![]() |
![]() |
Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | AF 350Z | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
![]() | ![]() | ||
![]() | ![]() |
| Latest | 0 Rplys |
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#1 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Greensburg, Pennsylvania
Posts: 865
Thanks: 3
Thanked 64 Times in 63 Posts
|
2022 GM Malibu Not a Viable Option
Just looked at the 2022 Malibu. The engine is 1.5L Turbo. No thanks. They have just "marketed" themselves out of my choices.
My dad had a '76 Malibu Classic. It came with a 250 CI (4.1 L) inline 6 engine. That car was HUGE! I think two of the 2022 model could fit inside the footprint of the 1976 model. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Registered Offender
![]() Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rural
Posts: 6,563
Thanks: 8
Thanked 345 Times in 340 Posts
|
Re: 2022 GM Malibu Not a Viable Option
The '76 G-bodies were actually not "huge" but were a lot bigger than their current contemporaries. A '76 B-body was actually huge. A '76 Caprice 2-door had a quarter panel that was 11 feet long. The door alone was almost 6 feet.
I believe the comparable D bodies were even slightly larger. A '74-76 Buick Electra, Olds Ninety Eight, or Sedan de Ville had a curb weight that rivals most "standard" pickups today, at just under 5,300 curb weight. 130" wheelbase, 80" wide, 235" long, and that was with 27G of fuel versus the option 48G on a modern F-250. The station wagons were even more massive. It was a different philosophy.
__________________
Permanent seat assignment on the Group W bench... Automotive Forums Survival Guide |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
AF Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Charlotte, North Carolina
Posts: 409
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Re: 2022 GM Malibu Not a Viable Option
The 1.5L Turbo has been in the Malibu since model year 2016 and you'll find it in the Equinox as well. I have a similar engine in my Ford Fusion and it's not bad. My BIG problem with the Malibu, and why I didn't buy one, is the lack of a start/stop off switch. Other GM products have one but not the Bu.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | ||
AF Enthusiast
Thread starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Greensburg, Pennsylvania
Posts: 865
Thanks: 3
Thanked 64 Times in 63 Posts
|
Re: 2022 GM Malibu Not a Viable Option
Quote:
As far as the new Malibu, I am not a fan of turbo charged engines for a daily driver. I see turbo as a very expensive added failure point. Another smaller negative is the issue of turbo lag in engine output response. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to tomj76 For This Useful Post: |
Tom_SF (12-14-2022)
|
![]() |
#5 | |
A990 racer
![]() Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chestertown, New York
Posts: 17,025
Thanks: 26
Thanked 381 Times in 372 Posts
|
Re: 2022 GM Malibu Not a Viable Option
My wife's 2021. Equinox 1.5 turbo is surprisingly responsive, the smaller turbo spools pretty quickly. Given a choice I would have preferred a non turbo engine. Gotta use a pretty specific Dexos 2 oil. Been averaging about 27mpg, it hasn't reached 32 degrees here in a month!
__________________
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | ||
AF Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Charlotte, North Carolina
Posts: 409
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Re: 2022 GM Malibu Not a Viable Option
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
![]() |
|
|