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

[AZ00]

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.

[ponchoman49]

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.

[DirtyMoney]

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

[DirtyMoney]

Maybe the eco model should delete some standard equipment to bring the price down. Make a real eco base model.

[FanOfDurant]

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.

[solman98]

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.

[cmutt]

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.

[Diggerdan11]

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.

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.

[motorman]

[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.

[camaro_freak]

Wonder if the malibu's weight is par of the problem?

that is a problem with most GM vehicles is it not....

[prowlerjc]

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.

[Ed753]

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.

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.

[1487]

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.

[igotzzoom]

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.

[BlackGTP]

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.