Chevrolet Malibu Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Weather: 39 degrees F. Dry. 1,000' altitude. 3800 miles on the ODO. Been babying it since mile 1 on the ODO. Time to test it!

First run netted a 8.7 second 0-60.
Second run resulted in an 8.42.
Third thru fifth runs were all at 8.24.

Must be the computer decided I wasn't a 90 year old man after all and recalibrated to a 45 year old boy! :p

All runs were made with acceleration from idle, NO power braking. Right foot from brake pedal to gas pedal. Headlights turned off. Traction control left 'on'.

I did try two runs using the paddle shifters, and they were slower than letting the computer decide when to shift. When in 'auto' mode, the computer shifted the tranny into the red zone a little, I'm guessing 6500-6600 rpms.

Muffler stank after the runs. Back to driving like a 90 year old man!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
574 Posts
Haha, its okay to push those 4 cylinders. The Ecotech can easily handle abuse like that. Lol. The smell was just all the carbon burning off from the higher than normal temps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Yes, the manual paddle shifters are a bit sleepy. Pushing the paddle shifter results in a shift about 2 seconds later. Not sure why it has such a long delay but it's much slower than the one in the Chrysler 300m that my neighbor has. Technically, it should be faster if you can rev it more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
:D

So it's about one year later, time to G-TECH the 'Bu again! A little more broken in now, and using 5W-30 Mobil One oil. Here's the stats for today:

Same tires (Firstone FR710)
Mobil One 5W-30 synthetic
28 degrees F
5/8 tank of gas
Same roads, so 1000' altitude
19,134 miles on the ODO. I was at 33 mpg average on the computer just before the run.

Four runs, the first was 8.3 seconds 0-60. Second and 4th runs were at 7.8, the third run was at 8.0 even.

Averaging the four runs netted approx. 0-60 time of 8 seconds on a nice cool dry day.

Not bad for how heavy this car is. I think the biggest reason these cars can accelerate as well as they can is that nice 6-speed auto. When the engine shifts from first to second, the tach drops to 4900 rpms, so the engine is still well up in it's power band when hitting second gear.

Still loving it, and still driving it like an old man the rest of the year :D Will be back to this thread in another 12 months!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
915 Posts
Hah, awesome update!

And yet another reason why so many people love the 2.4L/6-spd combo. Oh, if only it were available from the start...but that it is now, is all that matters;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I agree on the 'from the start'! I had to wait a year to get an '09 with this tranny. I liked the 'Bu from day one, but as soon as they released the '08's they started talking about the new 6-spd auto. Decided to wait.

I normally don't trust the first and second year of any new design, but I figured if the new 6-spd was designed to handle the powerful but gas-hoggy 3.6 liter, then it should be able to handle the little 4 cylinder with NO problems! I have a long commute, so gas mileage was paramount.

My second choice of car was the V6 Camry SE. Way more power than I needed, but the 6-speed auto in that car returns a lot better gas mileage than the 'Bu with the V6 and auto.
Third choice was the 4 cylinder Camry LE with the 5-speed auto.
Fourth choice was the '08 'Bu with the 4-speed auto.

SOO glad Chevy gave me the first choice car for '09!!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
915 Posts
The 4-cyl and V6 use different 6-spds (the 4-cyl for lighter duty/less power applications than the one the V6 cars use), but otherwise, YES.

We just had to have one when we bought one, and from experience with a last gen 2.2L/4-spd Malibu, I didn't think it was a big deal. It's still a great car, but the powertrain performance could certainly be better--and it was nice to see how much so the first time I drove an early Spring Edition LTZ 4-cyl.

Interesting talking to 2 GM engineers about this once when they came to review my '09 2LT V6 for shuddering issues. I talked about our 4-cyl/4-spd car and the 6-spd changeover and rather than it not being ready at initial intro, they said the 4-cyl spec 6-spd was ready "we just weren't happy with the programming yet and still tuning". Hence why there were some 4-cyl/6-spd test mule cars they let press drive at the initial intro in late '07, but said "not yet...later".

Now just think about this car with the torquier DI 2.4L just introduced on the Equinox, from even the comments on power & mileage in that heavier & boxier 'ute. Should be a very nice change, soon enough down the line.
 

·
CMF Honorary Member
Joined
·
4,326 Posts
Just be aware the G-Tech is very optimistic. I have one and use it and have used it on cars that I race. The G-Tech is always about 2-3 tenths too quick in the 1/4 mile compared to the track timers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Just be aware the G-Tech is very optimistic. I have one and use it and have used it on cars that I race. The G-Tech is always about 2-3 tenths too quick in the 1/4 mile compared to the track timers.
Well aware of that. The 1/4 mile times have proven inaccurate, while the 0-60 times have been quite accurate. I only use the G-Tech for 0-60. Thanks for mentioning it, others may not know the G-Tech 1/4 mile times are worthless...........
 

·
CMF Honorary Member
Joined
·
4,326 Posts
Well aware of that. The 1/4 mile times have proven inaccurate, while the 0-60 times have been quite accurate. I only use the G-Tech for 0-60. Thanks for mentioning it, others may not know the G-Tech 1/4 mile times are worthless...........
0-60 is off a little too. Going by my 60' foot times with my old Camaro and Corvette at the track I could tell. Plus if it's off 3 tenths in the 1/4 it will be off 0-60 too. I'd say it's off about a tenth or so depending on roll out.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top