN2M

This.

This is not the 80s turbo engines people.  Heck, I've seen gasoline turbo engines from the 90s go 400k miles (640k kms), including the turbos with proper maintenance.  Keep them stock and don't mod this heck out of them without proper tuning and it will be fine.

The internals are usually beefed up on turbo engines and it also boils down to proper engine management.  Do a poor job on engine tuning and it won't matter how tough you make the internals.

[rrocket]

^^Then how come BMW can't get it right?   

[mixmanmash]

^^Then how come BMW can't get it right?   

Because ze Germans over complicate things.  Although, I only know of turbo issues on the N54 and not on N55 (aside from on forum member here).  The N54 also had a host of other issues not related to the turbo aspect, but more related to DI (injector and HPFP failures, along with carbon buildup issues).

[saurus]

I have been using a 2015 Malibu LT as a courtesy car the last few weeks and tbh I have been very impressed with it.   The ride and build quality are better than my 50k daily driver - a VW Touareg.  I do wonder if the transmission will be as smooth and the ride will be as good once the miles pile on - every older GM I have been in or driven has been awful, but the initial experience has been positive.

if this 2016 version is even better it would be impressive, the engine is def the weakest point in the 2015.

[dirtyjeffer]

you should see what Kia/Hyundai do their engines at the test facility in Ann Arbor...i would imagine many other brands torture their engines just as much...it's pretty impressive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNPB3RtHN2M

You didn't hear?  Those videos are PR spin.  Torture testing is done by early buyers.  Or is that tortured testers?  That's how my Ecoboost experience went.  Great engine but too bad about that insoluble shudder.

i can't attest to how Ford tests their engines...considering Kia (and Hyundai) opened their test center in Ford/GM/Chrysler's back yard though, i'd assume they have comparable measures...perhaps not.

the Kia/Hyundai 2.0T engines have been out for several years now though, and i haven't really read anything about them being prone to issues/failures.

[ArticSteve]

where can I buy this FLEET RENTAL?

You won't be able too. Not for a couple of years at least.

GM is going to continue to produce the old Malibu and call it the "Malibu Limited" and these will be specific for fleet sales.  The new Malibu will be retail only for a couple of years at least.

Currently GM is selling the 2016 "Limited" retail, but I take it from your info that will end when the newer version arrives.  The real interesting Malibu will be the Hybrid.  Not a whole lot of detail on that yet except it's based on what they learned on the Volt .... apparently.  Could be great or could be sh*t.  You never know with GM.