Chevrolet Malibu Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have to meet with a Chev salesman tomorrow and I do not know how the 2.4 engine stands up. Are people satisfied with its overall performance or should a person opt for the V6. I am currently driving a 2000 Dodge minivan with a 3.3 L engine.
Any comments on the 2.4?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
I think you'll probably find those that say the 2.4 is fine and others who say it isn't, seems like a personal thing for many. I had a 2.5L V6 in my old car and got a 2.4L in the Malibu and it seems fine to me. Granted I don't even have 400 miles on it yet so I haven't been racing around in it or anything but I really think it is going to work well for me in this car. If you can, test drive one with a 2.4L and see what you think of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
It would be best to test drive both and then decide.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
If you were comfortable with your Caravan, then the VVT 2.4 will actually be a bit of an upgrade. The most powerful 3.3 had @ 180 BHP in a 3900 lb. vehicle. The 2.4 puts out 169 BHP but the Malibu weighs in at only 3300 lbs. Power to weight ratio is in favor of the Bu. Also, I'm almost positive that the 3.3's did NOT provide Variable Valve Timing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
244 Posts
I previously owned a G6 with the V6 and now I have the 2.4 Malibu and I can tell you that yes, in certain spots I do miss the overall pickup and quick acceleration but the 2.4 still has plenty of pop when needed, has a few sluggish moments up large hills but overall does a fine job touring around town or the highway - I think its more a personal preference thing - gas milage however, much better with the 2.4 so far with almost 2000 miles driven.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
326 Posts
As gas prices continue to escalate out of control, I'm seriously considering the 2.4L - maybe the LTZ model. MY 1999 Grand Am had a 3.4L V-6, but only generated 170 HP. And it was very fast (probably why it only got 24 MPG). I live in a pretty flat area where I'm not going to be tackling mountains. And 90% of the time I drive by myself. My co-worker says her 2.4L MAlibu is plenty fast as she has already been pulled over by the cops doing 79 MPH in a 65 zone.

I do drive a lot of freeways where I need to accelerate into traffic. And I would like to take a summer trip with the family. I wonder if the 6-speed transmission in the LTZ would help in this regard? Will the 4 cyl. LTZ have the paddle shifters?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
I own a 2000 3.3l Dodge GC. Claimed HP is 158, 11 shy of the 2.4l in the Malibu. The Bu should weigh about 400lbs less but that depends on the models you are comparing. I suspect the 2.4l in the Malibu will beat it in 0-30, or 0-60 times; however, the 3.3l has a 43 ft/lb torque advantage. The seat of the pants feel gives a slight edge to the 3.3l in around town [short distance accelerations] driving.

As for the 3.6L - I easily beat a Grand Cherokee w/ a 5.7 Hemi, yesterday.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
240 Posts
I own a 2000 3.3l Dodge GC. Claimed HP is 158, 11 shy of the 2.4l in the Malibu. The Bu should weigh about 400lbs less but that depends on the models you are comparing. I suspect the 2.4l in the Malibu will beat it in 0-30, or 0-60 times; however, the 3.3l has a 43 ft/lb torque advantage. The seat of the pants feel gives a slight edge to the 3.3l in around town [short distance accelerations] driving.

As for the 3.6L - I easily beat a Grand Cherokee w/ a 5.7 Hemi, yesterday.:D
I have beat my dads 300 (v6) but there is no way in the world a 3.6 Malibu will beat an R/T Charger. I'd bet he was playing with you or didn't know he was racing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
I have beat my dads 300 (v6) but there is no way in the world a 3.6 Malibu will beat an R/T Charger. I'd bet he was playing with you or didn't know he was racing.
The SRT's have the 6.1L HEMI and it will easily beat the Malibu with 0-60 in the 3.5 to 3.8 second range. The 5.7L Hemi in the Jeep has 0-60 times in the 6.5 to 7.0 second range, easily beaten by the Malibu 2LT. The Hemi Jeep tried once and lost and came back for a second time and I rubbed it in. And these are the '08 specs, older models were slower. Jeeps are pushing a ton of heft [4691lbs] and they have the additional drag of 4 wheel drive. The power to weight ratio is not as good on the Jeep R/T as it is with the Malibu.

The Charger is a different story. I should be able to to easily take an R/T AWD model. As for the RWD R/T it depends. If he has a full tank of gas and I has less than a quarter tank - I'm getting real close if not winning. If the driver outweighs me by 100lbs and he has a passenger that outweighs my wife by 100lbs - the R/T will be toast. My estimates are conservative. Chargers are 4,000+ lbs vehicles.

I live a couple miles from the famed Woodward Avenue. I'm sure I can land a race with one soon. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Will the 4 cyl. LTZ have the paddle shifters?
Yes it does. (Not sure how the mid line '09 models will be set up).

I also had a 6cyl GrandAm. I do notice the difference with the new 4cyl, but the 6sp does shift up quick and smooth on acceleration. I had 4 people in the car today and the acceleration was still quite good. I lost a few ticks on the avg mpg.

If you always need to feel the G's pushing you back into the seat then stay with a 6cyl, if that's only a secondary thing then the 4cyl/6sd is more then enough.

DrD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #14 (Edited)
Thanks for the info. I test drove the 2.4 Bu yesterday and I was quite impressed by its performance. Over the past 19 years I have driven trucks or vans and did not know how my wife and I would like the fact of driving a car. I was ready to purchase the car (although it seemed to take bumps a little harder than the van) but my wife is hung up on buying a Dodge Journey which to me is beyond what we require. Now we are in a stalemate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
The SRT's have the 6.1L HEMI and it will easily beat the Malibu with 0-60 in the 3.5 to 3.8 second range. The 5.7L Hemi in the Jeep has 0-60 times in the 6.5 to 7.0 second range, easily beaten by the Malibu 2LT. The Hemi Jeep tried once and lost and came back for a second time and I rubbed it in. And these are the '08 specs, older models were slower. Jeeps are pushing a ton of heft [4691lbs] and they have the additional drag of 4 wheel drive. The power to weight ratio is not as good on the Jeep R/T as it is with the Malibu.

The Charger is a different story. I should be able to to easily take an R/T AWD model. As for the RWD R/T it depends. If he has a full tank of gas and I has less than a quarter tank - I'm getting real close if not winning. If the driver outweighs me by 100lbs and he has a passenger that outweighs my wife by 100lbs - the R/T will be toast. My estimates are conservative. Chargers are 4,000+ lbs vehicles.

I live a couple miles from the famed Woodward Avenue. I'm sure I can land a race with one soon. :D
I've driven the SRTs and they aren't that fast. The only SRT that is sub 5 seconds is the Viper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
I've driven the SRTs and they aren't that fast. The only SRT that is sub 5 seconds is the Viper.
As I re-read the times... you are no doubt correct. The quick lookup I did last night was clearly wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
244 Posts
Thanks for the info. I test drove the 2.4 Bu yesterday and I was quite impressed by its performance. Over the past 19 years I have driven trucks or vans and did not know how my wife and I would like the fact of driving a car. I was ready to purchase the car (although it seemed to take bumps a little harder than the van) but my wife is hung up on buying a Dodge Journey which to me is beyond what we require. Now we are in a stalemate.
Yo Jaymista - Put the foot down and get the MALIBU!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
240 Posts
The SRT's have the 6.1L HEMI and it will easily beat the Malibu with 0-60 in the 3.5 to 3.8 second range. The 5.7L Hemi in the Jeep has 0-60 times in the 6.5 to 7.0 second range, easily beaten by the Malibu 2LT. The Hemi Jeep tried once and lost and came back for a second time and I rubbed it in. And these are the '08 specs, older models were slower. Jeeps are pushing a ton of heft [4691lbs] and they have the additional drag of 4 wheel drive. The power to weight ratio is not as good on the Jeep R/T as it is with the Malibu.

The Charger is a different story. I should be able to to easily take an R/T AWD model. As for the RWD R/T it depends. If he has a full tank of gas and I has less than a quarter tank - I'm getting real close if not winning. If the driver outweighs me by 100lbs and he has a passenger that outweighs my wife by 100lbs - the R/T will be toast. My estimates are conservative. Chargers are 4,000+ lbs vehicles.

I live a couple miles from the famed Woodward Avenue. I'm sure I can land a race with one soon. :D
Charger R/T 4200lbs/340hp= 12.35 power to weight
Malibu V6 six speed 3700lbs/252hp= 14.68 power to weight

Charger R/T 4200lbs/380= 11.05 torque to weight
Malibu V6 six speed 3700/252= 14.68 torque to weight

Yes the charger is a bigger car but it has the power to back it up. Now, I'm not saying you didn't beat him but that's the exception not the rule. Anything can happen on the streets but the Charger R/T is the faster car.

Also the SRT8 Charger, or Jeep is a force to be sure. Some of those Charger SRT8's have run high 12's in the 1/4 bone stock. In the right hands they are as fast as a C5 Vette coupe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Back to the topic at hand.. the 2.4L:

I came from a heavily modified Acura RSX Type S, so I was very trepid about buying the 2.4 over the V6. In the LTZ form, the Malibu can move, no doubt. It's not as fast as a Charger RT, but it will definately move. The 2.4 is not NEARLY the dog I thought it would be. Even handicapped with the 4 spd auto, it still has plenty of go. It's not a stoplight-to-stoplight motor, but is has AMPLE power for everyday driving. And on top of that, I'm already averaging 28.5 on the highway with less than 300 miles on the odo. Definately not dissapointed.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top