I’ve rented the Chevrolet Malibu before and I was treated to a normal weekly rate that didn’t have a drop charge in the Florida Panhandle, most likely because their tourist season is beginning and that area could use the cars.  It didn’t really drive in from Malibu, but from elsewhere within Florida!

It’s last call because the Malibu is bowing out this year.  Chevy and its General Motors stablemates are overhauling their product lines in a big way.

Nonetheless, whether as daily drivers or company cars and fleet cars, there are quite a few of these on the road, first arriving in 2017.  With newer powertrains, first a smaller turbocharged 4 cylinder engine and then the arrival of the CVT (continuously variable transmission), the Malibu appears to have been reliable enough.  I don’t know what Consumer Reports has to say, but most of the automotive press seems to give the nod to Toyota and Honda products.  The only issue I’ve had with rented Malibus having over 30,000 miles was a road drone in the rear that could have been a failing hub bearing.  (This last rental vehicle had less than 10,000 miles.)  However, if a person wants an American “Camcord,” this is it.

Basically, the car saw few changes during this last generation.  One would distinguish model years through changes in the front grille and colors.

Mostly, I like the Malibu and it would make a good daily driver.  There are a few things about it I don’t like and have never liked.  The Malibu doesn’t look good from every vantage point.  Its “best side” is its rear fascia, which was refined with new patterns in the taillamps in the last few years.  The front end is a little clunky, and the layered latticed grille didn’t help all that much.  Inside, I’ve come to appreciate its very sensible dashboard and seating, especially after being in other mid-size and full-size rental cars where the dashboard and cockpit are a “fail.”

The Malibu is economical in its use of fuel.  What is worth nothing is that, at highway speeds, an extra 5 to 10 mph can have quite an impact on fuel economy.  With cruise set at 70 mph, the legal speed limit on some treks, the mileage was coming in at under 35 mpg.  When I went to 65 mph on cruise, the engine was laboring less, at about 2,000 rpms or slightly lower, and fuel consumption (with minimal city driving thrown in) came up to about 37 mpg.  Considering that early Malibus with V8s couldn’t even get 20 mpg on the highway, that’s quite a leap!  Driving on a road with a 55 or 60 mph speed limit would make for less consumption - at or even slightly exceeding the 40 mpg mark at constant speed.

The ride is pleasant, but not refined.  The handling is easy, as it seems to be with so many electric power steering units, but not agile.  The controls and instruments are easy to use or, at least, quickly become acclimated to. The seating is comfortable and supportive enough.  The Malibu does what it needs to do without much fuss, but without impressing.

Power from the 1.5 liter 4 cylinder engine and its turbocharger is enough for most situations, such as smartly moving away from stop lights and picking up speed on an on-ramp to merge.  I don’t know how I’d feel about a high speed pass with its less than 200 horses.  As with other cars, the CVT seems to be getting more predictable … or not as erratic.  The important thing is that its service life is long.  CVTs also need periodic servicing.

The engine bay is very neatly organized.  However, it uses a prop rod.  When Malibus were ‘80s RWD GM mid-sizes, struts automatically keep the hood up.  The trunk is roomy.  Fuel tank capacity is generous and makes for respectable range with the car’s highway mileage numbers, but it won’t get you from one side of Texas to the other on I-10!  Maybe close, though.

In my mind, the Malibu could have been more, especially after the Impala was discontinued.  It looks like GM does not want to keep a single sedan in their stable, so they didn’t invest in it and let it wither.  First, a 1.8 or 2.0 L 4 cylinder engine without a turbocharger could have been tuned to get the same fuel mileage.  While an 8 speed automatic would have been preferable, I’d take the CVT if paired with a larger non-turbo engine.  The CVT is mechanically simpler (and also sits inside one casing) while an engine with a turbocharger is a more complicated set up.

Once it made its initial splash, the Malibu wore on and may have become ho hum to consumers.  The greenhouse looks elongated and has some strange quirks, making the rear deck lid look too short.  A more upright domed shape to make the greenhouse look more proportionate would have been preferable.  This is all about fractions of an inch, or centimeters, but they make a big difference when it comes to styling.  (One example of a vehicle that accomplished this is the Mazda 6 sedan from about the same time this last Malibu was introduced.)  In short, it’s wishful thinking that General Motors - via Chevrolet – would be keeping a bread and butter sedan they’d work a little magic on to make it more refined, more compelling, and more reputable such that a buyer’s choice between a domestic and a foreign sedan would be moot:  the Malibu would be just as good as a “Camcord.” 

However, it won’t be happening.  The curtain is falling and the Malibu’s chapter is closing.

- - - - -

Photos forthcoming

PHOTOS:

Side view of the Malibu

Front angled side view of the Malibu

Rear angled side view of the Malibu; here you can see the attractive sweep of the rear fascia and the taillamps, but also the relationship of the greenhouse and the trunk that I think could have been handled a little better.

You can't argue with the beauty of the beaches on Florida's Panhandle

The main instrument pod is really sensible and has good graphics:  symmetrical big tach and speedo, symmetrical but smaller main gauges (fuel and temp) at the top, and center information square area with digital speed (my selection), compass, odometer, and gear.  For temperature and time, you need to check the infotainment center screen. 

The dashboard has a good feel about it, is nicely shaped, and things are sensibly clustered together 

Photo # 7, not 7-7-7, but still a bonus!  (Or maybe not.)

- - - - -

End of photos

I like the Malibu...have driven a few of this and the previous two generations as rentals.  The steering wheel and dash on this one looks almost identical in design to my sister's '23 Equinox.

41 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

I like the Malibu...have driven a few of this and the previous two generations as rentals.  The steering wheel and dash on this one looks almost identical in design to my sister's '23 Equinox.

Very much so.  I believe it is, or is almost, the same.  So, the Equinox also has a nice dash.

Besides the fact that the Equiox is a CUV/SU and the Malibu is a sedan, I believe they have the same engine, but the Equinox keeps a 6-speed automatic transmission ... a plus.

My opinion may not be popular, but, of the last 10 years of Malibu, I liked the one with the Camaro-esque rear lamps and taller trunk ... possibly a 2015 or thereabouts. I see so many on the road.  It has a 2.5 L Ecotec 4, which was base power for very the last Impala. 

1 hour ago, trinacriabob said:

Very much so.  I believe it is, or is almost, the same.  So, the Equinox also has a nice dash.

Besides the fact that the Equiox is a CUV/SU and the Malibu is a sedan, I believe they have the same engine, but the Equinox keeps a 6-speed automatic transmission ... a plus.

My opinion may not be popular, but, of the last 10 years of Malibu, I liked the one with the Camaro-esque rear lamps and taller trunk ... possibly a 2015 or thereabouts. I see so many on the road.  It has a 2.5 L Ecotec 4, which was base power for very the last Impala. 

I liked those Malibus..rented several back then.    I liked the Impala a lot. 

As far as the Equinox, I drove a rental one a year ago to Syracuse and back on a Saturday/Sunday--6+ hrs each way on I-90.   Even in LT trim with cloth seats, I found the seats more comfortable than my Grand Cherokee.

My sister won't ride in the GC for more than a half hour or so anymore--she loathes the concrete leather seats in it and I get her point--it must be the M-B origins of the WK2, but the seats are very firm..    She loves her new Equinox and drove it to SC and back comfortably when she snow-birded this past winter. 

Edited June 4, 20232 yr by Robert Hall

Thank you @trinacriabob for the review, interesting to see how GM just kept this going when it truly needed a major refresh. Sad for the end of ICE cars for GM, but hoping they get more options in EV format.

1 hour ago, Robert Hall said:

I liked those Malibus..rented several back then.    I liked the Impala a lot. 

As far as the Equinox, I drove a rental one a year ago to Syracuse and back on a Saturday/Sunday--6+ hrs each way on I-90.   Even in LT trim with cloth seats, I found the seats more comfortable than my Grand Cherokee.

My sister won't ride in the GC for more than a half hour or so anymore--she loathes the concrete leather seats in it and I get her point--it must be the M-B origins of the WK2, but the seats are very firm..    She loves her new Equinox and drove it to SC and back comfortably when she snow-birded this past winter. 

I am not a fan of firm seats in cars.  They cite support.  When I had the Cutlass Brougham, I could drive for 10 hours in one day and feel pretty good when the day was over.

As for the Impala, I drove one for a day.  It was new and it rode and handled well, but I hadn't driven a car with such hindered visibility ... yet.  I took it back the following day and got that mid-2010s Malibu, which I had for a week in Reno/Tahoe, the Bay Area, and NorCal.  I was much more at ease driving that.

15 hours ago, trinacriabob said:

I am not a fan of firm seats in cars.  They cite support.  When I had the Cutlass Brougham, I could drive for 10 hours in one day and feel pretty good when the day was over.

Totally agree about the firm seats. I am back from my week of PTO having driven 545 miles in one day to Fairmont Hot Springs BC.

Summer Family Trip - Fairmont Hot Springs Resort Reservations

I will confirm that the comfort level on the seat is of BIG BIG IMPORTANCE for road trips.

My 2006 Cadillac Escalade ESV has the following seats:

Totally comfortable and had no problems driving for hours and hours without stopping. Solid adjustable support and yet comfort that makes it easy on the body.

Today's Escalade 2023 seat, website sucks as they no longer allow all the views you used to get, but the seats are hard as a rock having personally tried them, no comfort and would not make a road trip comfy SUV. Good thing for online reviews.

Current Cadillac seats are not road trip worthy even in the cars.

7 hours ago, David said:

Totally agree about the firm seats. I am back from my week of PTO having driven 545 miles in one day to Fairmont Hot Springs BC.

Summer Family Trip - Fairmont Hot Springs Resort Reservations

I will confirm that the comfort level on the seat is of BIG BIG IMPORTANCE for road trips.

My 2006 Cadillac Escalade ESV has the following seats:

Totally comfortable and had no problems driving for hours and hours without stopping. Solid adjustable support and yet comfort that makes it easy on the body.

Current Cadillac seats are not road trip worthy even in the cars.

I'm with you on this.  Those seats you show above look great.  It's easy to see they are substantial and comfortable.

In that tight span of years, seating was more comfortable.  In another Cadillac of that time - the DTS - the seats were excellent.  I test sat in one on Pensacola Blvd. and, being on vacation, the salesman knew I wouldn't be buying and was still laid back and friendly.  Like the car above, the DTS I sat in also had a console, so these seats were similar to 40-40 buckets.   The last refresh of the 2006-2007 Monte Carlo also had big, comfortable bucket seats - for a car of that price point. 

Along the same lines, when the Pontiac Bonneville got reformulated the very last time for 2000, the bucket seats also became a lot nicer, and bigger, and moved in the right direction from those of the upside-down boat/jelly bean Bonneville model (1992-1999 +/-) that preceded it. 

More recently, many automakers are going for high design and flash more so than aiming for comfort.  And charging way more for their cars!

4 hours ago, trinacriabob said:

I'm with you on this.  Those seats you show above look great.  It's easy to see they are substantial and comfortable.

In that tight span of years, seating was more comfortable.  In another Cadillac of that time - the DTS - the seats were excellent.  I test sat in one on Pensacola Blvd. and, being on vacation, the salesman knew I wouldn't be buying and was still laid back and friendly.  Like the car above, the DTS I sat in also had a console, so these seats were similar to 40-40 buckets.   The last refresh of the 2006-2007 Monte Carlo also had big, comfortable bucket seats - for a car of that price point. 

Along the same lines, when the Pontiac Bonneville got reformulated the very last time for 2000, the bucket seats also became a lot nicer, and bigger, and moved in the right direction from those of the upside-down boat/jelly bean Bonneville model (1992-1999 +/-) that preceded it. 

More recently, many automakers are going for high design and flash more so than aiming for comfort.  And charging way more for their cars!

Agree comfort should always be in Luxury Auto's foremost, but sadly brand name bragging has made things less so. I have no problem with the thinner seats that are made in the Escalade as long as they offer comfort, sadly the thinner seats are hard as a rock limiting road trip comfort.

From personal experience, the '00 DTS and '06 STS had some of the most comfortable seats I've dealt with for daily driving and road trips..  I miss cars that focus on comfort and silence...not everything has to be optimized for setting Nurburgring times. 

I drove my sister's DTS from Phoenix to LA or San Diego several times when I lived in Phoenix, very comfortable and quiet.   6 hr drives weren't bad at all.  6 hrs  (or 50 like I did in 2017) in my Jeep  and my back is in a world of pain. 

9 hours ago, David said:

Agree comfort should always be in Luxury Auto's foremost, but sadly brand name bragging has made things less so. I have no problem with the thinner seats that are made in the Escalade as long as they offer comfort, sadly the thinner seats are hard as a rock limiting road trip comfort.

I don't think it has anything to do with brand name bragging. I think it's that a lot of companies have moved to cars that "handle better" and think that also requires firm seats to hold you in place. 

This is one reason I like Lincoln. They're not lying to anybody saying they're going for legitimate comfort over sportiness. 

4 hours ago, ccap41 said:

I don't think it has anything to do with brand name bragging. I think it's that a lot of companies have moved to cars that "handle better" and think that also requires firm seats to hold you in place. 

This is one reason I like Lincoln. They're not lying to anybody saying they're going for legitimate comfort over sportiness. 

I get what you are saying and agree that Lincoln is not going after the performance market. With that said, Cadillac I feel is taking a cheap way here in that they offer Luxury levels of their autos and then sport and performance. I get that the seats should be firmer in the Sport and Performance, but Luxury should be Luxury and I find nothing wrong with the magna ride suspension absorbing the bumps of the road while still having a total comfort chair inside like my 2006 Escalade. Sadly, Cadillac seems to have gone the firm seat for everyone even if you are buying the Luxury level of auto.

I wish I could say well about the last Mali, but I haven’t been a fan of it since its last refresh. The 1.5 in this sucks- my Equinox with the same 1.5 doesn’t sound like it has a struggle sometimes to get up to speed. Worse off- they barely changed anything. At minimum, they could have passed the savings on to the consumer. Could have kept t around longer with some discounts….

 

With car getting even more expensive, they are going to wish they had more options than the Trax to offer to very cash strapped customers……….

I had rented a Malibu a few years back when we went to Toronto and Niagara Falls as a family trip.  

I do not remember the mileage the Malibu had, but it was a pretty new vehicle so I seem to remember it didnt have that many miles on it.  In and around 10 000 km (6000 miles).   

It was a pleasant and comfortable ride.  A longish trip that the whole family didnt complain about.  

It did have the 1.5 turbo.  I remember it performed well.  I remember it being as good as my Fusion's 1.6 ecoboost.  As far as the CVT transmission goes, I honestly didnt notice anything about it that the Malibu had a CVT transmission.  I was driving safe and smooth because I had my family in the car so no 'jack rabbit' starts off the line and no racing the shytty kid with a hopped up ricer so the CVT did a fantabulous job...in my honest opinion.   I did have to accelerate briskly plenty of times so I did mash the pedal to the floor and both the 1.5 liter and its transmission partner handled everything as asked and tasked with all I demanded from them.   No hesitations to accelerate and the car accelerated with enough oomph so I could pass with ease whatever and whenever I needed to pass.  I wasnt in a panic as to why the car was not moving because the car WAS moving fast enough for me to accomplish a passing manouever or to accelerate on a ramp to get to highway speeds.   And that was with a loaded car with a traveling vacationing family and all their garbage.   I have to say, it did so with the same confidence I have with my Fusion and its ecoboost 1.6 and 6 speed auto transmission.   

About cars getting more expensive and if GM will regret not offering a cheaper sedan in their line-up.

Part of THAT problem lies with the North American consumer.  I have to stop saying North American because that includes Mexico and a couple of other countries as well when I REALLY mean Canada and the US.   

In Mexico...  VW sells its Polo and Nissan the Versa.  Both start at about 20 000 US dollars.   The Versa is sold in Canada and in the US, but NOT the Polo.   How many of us Canadian and American spoiled brats buy the Versa  and how many of us bought the Aveo  so VW could actually offer the Polo here?

Chevrolet offers cars like the Aveo, Nuevo Aveo (NEW Aveo...LOL), Onix and Cavalier RS.   

MSRPs are as follows:  14 000, 17 000, 18 000, 24 000  US dollars... 

Dodge has something called the Attitude.   16 000 US dollars.  

2023

 

2019

 

Does THAT look like an interior that an American or Canadian would want to BE in???!!  And yes, the Attitude is a small car.  Bigger than the Aveo and on the same size as the Chevy Onix.  Or the Polo for that matter.  Just in case some of you were wonderin' the Polo is smaller than today's Golf but in reality, the Polo is as big as the 1980s Rabbit/Golf. 

 

Honda has something called the City.  21 000 US dollars.  

 

WE do NOT want to HUMBLE ourselves with these kinds of cars, yet the REST of the world actually GETS BY with THESE things!!!!

Like honestly!!!  Lets take a step back from ALL the bullshyte. From ALL the marketing and the lies and deception that our corporations shovel our way. Our politicians etc...

 

At the END of the day...WE make our daily decisions to do what we do. What we buy.  And we do NOT buy entry level A or B class cars with the bare minimum interiors. 

GONE are the days when we were content with those types of cars.  We bitch and whine that GM does not offer anything like that yet...GM actually DOES. And everybody else in the REST of the world.   WE just do NOT buy it here...  WE...do NOT want that as a society...     I guess we have prospered long enough that we think we dont need to compromize anymore.  Maybe that is true but unless we hold accountable all the corruption...but more to it than that...  

UNLESS WE TAKE RESPONSIBILITY OF OVER CONSUMING AND DEBTING OUR FUTURE SELVES SEVERAL LIFETIMES OVER WITH CREDIT CARD DEBT AND THE LIKE...  maybe WE SHOULD start driving shyeboxes again...

Note: I am not directing that at you @daves87rs.   Just general speak.