Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
SAmadei

Details

41 posts in this topic

I finally saw a minor thing I really like about the Malibu.

I got the latest issue of Car and Driver, which has a pretty high resolution photo of the Malibu in an ad. Looking closely, you can see that the little metal headlight reflector cups have a little, tiny Chevy bowtie in each one.

Is this something new on the 2010s? Has anyone else noticed these?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I finally saw a minor thing I really like about the Malibu.

I got the latest issue of Car and Driver, which has a pretty high resolution photo of the Malibu in an ad. Looking closely, you can see that the little metal headlight reflector cups have a little, tiny Chevy bowtie in each one.

Is this something new on the 2010s? Has anyone else noticed these?

When FlyBrian and I were at the Miami Autoshow in 2007, Brian Nesbitt had personally shown it to us and talked about it. I think one of us even snapped a photo. Gotta check and see.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to steal thunder away from the Malibu, but the 2010 GMC Terrain has the "GMC" letters inside of the rear taillights (well, actually on the side of the taillights). I took a picture of this at the NYIAS, and the spokesmodel didn't even know about it before I showed her. I think this is a new styling element GM is trying with some o their newer designs. I'm curious what other logos are used on other vehicles?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the Cadillacs have the wreath & crest in their headlamps and tail lamps

I'm pretty sure the Lacrosse and Enclave have Tri-Shields as well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't a new thing, really. I can't remember what car did this before now, but I'm sure it was a GM product ...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It prevents the manufacture of aftermarket direct-replacement lamps, typically used in crash repair. If the trademark is there, it cannot legally be duplicated by an aftermarket company. And I applaud it.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It prevents the manufacture of aftermarket direct-replacement lamps, typically used in crash repair. If the trademark is there, it cannot legally be duplicated by an aftermarket company. And I applaud it.

+1

Will make the part a bit more pricey, ans better chance for a good part....

I'm about read to toss the cheap headlight they put on her Cav back at the dealership it came from.....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It isn't a new thing, really. I can't remember what car did this before now, but I'm sure it was a GM product ...

Oh, of course... My favorites will always be the 1968 rear side markers shaped like arrowheads, firebirds, shields and rockets. One year and gone...

I just hadn't seen GM do anything as cool as the bowties on the headlights in a while. I had forgotten about the GMC markers on the Terrain.

It prevents the manufacture of aftermarket direct-replacement lamps, typically used in crash repair. If the trademark is there, it cannot legally be duplicated by an aftermarket company. And I applaud it.

I hadn't thought of that... Very interesting. Of course, more people won't notice that they were there or not after getting their car back from Super Budget Auto Body.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm....I very badly want to like the Malibu and give it an "A," but the best I can do is "B" or "B+." It has some awkward proportions here or there that could have been designed out.

Because I'm not that overly crazy about it, I haven't studied it to the point that I would have noticed this.

Regardless, I like properly dosed and placed branding insignias in both a car's exterior and interior. In fact, many cars are lacking in this regard, including my new LaX.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm....I very badly want to like the Malibu and give it an "A," but the best I can do is "B" or "B+." It has some awkward proportions here or there that could have been designed out.

I like the side profile the best...one thing I've noticed is that directly from behind, they look kind of narrow...I don't get that same impression looking at them head-on.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like the side profile the best...one thing I've noticed is that directly from behind, they look kind of narrow...I don't get that same impression looking at them head-on.

Why is it these days SO MANY new GM cars look too narrow? I see this even in the new LaCrosse!!! (Malibu is pretty bad too....)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is it these days SO MANY new GM cars look too narrow? I see this even in the new LaCrosse!!! (Malibu is pretty bad too....)

I assume some of it is tapering for aerodynamics...and they look narrow because the bodies of most sedans today are relatively tall relative to their width.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is it these days SO MANY new GM cars look too narrow? I see this even in the new LaCrosse!!! (Malibu is pretty bad too....)

Because they ARE narrow. This is the other reason I don't like Epsilon (other than it being FWD by default)... everyone praises the interior space... but they are still narrow cars, as they are tuned into what Europeans want, not us. The disappearance of the bench seat and the ever widening center consoles make this narrowness even more apparent.

And as has been said before, Americans aren't getting any narrower. Sure, I need to lose some weight, but my widest point has nothing to do with that... its my shoulders... banging into the B-piller and hanging OVER the passenger seat... and my shoulders aren't THAT big.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I assume some of it is tapering for aerodynamics...and they look narrow because the bodies of most sedans today are relatively tall relative to their width.

But I don't get that vibe with just about any other car out there on the market......they all look much better proportioned.....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the tall bodies, it's amazing how high the top edge of the decklid of many of today's cars are...the top of the trunk of a typical current sedan (like the CTS) looks to be about 2 feet higher than a sedan from 30-40 years ago.. I know part of it is the larger diameter tires of today, but the bodies seem to have gotten narrower and taller in general in the last decade or so..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
About the tall bodies, it's amazing how high the top edge of the decklid of many of today's cars are...the top of the trunk of a typical current sedan (like the CTS) looks to be about 2 feet higher than a sedan from 30-40 years ago.. I know part of it is the larger diameter tires of today, but the bodies seem to have gotten narrower and taller in general in the last decade or so..

30-40 years... try 10. The '99 Bonne parked near anything newer looks like a dovetail.

I think this is being done to make the rooflines look less tall and to bolster the EPA trunk space rating. Of course, I still prefer horizontal cargo area to vertical, because you can't stack everything and because sorting through a tall trunk full of crap turns into a game of "Towers of Hanoi".

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am still a fan of longer,lower,wider.

So am I... can't wait for the styling pendulum to swing back that way... Hopefully Harley Earl is reincarnating somewhere (besides Buick commercials).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Modern stuff is definately narrow in general.

High decklids are byproducts of aerodynamics - don't expect a return to a -say- '65 Corvair 3-box profile anytime soon....

I would agree with the assessment of the Malibu; looks 'normal' from the front but somehow narrower from the rear. Doesn't really bother me. Rear fascia is rather tall & flat & the plate is in the bumper - must be some of it.

BTW- Malibus are at this point all over the place by me....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
High decklids are byproducts of aerodynamics - don't expect a return to a -say- '65 Corvair 3-box profile anytime soon....

One of the most aerodynamic cars of all time is the 3rd gen Firebirds... granted, they aren't a 3-box, but they don't have a high decklid. Imagine what they could have done with the 3rd gen's aerodynamics with today's technologies...

Anyway, if high decklids improve aerodynamics, wouldn't stawags be good for aerodynamics? Though that doesn't seem to be the case, unless its a Kammback.

Speaking of aerodynamics... Mythbusters had a great episode recently in which they put golfball divots on a Taurus and increased fuel consumption by 11%.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am heartily tired of the high rear, stubby tail, high beltline, giant head/tail lamp look.

EDIT: Let me add slab-sided to the list.

Edited by Camino LS6
0

Share this post


Link to post
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.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0