Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technology - Page 2

  1. Welcome to GM Inside News Forum Ė General discussion forum for GM

    Welcome to GM Inside News Forum - a website dedicated to all things GM.

    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, Join GM Inside News Forum today!
     
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 49

Thread: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technology

  1. #16
    2.5L Iron Duke
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    I agree the Cruze is a better package. Eliminate the E Assist & go for a full hybrid to compete. A gas/air hybrid shown by PSA that GM has a partial ownership is a major jump over the competition. But only if it can make it viable. The minor hybrid is a major disappointment.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    GM Inside News
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    7.0 Liter LS7 V8
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    4,791
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 41 Times in 29 Posts

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    There math is wrong! The Eco model at $25795 is equipped more like the 1LT trim level at 23995 not the LS 21995 they are talking about in the article. That is 1800 difference. Even then the Eco comes with more std items than the basic 1LT such as 17" alloys, dual zone automatic climate control and the color display. Adjusted for those features and the difference between the 1LT and the Eco is around 1200-1300 bucks which I don't feel is excessive for the much better highway fuel economy that many have reported, some up to 40 MPG! The trunk is the real bummer but even then it is the same size as the non eAssist larger LaCrosse! The city mileage could also be improved some. Hitching up to the 2.5 instead of the old 2.4 might help.

  4. #18
    4.6 Liter Northstar V8 DirtyMoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Warner Robins, GA
    Posts
    1,993
    Thanks
    145
    Thanked 61 Times in 45 Posts
    My Ride
    Ford Explorer/2002/Green

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    Quote Originally Posted by prowlerjc View Post
    I'm surrised the take rate is that high.

    The car doesn't make economic sense, and a Prius is a great aternatiuve with far better mileage (and a more useable hatch) for about the same money.
    And it begins
    I didn't go to math school, so I'm not going to do the math.

  5. #19
    4.6 Liter Northstar V8 DirtyMoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Warner Robins, GA
    Posts
    1,993
    Thanks
    145
    Thanked 61 Times in 45 Posts
    My Ride
    Ford Explorer/2002/Green

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    Maybe the eco model should delete some standard equipment to bring the price down. Make a real eco base model.
    I didn't go to math school, so I'm not going to do the math.

  6. #20
    4.4 Liter Supercharged Northstar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,536
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    My Ride
    Chevrolet & Cadillac

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    a Prius is a great aternatiuve with far better mileage (and a more useable hatch) for about the same money.
    Ya but it looks like an egg on wheels. I'd have to pass for that reason alone... Seriously, if I was in the market for a sedan larger than our Cruze and smaller than the Impala, the Malibu wouldn't be on my list. I just don't think it's that great looking of a car. The only one I've seen I halfway liked was an LTZ in the pearl white color they have. I hate to say it but I think one of the nicest looking cars in the segment is the Kia Optima. That and the Ford Fusion. The Malibu's design language is just all wrong from front to back and on the inside as well. I care not personally about a mpg more or less. I do care about ugly.

  7. #21
    4.4 Liter Supercharged Northstar solman98's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,914
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    Other than the Volt, GM has never been able to offer a good hybrid vehicle for the cost differance. Even the last Malibu hybrid was a let down also.

    18" Polished Cobalt SS/SC wheels, LED tails, Recon 48 LED running board lights/signals, Turbo Tech rear 1" sway bar 35w 5K HID's. Upgraded to larger SS front brakes.

  8. #22
    2.4 Liter SIDI ECOTEC
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    248
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    Quote Originally Posted by briandors View Post
    GM didn't miss the boat. See: Volt. Toyota is barely making any profit on Prius, according to their own words, which means in reality they are breaking even. GM isn't looking to put a system into Malibu that causes it to barely break even. I applaud them for that. Let's get VOLTEC trickling through all models, but in the meantime, there is no point in slashing our own throats by selling it below cost in everything. eAssist is OK at what it does and most importantly the cost to adapt it to the current Malibu was probably next to nothing, all the engineering was done a long time ago. It helps a little with image and a little with sales, and that's all it was meant to do. Wait for a VOLTEC-2 equipped next gen Malibu to be a high volume seller.
    I'm not going to argue, but look at these stats for non-hybrid vehicles:

    Altima SV $24,460 27/38
    Hyundai SE $23,345 24/35
    Accord EX $25,405 27/36
    Camry XLE $24,775 25/35
    Malibu ECO 1SA $24,985 25/37

    Those are all mainstream competitors to the Malibu. All of those prices are for upper trim-levels.
    Look at the gas mileage GM's competitors are getting with just a conventional gasoline engine. Less complexity, less cost, a full-size trunk -- and competitive (if not BETTER) gas mileage for comparable (if not CHEAPER) prices. Now, when you compare the eAssist Malibu to other hybrid sedans:

    Fusion Hybrid SE $27,995 47/47
    Camry Hybrid LE $25,990 43/39
    Sonata Hybrid $25,850 34/39
    Malibu ECO 1SA $24,985 25/37

    Again, those are for upper-trim level vehicles. Everybody runs circles around the Malibu's gas mileage - 2 of those 3 sticker for within $1k of the Malibu's price-tag. You'd *easily* make that up (and more!) in gas mileage AND resale value. I love the Voltec system, I truly believe it's the future and I love that GM's positioned well in that market -- but it simply doesn't change the fact that their current hybrid sedan offering is woefully lacking - and that it isn't likely to change within the current generation of the Malibu - and maybe not the next one either.. and that leaves a huge whole in a mainstream product offering for quite some time.

  9. #23
    2.4 Liter SIDI ECOTEC
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Klamath Falls, OR
    Posts
    331
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 10 Times in 8 Posts

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    Quote Originally Posted by Car253 View Post
    Not all of the $3000 difference between the LS and the e-asist is the e-asist only, there is a lot more standard equipment on the e-asist Malibu.
    Quote Originally Posted by 1487 View Post
    Good point, the actual price gap between ECO and comparable model is probably $2k or slightly less. The article is misleading in comparing the ECO to the base Malibu LS.
    Yeah exactly. I figured it out one time and compared the eco vs the 2.5 and I compared them with the same options and the difference in cost was only about $1,500. With the increased MPGs you can pay off that $1500 extra fairly quickly compared to some other full hybrid models that can take 8-10 years to pay off the difference in price.
    2003 Silverado 1500HD
    2005 Subaru Legacy GT
    1969 Chevelle Malibu
    1969 Chevy C20
    1977 Chevy K20

  10. #24
    6.0 Liter L76 V8 motorman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,046
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    [QUOTE=cmutt;2642342]I was completely underwhelmed with the current gen eAssist. Try the math: if you average 15,000 miles/year, you'd save roughly 53 gallons of gas if you got 4mpg better. At $4/g that's $212/yr. Only 14 years to reach a break-even point. My biggest surprise is that the 8% take rate is as high as it is.



    GM is building these cars not to save the buyer money on fuel costs but to allow GM to sell more pickups and suburbans where the profit is to be made.
    chevy owner since 1953,30 new chevys and 11 new corvettes since 1959 ,# 11 2008 corvette in the garage ,2004 impala,1988 2500 silverado,former NASCAR tech inspector,retired race engine builder. 2008 corvette sold waiting for the C-7. old 88 silverado gone and replaced with a new 2013 ext cab silverado.

  11. #25
    6.2 Liter LS9 Supercharged V8 camaro_freak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,592
    Thanks
    145
    Thanked 19 Times in 16 Posts

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    Quote Originally Posted by b4z View Post
    Wonder if the malibu's weight is par of the problem?
    that is a problem with most GM vehicles is it not....

  12. #26
    7.0 Liter LS7 V8 prowlerjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    4,179
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 59 Times in 34 Posts

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigbee60 View Post
    Agree on value for the money point, but Prius as an alternative - NO!! The Prius drives like a 1960's sedan on bias ply tires (if even that good) and is a slug in acceleration and stops like it's on ice.
    I doubt people shopping for a hybrid really care.

    I've heard a tire change works miracles in that department, too.

  13. #27
    6.2 Liter LS9 Supercharged V8 Ed753's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    5,317
    Thanks
    666
    Thanked 258 Times in 174 Posts
    My Ride
    2013 Chevrolet Silverado LTZ

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    Quote Originally Posted by prowlerjc View Post
    I'm surrised the take rate is that high.

    The car doesn't make economic sense, and a Prius is a great aternatiuve with far better mileage (and a more useable hatch) for about the same money.
    I wonder how they are getting to the 8% figure?

    If you count the 7 month head-start the 2013 ECO got, I understand......

    The Dealer I just bought my truck at had 4 Malibu ECO DEMO's sitting right in front of the main door, even then they appear to be a hard sell.

    Quote Originally Posted by briandors View Post
    GM didn't miss the boat. See: Volt.......
    It seems like we see this all too often, GM's creates a less than perfect car in hopes of pushing the buyer to something more expensive with a higher margin, only to find the customer shopping the competition.


    Past: 11 Ram 13-11; 10 Commander 13-10; 08 Sierra 11-08; 07 Rendezvous 10-07; 05 Ram 08-05; 04 Grand Cherokee 07-04; 03 F-150 05-03; 01 Silverado 03-01; 00 Jimmy 04-00; 99 Sierra 01-99; 96 Mustang GT 01-98;97 Ram 99-96; 96 Jimmy 00-96; 90 Escort GT 96-92; 89 Ranger 96-91; 84 Omni 92-89; 76 Malibu 90-89; 78 LeMans 94-88; 85 Escort 88-87; 82 Lynx 93-86; 75 Sierra 87-85

  14. #28
    7.0 Liter LS7 V8
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,413
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 6 Times in 3 Posts

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    Quote Originally Posted by cmutt View Post
    I was completely underwhelmed with the current gen eAssist. Try the math: if you average 15,000 miles/year, you'd save roughly 53 gallons of gas if you got 4mpg better. At $4/g that's $212/yr. Only 14 years to reach a break-even point. My biggest surprise is that the 8% take rate is as high as it is.

    It's becoming clearer and clearer that GM 'missed the boat' on hybrids. Their eAssist system is nothing more than a weak attempt so that marketing has a something to tout while they wait for the Voltec to become profitable. They are in a tough position on this one: GM's bet is on the next-generation technology (Voltec) -- which is a generation (maybe two) away from being profitable. In the meantime, they've got nothing competitive (both cost and efficiency-wise) on the hybrid front - and if they did a 180 on things at this point, their full-hybrid product probably wouldn't reach market until the Voltec powertrain is close-to-profitability -- so why bother? They are stuck in limbo on this one. All the while gasoline hovers above $3.00+/g (and higher on the coasts). Perhaps they could reach an agreement/license hybrid tech? It's pretty sad that GM, as big as a player that they are, could misread the market on this so badly. Subaru is coming out with a hybrid - as is VW. Hyundai/Kia already have one on the market. Ford's and Toyota are on their 3rd-generation hybrid systems.
    the price premium isnt $3k, that figure isnt accurate. ON Buicks it was $2k and it's probably lower on Malibu.

  15. #29
    2.8 Liter Turbocharged V6 Premium Member igotzzoom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Laguna Hills, CA
    Posts
    975
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    My Ride
    2011 Hyundai Sonata SE 2.0T

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    I'd much rather pay $3k and get the 2.0 turbodiesel that's going in the Cruze. 160-ish hp and 260-ish torque would be plenty for it, and probably get better MPG than the e-Assist.

  16. #30
    News Contributor BlackGTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    5,081
    Thanks
    161
    Thanked 372 Times in 171 Posts
    My Ride
    2013 Cadillac ATS - Black

    Re: Malibu ECO Math: $3000 - 3 Cubic Feet = 3MPG; GM Works To Improve eAssist Technol

    Quote Originally Posted by 1487 View Post
    the real world gains are MUCH less than indicated by the EPA gap. for the regal the spread is closer to 4-5mpg per the EPA rating but in the real world I'm not seeing it. I got the eassist model based on an incentive being offered and the promise of better mileage but I'm barely getting 2mpg better than the standard regal. The system works well, it just doesn't yield any benefits in city driving. I would never recommend paying the premium for e-assist until the next gen comes out. It makes you wonder why they are even bothering on the Impala.
    What are you comparing the milage to? If you are comparing it to the EPA expected milage for the non-ECO Regal, maybe the EPA expected milage for the non-ECO is overstated as well for the way you drive.

  17. Remove Advertisements
    GM Inside News
    Advertisements
     

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.1.2