GM Inside News Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Garage Forums

Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

Jump to Latest
4.8K views 32 replies 21 participants last post by  wallus13  
Y
#1 · (Edited)
Image



http://www.caranddriver.com/compari...olet-malibu-vs-2016-honda-accord-2016-mazda-6-2016-toyota-camry-comparison-test


Can the New Malibu find some real estate among the best mid-size sedans?

Mar 2016
By AARON ROBINSON
Photography By CHARLIE MAGEE

Let’s start the proceedings with a couple of toasts. First, here’s to the ancient Chumash Indians, the name of whose little creekside California hamlet of Humaliwo got boiled down by the tongues of the conquering Spanish into the word Malibu. And here’s to the widow Rhoda May Knight Rindge, or May to her friends. The last owner of the 17,000-acre Rancho Malibu, she battled the burgeoning Los Angeles County to stop its plans for a coastal road through her property. But back in 1919, L.A. got what L.A. wanted, and the Pacific Coast Highway was born as the Roosevelt Highway. Luckily, Rindge did not live to see the banks of her beloved Malibu Creek developed with outlets for Starbucks and Yogasmoga. Nor, indeed, did she live to see the mid-size Chevy Chevelle that took the rancho’s name in 1964.

Why all the fuss over Malibu in this test of four mid-size sedans? No particular reason, except that we decided to take the new Malibu and its most formidable competitors to Rindge’s old, sunny seaside homestead, where the miles of good road are today outnumbered only by the suntanned utopians carrying their teacup Maltipoos.

Radically redesigned this year, the Chevy Maltipoo, er, Malibu has its name written on the front doors in widely spaced movie-theater-marquis letters, as if a David Lean epic is about to open. To keep the prices real, we opted for the base engines on all the cars in this test. While the others here have conventionally breathing four-cylinder engines displacing 2.4 to 2.5 liters, the Malibu goes turbo right off the bat with a blown 1.5-liter. Our LT is a couple of steps up from the *bottom, and as equipped is the most expensive car here at $27,940. However, knock off the $1150 sunroof that we opened just once, to make sure it did open, and the Malibu would be the second-cheapest car in this test.




Link to Malibu section -

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2016-chevrolet-malibu-lt-page-4


Final Scoring -

http://www.caranddriver.com/compari...da-6-2016-toyota-camry-final-scoring-performance-data-and-complete-specs-page-6

(Note score on rear seat space...)
 
#3 ·
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

DirtyMoney said:
13 gallon gas tank? Are you crazy?
Click to expand...
I think this is a repost, but anyway, I get why GM put in the 13 gallon tank as the car with such high mpgs should be able to go a lot farther on 13 gallons than yesterday's car with a bigger tank but lower mpg's. But I think a lot of people will be scared by the sound of a 13 gallon tank.

Funny how Honda and BMW, both known for their engines/driving fun, is having trouble in this new world of higher mpgs. Accord getting complaints about the CVT moaning and BMW everything from numb steering to non-linear engines (recent Camaro vs. M4 in Motor Trend).
 
#6 ·
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

All Star said:
Why do I feel that anything less than first place finishes aren't going to move the needle sales-wise?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately performance/handling isn't the primary reason to buy a mid-size family car, hence the inverse relationship to the tests rankings vs. sales volume.
 
#7 ·
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

Malibu did well considering that tough group. Put a 2.0T in it, and voila! ... it's in first place.

As far as the fuel tank size, just how many people do you think can go four-plus hours without "stretching their legs?"
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
E
#9 ·
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

rand49er said:
Malibu did well considering that tough group. Put a 2.0T in it, and voila! ... it's in first place.

As far as the fuel tank size, just how many people do you think can go four-plus hours without "stretching their legs?"
Click to expand...
It is more than that, this is almost the same argument we had about GM Trucks and the lack of "extended-range" tank.

A small tank forces your "stops" to evolve around getting gas............

What if you just stopped at a rest area 45 minutes ago?......... Unless you have a way of timing your passengers bladders with the fuel gauge, you'll be stopping twice.

You have 2.5 gallons of gas, but your next (planned stop) is 80 miles a way.......... Do you stop now and again in 80 miles, or slow-down and "hope to make it"?

And no these things don't happen often, but in this car, beating around town with mid-20's MPG, wouldn't give many drivers range to make it a full week of work-commute and weekend running around.
 
T
#10 ·
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

While I would have liked to see an overall victory, to lose to a Mazda in a comparo that emphasizes performance is no bad thing. Even the most hardcore must concede that Madza does a good drivers car.

What's more critical here is that the customer sees the (still quite good) result and interprets it for what is important for them: this is a superbly thought-out automobile. Even the gas tank is no big deal: GM chose to parlay the solid mileage into "it costs nothing to fill up!" instead of "it has bladder-busting range!"
 
#11 ·
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

I think GM did it as a way to keep the weight down... Only reason I can think why they would give it such a small tank. My Fusion holds over 16 gallons, the extra capacity goes along way. This car is better then the outgoing model but that's about it, it's really no better then the big players in segment and sales are going to show it
 
#13 ·
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

07SIERRA said:
I think GM did it as a way to keep the weight down... Only reason I can think why they would give it such a small tank. My Fusion holds over 16 gallons, the extra capacity goes along way. This car is better then the outgoing model but that's about it, it's really no better then the big players in segment and sales are going to show it
Click to expand...
And with all of what the past few Malibu's haven't been. GM needed to hit it out of the park, if for no other reason but to gain back the customers they lost over the last 2 or 3 Gen. Malibu's.
 
#23 ·
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

13 gallon tank.....not for me.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#29 · (Edited)
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

Dave B said:
13 gallon tank.....not for me.
Click to expand...
I don't even know how big the gas tank is on my cars.
When it runs low I fill it up.

It's got an extra cu.ft. of trunk space vs the Mazda and Camry.
Maybe that's where it went.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#25 ·
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

Perhaps the Malibu's smaller tank has something to do with the car being designed to accommodate the hybrid system for the hybrid model, and/or future crash regulations...

I honestly don't know (couldn't connect to the link to read the C&D story from where I am right now), and haven't seen the specs for the hybrid or 2.0T models... Just throwing it out there...
 
J
#26 · (Edited)
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

Funny the complaining about the tank size. Our Mini Cooper has a 13.2 gallon tank with a range that varies between 380 and 420. Roughly 30'ish MPG. Never previous to owning or during have we mentioned concern over the size of the tank. The opposite mindset has actually occurred in off the cuff remarks, "You can drive it forever without having to fill up." Many references to the MPG. Or similar. This is compared to other vehicles in our household that get substantially less mileage with tank sizes of 22 and 36 gallons. Tank size ain't all that it's been made to be.

On the flip, there has been enjoyment in fill-ups that cost less than $30.

Summary tank size was never part of the consideration. I find it hard to fathom that consumers in large evaluate tank size as serious consideration or differentiation point for purchasing an economy family sedan. Would the masses go buy a vehicle with larger tank size that gets worse mileage than one with a smaller tank and better mileage? There are quite a few 11.9 gallon tank size Prius' on the road.

With manufacturers these days going to great lengths to remove weight and innovate with packaging aspects of a vehicle. The size and weight especially when loaded with 3 to 4 extra gallons at just north of 6 lbs each are certainly a design factor worth evaluating.

Back years ago my boss bought an HD truck with 8.1 and 26 gallon tank. He would joke that he couldn't pass a gas station without filling up. Driving like Miss Daisy at 12 MPG he wasn't far off from actuality.
 
E
#32 ·
Re: Car & Driver - 2016 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2016 Honda Accord, Mazda 6, Toyota Camry

Too bad the engineering team that R&D the New Cruze didn't get the memo, those morons put a 13.7 gallon tank in a smaller car that gets better gas mileage............ :lmao:

Oh, well maybe next time they'll get it right.


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 
GM Inside News Forum
posts
3.5M
members
90K
Since
2003
A forum community dedicated to GM owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about General Motors news, concepts, releases, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Automotive Industry & GM News General Car Lounge Global Chevrolet News Competition News Global Cadillac News