• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    2013 Chevrolet Malibu Eco


    • August 20th, 2012

      Drew Dowdell

      Managing Editor - CheersandGears.com


    Now that the Sonic and Cruze have launched, by all accounts, successfully, Chevy is eager finish up the upper two models in its family car lineup. This 2013 Malibu Eco marks the three quarter mark on this refresh project while the Impala awaits its turn for 2014.

    The outgoing Malibu was on the large end of the mid-size scale, nearly approaching big brother Impala in overall size. And, while not the most feature laden of family cars, it offered a good combination of space, performance, efficiency, and value. In fact, even when viewed next to more modern designs like the Kia Optima and Toyota Camry, the 2012 Malibu was still an attractive and handsome car, especially in upper trims. That generation of Malibu had fairly good reports for build quality and reliability as well.

    Chevy could likely have gotten away with a minor styling refresh with some power train updates and kept that model on sale for another two years. Instead, Chevy decided to push the new Malibu out sooner in spite of not all of the engines being ready at launch. So instead of a full Malibu lineup, the car was launched in only the Eco trim which comes only with a mild hybrid setup GM called eAssist.

    I sampled the eAssist set up in the 2012 Buick Lacrosse back in January where I achieved an astounding 36mpg highway and 27mpg city. I was impressed with the performance of the eAssist because it gave the 4-cylinder gasoline engine more of a smooth V6 feel while rolling around town yet was still able to get to those fuel efficiency numbers without employing one of the more expensive full-hybrid configurations in a car that is not at all light weight.

    So the 2013 Malibu has two main tasks to convince me of: First prove that it is better than the outgoing Malibu and second perform at least equal or better than the bigger and heavier Buick Lacrosse eAssist. A few weeks ago, you got William Maley’s review on the 2013 Chevrolet Malibu Eco and now it is my turn. Is the new Malibu up to the two tasks I have set out for it?

    Next up: How is the Malibu inside?


    As GM’s value brand, it is Chevy’s job to offer good value for the money. Clocking in at an eye popping $29,380 as tested, this Malibu has a number of nice features, but a notably absent one at this price being a full navigation system instead of just OnStar turn-by-turn. In the prior model, the only navigation option was OnStar, but the rest of the car upped the value quotient with a lot of car for your dollar with good passenger space and plenty of trunk room.

    With the new Impala coming, Chevy had to kick the Malibu down a notch in size and shaved 4.5 inches out of the wheelbase while trimming exterior length by just 2/10ths of an inch. I know we usually start our tour with the driver’s position, but this 4.5 inch drop has the largest impact on rear seat passengers.

    Chevy claims it was able to keep rear legroom about the same by the numbers, but I wasn't able to find it. Rear leg room is on the tight side and even though I’m only 5’10”, my knees were almost in the back of the front seat. In fact, knee room feels roughly on par with the Malibu’s little brother Cruze. The Cruze get there by having cutouts in the rear of the front seat. It seems to me this same trick could have been employed to get a little more room for the Malibu, but no such luck. Even the Jetta, a car that should not even be playing in this size class, has a good bit more leg room than the Malibu.

    gallery_51_457_2734.png

    Headroom in back is merely acceptable, but don’t be much taller than I am. Those wishing for a rear center armrest that the previous model lacked finally get their wish fulfilled. The rear seats themselves are firmly supportive and comfortable.

    Moving up to the pilot’s position, we are greeted with a new take on Chevy’s dual cowl dashboard. The design is now split horizontally with black plastic ribbing inside the split and a thin chrome strip running through the center. No one’s pictures (especially mine) do the design justice, but it does look very attractive in person especially when the night time ambient lighting kicks on. The plood on the steering wheel, doors, and center console looks especially fake with the dark veins of grain looking printed on almost to the point of being pixilated.

    The large oval center stack dominates and the camaro-esque instrument panel gives a nod to the Malibu’s sportier cousin. Controls on the center stack are laid out logically and have a high quality feel to them. An attractive addition is the active backlight behind the controls that gives a swooshing lighting effect when you make adjustments on certain dials.

    Chevy’s MyLink system is here and it is simple enough to use for even the most technically inept. I did find the response from the touch screen to be rather laggy, but otherwise I experienced no bugs. There is a compartment under the MyLink screen which would be useful for storing your MP3 player or smart phone if Chevy had included a USB port inside. Without that, the smart phone was relegated to the center console. The only thing I found the compartment useful for was storing my toll transponder.

    The HVAC system is more than up to the task of cooling the cabin rapidly. There are two modes for the system : Eco and Comfort. Eco will allow the eAssist system to stop the gas engine when the car has come to a stop, in effect stopping the cooling ability of the A/C compressor. The Comfort setting will continue to run the engine to keep the cabin cool. Being somewhat eco conscious, I kept the setting in Eco, however the car seemed to want to override my selection from time to time and bump back into Comfort. If outside temperatures are over about 85 degrees Fahrenheit you will probably want to keep the car in Comfort as cabin temperature can rise rapidly at a long light.

    Interior build quality is not one of the new Malibu’s strong suits. I found numerous assembly defects in my test vehicle. Frankly, given the great strides GM has made on its interiors lately, the number and severity of the defects in this Malibu was shocking. Hitting heavy turbulence, I noticed the instrument pod had a bit of extra shake to it. After poking at that I found the cover just peels back. Even just small amounts of pressure was able to move part of the dash on the passenger side around, and just a one handed small tug pulled the whole piece off. The carpet on the passenger side was not installed correctly, leaving a large gap in the foot well. Interior panel gaps were misaligned all over. I’m not sure how this particular car ever passed Q/C much less end up in the press fleet.

    gallery_51_457_7251.png

    gallery_51_457_275213.png

    Next up: Can we judge a book by its cover?


    With a new model comes new exterior styling as well. Personally, I felt the dearly departed previous generation Malibu to be one of the most handsome vehicles in the segment. If I were in the market, I could have written a check for the LTZ without remorse.

    Out front Chevy butched up the face of the Malibu with a lot more creases and folds. Rather than one subtle crease in the hood like the previous model, Chevy upped the ante with no less than 7 folds of the metal making up just the hood. It has to be a very expensive part to produce and on my example it did line up perfectly. In fact, all of the body panels lined up well with tight gaps. Around back, Chevy incorporated more Camaro into the tail lights. Taken as a whole, I like the overall more masculine effect. It’s not better or worse than the previous body, just a different style. If I had any specific complaint about the exterior, it is that the 17” aluminum wheels look too small, but that is likely a compromise for Eco’s sake.

    gallery_51_457_1005882.png

    If you’re expecting to need to haul a lot in the trunk, just wait for a non-Eco model. The battery pack takes up so much room back there you end up with one of the smallest trunks in the class and again bested by Cruze and Jetta.

    Next up: Yes, but how does the Malibu Eco drive?


    In spite of the Camaro cues incorporated into various parts of the Malibu design, it isn't especially sporty out on the road. The suspension is more concerned with providing comfort than strong cornering abilities. Out on the highway, the Malibu is a comfortable long distance cruiser soaking up road imperfections before they infiltrate the cabin.

    One of the reasons you can buy a 2013 Malibu today rather than having to waiting till the fall is because GM management at the highest levels decided to push the car out early in spite of not all engines being ready for production. Since the 2.4 liter Ecotec with eAssist was the only engine ready to go at launch time desired by management. This put Chevy in the disadvantage of having its new midsize entry come with an initial base price thousands of dollars above the competition.

    Functionally, the eAssist starts and runs like any other engine out there available. During light acceleration conditions, the 15 horsepower electric motor adds some twist to the wheels to help out the gas engine and save some fuel. The additional power mostly comes on at lower speeds, giving the 4-cylinder a more torquey feel that one might expect from a V6. On the highway, the system will give slight boost to crest light waves in the highway while regenerating the battery on the downside of the hill. The transition between assist and regeneration is absolutely seamless and, unless you have one of the power train displays up, you will have no idea what is going on under the hood. When stopping at a light, the eAssist will also stop the gasoline engine unless the HVAC system is set to Comfort as mentioned above or if the engine is not yet at operating temperature. Full throttle acceleration is not what I would call brisk. Swing the tach too far past the 4,000 mark and the engine seems to run out of breath. Don’t expect much help from the electric motor at that point either, its 15 horsepower only goes so far.

    While I appreciated the eAssist in the Buick Lacrosse back in January, the lack of Buick’s quiet tuning was quite apparent here with much more engine noise entering the cabin.

    gallery_51_457_753332.png

    Brake feel has the same lack of feedback that nearly every hybrid I've driven has. There were a couple of times when coming to a stop that I rolled out further than I expected to due to this lack of feel.

    Fuel economy for an “Eco” midsize was terrible. As I mentioned earlier, I left the climate control in Eco mode as much as possible and averaged just 23.7 mpg combined for the week. On one longer trip I hyper-miled it and still was only able to manage 28mpg. There are circa 300 horsepower V6es in heavier cars that can do better than that, Chevrolet’s own Camaro V6 being the most obvious example and Chrysler 300 is another. At first I thought the atrocious fuel economy was a problem limited to one car as I had done substantially better in the Buick Lacrosse eAssist review, however William Maley experienced similar terrible fuel economy during his review of the 2013 Malibu Eco a few weeks ago. In the end, it just reinforces the idea that if Chevrolet went through the hassle of fitting batteries into the car, shouldn't it get substantially better fuel economy than those cars without?

    Next Up: What it all boils down to...


    In the end, the 2013 Malibu Eco failed the two tasks I set out for it. The unacceptable build quality of my example ruined any chance of it being judged better than the prior model. The diminish rear seat room that has the Malibu matching with the Jetta and Cruze, the class smallest trunk space, the real world fuel economy below a larger Buick with the same power train, and higher-than-competition base price tag remove the value proposition. About the only thing this Malibu has going for it at the moment is its looks and a decent entertainment system.

    It is abundantly clear that this was a rush job on GM’s part, a rush job that wasn't even necessary with the already competent, though aging, previous generation Malibu out there for sale and doing good for GM’s reputation. Sorry GM, this one wasn't done cooking before you took it out of the oven. Better see what you can do to salvage things.

    General Motors provided the Chevrolet Malibu Eco, one tank of fuel, and insurance.

    Make: Chevrolet

    Model: Malibu

    Model Year: 2013

    Trim: Eco 2SA

    Engine: Transversely mounted 2.4 liter 4-cylinder with eAssist

    Transmission: Front Wheel Drive, 6-speed manual

    Max horsepower @ RPM: 182 hp @ 6200 rpm

    Max torque @RPM: 171 lb-ft of torque @ 4900 rpm

    EPA Fuel Economy: 25 City / 37 Highway

    Exterior color as tested: Crystal Red Tintcoat

    Interior color as tested: Cocoa

    Location of Manufacture: Kansas City, Kansas, USA

    MSRP as tested: $29,380.00

    Drew Dowdell is Managing Editor of CheersandGears.com and can be reached at Drew.Dowdell@CheersandGears.com or on twitter as @cheersngears

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback




    Good review. Gives us the bad news without resorting to bashing

    I can't fault them for downsizing the Malibu to put some space between it and the new Impala, but the other stuff is just inexcusable. This just shows that Dan Akerson is an idiot and not fit to be CEO of a lemonade stand, much less GM. Hopefully he gets an inside-the-gate retirement package really soon.

    I had some seat time in a 2012 Malibu LTZ with the 4cyl last week, and that is fantastic car that could have more than held the fort until the current car was ready. Considering that it went its entire existence without a single touch to the exterior and was still one of the more handsome sedans on the market says something. It was built like a vault, very peppy, very roomy, and got great fuel economy. It's a shame that the new car doesn't capitalize on the momentum of the previous car. Still, as bad as it all sounds, much of it can be fixed with running changes. I'd hold out for a '14 at the earliest.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thank you so much for this review - love to read about all the latest cars at this site.

    The last auto show I went to was in 2007-2008 in Washington DC at the Convention Center there...whichever year it was they had the newly redesigned 2008 Malibu there. I remember sitting in them and being so impressed with the way the interior looked and felt, the solidness of the car, especially liked the rear end.

    I am really disappointed by the way the 2013 Malibu looks, it seems like a step backwards to me. I'm reading about it here, looking at pictures and thinking..meh

    Then GM releases the 2014 Impala and I'm thinking WOW, that's NICE - I just don't understand what GM was thinking with the Malibu. So much work & time & money and it looks, well, bad.

    Your last paragraph says it all...I do hope they can make some fixes.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Agreed...I've seen a few of them around and they look a little sportier, but it doesn't really seem like a step forward...just a replacement...

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I sat in one of these (display car) that was an uplevel trim, didn't look to see if it was LTZ and I did like the color selections and thought they used some nice materials. Didn't look that closely on quality or fit and finish.

    The lack of interior and truck space, bland driving and high price will hurt this car big time. $29,000+ gets you a Jetta or Passat TDI or Camry or Sonata hybrid that will crush the Malibu in mileage. Plus, new Accord and new Fusion about to go on sales, new Altima just came out, this segment is loaded right now.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't understand why they couldn't throw the DI 2.4L in the 2011/12 Malibus and held the release until it could be released properly in late 2012. This is inexcusable. In this segment you can't afford to make a mistake muchless several.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You know Olds, I looked at your pics, and all of them I really appreciated because they helped support what you wrote about build quality/finish. There was a pic of the side of the center console... was there a particular part I was supposed to focus on? Was it all the things meeting in different places or that they could have had tighter tolerances when coming together? Frankly, I'm shocked at some of the things like the carpet having a gap and pieces not fitting properly. You think with a press car they'd make sure it was PERFECT.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On styling, having seen the new one parked next to the old one on a dealer lot, I prefer the new one, all the way through until I get to the Camaro-inspired taillights, which I feel are not integrated well. The uplevel LED tails look cheesy when lit.

    I like the interior on the newer car as well. Yes, the back seat may be smaller than before, but that may not be a major factor for a lot of buyers who will likely use the front seat a lot more. A baby seat can still be installed back there, I'm sure. Equinox has tons of rear seat legroom.

    The e-Assist system is the elephant in the back seat here. It adds no value... in fact, it takes value OUT of the car, clearly. It is not a good system, and by forcing the buying public's hand by putting it out there before versions with simple, economical powertrains, confident brakes and decent trunk room, GM has imperiled their relatively weak position in a powerhouse market segment even further.

    As far as interior assembly quality, I wonder what the production date is on your test example. I'm guessing it is an extreme early-build car that's already been in the hands of some pretty unforgiving test drivers, plus it may have been taken apart after it left the factory by GM people for some such reason we may not be privy to. Examples on dealer lots now, for sale to the public, would be a fairer arbiter on interior assembly quality.

    Edited by ocnblu
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You know Olds, I looked at your pics, and all of them I really appreciated because they helped support what you wrote about build quality/finish. There was a pic of the side of the center console... was there a particular part I was supposed to focus on? Was it all the things meeting in different places or that they could have had tighter tolerances when coming together? Frankly, I'm shocked at some of the things like the carpet having a gap and pieces not fitting properly. You think with a press car they'd make sure it was PERFECT.

    Yes but the alignment problem there didn't show up well in the photo. The gap between the metallic looking piece and the side of the console is uneven.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    From what I have read so far, where this car fails is in the way it was lauched. Pretty much like the launch of the RWD/AWD SRX a few years back, it seems GM didn't spend too much time thiking of lauching it head-on on where the sales are and instead chose to give priority to the variant that should have been lauched last (in this case the e-Assist model; in the previous-gen SRX case the USD 50K V8 models)...

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Here is the thing folks don't know much about the 08-12. At many dealers, they could not move too many Malibu's retail for a couple of reasons, sort of related. One, the Impala had more space and was easier to get in (many many folks bitched about the low roof and tough ingress and egress) and out of which was much easier to understand because 2, the Impalas in many cases were cheaper. So the overlap issue is understandable.

    They COULD have kept the 08-12 body, but the whole powertrains would need to be new and the interior would need a complete gut and redo.

    This review is timely for me for a couple reasons. One, I roamed a chev lot Sunday and a new Eco was left open....I spent a lot of time in it. Second, I may have a daily drive change which would require long distance (primarily interstate) travel. Eco leases have been advertised cheap now with the new non Eco's coming out.

    Here is what i think Chevy's logic was, build the Ecos as basically production test bed cars, i.e. sell preproduction cars....but get the car out so there was it's time in the limelight. Getting it out now, would fall into the intros of all the other new midsizers. The other factor people should not discard.....to introduce it now, would mean only a few months of gap between the new Impala and new Malibu.

    Of course any decision can be judged in retrospect. Maybe it did not work out to GM's favor here. But it probably would have made most sense to have the Eco ready with the 2.5, and to launch the car when the 2.5 was ready also.

    I do think the 'pre-production Eco's' are why your quality issues seems to be there. The car I checked out (and I have seen them a few times already at the auto show etc.) seemed put together pretty well. The exterior was top notch, and after long long gazing, I do believe the 13 stands up as well as the 12. In fact, i like the sportiness of it more. I do not even mind the overhangs..... there is a lot of drama on every line on this car. You have to study it from many angles. Parked next to the 12, you see how much larger the hood and such is on the 13, and you also see how the pillars and windshield are essentially the same.

    The interior is unique in the new midsize class in that it is very invasive and intimate. The front has deep knee bolsters and the seats hug. The front seats are a great place to be. All the controls are well thought. Impressive how the lower dash is squishy on the passenger side but solid on the driver side...but they look the same.

    The rear is the let down. The leg room is barely adequate. For my 9 year old its ok. But why its a problem is what he said.....footspace. GM needs to re-engineer the seat base to return footspace. Does the Regal have the same problem? Not as much. Here is the culprit. The malibu's rakish roof takes a nosedive. It pushes the rear seat bottom down, and the tight ingress really constricts the feel in back.

    The car is stunning, but I do really feel they could have pulled off the same design theme with a little more changes (some of which would be tough being an epsilon car). I would cab forward the windshield a bit. i would add at least 2 inches wheelbase. I would then continue the raising part of the roof a little further back on the car and taper it back a little later with a shorter trunk....to preserve head space and get the rear seat a little higher. If the roof the car was even 2 inches higher over the rear headrests and the car had a 2 inch stretch for leg room, with a deeper footspace, i think we'd be good.

    The Malibu and Impala are very distinct as they needed to be. The wheelbase issue is a big part of it. The Malibu lacks windows (see gunslit rear window). The impala does not. The malibu will be primarily four cylinder. The impala should be mostly 6. The Malibu will lease cheap....i foresee lots of lease deals on the malibu to move in the showroom.

    the interior quality issues will get taken care of. The tech is now in the mix. the engines will be top drawer. The car will be a great cruiser. I think price is good. I think the backseat trouble will hinder sales....styling, once the car is in the wild, should be an asset. I have already seen a couple in the wild and let me tell you, you notice it. Too bad crystal red is not on the lower level cars. It needs it.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    The car is stunning, but I do really feel they could have pulled off the same design theme with a little more changes (some of which would be tough being an epsilon car). I would cab forward the windshield a bit. i would add at least 2 inches wheelbase. I would then continue the raising part of the roof a little further back on the car and taper it back a little later with a shorter trunk....to preserve head space and get the rear seat a little higher.

    ... so... just to be clear... you'd build a 2012 Malibu.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    no. because i welcome the design change. they could still have the curvy new design them and much of the same lines, they would not need the full 08 wheelbase. just an extra couple inches. the arc of the side window lines and the roof should arch higher and further back before it starts to come back down. they would raise the roof above the rear seat then. The trunk lid could be a few inches shorter if the roof taper starts higher and goes back further. the front windshield base could come forward to balance it out. in essence, to cab forward the car some and stretch the greenhouse would have been all that was needed. the hard epsilon points restricted them. Again, to be clear, the design THEME and it's primary features are fine. The proportioning would have worked better if they did not need to adhere to the limitations of epsilon. The 08-12 had the same problems of low roof also....ingress and egress and small windows were a complaint of many buyers with the 08-12.

    GM would have been crucified to keep the 08-12 body with all the new redos from everyone else coming out. It was the right plan to come out with the new body style to compete. The execution of it had some flaws. All the early Eco's are basically pre-production test bed cars.

    What if you set the cruise at 75 and drive 20 miles no stop, what does the computer show for mpg?

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There are way too many complaints on this car already in a segment where you need to get everything right. The Camry and Accord may be boring, but they have a super loyal customer base and build quality and reliability. The masses trust those nameplates. The Sonata, Optima, Fusion and Altima are proven winners as well, and none of those six cars I just mentioned have multiple glaring flaws like the Malibu does. GM dropped the ball here, and perhaps there are too many Epsilon 2 cars and they can't manage them all.

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    How ironic, since there were many more Epsilon I cars...

    Weren't there 4 of them? Malibu, G6, Aura and 9-3 (which was heavily differentiated) and the G6 and Aura died mid-way through the current Malibu's life cycle. Epsilon 2 has Malibu, Impala, Regal, LaCrosse, XTS and very briefly a 9-5.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The 2008-2012 Malibu was still Epsilon 1. The first Epsilon 2 car produced was the current Lacrosse.

    You've forgotten Vectra and Insignia as Epsilon 1 and 2 respectively as well.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I've held my tongue about the new Malibu for quite some time now but now is as good a time as any to let my thoughts be heard I think.

    The current Malibu was designed, as Lutz put it, to look like a car that cost $10k more. That mission also seems to have been the driving force behind the 2014 Impala. The 2013 sub-LTZ Malibu models look kinda cheap, like a second tier of the midsize segment when you compare the looks of the more inexpensive trims of the Fusion and Sonata. The LTZ is a very nice looking car but that's just because this is one of those cars that uses a good wheel/trim package as a crutch to achieve good looks. That's not the case with the Sonata or Fusion, the new Impala or even the current Taurus either. It's certainly not the case with the Dodge Charger and Chrysler 300 either.

    If you look at other newer members of the Chevy lineup (Traverse, Equinox, Impala) the contrast is there too... I can't put my finger on it. Suffice to say it does bug me enough that I won't be considering one for myself while I will consider spending the extra money on an Impala. It's just that lukewarm to me for some reason

    I hope the interior is not of a poor quality and this was an isolated incident because the couple I've seen at the Auto Shows and press events have had impressive interior quality by my estimation, way better than the outgoing model, I'd almost say that my impression was build quality inside and out (along with the 2.0T engine) are probably the high points of the entire damn car.

    Rushing out your volume model in the biggest segment in the majority of your markets was a huge mistake. That's just bad strategy. The current Malibu could have waited the 8 months it would have taken to get it out with the right engine and maybe some more engineering and sorting out. I'm confused as to why they didn't think they'd get dinged for this.

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Perhaps they were thinking that few would noticethe Eco model and then forgive them once the regular 2013 Malibu came out. #Fail on that strategy. Wrong market, piss poor timing too.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    One of my issues with the Malibu not mentioned in the review is weight. The Malibu is easily the smallest of its declared competitors, yet it weighs the most.

    Malibu 1LT - 3439

    Malibu Eco 2SA - 3602

    Kia Optima - 3223

    Volkswagen Passat 2.5 SE A/T - 3221

    Hyundai Sonata GLS - 3199

    Hyundai Sonata Hybrid - 3457

    2012 Nissan Altima - 3180

    2013 Nissan Altima - 3187

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

      Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. stlcadet11
      stlcadet11
      (27 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      The rivalry of the Chevrolet Camaro and Ford Mustang has been going for ages in the U.S. But now this fight has expanded into China.
      Automotive News reports that a growing group of Chinese buyers are being drawn towards to these models as the exude the no-apologies Americana attitude.
      "We're seeing the beginning of a muscle car culture here. Something that is uniquely American appeals to the Chinese consumer. The image that it relays to the automotive public is very positive," said James Chao, a China market auto analyst with IHS Markit.
      Sales of both models are small with Chevrolet only moving 2,000 Camaros since its launch 2011. Ford is doing slightly better with 6,200 Mustangs sold since its launch in 2015. In the first quarter, Mustang sales saw a 90 percent increase to 963 vehicles. Part of the reason for the slow sales comes down to the price. The Camaro starts about 399,900 yuan (about $58,000) - more than double of the base price of $26,900 in the U.S. The Mustang isn't that far behind, costing about $15 dollars less. Prices are increased due to a 25 percent import tariff on U.S. made vehicles, homologation and shipping fees, and Chinese buyers trending to splurge on higher-time models.
      But despite the low sales, the Camaro and Mustang are bringing buyers to dealers. These models act as eye candy to help draw shoppers into showrooms with the hope they'll purchase a vehicle, where it be the eye candy or something a little less exciting.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      The rivalry of the Chevrolet Camaro and Ford Mustang has been going for ages in the U.S. But now this fight has expanded into China.
      Automotive News reports that a growing group of Chinese buyers are being drawn towards to these models as the exude the no-apologies Americana attitude.
      "We're seeing the beginning of a muscle car culture here. Something that is uniquely American appeals to the Chinese consumer. The image that it relays to the automotive public is very positive," said James Chao, a China market auto analyst with IHS Markit.
      Sales of both models are small with Chevrolet only moving 2,000 Camaros since its launch 2011. Ford is doing slightly better with 6,200 Mustangs sold since its launch in 2015. In the first quarter, Mustang sales saw a 90 percent increase to 963 vehicles. Part of the reason for the slow sales comes down to the price. The Camaro starts about 399,900 yuan (about $58,000) - more than double of the base price of $26,900 in the U.S. The Mustang isn't that far behind, costing about $15 dollars less. Prices are increased due to a 25 percent import tariff on U.S. made vehicles, homologation and shipping fees, and Chinese buyers trending to splurge on higher-time models.
      But despite the low sales, the Camaro and Mustang are bringing buyers to dealers. These models act as eye candy to help draw shoppers into showrooms with the hope they'll purchase a vehicle, where it be the eye candy or something a little less exciting.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
    • By dfelt
      G. David Felt - Staff Writer Alternative Energy - www.cheersandgears.com
      National BOLT Lease Deal with 15,000 miles.
      According to CarsDirect web site, Chevrolet rolled out starting April 1st a national lease deal on the Chevy BOLT.
      Details of the Lease:
      $329 a month for 36 months with $3,809 due at signing with 15,000 miles of range per year. 
      This is a hell of a deal when you compare the normal lease deals are just 10,000 or for a bit more, 12,000 miles per year.
      Now if your in a CARB state like California or Oregon, you get an additional $2,250 off on the lease. Thus giving you a upfront cost of only $1,559, 15,000 miles and a monthly payment of just $329. Sweet deal for the LT. The premier is just a bit more $347 according to the local web site in Seattle.
       
    • By William Maley
      American automakers haven’t been known for building good compact vehicles. Previous attempts have faltered when compared to those from the likes of Honda, Mazda, and Toyota. But this perception began to change when Ford brought out the Focus in 2000. It seemed progress was being made in making a decent compact vehicle thanks to their European branch helping out. Seeing this, GM decided to follow the same path. They called in their Korean and European offices to help out with the development of a new model known as Cruze. The vehicle proved to be a massive improvement from the Cobalt as it got the basics right such as fuel economy and overall interior space. Yes, the Cruze was lacking in some key areas such as design and driving fun. But it was light years ahead of GM’s previous attempts at a compact vehicle.
      When it came time to work on the next-generation Cruze, Chevrolet knew they had a good starting point and only needed to make improvements to make the model a real contender in the class. Let’s see if that has panned out or not.
      Dare I say the new Cruze is a sharp looking compact? Yes, but to a point. It is clear that Chevrolet’s design team took a lot of inspiration from the Volt PHEV when working on the second-generation Cruze. The overall profile and certain lines of the Volt appear on the Cruze. The front end features Chevrolet’s new tiered-grille and a set of slimmer headlights. Where the Cruze’s design falls flat is in the back. It seems Chevrolet’s designers really couldn’t be bothered to do something special. There two ways you can fix this. You can either go with the Cruze hatchback which to our eyes looks so much better thanks to the longer roofline and tailgate, or opting for the RS appearance package which dresses up the back with a more aggressive bumper. The RS package also adds mesh grille inserts, and sporty looking wheels - 18-inch ones on our Premier tester.
      Moving inside, Chevrolet has put a lot of effort in making the Cruze a nice place to sit in. Many surfaces are covered with high-quality materials and feature some unique touches such as a curving character line on the dashboard. Making yourself comfortable is quite easy thanks to eight-way power adjustments for the driver and a tilt-telescoping steering wheel. The front passenger has to make do with manual adjustments. In the back, there is enough legroom for most passengers. Headroom is slightly tight if you decide to get a sunroof. One nice item for those sitting in the back is the option of heated seats.
      One area Chevrolet is using as a selling point for the Cruze is technology. All Cruzes get a seven-inch touchscreen with Chevrolet MyLink and compatibility with Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. OnStar 4G LTE with Wi-Fi also comes standard across the board. Our Premier tester came with the optional 8-inch touchscreen with navigation. MyLink has been a source of frustration in many of Chevrolet vehicles we have reviewed, but it seems they are starting to get its act together. Overall performance has seen a slight improvement with transitions into various functions being snappy. The navigation system still has some performance issues as it slows down when zooming in or out. Chevrolet has also fixed some of the bugs with their Apple CarPlay integration. We saw no issues of slowdown or apps crashing whenever we had CarPlay up.
      Under the Cruze’s hood is a turbocharged 1.4L four-cylinder with 153 horsepower and 177 pound-feet of torque. A six-speed automatic is the only transmission choice if you get the Premier. Anything below and you have the choice of the automatic or a six-speed manual. A diesel engine is coming later this year. The performance figures for the turbo 1.4L will not knock the socks off of anyone - 0-60 mph time of just over eight seconds. But you won’t think the Cruze is a slowpoke thanks the engine having a lot of low-end grunt. The vehicle leaps forward when leaving a stop and doesn’t feel that it is going to run out of breath. It doesn’t hurt Chevrolet has dropped almost 300 pounds from the new model. The six-speed automatic is quick to upshift to maximize fuel economy, but the same cannot be said for downshifts. It takes a moment or two for the automatic to go down a gear when you step on the accelerator.
      The turbo 1.4 comes with an auto stop-start system as standard. The system is quick to start the engine back up whenever you take your foot off the brake. One item that will irk some people is that you cannot turn off the stop-start system.
      EPA fuel economy figures for the 2017 Chevrolet Cruze stand at 29 City/39 Highway/33 Combined for the Premier sedan. Our average for the week landed around 31.2 mpg. The L, LS, and LT sedan get slightly higher fuel economy figures of 28/39/32 for the manual and 30/40/34 for the automatic.
      It seems most compacts are trying to outdo one another in terms of offering the best driving experience. So it is a bit of fresh air that Chevrolet has decided to skip this and make the Cruze ride like a bigger car. The suspension provides a cushy ride with most bumps being ironed out. Road and wind noise are kept to almost silent levels. Handling is competent in the class as the Cruze shows little body roll. However, the steering is too light in terms of feel and weight when driven enthusiastically.
      Chevrolet’s previous attempts at a compact vehicle have ranged from the punchline to a bad joke to something that can be considered at competent. But with the 2017 Cruze, Chevrolet put their heads down into making a compact that could stand tall among competitors. They have succeeded as the Cruze gets the fundamentals right and offers some distinctive traits that help it stand out from others such as the big-car ride and impressive amount of tech. Yes, it would be nice if Cruze was a slightly sharper in terms of design and the steering tweaked a bit to make it a bit more fun to drive. 
      Since I have been reviewing new vehicles for almost five years, there have been only a few vehicles that I keep thinking about to this day. Chevrolet has two to its name. The first was the 2014 Impala and the Cruze is number two.
      Disclaimer: Chevrolet Provided the Cruze, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2017
      Make: Chevrolet
      Model: Cruze
      Trim: Premier
      Engine: Turbocharged 1.4L DOHC VVT DI Four-Cylinder 
      Driveline: Six-Speed Automatic, Front-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 153 @ 5600
      Torque @ RPM: 177 @ 2000-4000
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 29/39/33
      Curb Weight: 2,978 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Lordstown, OH
      Base Price: $23,475
      As Tested Price: $29,195 (Includes $875.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Sun & Sound w/Navigation - $1,995.00
      RS Package - $995.00
      Enhanced Convenience Package - $865.00
      Driver Confidence II Package - $790.00
      Floor Mats - $140.00
      Wheel Lock Kit - $60.00

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      American automakers haven’t been known for building good compact vehicles. Previous attempts have faltered when compared to those from the likes of Honda, Mazda, and Toyota. But this perception began to change when Ford brought out the Focus in 2000. It seemed progress was being made in making a decent compact vehicle thanks to their European branch helping out. Seeing this, GM decided to follow the same path. They called in their Korean and European offices to help out with the development of a new model known as Cruze. The vehicle proved to be a massive improvement from the Cobalt as it got the basics right such as fuel economy and overall interior space. Yes, the Cruze was lacking in some key areas such as design and driving fun. But it was light years ahead of GM’s previous attempts at a compact vehicle.
      When it came time to work on the next-generation Cruze, Chevrolet knew they had a good starting point and only needed to make improvements to make the model a real contender in the class. Let’s see if that has panned out or not.
      Dare I say the new Cruze is a sharp looking compact? Yes, but to a point. It is clear that Chevrolet’s design team took a lot of inspiration from the Volt PHEV when working on the second-generation Cruze. The overall profile and certain lines of the Volt appear on the Cruze. The front end features Chevrolet’s new tiered-grille and a set of slimmer headlights. Where the Cruze’s design falls flat is in the back. It seems Chevrolet’s designers really couldn’t be bothered to do something special. There two ways you can fix this. You can either go with the Cruze hatchback which to our eyes looks so much better thanks to the longer roofline and tailgate, or opting for the RS appearance package which dresses up the back with a more aggressive bumper. The RS package also adds mesh grille inserts, and sporty looking wheels - 18-inch ones on our Premier tester.
      Moving inside, Chevrolet has put a lot of effort in making the Cruze a nice place to sit in. Many surfaces are covered with high-quality materials and feature some unique touches such as a curving character line on the dashboard. Making yourself comfortable is quite easy thanks to eight-way power adjustments for the driver and a tilt-telescoping steering wheel. The front passenger has to make do with manual adjustments. In the back, there is enough legroom for most passengers. Headroom is slightly tight if you decide to get a sunroof. One nice item for those sitting in the back is the option of heated seats.
      One area Chevrolet is using as a selling point for the Cruze is technology. All Cruzes get a seven-inch touchscreen with Chevrolet MyLink and compatibility with Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. OnStar 4G LTE with Wi-Fi also comes standard across the board. Our Premier tester came with the optional 8-inch touchscreen with navigation. MyLink has been a source of frustration in many of Chevrolet vehicles we have reviewed, but it seems they are starting to get its act together. Overall performance has seen a slight improvement with transitions into various functions being snappy. The navigation system still has some performance issues as it slows down when zooming in or out. Chevrolet has also fixed some of the bugs with their Apple CarPlay integration. We saw no issues of slowdown or apps crashing whenever we had CarPlay up.
      Under the Cruze’s hood is a turbocharged 1.4L four-cylinder with 153 horsepower and 177 pound-feet of torque. A six-speed automatic is the only transmission choice if you get the Premier. Anything below and you have the choice of the automatic or a six-speed manual. A diesel engine is coming later this year. The performance figures for the turbo 1.4L will not knock the socks off of anyone - 0-60 mph time of just over eight seconds. But you won’t think the Cruze is a slowpoke thanks the engine having a lot of low-end grunt. The vehicle leaps forward when leaving a stop and doesn’t feel that it is going to run out of breath. It doesn’t hurt Chevrolet has dropped almost 300 pounds from the new model. The six-speed automatic is quick to upshift to maximize fuel economy, but the same cannot be said for downshifts. It takes a moment or two for the automatic to go down a gear when you step on the accelerator.
      The turbo 1.4 comes with an auto stop-start system as standard. The system is quick to start the engine back up whenever you take your foot off the brake. One item that will irk some people is that you cannot turn off the stop-start system.
      EPA fuel economy figures for the 2017 Chevrolet Cruze stand at 29 City/39 Highway/33 Combined for the Premier sedan. Our average for the week landed around 31.2 mpg. The L, LS, and LT sedan get slightly higher fuel economy figures of 28/39/32 for the manual and 30/40/34 for the automatic.
      It seems most compacts are trying to outdo one another in terms of offering the best driving experience. So it is a bit of fresh air that Chevrolet has decided to skip this and make the Cruze ride like a bigger car. The suspension provides a cushy ride with most bumps being ironed out. Road and wind noise are kept to almost silent levels. Handling is competent in the class as the Cruze shows little body roll. However, the steering is too light in terms of feel and weight when driven enthusiastically.
      Chevrolet’s previous attempts at a compact vehicle have ranged from the punchline to a bad joke to something that can be considered at competent. But with the 2017 Cruze, Chevrolet put their heads down into making a compact that could stand tall among competitors. They have succeeded as the Cruze gets the fundamentals right and offers some distinctive traits that help it stand out from others such as the big-car ride and impressive amount of tech. Yes, it would be nice if Cruze was a slightly sharper in terms of design and the steering tweaked a bit to make it a bit more fun to drive. 
      Since I have been reviewing new vehicles for almost five years, there have been only a few vehicles that I keep thinking about to this day. Chevrolet has two to its name. The first was the 2014 Impala and the Cruze is number two.
      Disclaimer: Chevrolet Provided the Cruze, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2017
      Make: Chevrolet
      Model: Cruze
      Trim: Premier
      Engine: Turbocharged 1.4L DOHC VVT DI Four-Cylinder 
      Driveline: Six-Speed Automatic, Front-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 153 @ 5600
      Torque @ RPM: 177 @ 2000-4000
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 29/39/33
      Curb Weight: 2,978 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Lordstown, OH
      Base Price: $23,475
      As Tested Price: $29,195 (Includes $875.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Sun & Sound w/Navigation - $1,995.00
      RS Package - $995.00
      Enhanced Convenience Package - $865.00
      Driver Confidence II Package - $790.00
      Floor Mats - $140.00
      Wheel Lock Kit - $60.00
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online