Right now with rebates you can get a 08 Impala 3.5l V6 for the near the same price of the new Malibu LS.
Which would you pick?
Which would you pick?
Last edited:
V6 Impala or 4 cylinder Malibu???
- Thread starter 06RANGER
- Start date
- Status
Impala has got more space and will probably get the same (or better) gas mileage than the Malibu if you take it easy on the gas. That 3.5L is going to last forever, too.
I've always loved big cruisers, so I'd go with the Impala.
I've always loved big cruisers, so I'd go with the Impala.
Your choice there is space versus mileage, it's one or the other. Impala gets fairly good mileage but a four cylinder Malibu would get better yet. It would drive with much less authority, though.
The Impala has extra width and a larger more usable trunk. If that is what you want then go for it. If you don't care about that too much then the Malibu is a better car otherwise. With the 4-cyl Malibu I'm sure you will get better fuel economy as well although the 3.5L in the Impala will do fairly well.
I'd pick the Impala for my wife because we have 3 kids in the back seat daily. The Malibu would be my preference for my daily driver however since I have passengers much less often.
I'd pick the Impala for my wife because we have 3 kids in the back seat daily. The Malibu would be my preference for my daily driver however since I have passengers much less often.
I don't think the mpg advantage for the 4 cylinder Malibu is significant. It does seem to do as well as the last generation Malibu.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=mpgData&vehicleID=24367&browser=true&details=on
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=mpgData&vehicleID=24367&browser=true&details=on
I'd pick the Impala.
I've got 2 '06 G6's. One with the 3.5, one with the 4cyl. The 6 equals the 4 in city driving and gets 1-2 better mpg on the hwy at 70 using the cruise.
I'd take the Impala.
I'd take the Impala.
You didn't mention if you plan do your own maintenance work. If so, I'd lean more to the 4 cylinder Malibu. Just changing spark plugs on some V6 engines seems to be pretty difficult. Something to consider, the DIY angle, if you go in for that.
If you're the kind of guy who likes to put the hammer down out on the open road, then I'd say the Impala would give you more driving pleasure.
If you're the kind of guy who likes to put the hammer down out on the open road, then I'd say the Impala would give you more driving pleasure.
Believe what you will, but the 60*V6 engines reward those light with the pedal. My 3.9L powered car is rated at 26 highway, but on highway trips with the cruise set to 65-70, it easily returns 30 mpg. The 3.5L probably will do 32-33, and I'm willing to bet some 3.5 owners will chime in and back me up on that one.
mstrjon32: Just out of curiosity, does the Impala V6 engine have a system like Honda uses, where out on the highway it cuts off 2 cylinders? Where 4 in use is plenty to move at a semi-constant speed, thereby improving the mileage over hitting on all 6 all the time?
Test drive both then decide.
Aren't they 100k spark plugs?
Originally Posted By: 06RANGER
Aren't they 100k spark plugs?
If you want to maintain good mpg, you're going to want to replace them much sooner than that.
Aren't they 100k spark plugs?
If you want to maintain good mpg, you're going to want to replace them much sooner than that.
Originally Posted By: 06RANGER
Aren't they 100k spark plugs?
Yes, and the plugs should last that long or longer quite easily on those cars.
Anyway, I'd choose the Malibu mainly because I prefer a more modern and up-to-date vehicle design. The Impala is quite outdated and the Malibu is a much more refined.
Aren't they 100k spark plugs?
Yes, and the plugs should last that long or longer quite easily on those cars.
Anyway, I'd choose the Malibu mainly because I prefer a more modern and up-to-date vehicle design. The Impala is quite outdated and the Malibu is a much more refined.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: 06RANGER
Aren't they 100k spark plugs?
If you want to maintain good mpg, you're going to want to replace them much sooner than that.
I replaced the "100k" plugs in my '01 Grand Prix after 5 years and 60,000 miles. They looked just like new and the new AC Delco Iridium plugs that went back in did not improve my mileage. I've heard some complaints of the platinum tips falling off but have not experienced that myself. No more often than plugs need to be replaced it really isn't that big of a deal.
One other advantage of the Impala is that the back seat has 3 head rests. It is one of the very few GM vehicles that has a center head rest.
Originally Posted By: 06RANGER
Aren't they 100k spark plugs?
If you want to maintain good mpg, you're going to want to replace them much sooner than that.
I replaced the "100k" plugs in my '01 Grand Prix after 5 years and 60,000 miles. They looked just like new and the new AC Delco Iridium plugs that went back in did not improve my mileage. I've heard some complaints of the platinum tips falling off but have not experienced that myself. No more often than plugs need to be replaced it really isn't that big of a deal.
One other advantage of the Impala is that the back seat has 3 head rests. It is one of the very few GM vehicles that has a center head rest.
Right now, I think a buyer could bargain harder on a V6 Impala, over the "hot, new" Malibu.
I've said it many times before, my favorite (rental) car is an Impala. Excellent fuel mileage, great road manners, will run up and down the interstate all day at 75 with little effort, and has a good amount of room inside, and a nice sized trunk.
I sat in a Malibu at the dealership, and then in an Impala (both were on the showroom floor) and there was not enough room in the Malibu for me to be comfortable (I'm 6 foot 2 and 200 pounds).
My choice would definitely be the V6 Impala.
I've said it many times before, my favorite (rental) car is an Impala. Excellent fuel mileage, great road manners, will run up and down the interstate all day at 75 with little effort, and has a good amount of room inside, and a nice sized trunk.
I sat in a Malibu at the dealership, and then in an Impala (both were on the showroom floor) and there was not enough room in the Malibu for me to be comfortable (I'm 6 foot 2 and 200 pounds).
My choice would definitely be the V6 Impala.
That would be my determining factor.
I would pick the one with the best ride quality.
From owner's reviews I've read, they both have a quiet, smooth ride.
I would pick the one with the best ride quality.
From owner's reviews I've read, they both have a quiet, smooth ride.
The 3.9L engine in the 2008 Impala has "Active Fuel Management" as it's now called, but I don't believe they had it in 2007 and they definitely did not in 2006. It cuts half the cylinders, so it runs on 3 when you are just cruising down the highway. The 5.3L SS has had it since 2006, cutting down to 4 cylinders when cruising.
My 2006 Monte Carlo has the 3.9L without the AFM, and will easily get 29-30mpg on the highway with smooth, consistent driving. I'm not sure how much better you'd do with it, perhaps you could pull off 30-31?
I didn't realize Honda had a similar system. I thought Chrysler was the only other company shipping these systems.
My 2006 Monte Carlo has the 3.9L without the AFM, and will easily get 29-30mpg on the highway with smooth, consistent driving. I'm not sure how much better you'd do with it, perhaps you could pull off 30-31?
I didn't realize Honda had a similar system. I thought Chrysler was the only other company shipping these systems.
Originally Posted By: mstrjon32
Believe what you will, but the 60*V6 engines reward those light with the pedal. My 3.9L powered car is rated at 26 highway, but on highway trips with the cruise set to 65-70, it easily returns 30 mpg. The 3.5L probably will do 32-33, and I'm willing to bet some 3.5 owners will chime in and back me up on that one.
My Sister owns an 06 3.5L Impala. I have driven it a lot. It is a GREAT car. MPG is OUTFREAKINGSTANDING! I would not even dream of a new Malibu if an Impala was an option. The new Malibu is like a sardine can inside IMO( I am 6'3 and 300lbs )but the Impala has all the room you could ask for. Very comfortable ride and it has been very dependable. She did have some issues with the radio right at 1st( needed 3 replacements to fix it )plus the engine was replaced at around 7K under warranty because of a mfg defect( but the new engine has been 100% fine ). Other than that not a thing but oil changes.
Note - The engine issue was there from day 1. Had a slight odd noise I couldn't ID and over time it got worse. Even a GM tech that came down couldn't figure out what it was? Got to the point they just put a brand new engine in( not short block - long block ). GM was actually really good about it all. Got her a nice rental for the entire time her car was down and threw in a full 100K extended warranty free for the hassle. Can't ask for more. This is not the norm for the 3.5L. Excellent motor.
The EPA MPG ratings of 18/29 are vastly under rated as long as you are not a serious lead foot. Actually, last fall I drove the car to Virginia, to PA, and then back home here to NH on vacation. 3 full size adults and a bunch of luggage and other "stuff". Did the driving late at night when traffic was light doing 70 MPH in CC. 34 MPG average for the all highway portions of the trip. We saw 31 MPG total average over the 1700 miles of highway and city. Normal driving in the car is around 22-23 City and 30-32 Highway.
IMO it is a no brainer. The Impala is the ONLY chocie of the two.
If I was in the market for a car the Impala would be the 1st and only choice for me.
Believe what you will, but the 60*V6 engines reward those light with the pedal. My 3.9L powered car is rated at 26 highway, but on highway trips with the cruise set to 65-70, it easily returns 30 mpg. The 3.5L probably will do 32-33, and I'm willing to bet some 3.5 owners will chime in and back me up on that one.
My Sister owns an 06 3.5L Impala. I have driven it a lot. It is a GREAT car. MPG is OUTFREAKINGSTANDING! I would not even dream of a new Malibu if an Impala was an option. The new Malibu is like a sardine can inside IMO( I am 6'3 and 300lbs )but the Impala has all the room you could ask for. Very comfortable ride and it has been very dependable. She did have some issues with the radio right at 1st( needed 3 replacements to fix it )plus the engine was replaced at around 7K under warranty because of a mfg defect( but the new engine has been 100% fine ). Other than that not a thing but oil changes.
Note - The engine issue was there from day 1. Had a slight odd noise I couldn't ID and over time it got worse. Even a GM tech that came down couldn't figure out what it was? Got to the point they just put a brand new engine in( not short block - long block ). GM was actually really good about it all. Got her a nice rental for the entire time her car was down and threw in a full 100K extended warranty free for the hassle. Can't ask for more. This is not the norm for the 3.5L. Excellent motor.
The EPA MPG ratings of 18/29 are vastly under rated as long as you are not a serious lead foot. Actually, last fall I drove the car to Virginia, to PA, and then back home here to NH on vacation. 3 full size adults and a bunch of luggage and other "stuff". Did the driving late at night when traffic was light doing 70 MPH in CC. 34 MPG average for the all highway portions of the trip. We saw 31 MPG total average over the 1700 miles of highway and city. Normal driving in the car is around 22-23 City and 30-32 Highway.
IMO it is a no brainer. The Impala is the ONLY chocie of the two.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
Similar threads
