2014 Malibu

Hokiefyd · May 31, 2013

Chevy hasn't taken the criticism of the new 2013 Malibu lightly. It's already re-freshed the 2014 Malibu with more rear leg room and their new 2.5L I-4, with Chevy's implementation of variable valve lift technology.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars...vealed/2375745/

Mykl · May 31, 2013

That's a nice looking car. But in my "I haven't test driven or looked at any of these cars" list, ranked by desirability, this car still trails the Mazda 6 and Honda Accord.

sciphi · May 31, 2013

Good for GM to refresh a bread and butter model so quickly.

JHZR2 · May 31, 2013

Slightly OT but I assume it is the same platform - had a buick regal hybrid recently as a rental, which I loved (free upgrade from my economy rental!!!). But the trunk was really short... So I havent kept up on the 13 malibu, but assuming it is the same chassis and similar body, I get where the gripes are coming from...

Quattro Pete · May 31, 2013

Malibu's trunk is quite a bit bigger than Regal's. But I wonder if they reduced the trunk space for 2014 though in order to push the rear seats further back to make more legroom.

NHGUY · May 31, 2013

GM did a Malibu like Ford did a Contour.Less rear seat leg room than a smaller car in the same showroom (Escort vs Contour).

kkreit01 · May 31, 2013

Originally Posted By: Mykl
That's a nice looking car. But in my "I haven't test driven or looked at any of these cars" list, ranked by desirability, this car still trails the Mazda 6 and Honda Accord.

...and many more. It will still be towards the back of the list (except for Avenger and 200)...

Danh · May 31, 2013

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Malibu's trunk is quite a bit bigger than Regal's. But I wonder if they reduced the trunk space for 2014 though in order to push the rear seats further back to make more legroom.

The additional rear leg room comes from "recontouring" the front seat backs, so trunk space should be about the same.

Tzu · May 31, 2013

I never thought the "old" 2013 Malibu front end needed change or improvement. It was the overly hump-backed look of the trunk, and a so so looking console that I would have redesigned ASAP. A guy photo chopped ( I think GM Inside website) the same trunk only squished down more and it looked great. This is the car I would have upgraded to in a few years, but I might just keep looking around. These few changes made IMHO, will not make people notice it anymore than when it first came out. I know other manufacturers are doing it too, but dropping the V6 in favor of 4 bangers only put another check in the "minus" box for me. Maybe put some more cash on the hood and watch them fly away. More rear legroom = thinner seats. Great.

bigt61 · May 31, 2013

Nice looking car - the new 2.5L engine sounds impressive. (196 horsepower and 186 pound-feet of torque) I like the new Accord as well, but would never buy a car with a CVT. I have serious reservations about their long term reliability. Time will tell.

kam327 · May 31, 2013

Originally Posted By: Mykl
That's a nice looking car. But in my "I haven't test driven or looked at any of these cars" list, ranked by desirability, this car still trails the Mazda 6 and Honda Accord.

Even considering the Malibu's available 2.0 Turbo 4 with 295 lb-ft of torque??? I don't have all the numbers in front of me but that's gotta be class-leading torque. Especially compared to the Mazda6's maximum-available 185 lb-ft.

bourne · May 31, 2013

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
their new 2.5L I-4, with Chevy's implementation of variable valve lift technology.

The 2013 have the same engine, I rented one. Its a nice smooth unit, grossly underpowered for such a heavy car. Pros included smooth shifting six speed auto, decent hwy mpg ( 36.1 mpg ) and a quiet smooth ride with the windows up. Cons include dull lifeless overboosted power steering, weight and weirdly the rear suspension is too soft. With no passengers in the back seat or luggage in the trunk, it bottomed out multiple times when hitting a rut on the freeway, accompanied by a loud audible unpleasant thump. Interior material quality was ok, on par with the competition. They really need to shave off about 200~300 lbs off this vehicle ( especially in the base 4 cyl model ).

jrustles · May 31, 2013

Hmm so is this the new front end (from the article)

1370014205001-malibu2-1305311637_4_3_rx513_c680x510.jpg

or this?

Personally can't stand that Cruze style Chevy front end with that awkward lateral bar in the middle, they're way better off making the 2013 Impala/Traverse front end the "Chevrolet" trademark grille, eh?

rjundi · May 31, 2013

Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: Mykl
That's a nice looking car. But in my "I haven't test driven or looked at any of these cars" list, ranked by desirability, this car still trails the Mazda 6 and Honda Accord.

Even considering the Malibu's available 2.0 Turbo 4 with 295 lb-ft of torque??? I don't have all the numbers in front of me but that's gotta be class-leading torque. Especially compared to the Mazda6's maximum-available 185 lb-ft.

A Toyota Camry v6 has incredible power. However is still an absolute bore. Like a couch on wheels, a comfy one and fast one with v6 but a couch.

Hopefully Malibu has gotten away from couch, the previous iterations(before this generation) were like a Dr waiting room couch. Served its purpose but nothing you would go out and buy. My rental experience.

Zaedock · May 31, 2013

I wonder how many electrical gremlins it will have.

97tbird · May 31, 2013

It looks like the designers acted in a random manner...somehow it doesn't 'flow' in a coherent manner. Ungainly.
And the double grill adds to cluttered impression on the nose.

sciphi · May 31, 2013

Originally Posted By: Zaedock
I wonder how many electrical gremlins it will have.

If the Cruze is any indication, not a whole lot. Electrical problems are rare on the Cruze boards. They do happen, but they are rare. It's not using Lucas Electrics for the electricals.

Vikas · Jun 1, 2013

I like the red one, looks like they were able to poach the previous generation Acura TL designer

Same lights and same grill.

Mykl · Jun 3, 2013

Originally Posted By: kam327
Even considering the Malibu's available 2.0 Turbo 4 with 295 lb-ft of torque??? I don't have all the numbers in front of me but that's gotta be class-leading torque. Especially compared to the Mazda6's maximum-available 185 lb-ft.

Yeah, there's certainly something to be said for a lot of torque in a car like this, it does makes the driving experience more pleasant. But my joy usually comes from better handling, so the test drives would focus on which quality I enjoyed more.... the torque of the Chevy or the handling of the Mazda.

sciphi · Jun 3, 2013

Torque is nice. So is handling. One of the things a little torque-rich turbo 4 has going for it is the ability to seemingly effortlessly accelerate the car, then get great fuel economy. It also makes the car able to pass effectively without revving to the sky. Although some of them do sound pretty nice when revved, if the engineers have done their jobs.

I still think the Cruze is pretty direct competition for the redesigned Malibu. It's like Chevy put two identically-sized cars on the lot and imbued one with high MPG, the other one with high power.

2014 Malibu

Similar threads