Topic: 2008 Malibu LTZ 2.4/6speed AT - better FE than 09 Camry and 08 Accord

[KRS]

 
 
   
  When GM Canada officially announces the LTZ will have the 2.4l, 6 spd combo I will believe it. Certainly nothing on their website would indicate that at this time. If the US arm offers the LTZ with a 2.4l that doesn't necessarily mean that the same car will be offered here. (assuming that this is US data, based on the mileage numbers. certainly nothing you've left me sure of)

 If these are not American Mileage numbers then I foresee General Motors not being able to move these things when the older combination got 43 MPG Highway as noted above
   

2) I should have said upfront the numbers posted were US mpg. You do realize there is a difference between US and Canadian gallons, right? <-- wow, this is the second person that didn't know this, are there others?

   As you can probably guess if you look at the now Bolded part of my quote where I made at least two references to these possibly being US numbers, I am fully aware of the Smaller US gallon. I was not sure that you where posting American mileage figures on a Canadian based website with a majority Canadian membership since you did nothing to clarify the information.

  While I'm happy for you that you have a secret source you are unwilling to share I consider all uncredited information as useless.

 

[ArticSteve]

$33825 would be correct. About $1000 more than a Camry SE with leather and moonroof.

My bad, failed to delete the V6.  

Regardless, I can tell you the vast majority of buyers that seek these class of vehicles in 4 banger mode aren't going any where near $33,800 territory.  Camry LE touring; VSC/Tracs, moon roof, alloys, power d seat, compass .... lists for $28.300.  Accord same thing and you get bullet proof 4 cylinder/5 speeds.

The Mailbu in the V6/6 speed seemed to get all the rave reviews and by and large might have been a good car if:

1.  they had made enough of them at launch
2.  gas prices weren't heading over $4.00 a gallon in the US where for the first time in American history the 4 banger will rule

As for the Malibu 4 banger/4 speed; just another lame offering nowhere near the level of the Japanese.  It's going the same way as the Impala and that Aura thingie.

Can't make an exceptional 4 cylinder and transmission overnight and GM is no exception.  

[drederick]

 
 
   
  When GM Canada officially announces the LTZ will have the 2.4l, 6 spd combo I will believe it. Certainly nothing on their website would indicate that at this time. If the US arm offers the LTZ with a 2.4l that doesn't necessarily mean that the same car will be offered here. (assuming that this is US data, based on the mileage numbers. certainly nothing you've left me sure of)

 If these are not American Mileage numbers then I foresee General Motors not being able to move these things when the older combination got 43 MPG Highway as noted above
   

2) I should have said upfront the numbers posted were US mpg. You do realize there is a difference between US and Canadian gallons, right? <-- wow, this is the second person that didn't know this, are there others?

   As you can probably guess if you look at the now Bolded part of my quote where I made at least two references to these possibly being US numbers, I am fully aware of the Smaller US gallon. I was not sure that you where posting American mileage figures on a Canadian based website with a majority Canadian membership since you did nothing to clarify the information.

  While I'm happy for you that you have a secret source you are unwilling to share I consider all uncredited information as useless.

 

uh huh KRS..... to be perfectly fair I can't even understand how anyone who is on a car site forum (especially a Canadian one) and sees these numbers for well known fuel efficient cars:

car                  trans        engine      city     hwy    combined
08 Malibu LTZ    6spdauto    2.4          22       32        27

09 Camry          5spdauto    2.4          21       31        26
08 accord         5spdauto    2.4          21       31        26

cannot make the leap and realize that they are US MPG. These aren't full size trucks, right?

It seems that most people on this site understand this, and so long as it is US to US numbers being compared or CDN to CDN, taken right from the Manufacturers own websites, what does it really matter, right?

PS - the secret source is GM itself..... ain't it great!

[drederick]

$33825 would be correct. About $1000 more than a Camry SE with leather and moonroof.

My bad, failed to delete the V6.  

Regardless, I can tell you the vast majority of buyers that seek these class of vehicles in 4 banger mode aren't going any where near $33,800 territory.  Camry LE touring; VSC/Tracs, moon roof, alloys, power d seat, compass .... lists for $28.300.  Accord same thing and you get bullet proof 4 cylinder/5 speeds.

The Mailbu in the V6/6 speed seemed to get all the rave reviews and by and large might have been a good car if:

1.  they had made enough of them at launch
2.  gas prices weren't heading over $4.00 a gallon in the US where for the first time in American history the 4 banger will rule

As for the Malibu 4 banger/4 speed; just another lame offering nowhere near the level of the Japanese.  It's going the same way as the Impala and that Aura thingie.

Can't make an exceptional 4 cylinder and transmission overnight and GM is no exception.  

my bad - shouldn't that be your theme song?

You do understand that the 08 Malibu LTZ 4cylinder/6speed auto combo HAS better FE than the 09 Camry 4cylinder/5speed auto, right?

and that for the 09 model year, the Malibu, G6 and Aura will get this powertrain at various pricing levels, right?

so in 09, all GM mid size cars will have better Fuel economy than the Camry..... right?

Find something - anything - that says the 2.4/6speed auto from GM is not bullet proof. Can't can ya? didn't think so.

Another lame offering no where near the Japanese? Look this:

car                  trans        engine  hp    torque     city     hwy    combined
08 Malibu LTZ    6spdauto    2.4     169     160       22       32        27

09 Camry          5spdauto    2.4      158    161       21       31        26
08 accord         5spdauto    2.4      177    161       21       31        26

hmmm camry down on hp and worse fuel economy than the GM powertrain......

Year    Make      Engine size   hp   torque   curb weight  transmission    city   hwy    avg combined
2008    cobalt      2.2           148   152        2681           5speed m      25     36           30.5

2009   corolla        1.8          132   128        2822           5speed m      27     35          31

hmmm corolla down on hp and torque ALOT and barely gets better FE - in fact don't you round numbers that end in .5 up?......

so how again are these GM powertrains not competetive? or sorry, put another way, how are the Toyota powertrains competetive?

[rrocket]

Are you eyes painted on?  He specifically said the 2.4 with the 4 speed was lame.  He said nothing of the 2.4 with the 6 speed that I could see....

[dorin]

uh huh KRS..... to be perfectly fair I can't even understand how anyone who is on a car site forum (especially a Canadian one) and sees these numbers for well known fuel efficient cars:

car                  trans        engine      city     hwy    combined
08 Malibu LTZ    6spdauto    2.4          22       32        27

09 Camry          5spdauto    2.4          21       31        26
08 accord         5spdauto    2.4          21       31        26

cannot make the leap and realize that they are US MPG. These aren't full size trucks, right?

It seems that most people on this site understand this, and so long as it is US to US numbers being compared or CDN to CDN, taken right from the Manufacturers own websites, what does it really matter, right?

For some of us the problem is the silly habit of using MPG on a Canadian site that annoying and meaningless to begin with.  I buy gas in LITRES and measure distances in KILOMETRES.  Therefore L/100km means something to me as a Canadian.  MPG is meaningless regardless of which stupid gallon you use.

[ArticSteve]

Are you eyes painted on?  He specifically said the 2.4 with the 4 speed was lame.  He said nothing of the 2.4 with the 6 speed that I could see....

Exactly.  What I'm saying is the price point for the 6 speed auto mated to the GM 2.4 is not competitive whatsoever so you will see few of those.  The bulk of Malibu sales vis-a-vis the surging gasoline prices will be the 2.4 and the 4 speed.  Ridiculous is what it is; year 2008 and GM is still fishing around the GM/Cobalt parts bin.  A little late to the game me thinks. 

[mar1990]

All the more reason why we should stick to good unambiguous L/100km

I never really liked that unit of measure.  I don't understand why they couldn't keep it at km/L.  I want to know how many litres it will take to  get to my destination.  The Metric system was supposed to simplify all that.

I do to. Why not just 80 KPG. Just like you say or see 50 MPG.

KPG?  Thats even worse.  Mixing your measurements. One of the dealers in town has some Aveo's in the front of the lot with 77KMPG on bold yellow lettering.  What is wrong with stating 48mpg? Better yet, put some large vehicle out there with a really big gas tank and say 800km per tankful.

[drederick]

For some of us the problem is the silly habit of using MPG on a Canadian site that annoying and meaningless to begin with.  I buy gas in LITRES and measure distances in KILOMETRES.  Therefore L/100km means something to me as a Canadian.  MPG is meaningless regardless of which stupid gallon you use.

Dorin the point is that so long as you keep the measurments all the same, right, they can be used for comparison purposes.

In this example the Malibu has superior FE in US MPG.

Do you think that it won't also hold an advantage in L/100kms?

I think that is pretty simple to get, don't you?

The Malibu FE was released in US MPG. As such the fairest way to compare this with its competitors is in US MPG - which was done right off the bat.

[dorin]

For some of us the problem is the silly habit of using MPG on a Canadian site that annoying and meaningless to begin with.  I buy gas in LITRES and measure distances in KILOMETRES.  Therefore L/100km means something to me as a Canadian.  MPG is meaningless regardless of which stupid gallon you use.

Dorin the point is that so long as you keep the measurments all the same, right, they can be used for comparison purposes.

In this example the Malibu has superior FE in US MPG.

Do you think that it won't also hold an advantage in L/100kms?

I think that is pretty simple to get, don't you?

The Malibu FE was released in US MPG. As such the fairest way to compare this with its competitors is in US MPG - which was done right off the bat.

The difference is in being able to see that car A's fuel consumption is different from car B's fuel consumption (which is straightforward in MPG as well) vs. being able to see how much that difference amounts to (which to those of us who grew up with the Metric system is meaningful in L/100km but is meaningless in MPG).  So to a metric audience (which as Canadians we all are) L/100km conveys more information than MPG.  Add in the confusion over which gallons are being used and MPG is an even less meaningful set of units.

[drederick]

Are you eyes painted on?  He specifically said the 2.4 with the 4 speed was lame.  He said nothing of the 2.4 with the 6 speed that I could see....

Exactly.  What I'm saying is the price point for the 6 speed auto mated to the GM 2.4 is not competitive whatsoever so you will see few of those.  The bulk of Malibu sales vis-a-vis the surging gasoline prices will be the 2.4 and the 4 speed.  Ridiculous is what it is; year 2008 and GM is still fishing around the GM/Cobalt parts bin.  A little late to the game me thinks. 

Isn't this whole thread about the 2.4/6speed auto combination? and its superior FE than the Camry 2.4/5speed auto and Accord, right?

GM chose to launch the powertrain combo in a top of the line model Malibu for the last part of the 08 model year.

09 will see it in more models and price points - in more GM vehicles - all getting superior fuel economy, right?

[drederick]

For some of us the problem is the silly habit of using MPG on a Canadian site that annoying and meaningless to begin with.  I buy gas in LITRES and measure distances in KILOMETRES.  Therefore L/100km means something to me as a Canadian.  MPG is meaningless regardless of which stupid gallon you use.

Dorin the point is that so long as you keep the measurments all the same, right, they can be used for comparison purposes.

In this example the Malibu has superior FE in US MPG.

Do you think that it won't also hold an advantage in L/100kms?

I think that is pretty simple to get, don't you?

The Malibu FE was released in US MPG. As such the fairest way to compare this with its competitors is in US MPG - which was done right off the bat.

The difference is in being able to see that car A's fuel consumption is different from car B's fuel consumption (which is straightforward in MPG as well) vs. being able to see how much that difference amounts to (which to those of us who grew up with the Metric system is meaningful in L/100km but is meaningless in MPG).  So to a metric audience (which as Canadians we all are) L/100km conveys more information than MPG.  Add in the confusion over which gallons are being used and MPG is an even less meaningful set of units.

sure Dorin.

[ArticSteve]

GM chose to launch the powertrain combo in a top of the line model Malibu for the last part of the 08 model year.

09 will see it in more models and price points - in more GM vehicles - all getting superior fuel economy, right?

No evidence of that based on anything GM has done lately.  The Volt, when announced, was about a year or two away from production.    It's not even on the GM horizon many years later.  GM makes so many predictions all which turn out badly or not at all.

What you're going to find is that 6 speed, originally developed for the V6, will not work well in the 4 banger in ACTUAL operation.  As for the mileage, those ratings are so easily manipulated they're pointless for exact measurements and that applies to all makers.

[drederick]

GM chose to launch the powertrain combo in a top of the line model Malibu for the last part of the 08 model year.

09 will see it in more models and price points - in more GM vehicles - all getting superior fuel economy, right?

No evidence of that based on anything GM has done lately.  The Volt, when announced, was about a year or two away from production.    It's not even on the GM horizon many years later.  GM makes so many predictions all which turn out badly or not at all.

What you're going to find is that 6 speed, originally developed for the V6, will not work well in the 4 banger in ACTUAL operation.  As for the mileage, those ratings are so easily manipulated they're pointless for exact measurements and that applies to all makers.

Given that no one has driven the 2.4/6speed auto combo how can you be so sure it won't be great? I mean it allready gets better fuel economy than the Camry 2.4/5speed auto while making more horespower.

[ArticSteve]

Given that no one has driven the 2.4/6speed auto combo how can you be so sure it won't be great?

Based on everything else they do.  Engineering excellence are not words associated with GM products.

What they did is launch their last horah into the biggest passenger car segment without a transmission for their 4 banger thinking that all orders would be for the V6.  It's insane.  Develop the product fully THEN introduce it. 

Don't panic and slap a 6 speed designed for a V6 into a 4 cylinder because ppl caught on that the 4 speed sucked.

It's all too late now.  GM has lost their window of opportunity on the Malibu to be a segment buster and all that will happen is that they will steal existing Impala and G6 customers.  BTW, Toyota just blew past GM on worldwide sales. 

[Wolfe]

GM chose to launch the powertrain combo in a top of the line model Malibu for the last part of the 08 model year.

09 will see it in more models and price points - in more GM vehicles - all getting superior fuel economy, right?

No evidence of that based on anything GM has done lately.  The Volt, when announced, was about a year or two away from production.    It's not even on the GM horizon many years later.  GM makes so many predictions all which turn out badly or not at all.

What you're going to find is that 6 speed, originally developed for the V6, will not work well in the 4 banger in ACTUAL operation.  As for the mileage, those ratings are so easily manipulated they're pointless for exact measurements and that applies to all makers.

Given that no one has driven the 2.4/6speed auto combo how can you be so sure it won't be great?

Given that no one has driven the 2.4/6speed auto combo how can you be so sure it will be great?

[EV Dan]

It will be great all right, but the higher gear was calculated (likely) with a V6 torque in mind. Fear not tho, it will come useful when going in the general GM's direction - downhill 

[mrthompson]

[UmroAyyar]

  

 

[Seafoam]

Isn't this  a rehashed thread from a couple of months back when the malibu first debuted. sounds very familiar.  
As for mileage numbers since it is a Canadian Forum they should be in metric format or miles per gallon at the imperial measure.
The other numbers are pointless even if you can compare them.