Chevrolet Malibu Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

2013 Chevy Malibu 2.5L Review

22K views 23 replies 10 participants last post by  Malibu 2lt 
#1 ·


Malibu adds entry-level model as it struggles to stand out
by Sami Haj-Assaad

When we first looked at the 2013 Chevy Malibu Eco, we came away awed by its incredibly quiet ride, but were otherwise unimpressed. Despite its mild-hybrid powertrain, it lagged behind its hybrid rivals in fuel economy and driving enjoyment.

However, a new four-cylinder engine is now available on the Malibu, and is focused on being quiet, providing solid power, and netting good fuel economy. These might seem like simple goals, but if met they can help make the Malibu stand out in a crowded playing field.

This new 2.5L engine is available on the lowest trim Malibu, and is cheaper than the eAssist mild-hybrid Malibu Eco by about $3,000. While comparing that car to the other hybrids in its segment proved a lopsided affair, the Malibu 2.5L offers a closer head-to-head comparison with other base models in the mid-size family sedan segment such as the Toyota Camry, Hyundai Sonata and the all-new Nissan Altima.

The Malibu 2.5L is looking to continue the reputation of its mild-hybrid model. That means the expectations are set with a bunch of standard features, a quiet cabin and a comfortable ride. The new engine also hopes to breathe life into the car, in terms of power and fuel efficiency.

PLENTY OF POWER

The additional power that the new engine makes is a clear advantage over its mid-sized rivals – at least on paper.

At 197-hp and 191 lbs-ft of torque, the Malibu beats out the power numbers made by the base Camry, Altima and Accord. It’s just one pony shy of the Sonata and Optima twins, but bests them in torque. When driving, the car never feels out of breath, and will adequately pass slower vehicles on the highway.

While family sedans aren’t known for blazing fast acceleration, Chevrolet says that the Malibu can hit 60 mph in about 8-seconds, which is on par with other sedans in the segment. The reason it’s not quicker is the extra weight the Malibu lugs around, ranging from 200 to 300 lbs more than many of its competitors.

The car delivers its power smoothly, and briskly glides when pushed hard, rather than abruptly throwing passengers back in their seats.

SOLID FUEL ECONOMY, BUT SHORT OF RIVALS


That extra power (and weight) comes with a compromise. The EPA rates the Malibu 2.5L at 22/34/26 mpg city/highway/combined. While this is a better rating than the old 2.4L in the 2012 Malibu, it’s slightly lower than the ratings of the Camry, Accord, Altima and Sonata. The plus side is that the Malibu’s fuel economy numbers are actually attainable, and done without a frustratingly unresponsive Eco mode.

During city, highway and rural drives, our test car averaged closer to 30 mpg, higher than the EPA’s estimate.
Read the complete 2013 Chevy Malibu review at AutoGuide.com
 
See less See more
1
#2 ·
Wow so amny things wrong with that review. First of all what car were they comparing the base Malibu to with the statement "The plus side is that the Malibu’s fuel economy numbers are actually attainable, and done without a frustratingly unresponsive Eco mode." It can't be the Malibu ECO as it is in no way "frustratingly unresponsive"

Next they show an interior shot of the LTZ yet they are talking about the Base Malibu. They make it sound like the base Malibu is going to have the MYLink system which it isn't.
Then they say the malibu doesn't have a navigation feature which it does have an option for it but not on the base one as far as I know.

They also show pics of a non base Malibu.
 
#3 ·
I also don't know where they got this info...
"While the 2013 Malibu Eco has eight airbags as standard, this one is equipped with an additional two airbags. "

Uhh the ECO has 10 air bags. They should check the Chevy site if they don't believe it.
 
#4 ·
After further investigation on the Chevy site I guess the first Malibu Ecos did have 8 air bags. It says Malibu Eco models built after June 2013 have 10 air bags... wait a minute... 2013? I think they mean 2012 :D
Our car was built in May so it should have 8 air bags.
 
#5 ·
I find it kind of disappointing that the 2.5L 0-60 is still at ~8 seconds. The 2.4L 7th gens with the 6-speed had about an 8.5s 0-60. That's not much faster for 30hp and 30tq more.

I do like the interior though. Still reminds me too much of the LaCrosse (minus the rear end). Still a nice car though!

The T/C version is the same engine in the ATS. So, that will be interesting!
 
#12 ·
Don't forget that the Malibu Eco has 182 hp + boost from the battery system. 8.2 seconds actually puts the Eco near the head of the midsize class. If the 2.5L hits 7.9 seconds like Motor Trend and Car & Driver have been told, that will make it the fastest midsize car with an automatic behind only the feather weight 2013 Nissan Altima.
 
#7 ·
Then I wonder if the 2.0 T/C will get closer to the 3.6's 6.3 seconds.
 
#11 ·
Not sure where you saw that, but no production car has been tested with GM's new 2.0T. It is not related to GM's previously used 2.0T found in the Buick Regal or Cobalt SS.
 
#13 ·
Actually I think the 182hp is including the 15hp boost from the electric motor well according to this site it is http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-chevrolet-malibu-eco-drive-review (look under specifications)
That would make the 2.4L engine have 167hp which is close to the same as the 2012 2.4 engine.
I am not sure if that is correc though since if the hp and tq numbers are combined and they list the tq for the 2013 Eco as 172 then the 79 ft lb tq from the electric motor would mean that the engine only makes 93 ft lb tq which is crazy. The 2012 2.4 made 160.

Anyone have any clarification on this? Maybe the hp shown is combined but not the torque.
 
#14 ·
The 2.4L engine in the eAssist system uses Direct Injection along with advanced VVT, and is rated 182 horsepower and 172 lb-ft of torque, as it is in the Equinox, Terrain, and Buick Verano. There is no combined power rating listed for the eAssist drivetrain.

The 2.4L engine used in the 2008-12 Malibu and other GM vehicles uses port fuel injection and VVT, which is why the rating is lower.
 
#16 ·
Combined horsepower on a hybrid drivetrain isn't cut and dry addition of electric + gas horsepower, but the gas engine alone is definitely rated 182 hp/172 ft-lbs which Car and Driver lists correctly before saying it's also 182 combined. The major benefit is the boost in torque, anyway.

GM needs to build a 2.5L eAssist because the 2.4L DI is an old engine dating back to 2006 modified with some new tech. They could get 2-3 more MPG.
 
#17 ·
I'm sure they will make the 2.5 in an eassist model. In fact I'd bet either next year or the one after will drop the 2.4 eassist for the 2.5 eassist.

This 2.4 really feels powerful to me so I can just imagine how the 2.5 feels.
 
#18 ·
Don't get me wrong, the eAssist 2.4L is a great system with strong power. The only problem is how quickly the competition came roaring in with similar mpg without any battery tech. For example, the base model of the Camry gets 25/35 mpg and the 2013 Altima gets 28/37. Now a Camry is vastly inferior to the Malibu in engineering, design, and interior quality, but the #1 consideration of buyers right now is fuel economy and price.

I was also a little disappointed the FE wasn't noticeably higher than the heavier LaCrosse with the same eAssist system.
 
#19 ·
I'll be honest, even if the Malibu got 20mpg highway we still would have got it. Me and the wife fell in love with the car that much. :eek:
 
#24 ·
Maybe the testers forget most people who are buying in this class of automobile don't do track days and will sacrifice some weight for a more quite ride. I have stated else where that I drove most of the cars in this class that we were interested in and the Malibu out performed them all in the areas we were most concerned. I truly like the body style on the 2013 over the 2014 and found out that all of the 2014s were going to have eco assist and I did not want that. The large truck space with the large pass through when the rear seats are folded down helped make the decision. The 2.5 seemed to accelerate better than those tested and had less body lean when pushed hard in cornering, or a quick evasive maneuver. Braking was excellent as well. Our 2013 was only 12 days old when our dealer found the car at another dealer about 150 miles away. They had it the very next day and we drove it home that night! We opted out of leather to try the premium cloth this time. Most of are cars in the past all had leather. We both agree the cloth is great. Only time will tell how well it holds up. We had the cloth part of the seats Scotch Guarded for stain and spill protection. Had the floor mats done as well. We added the Electronics & Entertainment package as well as the crystal red tintcoat. We do very few long trips so we leave the navigation to the gps on our iPhones. I think this Malibu if proven reliable will serve us well into the future.;)
 

Attachments

Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top