third.

4 cylinder automatics (as tested price listed)

7. Avenger SXT - 20,195

6. Fusion SEL - 26,945 (note Fusion gets new engine for 09)

5. Camry LE - 23,883

4. Sonata Limited - 24,485 (must be an 09, it has a new interior)

3. Malibu LT - 21,905

2. Altima 2.5S 23,665 (despite some drivers hating the CVT)

1. who else? - 24,495

Edited January 26, 200818 yr by regfootball

0-60/5-60/quartermile/mpg

7. Avenger 9.0/9.3/16.8/26

6. Fusion 9.5/10.1/17.3/24

5. Camry 8.9/8.8/17.0/26

4. Sonata 8.8/9.0/16.8/25

3. Malibu 8.7/9.1/16.7/24

2. Altima 7.8/7.9/16.2/23

1. Accord 8.2/8.7/16.4/25

no mazda6, no legacy, no passat, no galant, no aura, where are all the competition?

the best four cylinder mainstream car GM has ever built.

You're complaining with third? The differences between the Accord and Malibu are so minimal that picking between one or the other comes down to personal taste. They're mostly equal with either being better in certain areas. The Altima... well... It's sporty. Car And Driver likes sporty.

not complaining, actually. reporting.

no worries. 010 taurus will kill all these cars.

Edited January 26, 200818 yr by regfootball

not complaining, actually. reporting.

no worries. 010 taurus will kill all these cars.

In sales to Avis?

not complaining, actually. reporting.

no worries. 010 taurus will kill all these cars.

Its to bad the Taurus is a fullsize car and the Malibu competes w/ the Fusion in the midsize category.

Hence the Fusion in that test and not the Taurus.

Wow, auto Fusion is teh suck, stick with the stick. The less expensive SE probably would have jumped a spot or two. It does need an updated interior, a little more style would be nice.

I assume they mentioned the excellent ride and handling combination of the Accord, a trait many Hondas have exhibited over the years. I would say they got the top 3 right, you cant go wrong with any of them. Though I'd take an Accord coupe over any of the sedans.

fusion gets new just about everything in 09.

they liked the chevy but for some reason went altima at number 2. i will have to go back and reread. their praise for the honda was consistent with their track record and was filled with man love about the car just like their man love for the 3 series.

truth be told, i would at least test drive the accord, but the interior and exterior styling drive me away from the car big time. Honda blew it with styling on this car.

Now with the C/D test pretty much everyone has compared the midsizers. The Malibu has done well, now lets see whether folks actually buy the car.

The Malibu has done well, now lets see whether folks actually buy the car.

GM is increasing Malibu production by adding it to Orion with the G6... so people are buying the Malibu.

Wow, auto Fusion is teh suck, stick with the stick. The less expensive SE probably would have jumped a spot or two. It does need an updated interior, a little more style would be nice.

I assume they mentioned the excellent ride and handling combination of the Accord, a trait many Hondas have exhibited over the years. I would say they got the top 3 right, you cant go wrong with any of them. Though I'd take an Accord coupe over any of the sedans.

There is an Altima coupe now too...which means I'd still choose the Accord coupe.

And hey, the Malibu beat the Camry - that's good enough to build several months of an ad campaign around.

Edited January 26, 200818 yr by Duncan

The Avenger is t3h suck. I hope the new interior upgrades are drastic, and they do something about the suspension and powertrain.

Fusion sucked too, but it's being upgraded too.

Go Malibu! It kicked the Camry's ass once again. You really can't go wrong with the top 3, but if I had coupe or sedan to choose from I might pick the Accord Coupe (exterior is excellent, love the interior), although if I were picking sedans solely the Malibu with win it for me.

GM needs to continue advertising that the Camry should beware.

Edited January 26, 200818 yr by Dodgefan

I don't really have an issue with the Accord winning; that was a given since it's C&D we're talking about.

I do have issues with the Altima beating the Malibu.

I think the Altima is probably the most overrated mid size car on the market, and FWIW the Altima coupe is one ugly SOB. At least the Accord coupe is somewhat interesting to look at.

The Altima has more HP (both 4 and 6 cyl) and better EPA ratings (both 4 and 6) than the Malibu, it also has more interior room than the Malibu. Design is subjective, I cant find a real problem with either cars exterior, interior wise, the Malibu is fantastic in LTZ trim, the rest of the Malibu trim are ok, I wouldn't call them any better than the Altima. So why did the Malibu deserve to beat the Altima?

Edited January 26, 200818 yr by Satty

fusion gets new just about everything in 09.

they liked the chevy but for some reason went altima at number 2. i will have to go back and reread. their praise for the honda was consistent with their track record and was filled with man love about the car just like their man love for the 3 series.

truth be told, i would at least test drive the accord, but the interior and exterior styling drive me away from the car big time. Honda blew it with styling on this car.

Now with the C/D test pretty much everyone has compared the midsizers. The Malibu has done well, now lets see whether folks actually buy the car.

I haven't seen the article yet.....but I'm guessing the Malibu LT with its softer suspension and smaller tires (compared to the LTZ) probably didn't have the same ride-and-handling compromise that C&D has raved about in the past.....slotting the sportier Altima one step ahead.

Way I look at it....is that ANY GM car that can finish within the top three of such a large comparison test is only due praise....

The Altima has more HP (both 4 and 6 cyl) and better EPA ratings (both 4 and 6) than the Malibu, it also has more interior room than the Malibu. Design is subjective, I cant find a real problem with either cars exterior, interior wise, the Malibu is fantastic in LTZ trim, the rest of the Malibu trim are ok, I wouldn't call them any better than the Altima. So why did the Malibu deserve to beat the Altima?

I agree......

While I'd be inclined to purchase a Malibu over an Altima, I can say honestly that the Altima still has a higher-quality interior.......

I wonder how much the 6-speed auto would have helped the Malibu. Offering a class-exclusive (I believe) feature such as a 6-speed on a 4cyl may have gotten some high praise.

I don't really have an issue with the Accord winning; that was a given since it's C&D we're talking about.

I do have issues with the Altima beating the Malibu.

I think the Altima is probably the most overrated mid size car on the market, and FWIW the Altima coupe is one ugly SOB. At least the Accord coupe is somewhat interesting to look at.

G6 coupe is nicer to look at than both.

G6 coupe is nicer to look at than both.

Yeah, I always liked the second gen Solara.

I agree......

While I'd be inclined to purchase a Malibu over an Altima, I can say honestly that the Altima still has a higher-quality interior.......

the altimas plastic is an improvement but its door and seat fabric is nasty bad. plus, its all very monotone dreadful and dreary. this ain't 1994 anymore.

the nissans do well in test numbers lately due to the CVT, but that is wide open droning engine testing. In this test I would have expected the CVT to help mileage more than it did.

the altima reminds me of the last gen bonneville in terms of style. somewhat overdone and gaudy.

they certainly could have waited with this test to get the 6 speed on the bu.

GM needs to go on a huge camry offensive. kick toyota in the nuts. recognize that honda is still a good product that the honda faithful will not really depart from. but i think they can really build off the mo and start to eat at the camry.

those of you who have seen the 09 sonata's interior (which, yeah why did they let them test an 09?) will have to comment. That is one nasty looking center stack.

Edited January 26, 200818 yr by regfootball

I wonder how much the 6-speed auto would have helped the Malibu. Offering a class-exclusive (I believe) feature such as a 6-speed on a 4cyl may have gotten some high praise.

I though so too but apparently you can get that powertrain with the VW Passat, although the VW completes in the more premium bracket of the midsize segment.

G6 coupe is nicer to look at than both.

Maybe in an alternate dimension where the G6 looked like, well, not crap, otherwise you're eyesight must be impaired.

Well ok, it does look better than the Altima Coupe...maybe...

Did they comment on the Malibu's interior space/ergonomics?

The Avenger is t3h suck. I hope the new interior upgrades are drastic, and they do something about the suspension and powertrain.

Fusion sucked too, but it's being upgraded too.

Go Malibu! It kicked the Camry's ass once again. You really can't go wrong with the top 3, but if I had coupe or sedan to choose from I might pick the Accord Coupe (exterior is excellent, love the interior), although if I were picking sedans solely the Malibu with win it for me.

GM needs to continue advertising that the Camry should beware.

Pretty much my opinion there. Phew, saved me a lot of typing :AH-HA_wink:

While not the worst performer---average is not exactly inspiring.

The Malibu is too heavy for a 2.4L Ecotec of this HP.

I have the same engine, trans in my Cobalt and I hate it. Slow revving and it moans.

Regfootball,

Since the Sonata was in Limited Trim, did it have Navigation? I hear Sonata's get the optional Nav. System for 09.

I'm going to run over to Borders to see if they have it already, I know my copy hasn't come in yet.

Also, what's all this hate on the Altima for? It was the fast, but it did get the WORSE gas mileage even though by EPA standards the Altima has the Highest ratings.

Also, the Altima is roomier, has more technological features than the Malibu (Push button start, optional bluetooth, and standard Intelligent Key)

As far as interior materials, I still believe the Altima has better materials than this latest Malibu. What makes the Malibu stand out is it's color combinations. There is nothing "impressive" at all about the Malibu's interior materials and the door panels and secondary controls (Power window swtiches, audio and climate control knobs) feel cheaper to the touch than the Accord or the Altima.

I would rate the new Malibu's interior higher than my Altima (which is an 05) but I don't think it's materials are better than the 07 and up Altimas.

I wouldnt' have ranked them any different, except to maybe pull the Fusion up ahead of the Camry.

The Camry LE must have been pretty loaded to reach $23K.

Also, why do you think C&D should have waited fro GM to supply them with a 6spd auto? So a comparison test should stop because one car isn't ready yet? Umm. Like with everything else, time waits for nothing and no one, blame GM for not releasing the 6spd transmission in the LTZ trim before now...it will be even longer before the LT models get it. Also, the Aura, Passat and other cars probably werent compared because some or too old (Mazda6) some cost too much (Passat) and others were compared before and already have a sibling in the test (Optima and Aura were compared last year)

I will say this though, I wonder how the results would have been if GM had supplied

I wonder how much the 6-speed auto would have helped the Malibu. Offering a class-exclusive (I believe) feature such as a 6-speed on a 4cyl may have gotten some high praise.

i agree, but they'll just test it...next year or something and hopefully bring up these test results to compare to.

G6 coupe is nicer to look at than both.

Right... and the G6 doesn't look like a disproportioned jelly-bean.

About the only thing you could nit-pick on the Accord if you really were looking for something to complain about would be the grille, and even then at least it doesn't look feminine like the G6.

The Accord coupe does everything a coupe should do better than the G6. Now if you want to compare the G6 to the Solara, then you might have something.

While not the worst performer---average is not exactly inspiring.

The Malibu is too heavy for a 2.4L Ecotec of this HP.

I have the same engine, trans in my Cobalt and I hate it. Slow revving and it moans.

the malibu was within 100 pounds of the rest of them

there is also a test in the same issue of the accord couple manual v6. they rip on the interior some. personally, the new accord coupe has the same aesthetic as a new tundra. it oinks when you walk by.

honda should at least fix the ass ugly grille on the accords.

Edited January 27, 200818 yr by regfootball

Regfootball,

Since the Sonata was in Limited Trim, did it have Navigation? I hear Sonata's get the optional Nav. System for 09.

I'm going to run over to Borders to see if they have it already, I know my copy hasn't come in yet.

Also, what's all this hate on the Altima for? It was the fast, but it did get the WORSE gas mileage even though by EPA standards the Altima has the Highest ratings.

Also, the Altima is roomier, has more technological features than the Malibu (Push button start, optional bluetooth, and standard Intelligent Key)

As far as interior materials, I still believe the Altima has better materials than this latest Malibu. What makes the Malibu stand out is it's color combinations. There is nothing "impressive" at all about the Malibu's interior materials and the door panels and secondary controls (Power window swtiches, audio and climate control knobs) feel cheaper to the touch than the Accord or the Altima.

I would rate the new Malibu's interior higher than my Altima (which is an 05) but I don't think it's materials are better than the 07 and up Altimas.

I wouldnt' have ranked them any different, except to maybe pull the Fusion up ahead of the Camry.

The Camry LE must have been pretty loaded to reach $23K.

Also, why do you think C&D should have waited fro GM to supply them with a 6spd auto? So a comparison test should stop because one car isn't ready yet? Umm. Like with everything else, time waits for nothing and no one, blame GM for not releasing the 6spd transmission in the LTZ trim before now...it will be even longer before the LT models get it. Also, the Aura, Passat and other cars probably werent compared because some or too old (Mazda6) some cost too much (Passat) and others were compared before and already have a sibling in the test (Optima and Aura were compared last year)

I will say this though, I wonder how the results would have been if GM had supplied

i do not think the sonata had nav. i could seriously make the case for sonata now over accord and camry because of the interior redo, until you get to the center stack area below the radio. it looks very disproportionate and strange. i see the intent in the design, they just needed to fill the area with something besides a wood look panel. -edit- in the magazine the area below the radio to the shifter is all woodgrain. this picture sure makes it look ok, and looks nicer maybe than the accord and hahmrlee

Edited January 27, 200818 yr by regfootball

Right... and the G6 doesn't look like a disproportioned jelly-bean.

yeah but the G6 coupe does not make me puke like the Accord does. I hav never thought the G6 was disproportioned....but the Accord does...it was and still is my first thought "what an odd looking car"

Edited January 27, 200818 yr by avro206

yeah but the G6 coupe does not make me puke like the Accord does. I hav never thought the G6 was disproportioned....but the Accord does...it was and still is my first thought "what an odd looking car"

The G6 looks like a Japanese Pontiac with big overhangs and an underbite. Go from sedan to coupe to convertible and the proportions get worse and worse. The coupe is especially bad because the front and back don't look like they belong together. The Accord is much better looking with much better proportions. Plus they fixed everything I hate about the sedan, namely the disgusting budging head and tail lights.

correction. the sonatas lower center stack was as you see in the photo above. metal like trim. looks disproportionately too tall though.

The G6 looks like a Japanese Pontiac with big overhangs and an underbite. Go from sedan to coupe to convertible and the proportions get worse and worse. The coupe is especially bad because the front and back don't look like they belong together. The Accord is much better looking with much better proportions. Plus they fixed everything I hate about the sedan, namely the disgusting budging head and tail lights.

While I mostly agree.. the one aspect I cannot stand about the Accord coupe is the front clip. Specifically, from the side. It's completely upright and it doesn't fit with the sleek body. It's hidden better on the sedan. I like the actual styling of it, it looks wonderful in detail shots, but the proportions from afar are a holy terror. It just bothers me, especially in person.

Yet, take away the rest of the body it looks fine. I wish it looked as good as it does here.

From other angles, as well. This one is particularly flattering.

And the rear is absolutely fine.

http://automobiles.honda.com/images/2008/a...ery/gal_lg2.jpg

The G6, on the other hand, looks like its been stretched and contorted. It has short ends with an extremely long midsection. However, everything plays along with it. The headlights stretched back, the taillights are stretched forward, and the fastback greenhouse seems to be seamless with the decklid. It's also quite plain, ironically enough.

Edited January 28, 200818 yr by blackviper8891

It got 3rd with a 4spd. automatic $h! I'd say GM IS DOING IT! They wouldn't have given the last gen Mali anything but last or second two last. Camry can suck it. THIS MADE MY DAY!

Edited January 28, 200818 yr by gm4life

While I mostly agree.. the one aspect I cannot stand about the Accord coupe is the front clip. Specifically, from the side. It's completely upright and it doesn't fit with the sleek body. It's hidden better on the sedan. I like the actual styling of it, it looks wonderful in detail shots, but the proportions from afar are a holy terror. It just bothers me, especially in person.

Yet, take away the rest of the body it looks fine. I wish it looked as good as it does here.

From other angles, as well. This one is particularly flattering.

And the rear is absolutely fine.

http://automobiles.honda.com/images/2008/a...ery/gal_lg2.jpg

The G6, on the other hand, looks like its been stretched and contorted. It has short ends with an extremely long midsection. However, everything plays along with it. The headlights stretched back, the taillights are stretched forward, and the fastback greenhouse seems to be seamless with the decklid. It's also quite plain, ironically enough.

Yikes, from the side the proportions really do look out of wack. It seems that the wheelbase is too short and/or the front overhang is too big. But from other angles it looks fine.

While I know a lot of people don't like the Avenger period, IMO it suffers from this too. Taken from the side it looks stubby and out of proportion, but from other angles it looks a lot better.

It's ashame they half assed so much of the car. I certainly hope they do a damn good job with the new interior and work on the suspension and powertrains.

While I mostly agree.. the one aspect I cannot stand about the Accord coupe is the front clip. Specifically, from the side. It's completely upright and it doesn't fit with the sleek body. It's hidden better on the sedan. I like the actual styling of it, it looks wonderful in detail shots, but the proportions from afar are a holy terror. It just bothers me, especially in person.

Every car looks goofy from that angle.

I think the rear end sticks out a little too far.

Every FWD car looks goofy from that angle.

I think the rear end sticks out a little too far.

Fixed

Every car looks goofy from that angle.

Not exactly. I don't see every vehicle from that view having a stubby upright face...

Edited January 28, 200818 yr by blackviper8891

I don't really have an issue with the Accord winning; that was a given since it's C&D we're talking about.

I do have issues with the Altima beating the Malibu.

I think the Altima is probably the most overrated mid size car on the market, and FWIW the Altima coupe is one ugly SOB. At least the Accord coupe is somewhat interesting to look at.

+1 on Altima over rated. Atima coupe is ugly. I saw one at the dealership when my son and I were looking at a used Mustang. At $26,000+ it was ten grand more than a Scion TC and argueably less car.

Chris

The Avenger is t3h suck. I hope the new interior upgrades are drastic, and they do something about the suspension and powertrain.

Fusion sucked too, but it's being upgraded too.

Go Malibu! It kicked the Camry's ass once again. You really can't go wrong with the top 3, but if I had coupe or sedan to choose from I might pick the Accord Coupe (exterior is excellent, love the interior), although if I were picking sedans solely the Malibu with win it for me.

GM needs to continue advertising that the Camry should beware.

As an off topic aside, I wonder why Chrysler didn't build an SRT-4 Avenger instead of an SRT-4 Caliber. That would have made a much cooler car.

While I am no fan of the Avenger I would chose it over the Hyundai, the Nissan, Camry, and perhaps a few other cars in the test. I did like how they (C+D) indicated that their avenger had fewer rattles than the Camry.

As another off topic aside those Baloney Sandwiches they talked about in the article are local legend here in central Ohio. One of our other great places to eat is the thurman Cafe, recently rated as one of the ten best hamburgers in the US.

Chris

Altima is the rental princess probably eclipsed by Crapry and Sonata.

The previous gen was good, they have overdid this generation style and substance wise.

I wish now they would test the 4-cylinder Malibu against the rest of its equals much like this test of the top end models. I may look at one of these but mine would have to be the 4-cylinder one.

I wish now they would test the 4-cylinder Malibu against the rest of its equals much like this test of the top end models. I may look at one of these but mine would have to be the 4-cylinder one.

That is much of the problem with the media in general: they climb out of their BMW 5, drive a loaded LTZ Malibu and proclaim it 'worthy.' They wouldn't be caught dead in a lowly 4 cylinder anything, which is why when they crow about 'power pedals' and the 110 V outlet, etc. I just laugh: the LTZ will be such a small part of the over all build of the Malibu, yet it is the one getting all the accolades.

I am sorry, but it is humanly impossible to fairly judge something objectively when you yourself live in an ivory tower. These fat cat auto 'journalists' have driven so many vehicles of so many lofty categories that they probably can't remember the last car they drove. As part of their full disclosure process, they should list the vehicles that they currently own (if any, since they are 'given' vehicles to drive) and the first couple vehicles they owned growing up. The latter would be very, very telling about how and why they are biased.

I'll keep my $2600 difference and enjoy a car that will not have transmission issues later on down the road.

Big the thing to note; the Malibu is the 2nd cheapest by a pretty fair amount. That alone should make it #1. The big question is; did they equip them the same? For the price of teh Accord you could consider the V6 Malibu.

I wish now they would test the 4-cylinder Malibu against the rest of its equals much like this test of the top end models. I may look at one of these but mine would have to be the 4-cylinder one.

Hey....which one are you looking at? C&D DID test 4-cyl versions of the cars and the Malibu stacked up nicely....they even were VERY complimentary of the 2.4L Ecotec in this application.

Hey....which one are you looking at? C&D DID test 4-cyl versions of the cars and the Malibu stacked up nicely....they even were VERY complimentary of the 2.4L Ecotec in this application.

yes that was the flowing Car and Driver issue. However they said zero, specifcally about the 2.4L Ecotec.

In siegen's comparison photo between Accord coupe and G6... picture that G6 GT coupe with the chrome package (wider chrome surrounds for the upper grilles, which are also deeper-set, and chrome lower grilles) and the optional 18 inch machined-face rims... instantly it comes alive. Optioned that way, the G6 GT coupe is a very good looking car, sleek and sporty without looking like a pokemon character. The last-gen Accord coupe was a featureless blimp, this gen is too far in the opposite direction, with WAY too many discordant angles banging together. The G6 is simple and clean, while also being dynamic.

Edited February 17, 200818 yr by ocnblu

yes that was the flowing Car and Driver issue. However they said zero, specifcally about the 2.4L Ecotec.

Dude....go read it again.

They said in the article how they couldn't believe they were driving a GM 4-cyl sedan that was so refined and quiet. They gave it significant props for that.

The last-gen Accord coupe was a featureless blimp, this gen is too far in the opposite direction, with WAY too many discordant angles banging together. The G6 is simple and clean, while also being dynamic.

The last-gen Accord was much classier looking than the G6. The G6 looked like it was a copy of that Accord, with some slightly more aggressive angles but otherwise very close to the level of blandness.