1.5 vs. 2.0 motor - Chevy Malibu Forum: Chevrolet Malibu Forums
 35Likes
Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 31 (permalink) Unread 05-11-2019, 07:56 PM Thread Starter
CMF Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 37
1.5 vs. 2.0 motor

Have to say....

I owned a 2016 Malibu LT with the 1.5, and 2 weeks ago traded that car for a 2017 Premier with the 2.0

What a difference in power..... and.... not much difference in gas mileage either.

Its like a whole different car.
knightp25 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 31 (permalink) Unread 05-11-2019, 09:18 PM
CMF Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 82
Re: 1.5 vs. 2.0 motor

Well yeah, you didn't test drive all three engines before you bought the 1.5l??
RcClockman is offline  
post #3 of 31 (permalink) Unread 05-11-2019, 10:22 PM
CMF Senior Member
 
GarBec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Cambridge IL - USA
Posts: 211
Garage
Re: 1.5 vs. 2.0 motor

Yes, the 2.0 is a potent engine in comparison. Unfortunately its only available in Premier trim on the Malibu. It also is a premium fuel recommended engine.

I have a Malibu with the 1.5; we like it very much, runs great, sounds good, good fuel economy. It averages 35 mpg.

I have an Equinox with the 2.0; amazing what an extra 500 cc's can do to increase performance, it's impressively fast/powerful. It averages 30 mpg.

.
cp-the-nerd likes this.

2019 Equinox 2.0 LT Redline- Silver - FWD
2017 Malibu 1.5 LT - Pepperdust - Leather - Convenience
2016 Equinox 3.6 LTZ - AWD
2009 Silverado 5.3 LT 4x4 ext. cab
GarBec is offline  
 
post #4 of 31 (permalink) Unread 05-12-2019, 02:09 AM
CMF Rookie Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 15
I couldn't handle the 1.5 liter and had to pay $5000 more for the 2.0. It was just to weak. My 2017 2.0 has been a disaster though. It has had transmission problems twice at 70,000, turbo failed, oil leaked, and that's on top of the garbage brake light leaking all over the roof. I really wish I had my old reliable V6 Impala back. I drive city mostly and mpg is worse than the Impala in this thing. I get 23 mpg lol.
JBolster is offline  
post #5 of 31 (permalink) Unread 05-12-2019, 07:39 PM Thread Starter
CMF Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 37
Re: 1.5 vs. 2.0 motor

i only test drove the 1.5, at the time i couldnt afford the 2.0
knightp25 is offline  
post #6 of 31 (permalink) Unread 05-13-2019, 07:56 AM
CMF Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 82
Re: 1.5 vs. 2.0 motor

I had a LTZ Cruze before, and was getting 26 MPG ave, as I mainly drove city and had to run Premium or it wouldn't get out of it own way.... Now with the 2.0l Malibu, I ave 24.8 with 112 HP more and a bigger car...It was a no brainer! And still have to run premium anyway..
Mynewbu87 likes this.
RcClockman is offline  
post #7 of 31 (permalink) Unread 05-13-2019, 11:28 AM
CMF Rookie Member
 
Mynewbu87's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 16
Re: 1.5 vs. 2.0 motor

The family and I took a road trip to lake george this weekend about 1.5hrs from where I am. I am impressed to say we average over 40mpg the whole trip mostly highway around 70mph. This in a 2.0 2016 premier all the bells and whistles and the 19" wheels. A whole lot of looks and the parking lot attendants stopped us twice at the great escape to ask about what kind of car it was(havent debagged yet) city around town not the best buf what a great road trip car. Also we had a RS5 who gave us a thumbs up. (Head got a little big from that one)
Mynewbu87 is online now  
post #8 of 31 (permalink) Unread 05-13-2019, 12:50 PM
Super Moderator
 
cp-the-nerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 4,227
Garage
Re: 1.5 vs. 2.0 motor

1.4T versus 6.2L motor:

1.4T DI (Cruze Premier) - has decent pep till about 5500 rpm, then the hamster flings off its wheel. The 177 lb-ft of torque surges strongly and can chirp the wheels from a stop, startling old women carrying groceries and eliciting profanity like "Jeezy peezy!" and "Well I never!" Gets 35-40 mpg, never drops below 30 but your pulse might. Sounds like a constipated vacuum at wide open throttle.

6.2L LS3 (SS Sedan) - is certified to perform CPR chest compressions by dropping the hammer from a stop, will chirp the 2-3 shift at over 60 mph, pulls freakishly linear from 2000 rpm to 6500 rpm. Gets 35-40 smiles per gallon even if you try really hard to frown. Sounds like the sweet love child of a rare and beautiful liger and a dragon with anger management problems. Bonus: increases internal freedom index, which is known to cause cancer in the state of California.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

2017 Chevy SS Sedan
6.2L LS3 V8/6-Speed Manual
cp-the-nerd is offline  
post #9 of 31 (permalink) Unread 05-14-2019, 07:32 PM
CMF Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 288
Re: 1.5 vs. 2.0 motor

Iíve had several loaner 1.5s and had tried one out before buying my Ď16 2LT with the 2.0, thereís just no comparison and to me the car is a bit of a dud with the little motor in it. I see very little downside to the bigger engine and the upside is a car thatís a blast to own and drive.

To each their own.
Mynewbu87 likes this.
miweber929 is offline  
post #10 of 31 (permalink) Unread 05-15-2019, 02:00 AM
Super Moderator
 
campb292's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,428
Garage
I'd say the biggest difference is the extra $5000 and 0.60 / gallon fuel which equates to $7300 more in the first 3 years if you average 12,000 miles per year (Motortrend calculation). All for just 2.5 seconds faster 0-60 if you floor it everywhere you go.

Plus the fuel economy of both is good on the freeway but the 2.0 suffers in the city and hinders averages. The two 2.0T averages listed in this thread are 23 and 24.8 mpg for an average of 23.9 which is 2.1 under the EPA average. The two 1.5 averages in this thread are 35 and 32.2 (mine) for a 33.6 average. But yes, if you floor both it will take "one Mississippi two Mississippi thr..." longer to get to 60 mph.

One way I can certainly see always without exception opting for the 2.0 is if buying used as the OP seems to have done.
Mynewbu87 likes this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

2016 Malibu 1LT 1.5T
2016 Crosstrek Premium 2.0L
2018 F-150 XLT 5.0L
campb292 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Chevy Malibu Forum: Chevrolet Malibu Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Driver Door Window Power Motor DrDJ Problems/Service Issues/Troubleshooting (Generation 7) 0 10-21-2017 09:28 PM
A/C Blower Motor issues 2011 Malibu LTZ bobtbilder Problems/Service Issues/Troubleshooting (Generation 7) 10 06-20-2017 02:23 PM
1999 Malibu Sunroof motor modiol Do It Yourself Maintenance (Generations 5 & 6) 0 06-17-2013 08:28 PM
A/C Air Filter in Bu GregF70 Problems/Service Issues/Troubleshooting (Generation 7) 13 11-29-2011 05:39 AM
AC Evaporator location allison1212 Problems/Service Issues/Troubleshooting (Generation 7) 1 08-16-2011 02:48 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome