[nutcrunch]

These cars are a tough sell. Even many who have bought the 2013 malibu eco, if you look on autotrader.com you will see hundreds of low mileage EOC'S already for sale by their owners.

After the powertrain warranty runs out, and if you keep the eco longer what does it cost to have the Ion battery replaced when it craps outs and needs replacement? Much like the chevy Volt. The battery in that is over $8,000, who is going to fork out $8,000 after 10 years of service when the car then is worth half the cost of a new battery. The car would be worth only scrap.

A lot of figuring out has to be done, but most people would rather drive and enjoy their cars instead of continually crunching numbers.

just my opinion......

I agree just like everyone else does that the 2013 Malibu isn't selling all that well, that is why they had to shut down it's production for a while.

I looked on Auto trader like you suggested and I see a total of two 2013 malibus for sale by private owner within a 500 mile radius of me. Both are Ecos and one is 202 miles away while the other is 579 miles away.

I then looked at all 2013 Chevys for sale by private ownerand I saw that there are 3 2013 Camaros for sale by private owner within 500 miles from me. 1 is 141 miles away, 1 is 145 miles away and 1 is 228 miles away.

Also 1 2013 Avalanche was for sale.

Using your logic the Malibu is selling better than the Camaro I guess.

I don't think I've seen one other 2013 Malibu on the road that I can remember.

I have no idea how much the battery costs in the ECO. I know there is a 8 year 100,000 mile warranty on the eassist components which includes the battery so I'm not worried personally. If the battery goes after that it should be less in price than it is now whatever the cost is.
The ECO is a less complicated machine than the VOLT so I would think the battery would be less expensive but I'm not sure. The Volt can run off the battery alone but the ECO doesn't have that powerful of a battery, it cannot run solely on the battery in the trunk. It uses the battery to give it a boost in power and to run the electronics while the car is shut off.
Where did you come up with the cost for the Volt battery by the way? Any sources for that cost? I have not seen an exact price just a few people's guesses.

 

[nutcrunch]

Sorry for my ignorance. What does 20/20 tint mean?

Is that legal in all states? I am just asking.

20/20 tint is referring to the front and back tint so he means he has 20% tint on front windows and 20% on the back.
20% means it lets 20% of light in, the lower the number the darker it is.

No it is not legal in all states, in Virginia for example it is only legal wjhen it is 50 on the front and 35 on the back it is also not legal in Oklahoma where mzodarg is. Oklahoma law states 25% front and back. See here for more info http://www.tintlaws.com/

To complicate it further, even though I have 50 on front and 35 on back like the law says, I am still not legal though because the windows already had a slight tint from factory so putting the legal tint on them brought it even darker so I am guessing our car is more like 40 front and 25 rear or something, which is in fact illegal.

 

[charts.1]

I agree just like everyone else does that the 2013 Malibu isn't selling all that well, that is why they had to shut down it's production for a while.

I looked on Auto trader like you suggested and I see a total of two 2013 malibus for sale by private owner within a 500 mile radius of me. Both are Ecos and one is 202 miles away while the other is 579 miles away.

I then looked at all 2013 Chevys for sale by private ownerand I saw that there are 3 2013 Camaros for sale by private owner within 500 miles from me. 1 is 141 miles away, 1 is 145 miles away and 1 is 228 miles away.

Also 1 2013 Avalanche was for sale.

Using your logic the Malibu is selling better than the Camaro I guess.

I don't think I've seen one other 2013 Malibu on the road that I can remember.

I have no idea how much the battery costs in the ECO. I know there is a 8 year 100,000 mile warranty on the eassist components which includes the battery so I'm not worried personally. If the battery goes after that it should be less in price than it is now whatever the cost is.
The ECO is a less complicated machine than the VOLT so I would think the battery would be less expensive but I'm not sure. The Volt can run off the battery alone but the ECO doesn't have that powerful of a battery, it cannot run solely on the battery in the trunk. It uses the battery to give it a boost in power and to run the electronics while the car is shut off.
Where did you come up with the cost for the Volt battery by the way? Any sources for that cost? I have not seen an exact price just a few people's guesses.

These prices were mentioned 2 years ago on chevrolet websites. The battery on the volt runs almost the entire length of the car in a y shape. It weighs over 350 pounds. That is why the volt retails for what it does, the electrical components are very expensive.

I am not sure if the battery in the Eco is replacement cost up to 8 years or pro rated cost much like a regular 12 volt battery in a car.

Most 12 volt batteries have 24 or 36 months free replacement, with pro rated value as each month after goes by after that.

 

[nutcrunch]

There is no prorating as far as I know.
Here is a 2011 Volt warranty and it makes no mention of pro-rating except for tires.
Let me know if you see otherwise.
http://www.chevrolet.com/content/da...te/en/Home/Ownership/Manuals and Videos/02_pdf/2011_chevrolet_volt_warranty.pdf

I do see this when they are talking about the 8 year 100,000 mile warranty on the battery...

Under warranty, the high voltage
battery will be replaced with either a
new or factory reconditioned high
voltage battery with an energy
capacity (kWh storage) level at or
above that of the original battery
prior to the failure.
Your Volt battery warranty
replacement may not return your
vehicle as an “as new” condition,
but it will make your Volt fully
operational appropriate to its age
and mileage.

Sounds kind of like they could put a less powerful battery than the original in. Like for instance if your car is 7 years old and they expect the battery to be about 50% and the battery dies then they could put a battery with 50% life left in it or something.

I will have to look at the Malibu warranty but I don't remember seeing anything about it being pro-rated either.

 

[nutcrunch]

I just saw that the Malibu ECO battery is but 65lb.

I see here people discussing the price of the Volt battery
http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread...um/showthread.php?11237-What-will-a-Chevy-Volt-replacement-battery-cost-in-2020

Someone in January of 2012 said the battery is listed for a bit below $3,000 but can be had for as low as $2,250
Expensive but far from $8,000

Here it is listed as just a little under $3,000
http://www.newgmparts.com/parts/201...leid=1447713&section=HYBRID COMPONENTS&group=HYBRID COMPONENTS&subgroup=BATTERY

I also see someone saying you still need to add a few more battery cell modules that cost about $1400 for some reason (doesn't make much sense to me) so that could add up close to $8,000.

Still not too worried though since I don't have a Volt

 

[charts.1]

Just for sh!ts and giggles I searched Autotrader, there are 7 13 Malibu's within a 400 mile radius of my location. One of which is the one I traded in, 3 were 2.5 ltr ones.

As I've stated before, I don't see many on the road in my city. There certainly isn't a market full of used ones on Autotrader, at least not in my area.

Tre'

I didn't say there were hundreds of malibus within a 400 mile range, I stated there are hundreds of used 2013 malibus for sale on AUTOTRADER.COM

If you punch in 2013 malibu NATIONAL on Autotrader you will see this morning January 8th, there are 581 USED 2013 Malibus for sale and MOST are ECO models.

 

[mzodarg]

Hey charts.1, I wasn't calling you out on BS, just stating that within 400 miles of me there isn't many used ones out there. Nothing more nothing less other. This is most likely due to the low sales volume.

 

[dcsforum]

I'm in a GM family and have honestly been planning on getting a new Malibu for about 3 years. I was holding out as long as I could to save money and then decided to wait until the new 2013 model came out about a year ago. Then I decided to wait until the 2.5L model came out last summer to see how the mainstream model would do.

So, I obviously saw all the negative reviews and I went and checked the car out multiple times. I was most frustrated by the lack of room in the back seat. For our family of 4, I considered it a virtual deal-breaker for a sedan in this class. I didn't care about many of the other complaints (styling, different interior textures, etc.) but I had some other issues which I've mentioned here previously.

And then GM came out and announced they were doing an early model refresh on it (in another year) and that was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. I couldn't bring myself to buy the current model knowing that GM was working on fixing some of the issues but not knowing which issues would be address. I question whether it was really beneficial to GM to put that announcement out there when they were already sitting on a 150-day inventory. I can only speak for me and that announcement eliminated the Malibu from consideration. I really perceived their announcement as "yeah, we messed up in some areas but we are working on solutions to some of those things so please go ahead and buy one of these unfixed models."

So, I just bought a new 2013 Equinox. It cost a little more but offers more flexible space for an active family (and a lot of room in the back seat with the sliding rear seat) and still offers respectable fuel economy. The Equinox is in the 4th model year and they sold over 400,000 the last two years (combined) so I hope they've worked most of the bugs out of it by now.

I'm honestly surprised the Malibu isn't selling better as I don't really think it's a bad car. A lot of people don't care much about the back seat room and I think it's a nice car otherwise. I wish it was a little less expensive in leather trim and got a little better fuel economy (and weighed a little less) but I'm surprised that sales of a sleek new widely-appealing model didn't pick up better. I mean, Chevy is a mainstream brand and without Pontiac and Olds to siphon away sales, I thought they would sell a lot "just because".

Hope this model turns out to be a winner. As the GM CEO said, they need to be successful in this segment. Maybe we'll pursue one when we need the next vehicle.

dcsforum

 

[cp-the-nerd]

Well... the Equinox is on the verge of an update too. It's going to get the 2.5L engine, probably at the same time they refresh the Malibu if not sooner.

 

[charts.1]

I'm in a GM family and have honestly been planning on getting a new Malibu for about 3 years. I was holding out as long as I could to save money and then decided to wait until the new 2013 model came out about a year ago. Then I decided to wait until the 2.5L model came out last summer to see how the mainstream model would do.

So, I obviously saw all the negative reviews and I went and checked the car out multiple times. I was most frustrated by the lack of room in the back seat. For our family of 4, I considered it a virtual deal-breaker for a sedan in this class. I didn't care about many of the other complaints (styling, different interior textures, etc.) but I had some other issues which I've mentioned here previously.

And then GM came out and announced they were doing an early model refresh on it (in another year) and that was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. I couldn't bring myself to buy the current model knowing that GM was working on fixing some of the issues but not knowing which issues would be address. I question whether it was really beneficial to GM to put that announcement out there when they were already sitting on a 150-day inventory. I can only speak for me and that announcement eliminated the Malibu from consideration. I really perceived their announcement as "yeah, we messed up in some areas but we are working on solutions to some of those things so please go ahead and buy one of these unfixed models."

So, I just bought a new 2013 Equinox. It cost a little more but offers more flexible space for an active family (and a lot of room in the back seat with the sliding rear seat) and still offers respectable fuel economy. The Equinox is in the 4th model year and they sold over 400,000 the last two years (combined) so I hope they've worked most of the bugs out of it by now.

I'm honestly surprised the Malibu isn't selling better as I don't really think it's a bad car. A lot of people don't care much about the back seat room and I think it's a nice car otherwise. I wish it was a little less expensive in leather trim and got a little better fuel economy (and weighed a little less) but I'm surprised that sales of a sleek new widely-appealing model didn't pick up better. I mean, Chevy is a mainstream brand and without Pontiac and Olds to siphon away sales, I thought they would sell a lot "just because".

Hope this model turns out to be a winner. As the GM CEO said, they need to be successful in this segment. Maybe we'll pursue one when we need the next vehicle.

dcsforum

Glad you like it.

Chevy installed new front suspension dampers for 2013 on the Equinox. It is suppose to give a more compliant, better ride than the 2010-2012's

 

[tradosaurus]

My wife and I test drove the 2013 Honda Accord and then test drove the 2013 Malibu Eco.

The Malibu Eco won hands down and was cheaper by a few thousand given the same amenities.

 

[cp-the-nerd]

Glad you like it.

Chevy installed new front suspension dampers for 2013 on the Equinox. It is suppose to give a more compliant, better ride than the 2010-2012's

Suspension changes only come with the newly available 302 hp 3.6L V6 (which turns the 'Nox into a total sleeper beast, by the way). It gets dual flow dampers that allow for more comfort as well as better handling performance and feel.

 

[charts.1]

Suspension changes only come with the newly available 302 hp 3.6L V6 (which turns the 'Nox into a total sleeper beast, by the way). It gets dual flow dampers that allow for more comfort as well as better handling performance and feel.

Thanks for that info.

 

[charts.1]

My wife and I test drove the 2013 Honda Accord and then test drove the 2013 Malibu Eco.

The Malibu Eco won hands down and was cheaper by a few thousand given the same amenities.

I would believe you could go to a couple chevy dealers that have their lots full of 13' Ecos, tell the salesperson that you are aware of the glut of unsold product in the pipeline, do comparison pricing, and make the deal of a lifetime.

A great opportunity for people who like the Malibu. Remember in about 5 months, the 2014s go into production with basically the same car, and with over 160 days of 13' Malibus sitting unsold, great deals can be made, over and above the deals they offer now.

 

[EnvoyBu]

Suspension changes only come with the newly available 302 hp 3.6L V6 (which turns the 'Nox into a total sleeper beast, by the way). It gets dual flow dampers that allow for more comfort as well as better handling performance and feel.

I don't know about "total sleeper beast", but it is pretty peppy. The 3.6L should have been there from day one though. The 3.0L sucked.

 

[cp-the-nerd]

I don't know about "total sleeper beast", but it is pretty peppy. The 3.6L should have been there from day one though. The 3.0L sucked.

Engineers said they were able to crack off high 14s in the 1/4 mile. In a CUV, that's freakin crazy sleeper.

 

[EnvoyBu]

Engineers said they were able to crack off high 14s in the 1/4 mile. In a CUV, that's freakin crazy sleeper.

I drove one. No way it'll reach the 14's. Low 15's? Yes. 14's? Hell no. The only CUV I know that was ever that fast was the RAV4 V6. THAT was a sleeper...

 

[cp-the-nerd]

Maybe you drove an AWD model, in which case you'd be absolutely right. I read a performance test where the AWD hit the 1/4 in 15.2 sec, and that's when the engineers told them they broke into the 14s with the lighter FWD model. I think that's plausible given a ~200 lb weight advantage.

Entry level AWD systems are pretty much dead weight, in my opinion, because they only transfer minimal power to the rear wheels when the fronts lose traction.

 

[EnvoyBu]

Maybe you drove an AWD model, in which case you'd be absolutely right. I read a performance test where the AWD hit the 1/4 in 15.2 sec, and that's when the engineers told them they broke into the 14s with the lighter FWD model. I think that's plausible given a ~200 lb weight advantage.

Entry level AWD systems are pretty much dead weight, in my opinion, because they only transfer minimal power to the rear wheels when the fronts lose traction.

*shrugs*

It'd be funny to see someone lose to a CUV in their "Sports Sedan", like the Regal Turbo haha!