03 Chevy Malibu known issues? other models issues

[Hokiefyd]

OP, can you post your budget for this vehicle? It seems that some of us are putting suggestions out there just for you to say, "no, I can't afford that one". Tell us what you CAN afford and then we can make some better recommendations. Also, tell us what you're driving now, if you'll trade that in (for cash), or if you are simply purchasing an additional vehicle.

Thanks.

 

[RegDunlop]

Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Originally Posted By: RegDunlop
Okay Bill thanks for all the great advice

What cars get close to 40 MPG, and can fit in the kids / wife?

NOT Toyota/Honda I already know about those....If the money was there it would be what I buy, no thought process involved, no need for me to start this thread.

About 15k - 18 k per year


15 to 18k per year then save up the $$ and get what will work. My main point is spending (not saving) on a 25-30 mpg vehicle will cost you in the end QUITE a bit more in fuel. If buying another vehicle the main reason is to save $$ then buy something that will do that even if it costs more.

The Hyundai offerings do knock off close to 40 mpg and resale is lower than the Toyota/Hondas. Since we can not have simple diesel engines

most of the high MPG vehicles are not going to carry everything plus people. I've gone for long trips with 5 in my Corolla and we made it just fine going 80mph and getting well over 40mpg. (and I'm over 6ft 5inches / 300lb alone)

Drive what you have and save up for something that will meet the mission. Lucky for you 15-18k is not a lot of miles (though still cost a lot in fuel no matter what we drive) so savings is not as great compared to high miles driven.

Take care, bill




Bill thanks

What I have is not going to cut it. Because of other $$$ obligations saving up a few Gs more will not be an option right now. I will be making a final payment on my Honda Odyssey very soon and do not want another car loan for the next 2 to 3 years. And I know over the long run I'll save more in gas, but the funds just arent there for the Honda civic/accord. I do not like Toyotas for reasons I dont want to get into.

I guess I'll start looking into some Hyundais. Thanks for the help.

 

[brianl703]

Originally Posted By: eljefino
IIRC they sold a malibu "classic" with the ecotec that they didn't really advertise.


It was sold for fleet use. My mom has one (a 2004 Chevy Classic--looks like a 2003 Malibu). 55K on it, runs well, and it was an ex-rental. She just had to replace the OE tires this month, and mainly because the sidewalls were cracking due to the tires being 7 years old. It's also time to change the coolant again.

 

[RegDunlop]

I am looking to keep it under 5k. I have seen many Chevy Malibus/Impalas on CL for under 5k. Which is why used Honda not an option ( unless I go to under 1995 vintage) .

I wasnt sure what other models may work. I know people have an aversion to usedd American cars, whicjh is why I'm hoping to find a suggestion in that category without any major issues or issues that are known but fixable ( LIM for example)


I have a new car (hONDA oDYSSEY MINIVAN FOR WIFE/KIDS )and a car on its last legs that has no resale value ( maybe 500 on CL?) . We still live in the city and all trips are very short so MPG never really been a problem. We want to move out from the city as far away as I can and still commute in for work 2 or 3 days per week ( quitting not an option).

 

[brianl703]

Originally Posted By: RegDunlop
II know people have an aversion to usedd American cars


The Toyota drivers around here have such an aversion to used American cars, they get out of my way all the time when I'm driving my '97 Crown Vic. Which, by the way, was a taxi before I got it and a police car before it was a taxi.

 

[The_Jeff]

Another advantage to the malibu is it must be cheap to insure and repair. Being in NYC this could be a helpful factor.

 

[mechanicx]

The Malibu 5th generation (97-03) is not a bad car at all. It is pretty roomy and cruises straight as an arrow on the freeway and should get up to 30 mpg highway. As someone mentioned they all got the 3.1 after '00 and the lower intake gaskets can leak. But that is about the only significant problem they have. And they were slightly updated over the model years, so an '03 is porbably going to be more sorted out than say '98. Also there was the '04-05 Classic with an Ecotec. This would probably be the best choice. Then there was the Alero and Grand Am but you give up some interior space with them. They are all N-cars and pretty good cars and you could probably cut a good deal on one. It's all about condiion and price with a used car and not brand.

The Impala is OK but it would use more gas and the transmission seems to act up more while the N-cars transmission is usually more reliable. My brother just bought a '99 Alero for $2600 and it is pretty nice. With a $5k budget you should be able to get a good one if you look hard enough.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: RegDunlop
I am looking to keep it under 5k. I have seen many Chevy Malibus/Impalas on CL for under 5k. Which is why used Honda not an option ( unless I go to under 1995 vintage).


Thanks, that helps.

I might look at an older Ford Taurus, say a 2003 vintage. They're pretty cheap to buy and fairly reliable I'd say. I'm pretty familiar with them, as we've had a bunch of them here at work. Transmissions have not typically been problematic. They're not very refined, but they're cheap and durable. MPG on the road is in the mid-20s.

Honestly, I think something like a '99 Camry is right up your alley: http://raleigh.craigslist.org/cto/2273801304.html I know you said you had something against Toyotas, but for used and efficient vehicles that still have some space, an older Camry is hard to beat. Plus, with a 20/28 MPG estimate, you'll "make money" every mile you drive compared to something like a Taurus with an 18/25 rating. Similarly, you can get used Accords from the 1999-2000 era for 5 large also.

 

[brianl703]

One of my friends got a 2001 Taurus for $400 from one of his co-workers. It has 200k on it. It apparently developed a vacuum leak and had a bad ignition coil and started running like [censored] so the co-worker engaged in some "shotgun troubleshooting" and caused more problems than he fixed(I guess he asked the Autozone clerk what he ought to replace), and on top of that replaced the wrong ignition coil. So he gave up on it and sold it dirt-cheap.

It runs fine except for the vacuum leak. The transmission shifts perfectly. When the vacuum leak is finally found and fixed, the engine will also run perfectly.

EDIT: The PO's mechanical skills are such that he drilled right through a 3" conduit with 480V power cables in it and didn't realize it until the boom and flash. So you can see that this car had the original problems plus the ones that this guy created with his ham-fisted attempts to fix it.

 

[PF52]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd

I might look at an older Ford Taurus, say a 2003 vintage. They're pretty cheap to buy and fairly reliable I'd say. I'm pretty familiar with them, as we've had a bunch of them here at work. Transmissions have not typically been problematic. They're not very refined, but they're cheap and durable. MPG on the road is in the mid-20s.


The post above yours mentions getting 30 MPG from the Malibu (on the highway), which I'm inclined to agree with, but I'd never say the same about the Taurus. The Taurus might do 25 - downhill.

 

[Hokiefyd]

The 3.0L Vulcan Tauruses we have here would easily pull 20+ around post, and that's 100% city driving. They do 27-28mpg on the road, but that's in a good (temperate) climate. I imagine a 3.0L Duratec model would be similar (it's rated near the same on the EPA scale).

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
The 3.0L Vulcan Tauruses we have here would easily pull 20+ around post, and that's 100% city driving. They do 27-28mpg on the road, but that's in a good (temperate) climate. I imagine a 3.0L Duratec model would be similar (it's rated near the same on the EPA scale).


Between the two, Taurus and Malibu, I think the Malibu would pull 3-5 mpg better on the highway. The 2002 Malibu I have experience with typically gets 32-34 mpg on the highway and 23-24 "around town" driving.

 

[Hokiefyd]

The 3.1L OHV Malibu is rated extremely close to the 3.0L OHV Taurus. 18/26 for the Malibu vs. 18/25 for the Taurus. Unless one person has driven both vehicles for a while, meaningful comparisons of individual MPG reports are difficult. Both you and I have experienced higher-than-EPA economy numbers in practice from both vehicles.

If you look up a 2002 Taurus and a 2002 Malibu on Fueleconomy.gov, the Taurus actually reports a higher "user" MPG than the Malibu (26.2 vs. 25.2).

In my opinion, the two estimates are sufficiently close to assume that neither one would be statistically and repeatably better than the other. Regardless, at this point (the cars would be 8 years old), a lot will depend on the state of tune, types of tires, miles on the engine, etc.

 

[mechanicx]

The way I see the milage issue, while I think even a V6 malibu can push 30 mpg on the highway, both Taurus and Malibu are probably at least capable of high 20's, and IMO that is good enough considering you are riding in a good bit more comfort and safety than an econobox that might get only margin better highway milage. It's in the city where the bigger car suffers some gas milage penalty. The used domestic can be a better value. And let's throw in a curve, there's cars like the Cobalt, Cavalier, Focus too, but I don't think their highway milage makes up for much.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
The 3.1L OHV Malibu is rated extremely close to the 3.0L OHV Taurus. 18/26 for the Malibu vs. 18/25 for the Taurus. Unless one person has driven both vehicles for a while, meaningful comparisons of individual MPG reports are difficult. Both you and I have experienced higher-than-EPA economy numbers in practice from both vehicles.

If you look up a 2002 Taurus and a 2002 Malibu on Fueleconomy.gov, the Taurus actually reports a higher "user" MPG than the Malibu (26.2 vs. 25.2).

In my opinion, the two estimates are sufficiently close to assume that neither one would be statistically and repeatably better than the other. Regardless, at this point (the cars would be 8 years old), a lot will depend on the state of tune, types of tires, miles on the engine, etc.


You make a few excellent points. Especially concerning overall condition of the vehicle. My conclusion was based on weight (the Taurus weighs about 300-400 lbs more than the Malibu) more than anything else.

 

[The_Jeff]

I made a road trip in an 04 ish taurus. They drive great because they have short gearing. There was some sort of gas crunch on but it was otherwise perfect economy driving weather, ambient temp of around 45 for thinner air, non-winter, non-summer gas, I think it was even real gas not E10.

Because of the gas crunch I set the cruise right at 65 and was getting passed the whole way. Pulled 27 MPG. Car had 15k on it and a dirty champ oil filter, so it was broken in and maintained.

This disappointed me because my 92 cutlass ciera with meagar 3 speed and bigger 3.3L v6 would have done 29 on the same trip.

The Taurus of course was waaaay ahead of the ciera in terms of NVH, driving position, and handling.

 

[RegDunlop]

Thanks for all the great info. Gave me a lot to look into. I think I am leaning towards the Chevy, maybe a Malibu, Cobalt, Impala


if I go Ford I'm getting a Crown Vic.

 

[oldmaninsc]

Originally Posted By: RegDunlop
Thanks for all the great info. Gave me a lot to look into. I think I am leaning towards the Chevy, maybe a Malibu, Cobalt, Impala


if I go Ford I'm getting a Crown Vic.


If you get a Crown Vic be sure to check what rear end it has. For mpg the 2.73 is preferred.

 

[PF52]

Originally Posted By: eljefino
Because of the gas crunch I set the cruise right at 65 and was getting passed the whole way. Pulled 27 MPG.


I would be disappointed too, but your results seem to be normal. All the Tauruses I've driven were a few years older, and typically mid-20s MPG on the highway with my driving and my math. At the same speeds, I can do over 30 on most big GMs I've driven.

 

[brianl703]

Originally Posted By: eljefino

Because of the gas crunch I set the cruise right at 65 and was getting passed the whole way. Pulled 27 MPG. Car had 15k on it and a dirty champ oil filter, so it was broken in and maintained.


Tire pressure?

The last Taurus I drove was a loaner from the dealer with all 4 tires at 15PSI. I returned it with 35PSI in all 4 tires.