Find Reviews by Make:
Even though Chevy’s new Malibu doesn’t get officially revealed until next Tuesday, and won’t actually go into production until January or reach dealers until the following spring (that’s right, a year from now), here’s a big, fat picture of the thing. After the Camaro-inspired taillight tease, I would guess that more than a few folks were expecting something a little more bold from the redesign, rather than the round-n-crease update we’re getting. We’ll withhold judgement until we see more, but as a first real look at a car that’s being rushed into production, this one leaves us feeling a little flat. But hey, at least we have plenty of time to get used to it.
79 Comments on “What’s Wrong With This Picture: Tomorrow’s Malibu Today Edition...”
Read all comments
I’d like to see that detachable steering wheel that is available on the Snuze, hopefully Government Motors is listening.
It’s great for keeping theives from stealing your car.
yes, there are even theives who are interested rental cars.
I see they’ve added mirror turn signal repeaters. Fender repeaters were standard on the 2008 model, and they made a huge to-do about it, only to delete them on the 2009 model.
The main thing wrong with the picture is that the car is made by Government Motors. That, and it was “rushed into production.” Perhaps it will come with five randomly detachable wheels instead of one.
Look at that “pedestrian protection” “power dome” hood …
I’m not a Chevy guy, or even a GM guy. But I have to say, the current Malibu and this next generation are really nice looking, competitive offerings. Good for GM.
I agree. I happen to like it, although I withhold some of that judgement until I see it in person. Two years ago, I rented a Saturn Aura, the Saturn version of the Malibu, and I was quite impressed. Several coworkers complimented my “new car”, even after I told them it was a rental. And that rental only had the I4, not the V6.
Yup. It’s a good-looking update to the Malibu. Much more sculpting with a good balance of big overt details (like the hood edges) against small fine tweaks, like the little upkick of the rear glass (like the Traverse).
I like the look of the redesign. It seems pretty tasteful, especially compared to the current Malibu, which I’ve always found kind of frumpy looking. While the new one isn’t all that interesting to look at, but I don’t think that that’s what Chevy was going for… they probably wanted a conservative Camcord fighter.
Looks good to me. What did you expect? It’s a 4 door midsize mainstream sedan. As long as it’s handsome and clean looking it will do fine in its segment.
Like the Cruze, the new Malibu appears to aim for a conservative style that may have more longevity than a gimmicky look (e.g. Sonata, Fiesta). Time will tell.
Add me to the list. I think that the conservative style and what looks like a continuation of the existing style will look better into the future than the wildly styled Sonata. At first I really liked the Sonata’s styling, but now that I’m seeing more of them, I’m finding some of the details not so well thought out as I did originally. To quote Robin, time will tell.
Keep in mind that this kind of “reporting” is par for The Spin Against GM.
This is a perfectly acceptable update of the Malibu. It’s much more sculpted and refined the current car.
Naturally, TSAG has to try to “spin” it:
“What’s Wrong With This Picture”
“here’s a big, fat picture of the thing.”
“I would guess that more than a few folks were expecting something a little more bold from the redesign, rather than the round-n-crease update we’re getting.”
“a car that’s being rushed into production”
Ed: Can you explain why there’s such a need to put a negative spin on everything that GM does?
If you wanted to simply be “The Truth”, then you’d write it like this:
“First Look:”
“Here’s a high-resolution picture”
“The design is an evolution of the current car”
“With production dates being moved up, ”
And then you could cut the opinionating from the straight news, or you could do a proper design critique.
Get off it SVX, just because everyone didn’t worship at the feet of GM and the new Malibu doesn’t mean it’s all critical. Every criticism of the car could be rightly aimed at every car in its segment. They are all appliances that are middle of the road, least common denominator everyday transportation. A design critique ought to be reserved for a Ferrari or Corvette not for a washing machine. It’s an important car for GM but for enthusiasts it’s a non-event and a chance to snipe at crappy family cars.
Just because some of us may buy one doesn’t mean we don’t aspire to something more fun and there is a place for practical. Don’t be so sensitive, it’s not personal.
Fact: GM invites more than its share of skepticism. That’s just the way it is. To quote a favorite axiom of mine, “if you don’t want to be viewed as a stereotype, don’t act like one.” To that point, GM has a long, long history of overpromising and underdelivering. That has now happened yet again.
A great many people were led to believe the next Malibu would be a fairly exciting sedan, at least stylistically. Whether they were wrong to think that is not the point — GM capitalized on their (misguided) opinion, and tried its damnedest to sell the Malibu as such. Instead, in the harsh light of day, we get a Taurus with a Silvy-rado grille and a Regal hood.
And need we go down the road of recapping GM’s track record with rushing vehicles to market? (Er, I mean, ‘moving up production dates.’) Those burned before are not likely to believe GM has miraculously figured things out now… especially since GM also has a number of problems with a car it took THREE YEARS to bring to the US market, in form of the Cruze.
@Mike: Given that we critique the Sonata and other cars styling, one can just as fairly critique a Malibu. Yes, the standards are different when you critique a Ferrari or Lambo, but that’s because they are for a different market segment.
My main point is simply that there’s no need to try and bias or slant the reporting. It’s possible to simply state the facts and share the picture without going after GM simply to get a few digs at them.
@Rob: There is nothing wrong with noting those issues in the proper forum, be it a First Look Test Drive a JD Power IQS result.
In this case, the news is the photo reveal. It’s more than the old Malibu, less than the Camaro. And given the line work that we’ve seen, along with the camo’d testers spotted, what sort of radical changes would anyone have expected?
I don’t expect everybody to like the Malibu, for looks or any other reason. I do expect TTAC to present the information as-is, for what it is. If they want to do a design critique, that’s a great addition and value add. But merely dismissing it without applying critical thinking or explanation is weaksauce. TTAC can, and should, do better.
SVX, I guess I trust the TTAC readership to appreciate a little snark when it comes to reporting on GM. I’ll note that Ed’s editorial stance hasn’t kept you from clicking on the page, which in the end is the sole metric involved here.
As it stands — be it from TTAC or any other reliable news source — I personally feel GM is getting exactly the level of respect and objectivity it deserves. If it wants more than that, maybe GM should do a better job designing a reliable steering wheel.
In that case, maybe Ford should start designing proper airbags for the F-150.
If 2000+ Chevy Cruze steering wheels are bad indicator for GM, what does it say about Ford when nearly 1.4 MILLION of their “best selling” F-150 trucks have faulty airbags?
Talk about primal fears, what happens when you get in a crash, and the airbag which is supposed to save your life, DOESN’T WORK.
See? I can play that game, too.
If 2000+ Chevy Cruze steering wheels are bad indicator for GM, what does it say about Ford when nearly 1.4 MILLION of their “best selling” F-150 trucks have faulty airbags?
Yeah, that’s a serious misfire on Ford’s part, and they should be taken to task for it. I’m not saying that’s not a black mark on the brand… but it also occurs to me a faulty airbag is extremely unlikely to kill you. Losing your steering wheel carries a lot more risk to the driver and passengers.
Talk about primal fears, what happens when you get in a crash, and the airbag which is supposed to save your life, DOESN’T WORK.
If that’s one of your “primal fears,” then you lead an amazingly sheltered life. What happens if the airbags don’t go off? There’s the seatbelt, for one.
See? I can play that game, too.
Not particularly well. In any case, there’s one more page click for TTAC, from someone ostensibly offended by the site’s editorial slant…
+1 to SVX’s first post
Front looks very current Ford Taurus-ish.
+1
Agree, first thing I thought was “Taurus-bu”.
That’s EXACTLY my first impression.
So not only will we have enough time to contemplate the design that it will look old a refresh-ready before it goes on sale, when it actually does go on sale it will remind people of the cross-town offering that will probably be months away from a refresh itself. Just like the Camaro…old before it’s new.
+2 That was my first impression as well. The Malibu isn’t a bad car really but when you compare the price of a loaded Malibu with a loaded Impala you see that the problem GM has is that it doesn’t make sense to buy certain models if you’re actually looking at the rest of what they have to offer.
I was coming here to post the same thing. It looks the same as the Taurus now from the front.
+12
I’m not a GM guy either, but this one gets a thumbs up from me too. Looks good enough. Actually this car shows the limits of having a corporate snout. Once those interesting back lights were released, everybody thought the front would be different and original, too. But then we have seen that face on other products. Familiarity is good but it also brings contempt. If this face had never been seen before, the reaction might have been more enthusiastic.
I agree. I’m not fond of this GM corporate snout or the Ford Atra Razor snout. On the one hand it generates an identity. On the other, if you don’t like it, it sours you to a company’s entire lineup.
I think it looks pretty good actually, hopefully it has a nice powertrain. I hope the offer the 255HP turbo in this one to replace the 3.6.
I do like the taillight change, not cause it’s Camaro inspired but because I never really liked the taillights on the current one.
I hate to get hopeful but do these two round taillights mean we might actually get 3 round taillights per side on the new Impala. (Please, please, please, pretty please…) All they have to do is add one. You’d really send me over the moon with happiness if the middle taillight if they integrated the back up light into it… Honestly if they did that with the Impala my father would likely have to break down and buy one. (He’s 55 and his first car was a 1962 Impala convertible.)
OK, it’ll send you over the moon. But will it get you to reach into your wallet, pull out the money, and actually BUY one?
My father would. I would wait a few years, let em hit the used market, and then justify to my Sweetie how we really need a long wheelbase car for distance travel. (Hey I’m just being honest. Owing a truck and a scooter my next purchase will likely be a mid-size or smaller with a manual trans.)
I’ll second the thumbs up on the tail lights. At last, it will be distinguishable from the Cobalt when viewed from behind. Hope the base tranny gets an upgrade too. Slow shifting rentals don’t inspire confidence.
I like this look, there’s some Lacrosse up front, and from the rear doors back Camaro-like flares. It’s definitely much more attractive than the Sonata, but seeing as how the Camry, Accord, Altima, Fusion, etc… have all only been refreshed and not had brand new models come out for quite some time I’m curious to see how this design will hold up. The last Malibu looked great when it first came out and was dated within 2 years after all the rivals were refreshed. Overall though, I do like how its a clean and conservative look, but there are some nice design cues to break up the vanilla too.
It’s a Regal (short wheelbase Epsilon 2) with a Chevy nose. Not sure just what was supposed to be different or innovative there. GM really doesn’t have the staff or the money to craft a unique design envelope for every brand.
Toyota doesn’t, Honda doesn’t, Nissan doesn’t, Hyundai doesn’t etc etc. Why do you expect GM to make a completely different platform for this? It isn’t profitable anymore to make so many different platforms.
They don’t have to be wholly different platforms, but there is room for much more variation than GM seems to be applying here. Compare the TSX, TL, and Accord; Camry, Avalon, and ES. The Sonata and Optima don’t even share a windshield.
I was thinking Chevy nose on the Regal, too. It looks different enough, but it definitely retains a lot of styling DNA from the Regal (high rear quarters and generally hefty, substantial look). Hardpoints that go along with safety (pillars and the cabin in general) are pretty difficult to change and retain your safety standards without a lot of investment, though.
I think it’s fairly handsome. Bold is not always good. The Sonata pulled it off, and the original Taurus, but most efforts to go outside the box fail. Camry styling peaked in 1996 and has been downhill since. The prior Mazda 6 looked better than this “bold” version. This is a tasteful update, which is all that’s needed.
i agree. personally, i think it looks very crisp and elegant. it won’t age like the sonata will. totally agree with you on camry styling.
HOWEVER, i must say that i like the look of the new mazda6, it looks like some kind of praying mantis or something.
The relatively staid styling of my ’06 Mazda6 is perfect for its mission, IMHO. Look at it closely, and there’s enough surface detail to make it interesting… but from a distance it looks completely unobtrusive and invisible. My 6 is the only car I’ve ever owned that I felt did not need a single line “redrawn.” The new 6 has some interesting lines and does look more exciting, but is a bit much for my tastes.
In comparison, this Malibu would appear to suffer from two design sins — there’s a lot going on here, and the design is overly fussy in places… yet the overall effect is thoroughly bland.
Hmmm.. Not bad, but the nose on the current one is a more elegant. This looks more than a bit truckish.
And with those few words, my dear Psar, you’ve summed up GM’s currrent design connundrm. Too truckish. I for one, don’t want my car to look like an angry truck. To much anger in the world already. Plus, this corporate snout thing limits designers creativity.
I agree. Pretty good overall, but I’m not a big fan of the Chevy nose. I wish they’d let it go and give their designers a freer hand.
The problem for GM vis a vis the Malibu is that they really did nail the exterior styling, so where do they go from there? To little and you look stale; too much and you end up looking bizarre.
This is not bad, not at all, but I wish they’d kept more of the current face.
Looks like a Taurus and a Chevy Epica (a nasty Daewoo) enjoyed some horizontal refreshment and, against the odds, the resulting offspring is fairly attractive (thank you, daddy Taurus).
Will probably do well for Chevy because it is a conservative and clean look. But I think I prefer the look of the Lutzian current model…at least the slight fender flares and chopped rear end give it a more balanced stance, in my opinion.
I think it looks good, a bit better than the current version.
This is a middle America car — and I think it works. More stylish than the old one, not as boring as a Camry, not quite as daring as a Sonata.
Seems like a good direction to me.
IF THEY MATED:
A frisky Camaro and a willing LaCrosse.
So a drunk frat boy and a frisky cougar met in a bar…
I personally like it, though it is a bit dull. At least it isn’t just plain ugly, like the 6th-gen was. It’s also still called “Malibu” rather than yet another forgettable new nameplate. Also, if Sergio Marchionne ran GM, he’d probably delay this another year until Welburn comes up with something a bit spicier.
I think you’re giving Marchionne way too much credit for ‘fixing’ Chrysler products, at a minimum some, if not all of the improvements had to start taking place before the BK and the subsequent donation to FIAT. Not that Nardelli & Co., really knew what they were doing, but as others have speculated, it probably had something to do with shopping the remains of Chrysler around to prospective suitors.
O.k another version of the Opel Insignia (car of the year in Europe)/Buick Regal.
What surprises me is that the Saab 9-5 is bigger than those two, why did not GM took that slightly bigger car and made that the Buick Regal in North America. But I guess GM can not stopping making strange brand-engineering?!
Descent car, will be a good ‘Bu!
That would be the Buick LaCrosse.
as someone with a direct financial interest in the cars success let me say it looks more than acceptable, in fact appealing. now if we would only fix the darn marketing. as I’ve said repeatedly for years, it’s not the product causing market share decline.
Respectfully, then what is?
from Return to Greatness…
These twenty illustrations from The Plan are an indication of the kinds of marketing that will lead to a rebound in GM’s sales. As you can see, there would be hardly any expense involved, and in fact, many of the ideas would actually serve to reduce costs. GM needs to get off of the fire sale, deal of the day, mentality. The full page, distress ads currently being run only harm image, and create a sense of desperation. GM needs to let it go, and save the dough. We spend tens of millions of dollars unnecessarily, including huge amounts for useless spokesmen, who bring nothing to the table. Additional steps in The Plan include things like further doing away with rebates. If there is a problem with days supply, don’t increase the rebate. Instead, add a point, or two, to the residual value and have the image of a good car with a great lease, as opposed to a slow mover with a big rebate. GM needs to wake up and realize, as the book says, “Your Marketing Sucks”. GM worries about health care costs and pension benefits, yet wastes untold millions in the name of marketing. To quote my friend Jerry Flint, senior automotive writer at Forbes magazine, “It’s not that the leaders of GM are bad people, they’re not. They just don’t understand the American car business”. He further states, “This business really isn’t all that difficult, all it takes is a good car, and someone to sell it”.
see more at http://generalwatch.com/editorials/editorial.cfm?EdID=2
Thanks Buickman, I agree with you wholeheartedly
“This business really isn’t all that difficult, all it takes is a good car, and someone to sell it”.
What? For the love of God, don’t say that to marketing or PR people, whatever you do.
Source of pic? Looks like a photochopped LaCrosse to me.
I like it. Is it the same size, just air pumped into it to make it bulge out a bit? Or is it a larger car? I think it was the right direction to go in making the previous version a bit narrower than the competition, as they are getting far too large. Keep the Impala for that size crowd. Three tail lights hinted at for the upcoming(?) Impala re-fresh? Boy, I sincerely hope so, E. Dan, I hope so. I’d be seriously looking as my Impala has 80K on it and a 100-mile commute upcoming in a few months! As far as the Chevy face – I wish they would just go back to a full-width grille again with quad headlights. That, and Malibu or Impala script on the sides, too, but I digress…
Sure it looks good, but when will Chevy learn to stop letting images of these new vehicles out a full YEAR before they launch. By the time the Camaro finally hit the lots we were all tired of seeing it.
I like it! Too bad they are not offering a wagon. Heck I think I’d really rather have a a Volt anyways.
Looks like the s.o.s. of making cars and trucks at least look bigger. Probably heavier and therefore less efficient too.
The hood is too fat/too high like a truck’s.
Very handsome. I think it would be appreciated more if it was shown side-by-side with segment competitors and the existing ‘bu.
Looks fine to me and about what I expected from todays stylist. Better than a boring Camry, not quite as daring as a Sonata and more refined and coordinated than the Accord or older looking Altima. It’s the lack of V6 and curbweight that concerms me with this new car.
Wow, seriously. Talk about the United States of Conformity. This is sickening. I don’t see much progression, its a freaking kill joy imo. Besides the back tail lights from the Camaro, this sucks. Creativity is dead, Individualism is dead, freedom of expression is dead. Self esteem is dead. Is everyone turning into a hermit.
It’s not ugly and not handsome either. The Malibu is in a segment in which looks don’t matter as much as price or perceived value. Any time spent talking about its looks is pretty much wasted, no one will be so taken by the looks that they will choose it over another car in its class. Those cars are appliances not for us as anything more than a necessary daily driver.
Its nice to see that you guys notice too that they design hasn’t changed much. I commented on AutoBlog that Honda did the exact same thing with the new Civic and everyone blasted it but they were all loving the new Malibu. But I guess that is because that site is really GMfanblog.
Autoblog is almost unreadable now, the comments anyway because it is so GM fanboyish. Anyone who deviates from the GM is great line gets shouted down fast.
New Malibu design has nothing in common with current one. It is brand new platform and all proportions are different. It is taller and wider. While new Civic seems more like refresh or the same thing.
Australia gets the Holden Malibu to replace the Epica, and the US gets the Commodore/Statesman (whatever they decide to export as a Chev). Who’s got the better deal or GM is going to standardise the car markets across the pacific Small & medium FWD, normal & large RWD (Cruze, Malibu, Commodore, Statesman Vs Cruze, Malibu, Chevy whatever and Chevy PPV)
This car would be fine now; not in one year.
The design is pretty much GM generic – new styling language of Buick. I could not tell the difference between this or a Buick.
No great design effort made here. More of the same mediocre styling.
It is just one picture, does not say a whole thing how car looks in person. My concern is – will it compete with Insignia? Front end looks similar to Opel. At least they could change the shape of grill and design headlights differently also. Still current Malibu looks very different from Aura and G6 even though proportions are the same.
If it has V6 and regal does not – does not sound good for Regal. Also is it overweight like Regal? With regal it is issue – it is seriously slow for US market.
Looks like Cruze. No V6 offerd in 2013 I believe.
“Autoblog is almost unreadable now, the comments anyway because it is so GM fanboyish. Anyone who deviates from the GM is great line gets shouted down fast”
Yea, kinda the opposite of here.
Wow negative sommments about a GM vehicle by Rob Finfrock. Your as predictable as Z71 Silvy when talking about Fords and your comments offer about the same amount value. Both you guys really need a hobbie.
If only 40+ years of GM mediocrity weren’t on my side.