General Vehicle Discussion/News Non-Mustang Vehicle Chat, Other Makes

2013 Chevy Malibu

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 4/18/11, 06:47 PM
  #1  
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Thread Starter
 
Zastava_101's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Wisconsin / Serbia
Posts: 12,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2013 Chevy Malibu







Old 4/18/11, 07:52 PM
  #2  
Needs to be more Astony
 
Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: October 4, 2004
Location: Volo, IL
Posts: 8,609
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
do not like. better then the current one though.
Old 4/18/11, 08:03 PM
  #3  
Cobra Member
 
m4a1mustang's Avatar
 
Join Date: August 22, 2010
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 1,313
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Interior looks a lot better than what I'd expect from GM.
Old 4/18/11, 08:24 PM
  #4  
GT Member
 
GTCS 2k9's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 28, 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Up to now I always liked the Malibu for a sedan.... except for those tail lights. Good to see that they cleaned that up.
Old 4/18/11, 08:34 PM
  #5  
Bullitt Member
 
Itravelalot's Avatar
 
Join Date: November 4, 2010
Location: Buckeye, AZ
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If 2.0 turbo at 250hp is the best you can do in this car, then it really is not for me. If you could fit in at least a 300hp 3.7liter N/A v6, then I would start thinking about it.
Old 4/18/11, 10:29 PM
  #6  
Cobra R Member
 
2010MustangGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 11, 2009
Posts: 1,774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Front doesn't look like the Cruze at all.

Old 4/19/11, 12:39 AM
  #7  
Cobra Member
 
Wolfsburg's Avatar
 
Join Date: July 11, 2007
Posts: 1,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bless their hearts, GM is trying...
Old 4/19/11, 01:10 AM
  #8  
Post *****
 
future9er24's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 13, 2004
Location: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
Posts: 18,613
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
not great but definitely better than the current. i kinda dig it, and that interior is pretty cool lookin too
Old 4/19/11, 02:18 AM
  #9  
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
 
Moosetang's Avatar
 
Join Date: February 1, 2004
Posts: 3,751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I consider myself to be in possession of a decent eye for detail, but I got a full-on "what did they change?" vibe the first time I saw that front end.
Old 4/19/11, 05:27 AM
  #10  
Cobra Member
 
topbliss's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 14, 2008
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,140
Received 7 Likes on 3 Posts
I like it.. Really like it.... Id buy one..
Old 4/19/11, 07:39 AM
  #11  
I'm people, and I like.
 
Lalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: March 13, 2004
Location: PDX
Posts: 9,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
eh.
not bad, but not amazing.
me thinks the cruze's front end look is going to be the face of chevrolet
Old 4/19/11, 07:47 AM
  #12  
bob
Legacy TMS Member
 
bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 16, 2004
Location: Bristol, TN
Posts: 5,199
Received 17 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by topbliss
I like it.. Really like it.... Id buy one..
Same here, I really like the look

Originally Posted by Itravelalot
If 2.0 turbo at 250hp is the best you can do in this car, then it really is not for me. If you could fit in at least a 300hp 3.7liter N/A v6, then I would start thinking about it.
For an every day beater 250hp is good ---> dropped my GT500 off to finally get the clutch taken care of and even as bad as it was slipping (had the slowest GT500 with the best gas mileage in the history of GT500's was getting almost 17mpg around town! ) I was able to keep up and even pass some people (no exaggeration). How bad was it, up until about 3000 rpm, anything more than 1/4 throttle and the clutch would slip like crazy and even then, depressing the pedal more than half to maintain speed would cause it to slip.

Now from a speed junky standpoint, this malibu is missing about 165hp

Last edited by bob; 4/19/11 at 07:54 AM.
Old 4/19/11, 07:57 AM
  #13  
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Thread Starter
 
Zastava_101's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Wisconsin / Serbia
Posts: 12,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Itravelalot
If 2.0 turbo at 250hp is the best you can do in this car, then it really is not for me. If you could fit in at least a 300hp 3.7liter N/A v6, then I would start thinking about it.
No V6s anymore. Just 4-cyl.

How many mid-size family sedans have 300 hp these days? Unless we're talking luxury cars, I don't think any of them do.
Old 4/19/11, 01:27 PM
  #14  
Bow Chica Bow Wow
TMS Staff
 
burningman's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 29, 2004
Location: Proudly in NJ...bite it FL
Posts: 7,445
Received 12 Likes on 7 Posts
that interior looks pretty swank!
Old 4/19/11, 01:28 PM
  #15  
Legacy TMS Member
 
69CaliStang's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 18, 2008
Location: Northern Cali
Posts: 452
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
I like it!
Old 4/19/11, 07:47 PM
  #16  
Bullitt Member
 
Itravelalot's Avatar
 
Join Date: November 4, 2010
Location: Buckeye, AZ
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Red Star
No V6s anymore. Just 4-cyl.

How many mid-size family sedans have 300 hp these days? Unless we're talking luxury cars, I don't think any of them do.

Sorry. Had a turbo... been there, done that.. I will never get one again on a car that needs to be reliable, especially on an everyday family car. And sub 200 hp 4 cyl is not anything different from everything else out there. If Chevy were famous for its quality, then that would be different. V6 is not dead yet. There are family cars that still have them. The only reason for me to consider a car from a company with less than stellar reliability is for bag for the buck. A 2.0 turbo might sound nice in europe, but here the reliability of a larger N/A engine still has its appeal.

I do have a Toyota Sienna with a V6 that makes somewhere around 250 hp. It really is not bad at all. It is so far the best car I have ever owned (still have not taken delivery of the mustang). If Chevy had 250 hp coming from a N/A engine, I would maybe start considering it. Turbo, no way. If they could get 300 hp into something that small, it would be amazing. As it sounds now, it is a decent car that still will likely lose out to many other worthy competitors that have better reliability.
Old 4/19/11, 07:57 PM
  #17  
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Thread Starter
 
Zastava_101's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Wisconsin / Serbia
Posts: 12,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You can still get a 2011 or 2012 Malibu with a 3.6L V6 engine (252 hp).
Old 4/20/11, 12:57 AM
  #18  
Bullitt Member
 
Itravelalot's Avatar
 
Join Date: November 4, 2010
Location: Buckeye, AZ
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Red Star
You can still get a 2011 or 2012 Malibu with a 3.6L V6 engine (252 hp).
A 3.6 liter going to a 2.0L turbo is not what I call progress. If the 2012 has a 252 hp N/A engine, a better exciting car would have even more without a turbo. A lot of companies can make a car look nice, but if Chevy ever wants my business they will have to make a car that beats others. This is okay, but certainly not what I would expect from a new and improved model. Sports styling with bad engines? That does not sound like a good combo.
Old 4/20/11, 12:57 AM
  #19  
Bullitt Member
 
Itravelalot's Avatar
 
Join Date: November 4, 2010
Location: Buckeye, AZ
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Red Star
You can still get a 2011 or 2012 Malibu with a 3.6L V6 engine (252 hp).
A 3.6 liter going to a 2.0L turbo is not what I call progress. If the 2012 has a 252 hp N/A engine, a better exciting car would have even more without a turbo. A lot of companies can make a car look nice, but if Chevy ever wants my business they will have to make a car that beats others. This is okay, but certainly not what I would expect from a new and improved model. Sports styling with bad engines? That does not sound like a good combo.
Old 4/20/11, 10:38 AM
  #20  
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Thread Starter
 
Zastava_101's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Wisconsin / Serbia
Posts: 12,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Itravelalot
A 3.6 liter going to a 2.0L turbo is not what I call progress.
More power & better fuel economy. Where is bad? Reliability? Impossible to tell anything about reliability ... yet.
Should we all stay away from Ford's EcoBoost engines then?


Quick Reply: 2013 Chevy Malibu



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:11 AM.