Motor Trend: new Malibu is worst/most disappointing new car...

[Chevrolet Customer Svc]

Thanks for the laugh this afternoon, nutcrunch.

I would love to have a vehicle that does better on gas, but I have a need for a full size SUV; 5ft 5in 13 year old daughter, 105 pound Golden Retriever who is only a year old and a wheelchair… do I need to say any more? LOL

I miss the fuel economy of a car, but the Tahoe is great.

Michelle, Chevrolet Customer Service

[mzodarg]

I am not doubting at all that the car isn't selling well, my beef is with the magazines making it out to sound like the new Malibu is horrible when it really isn't. I just want people to not be misled by that and find out for themselves how the car really is. Make sense?
__________________

It's always made sense. As you know I was not a fan of my ECO, my fault. I made a hasty decision and was miserable until I purchased the 2ltz. Now I'm smiling.

Not sure what they can do, if anything about the back seat. 90% of the time it's just me in the car so it doesn't effect me.

Unlike you, I always consider long term value of vehicles. Because it does matter to me in the long run.

[08LTZ]

You have to take everything MT says with a grain of salt. They're trying to sell magazines and lets face the "truth" won't sell. So they're going to over state and exaggerate the Malibus shrot falls making a caricature out of it to sale magazines. Yes, the new Malibu could have and should have done certain things better and shame on GM for cutting those corners. However, when looking at the car in total it's not a bad car.

On the flip side you have the media darling in the Ford Fusion. It's a good car too but IMO once you get past the grill it fades into mediocrity. IMO the Malibu interior looks nicer too.

[BeauTie]

Really, the only issues I see related to the new Malibu is:

Not class leading MPG
Cramped back seat
Released with limited model availability

Outside of that, it's a better vehicle than the vehicle it replaces, and IMO and IME, a better vehicle than at least the 2012 Camry and 2013 Accord. I haven't driven the offerings from Mazda or Nissan.

So I really don't see any corners that GM cut.

[cp-the-nerd]

I agree that GM did not cut corners, they put a huge amount of resources into the 8th gen Malibu. They pretty much just made bad fundamental decisions during the car's development. They knew weight has been an issue across the lineup, but didn't save any versus the 7th Gen, while competitors shaved hundreds of pounds. I guess they assumed the new 2.5L engine would make up for that.

Chevy recently had a similar problem with the Cruze when they had to scramble to improve fuel economy after it debuted with a 24/36 mpg rating and fell far behind other new compacts. Luckily, the Cruze is doing much better, and still leads the class with the fun and frugal 42 mpg Eco.

Kind of a fool me once, fool me twice scenario. They should know better. Hopefully they'll tweak the Malibu with equal success.

[charts.1]

Originally Posted by 08LTZ

You have to take everything MT says with a grain of salt. They're trying to sell magazines and lets face the "truth" won't sell. So they're going to over state and exaggerate the Malibus shrot falls making a caricature out of it to sale magazines. Yes, the new Malibu could have and should have done certain things better and shame on GM for cutting those corners. However, when looking at the car in total it's not a bad car.

On the flip side you have the media darling in the Ford Fusion. It's a good car too but IMO once you get past the grill it fades into mediocrity. IMO the Malibu interior looks nicer too.

Midsize car sales is the toughest market. Camry/Accord have decades of "GOODWILL" built into their cars with higher resale values to boot. Who doesn't want more money for their car at trade in time?

It doesn't matter what you or I think of the 2013 Malibu. What matters most are sales and right now they have tanked for the Malibu.

November, December 2012 Malibu sales USA..........21,900
November, December Fusion sales USA..........34,000

If GM says a fix will be in place by next November/December and the 2014s are on dealers lots in August what are they going to do? Build 2014s just like the 2013s are now and then next November call the new version a 2014 1/2?

A lot of confusion. If GM screws up the refresh they are in big trouble.

The eco-2.4 has been a disaster compared to the competition MPG and the new Impala going into production very soon will also offer the same Eco but weigh 300+ pounds more. YIKES!

[charts.1]

Originally Posted by cp-the-nerd

I agree that GM did not cut corners, they put a huge amount of resources into the 8th gen Malibu. They pretty much just made bad fundamental decisions during the car's development. They knew weight has been an issue across the lineup, but didn't save any versus the 7th Gen, while competitors shaved hundreds of pounds. I guess they assumed the new 2.5L engine would make up for that.

Chevy recently had a similar problem with the Cruze when they had to scramble to improve fuel economy after it debuted with a 24/36 mpg rating and fell far behind other new compacts. Luckily, the Cruze is doing much better, and still leads the class with the fun and frugal 42 mpg Eco.

Kind of a fool me once, fool me twice scenario. They should know better. Hopefully they'll tweak the Malibu with equal success.

The eco models have not panned out. AUTOTRADER.COM is loaded with used 2013 Malibu/Cruze Eco models for sale.

The eco is about $1500 more than base model cars and Car publications like Motor Trend/Car and Driver indicate that the slight increased MPG does not cover the increased cost of the Eco model.

Chevrolet has been building cars for over 100 years, and wouldn't one believe today they could get it right in all aspects of what people want and what people need in a car?

[nutcrunch]

Originally Posted by charts.1

The eco models have not panned out. AUTOTRADER.COM is loaded with used 2013 Malibu/Cruze Eco models for sale.

The eco is about $1500 more than base model cars and Car publications like Motor Trend/Car and Driver indicate that the slight increased MPG does not cover the increased cost of the Eco model.

Chevrolet has been building cars for over 100 years, and wouldn't one believe today they could get it right in all aspects of what people want and what people need in a car?

You have to remember too that the ECO is not just a base car with the added ECO stuff. It has a few more options.
I actually priced the Malibu1 LT compard to the ECO 1SA we bought. We have the power and convenience package on ours so I added it to the 1LT which also gave it the same 17" wheels the ECO has. The 1LT came out about $1650 cheaper than the ECO but then the ECO also has the color DIC and also auto climate control (you have to step up to a 2LT to get those features) while the 1LT has the turn signals in the mirror.
I have no doubt they aren't selling well. Most people are turned off just by the word "ECO".

[MyMalibu13]

Originally Posted by charts.1

Chevrolet has been building cars for over 100 years, and wouldn't one believe today they could get it right in all aspects of what people want and what people need in a car?

All aspects of what people want and need?..................... You're kidding right?

What manufacturer do you have in mind that can do that?

[rayle]

Most people don't even know what they want and need. heh heh heh.