Speed Trap Hunter Forum: Best Radar Detectors, Laser Jammers, Laser Detectors, Speed Cameras Forum  

Go Back   Speed Trap Hunter Forum: Best Radar Detectors, Laser Jammers, Laser Detectors, Speed Cameras Forum > National Motorists Association (NMA) Discussion Group & Forum > NMA Articles
Radar Detectors Forum Logon:

NMA Articles National Motorists Association (NMA) Articles

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 2016-08-19
NMA Reporter NMA Reporter is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: 2008 Feb
Posts: 125
NMA Reporter is on a distinguished road
Exclamation 2016 Chevy Malibu Review

NMA Article: 2016 Chevy Malibu Review

History does repeat — in unexpected ways.

When Japanese (and later, Korean) car companies challenged the family car hegemony of Detroitís Big Three back in the Ď70s and Ď80s, they did so with smaller-engined/high-efficiency/value-priced (but still very nice) cars.

Cue Role Reversal.

While Japanese family cars like the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord still come with big sixes (optionally, if you want Ďem) their American-brand rivals are powered by fuel-efficient fours only.

Small — and smaller — fours.

The new Chevy Malibu is the latest of these.

The biggest engine you can get in it is a 2.0 liter four (enhanced on demand by a turbocharger) and its standard engine is a 1.5 liter four — an engine thatís about 40 percent smaller than the smallest engines available in Japanese-brand rivals like the Camry (2.5 liters) and Accord (2.4 liters).

The Malibu also has a low price — something else the Japanese used to be known for.

Just over $21k to startÖ vs. just over $23k to start for the Camry.

And the Chevy’s just as roomy now — and just as nice.

The world turned upside down.


The Malibu is GMís mainline family car. It goes up against mid-sized Japanese rivals like the Camry and Accord as well as Korean-brand rivals like the Hyundai Sonata.

Fordís Fusion (just updated; the 2017s are already available) is another possible cross-shop. Like the Chevy, it comes only with four cylinder engines (small and smaller) and is priced very reasonably, just $22,495 to start.

But the Malibu is the most reasonably priced to start: $21,625 for the L trim with the 1.5 liter four. This undercuts them all — even the Hyundai Sonata, which has a starting MSRP of $21,750.

I know, itís not much of a difference, money-wise.

But it is significant in that here we have an American car that costs less than the Japanese and less than (of all things) the Korean competition.


The Malibuís new from the tread to the roof.

Itís larger and longer now — the wheelbase has been lengthened four inches vs. the previous Malibu — edging it closer in dimensions to full-size. But itís also 300 pounds lighter than before and gets better gas mileage, too. Better city mileage than all its rivals, including the Camry, Accord and Sonata.

Itís also the first GM family car to be powered by either of two turbocharged four-cylinder engines.

Rivals like the Camry and Accord, Sonata and Fusion come standard with fours, too- but not turbocharged fours.


Extremely competitive on price/performance/mileage — and general niceness — with the perennial leaders in this class (Camry and Accord).

Much more backseat legroom (38.1inches) than otherwise-excellent Hyundai Sonata (35.6 inches).

Wheelbase stretch gives it a very posh ride.

Non-claustrophobic cabin.


Seems thirstier than it actually is because of very small (just 13 gallons with the 1.5 engine; 15.8 gallons with the 2.0 engine) fuel tank. Accordís tank — regardless of engine — is 17.2 gallons; Camryís holds 17; Sonataís holds 18.5 gallons.

Turbos add potential down-the-road repair costs that are non-issues with non-turbocharged engines in the Camry and Accord.

Toyota and Honda (and Hyundai) still have a better rep — which translates into more favorable depreciation rates and higher resale values.

At least, for now.


The Malibuís base engine is a teensy 1.5 liter four — a whole liter smaller than the previous Malibuís standard 2.5 liter four.

Itís also less powerful: 160 hp (and 184 ft.-lbs. of torque) vs. the previous Malibuís 197 hp and 191 ft.-lbs. of torque).

But, the new Malibu is also much lighter — 3,086 lbs. vs 3,339 lbs. — so it evens out.

The new car gets to 60 in about 8.5 seconds, which is the same as the old car with the larger 2.5 liter engine. But, fuel economy upticks to 27 city, 37 highway — vs. 24 city, 34 highway previously. The smaller engine also develops its maximum torque sooner — at 2,000 RPM vs. the outgoing (and not turbocharged) engineís 4,400 RPM. This makes it feel stronger than the numbers indicate.

A six-speed automatic is paired with the 1.5 liter engine.

The Hyundai Sonata also offers a teensy turbo four (1.6 liters) and itís stronger (178 hp and 195 ft.-lbs. of torque) and so-equipped, the Hyundai is quicker (7.5 seconds to 60) and delivers outstanding mileage (28 city, 38 highway) but itís not standard equipment. To get this engine, you have to buy the Sonata Eco — which stickers for $23,275. Itís not a pricey car, but it is pricier than the Chevy — by $2,100.

Optionally available is an also-turbocharged 2.0 liter four thatís more or less the same as the old Malibuís optional 2.0 engine, although the hp and torque numbers are also down slightly — to 250 hp and 260 ft.-lbs. of torque now vs. 259 hp and 295 ft.-lbs. of torque before.

Again, the reduced weight of the new car makes up for this. The í16 Malibu 2.0 gets to 60 in just over six seconds but because of the weight reduction and because the 2.0 engine in the í16 is paired with an eight-speed automatic (vs. a six-speed last year) the new carís mileage is slightly better: 22 city and 33 highway vs. 21 city, 30 highway before.

This is slightly less quick, incidentally, than the V6 Accord and Camry — but the V6-equipped Camry and Accord are also pricier by about $2k and they use a bit more fuel, too.

But the main take-home point is that both the Malibuís engines are turbocharged — while neither of the Camryís or the Accordís are. Their base engines are larger-displacement (2.5 and 2.4 liters, respectively) fours that arenít turbocharged.

The downsides (if youíre a Toyota or Honda person) are that the four cylinder-powered versions of these cars are slightly less quick — and use slightly more fuel (23 city, 34 highway for the Honda, 25 city, 35 highway for the Toyota) and feel a bit more winded when you work them, due to their non-turboíd engines not producing their peak power until much higher up the RPM scale.

The upside — if you are a risk-averse person — is that these cars havenít got turbos and so youíll never have troubles related to the turbos. With the Chevy (and the Hyundai and the Ford Fusion, when equipped with their optional engines) youíve got a turbo — and you may have troubles with it, eventually. Not necessarily. Maybe not ever. But you might because itís there and any mechanical thing, no matter how well-engineered or reliable it may be, isnít 100 percent foolproof or impervious to wear and tear.

The fulsome scurvy truth is that Chevy (and Hyundai and Ford and others, too) are going with these micro-engines goosed with turbos over larger engines without turbos chiefly because of federal fuel economy (CAFE) mandatory minimums. The gain to you, the buyer, is not huge — maybe 3 MPG overall. But when factored over a fleet of cars (which is how CAFE compliance is calculated) that 3 MPG or so difference matters a great deal.

For this very reason, expect the next-generation Camry and Accord to also come with smaller (and turbocharged) standard engines and (probably) shed their currently available V6 engines.

Incidentally, the Malibuís 1.5 liter engine comes standard with an auto-stop/start system that kills the engine when the car isnít moving, then re-starts it automatically when the driver takes his foot off the brake and presses down on the gas pedal. This, too, is there for CAFE reasons only — and Chevy isnít the only brand resorting to such measures.


In a number of new cars you sit way low, gangster-style, because the doors rise up to your shoulders and the dash is a massive cliff of extruded plastic. Adjust the seat all you like, it still feels claustrophobic. Combine this with the trend toward low-riding ďsportĒ suspensions in family cars and itís no wonder so many people have abandoned ship for crossovers and SUVs. At least you can see where youíre going and donít feel like youíre sitting at the bottom of a well.

This Malibu, on the other hand, has one thing in common with its classic-era namesake: Good visibility. The door tops arenít too tall and the dashboard does not rise vertically like an incoming tsunami of extruded plastic. In fact, it slopes away from you, like a receding tide, which has the actual and psychological effect of making the interior feel expansive rather than closing in on you.

This is one of the Chevyís most appealing attributes. Itís a relaxing and easygoing car.

Well-padded seats (and a well-padded ride). All is calm — and quiet.

Speaking of which.

These new-gen turbo fours are on the down low. Youíd never suspect them of being turbocharged because there is very little evidence they are turbocharged. Itís not like it used to be when turboíd engines would doÖ nothingÖ. at first. And then (after a pause/flat spot) hit you with a surge of power that often caused the car to stagger-step left-right as the tires fought to cope with the sudden power spike.

That’s fun in a sports car. Not the best thing in a family car, where smoothness is the thing.

These new-gen turbos deliver immediate, lag-free thrust and so they come across as simply powerful enginesÖ larger (and not turbocharged) engines.

The Malibuís 1.5 engine gives you the same performance as the old 2.5 liter engine and seems like it’s working less hard to deliver it — which is exactly the case. Three-quarters throttle will give you the same acceleration (or better) as full-throttle, pedal-to-the-metal in the old car.

Because the turboíd engineís torque happens 2,400 RPM earlier.

There are still some quicker players in this segment — the Accord with its standard four being the standout (itíll get to 60 in about 7.8 seconds with its six-speed manual transmission, a very rare thing to find among family sedans these days).

But the Chevy is right there in the thick of it — and that ought to worry Honda (and the rest of the import blue chips, too).

With the optional 2.0 engine, the Malibu is — like the V6 (and optional turbo-engined) competition — a surprisingly speedy ride. Maybe not quite as speedy as the V6 Accord or Camry, but a six second to 60 run is only about 1 second off the pace of a Mustang GT, as a for-instance.

Weíre used to it — jaded by it — but family cars are now about as quick as Maximum Effort performance cars once were.

As in the 1.5-equipped Malibu, the turbo is a non-presence. No lag or whistle. It just goes. And the new eight-speed automatic does a fine job of reducing the revs at highway speeds such that this little four behaves much like a big six or even a V8 once youíre up to speed. At 80, the tach reads about 2,000 RPM — which is an easygoing pace for such as small engine at that speed.

Just donít stab the brakes too hard (or too often) at such speeds. The Malibuís brakes are family car brakes — and that means they are not Performance Car brakes. I got my test Malibuís so hot and bothered they smoked.

But you probably do not drive the way I drive. Almost no one does.

What probably matters more to you is the ride quality (as good as Camry’s, which is the Gold Standard for family car comfort) and the general pleasantness of the car.

There is a manual-shift function for the eight-speed transmission (ease the gear selector back toward you from D to L and then tap the + and — symbols to go up or down) but you will discover that selecting 7th or eighth (either way, up or down) has no discernible effect other than changing the numeric readout on the LCD screen in the center stack. The box may have shifted up or down, but the transitions cannot be felt or seen (on the tach). This transmission — like other eight-speeds Iíve tested — seems to use the top two gears only during light-throttle/steady state cruising and only when the computer (rather than you) decides to engage them.


The old Malibu — which you can still buy new as the ďMalibu ClassicĒ — had two obvious problems:

It had a cramped back seat — and it looked like a rental car. These issues have been addressed.

The wheelbase stretch (111.4 inches now vs. the old carís 107.8 inches) has resulted in a longer, roomier car. Particularly in the back.

The í16 has 38.1 inches of legroom in the second row — nearly as much as the limo-like Camry (38.9 inches) and slightly more shoulder room (57.1 inches vs. 56.6). The Camry still has a smidgen more headroom back there (38.1 inches vs. 37.5 for the Chevy) but itís not so youíd notice.

Itís now a Hyundai that takes the ďprizeĒ for the most cramped back seat. The Sonataís got just 35.6 inches, which is less than the old Malibu (36.8 inches).

Overall, the Malibu is now the largest — the longest — car in this segment: 193.8 inches from stem to stern vs. 190.9 for the Camry, 191.1 for the Sonata and 191.8 for the Ford Fusion. It is also slightly wider (73 inches) than all of them except the Sonata (73.4 inches) and the length plus the width helps make the Malibu look substantial while the lines of the car are graceful. Itís not a show-stopper, but itís a very nice-looking car, like its bigger brother, the Impala.

In my opinion, the only mid-sized competitor that out-looks the Malibu is the Mazda6 — which is a sport sedan, not a family sedan.

The Chevy’s a solid value too.

A Malibu L costs less than every other rival (a lot less than some rivals, like the $23,070 to start Camry) and comes standard with everything most families need (AC, power windows and locks) plus some things that are nice to have, like a tilt and telescoping steering wheel, push-button ignition, cruise control and a better-than-decent six-speaker stereo.

For about the same price as the entry-level Camry, you can move up to the LS trim ($23,120) and get in-car WiFi, an iPad-style, pinch/finger-swipe 7-inch LCD touchscreen with AppleCarPlay, Android Auto and other apps.

Itís hard to spend much more than $30k on a new Malibu — and that will get you a top-of-the-line Premier trim with the more powerful 2.0 engine, 19-inch wheels, leather trim, an upgraded main gauge cluster, heated and cooled front seats, wireless smartphone charger and a nine-speaker Bose premium stereo rig.


Despite having lots of “tech” equipment — including available automatic braking, automatic park assist, blind spot monitor and rear cross-traffic alert, these gadgets do not interfere with radar detectors. No constant false alarms. Chevy has figured out — apparently — how to make these systems work without making your radar detector not work.

A Malibu oddity is its unusually small gas tank: 13 gallons with the 1.5 liter engine.

The Sonataís tank holds 5.5 gallons more fuel. This translates into a highway range of 703 miles for the Hyundai (Eco model with the 1.6 engine) vs. 481 for the Malibu with the 1.5 liter engine. Even though the miles-per-gallon delivered by these two engines is very close, the Chevy seems downright piggy vs. the Hyundai (and the others in this class) because you have to stop for gas much more frequently.

Itís pretty much the only objective flaw I could find — and one that Chevy will hopefully correct.


The domestic brands continue to get better and better while the Japanese seem unaware of the hot breath on their necks.

They’d better wise up soon.



*** Photo courtesy of Caricos

The post 2016 Chevy Malibu Review appeared first on National Motorists Association.

© 2009 NMA
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2016 Buick Cascada Review NMA Reporter NMA Articles 0 2016-08-19 05:05
TheNewspaper.com Roundup: August 10, 2016 NMA Reporter NMA Articles 0 2016-08-19 05:05
2016 Chevy Cruze Review NMA Reporter NMA Articles 0 2016-08-19 05:05
2016 Mini Cooper Convertible Review NMA Reporter NMA Articles 0 2016-08-19 05:05
2016 Lexus NX200t Review NMA Reporter NMA Articles 0 2016-08-19 05:05

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 14:38.

©2019 SpeedTrapHunter