[Clipster]

Here goes nothing, my first post.

We are looking to get a new 2010 Malibu. I really like the sound and everything 6 cylinder, but we are second guessing on whether or not to settle for the 4.

What is better, if there is a better?
What motor is the more solid performer and has the guts to go the distance?

thanks for the help.

 

[RaineMan]

Go with the V6. You will enjoy having the extra torque and the mileage penalty isn't that big. At ~3800lbs the car is really too heavy for the 4-cyl, and some folks are really frustrated by the mileage that it returns.

As far as which will actually last longer... I'd say they are both equal. If you plan to keep the car past 100,000 the V6 is going to be more expensive to maintain just b/c it has more parts.

 

[DrivenDaily]

Welcome to the site!

I agree with the V6 suggestion. I have the V6 and am glad I do. I like all the power I can get and the 4 just wasn't going to be able to deliver enough to make me happy. I've read posts about mileage and on the freeway I get nearly as much as the 4, but in town I suffer a little more. I get about 18 in the winter, 20 or so in summer, with over 30 freeway. And I use the AC and cruise control.

If power is not an issue then the 4 is a good choice. Others have posted here that it is a venerable engine, used for modding and getting lots of power, so it seems like it's a strong block, which translates into long life in a modest-powered version like the 'Bu.

Consider this, also. It has been reported that GM is discontinuing the V6 in the Malibu and smaller vehicles, opting for the 4 only. Larger cars will likely still have a V6 option, though. This may weigh on your decision as well.

Happy driving!

 

[Silver LTZ]

Get the V6. It is as easy as that.

 

[Clipster]

Now is the 4 a newer motor, is the 6 based on a more proven motor or what?

thanks for all the replies.

 

[Malo83]

V6 is the only way to go


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

[DrivenDaily]

Wow! That's a clean machine!

 

[kencar10]

V6 if you miss the power, I4 if you want better mpg. I get 25 in the city and on long trips I get better than 34.

 

[RaineMan]

The 4-cyl is an EcoTec model development. The 2.4L LE5 (engine code) has been around since 2005 when it was first introduced as an up-level powerplant for the 2006 model year Cobalt and a base engine for the Pontiac G6. Since then GM has "shared the love" and spread the engine around to other models. It is a solid and sound design that provides a respectable amount of power. With Pontiac gone and Saturn defunct as well I believe the only current model using the LE5 is the Malibu.

The V6 is a development of the "High Feature" V6 originally put in the Cadillac CTS starting in 2004. So the design itself has been around for a while as well. The 3.6L LY7 is used in a large number of cars and SUVs.

So again, mechanically they are on equal terms. Neither is going to be better than the other when it comes to durability.

A 4-cyl will generally last a bit longer b/c there are less parts, so less to go wrong... plus a lot of the maintenance is relatively simple. A transversely mounted (FWD) V6 can be entertaining to work on as the miles add up... primarily b/c one of the cylinder banks is back by the firewall. Which means it is an exercise getting to spark plugs, gaskets, and the like.

Now, all GM engines are warrantied for 100,000mi... and you can purchase protection plans that go even long than that if you want. They say the average American keeps a car for 3 years... which I can believe. As rapidly as fuel economy technology is advancing these days the car itself might be obsolete by then anyways.

If you are looking at keeping it for the long term (5+ years), consider the price of gasoline... which is knocking on the door of $3/gal already and could easily be $5/gal within 5 years, especially if the govt. has their way with taxes. If you buy the V6 and keep it for a long time the final resale value could take a hit as gas prices continue to climb. It may become a used car that nobody wants simply b/c the EPA numbers are worse than the 4-cyl, when in reality the economy of the two is actually within 3MPG.

 

[Bedbug]

I have Both a Malibu 2009 LT1 with 4 and 2010 LTZ with a six.

I prefer the 6. Getting on the highway is much easier. Also the power is there instaniously when you want it.

The 4 is good for neighborhood driving.

I find gas miliage is not that much off between the two. I think I loose maybe 3mpg with the 6.

Now it all comes down to price if you can afford the 6 then go with it , you wont be disapointed.

 

[Trend1]

Get the V6. I can't think of anything worst then driving a 4 wishing you got the V6 instead...too late! On my mix driving 40% city and 60% local 2 lane highway (50 mph) I'm getting 18 mpg and if I'm easy on the gas and coast as much as I can easily get 20 mpg.

Welcome!

 

[Clipster]

Hey everyone thanks for the advice. I just hope the Wife feels the same way here in about a week.

 

[onecrazyfoo4u]

I was thinking about getting the 6 as well, for the extra power...but went with the 4 purely on gas savings. We drive about 30,000 miles per year, and that ~5 mpg (if not more like 10 mpg difference!) difference equates to a $500 in savings each year for gas alone. Add that on to the little extra in maintanence and the extra $1k or so up front for the bigger engine and it just wasn't worth it. I would have gotten the 6 if we didn't drive that much though. But getting 20mpg in a newer aged car is pathetic in my book. My old 1984 carbuerated blazer work truck gets that mileage!

But it's mainly the wifes car, I have my turbo 240 to go fast in...I didn't expect the Malibu to have that much power to begin with.

 

[Silver LTZ]

(if not more like 10 mpg difference!)

Don't go by the EPA ratings. It is not even close to a 10 mpg difference. More like 3 mpg in the real world.

 

[Clipster]

Then why do we use those EPA ratings then?

If real life debunks those ratings why? Doesn't it actually help sell cars?

 

[Silver LTZ]

Then why do we use those EPA ratings then?

If real life debunks those ratings why? Doesn't it actually help sell cars?

EPA ratings are a crock of sh*t. They haven't changed their testing procedures since the 70's. If you search on here you will see most I4 owners are not happy with their mpg's, and most V6 owners are getting pretty close to I4 numbers.

 

[Clipster]

Well that V6 is sounding better and better each post I read then.

 

[onecrazyfoo4u]

Yeah but I've seen a lot of people here that get 20mpg and under with the 6...so there are quite a few people with crappy mileage.

 

[Silver LTZ]

Yeah but I've seen a lot of people here that get 20mpg and under with the 6...so there are quite a few people with crappy mileage.

And someone just posted that they were getting 17 with the 4. It is all about driving habits. Bottom line is the car is too heavy for the 4. Which tends to shift more and need to be pushed harder, thus effecting mileage. I drive at 80-85 every day and still knock off 23-24, and when I take trips up north where I have to do 60-65 I get 27-28.

 

[Starship]

Something to consider, there are actually two different 6-speed powertrains for 2010:

2.4L paired with 6T40 (originally designed for compacts)
3.6L paired with 6T70 (for midsize and larger)

It looks like the 2.4L/6T40 combination is going through some growing pains. Thus, the V6 option (higher output engine, beefier transaxle) is probably worth the extra cost.

Also, anyone considering a high-end Malibu should also look at Buick LaCrosse which has a more refined ride quality. I'm rather intrugued by the 2011 Regal myself.