mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

Poll: Is Chevy Making A Mistake In Not Offering A V6 In The 2013 Malibu?

Since the unveiling of the 2013 Chevrolet Malibu late last month, there has been some heated discussion about the lack of a six-cylinder powerplant in the all-new sedan.

The only engine Chevy has announced so far for the Malibu is the new 2.5 liter ECOTEC four-cylinder that’s expected to make 190 horsepower. And while we expect to see more engine choices as we get closer to the Malibu’s launch in the beginning of 2012, we aren’t holding our breath for a six cylinder to be part of the lineup.

Besides the 2.5, we expect Chevy’s new global midsizer to offer an updated version of GM’s turbo-charged 2.0 liter ECOTEC — the same powerplant that’s currently in the Buick Regal Turbo — making somewhere in the vicinity of 250 horses (compared to the engine’s present-day output of 220 horsepower).

So, do you think the lack of a V6 in the ‘Bu is a mistake? Take the poll below and talk to us in the comments!

GM Authority Executive Editor with a passion for business strategy and fast cars.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. Since the Malibu shares the same platform at the Buick Regal, I don’t think we’ll see a V6, unless the Regal gets one first. And I haven’t seen any plans in the foreseeable future.

    With the new 2016 CAFE standards coming, it looks to me that GM will be using more turbo-charged I-4’s for efficiency and performance here in North America.

    I think that the only way we’d get V6 in the Epsilon is if there was a true high performance model with AWD, and that may wind up being a Regal exclusive.

    Reply
  2. No V6 is a mistake. There are those who are ready,willing and able to ante up a few extra bucks for a premium V6 in this size car! The volume would be low, but who cares? Offer all the choices, std.2.5L I-4, a turbo version of the 2.5L, the ECO/e-assist and the 287hp 3.6L?

    Reply
    1. What if the high-output turbo four makes just as much (or more) power — and weighs less… while delivering higher fuel economy than the V6?

      Rumor has it that the new 2.0 liter turbo that’s in the works will make around 290 horses and 290 pound-feet of torque — while incorporating a twin-scroll turbo to eliminate turbo lag?

      Reply
      1. IF, there is a new turbo 4 with 290hp,290lb.ft., then it’s a difficult agument to make that a six is needed, but that “mystery engine” sounds expensive and thirsty itself? Also, where would such a package/set-up leave a car like the yet to be released 2012 Regal GS? Totally overpriced and underpowered?

        Reply
        1. Well, from what we’ve been hearing, the new 2.0 turbo is in the works. We’ve don’t yet know whether it will have two variants (low- and high-output) like the current 2.0.

          But we do know that it will be direct-injected (unlike the current model) — so that’s a 15-30 hp bump right there over the current high-output 2.0 (250 horses, 295 lb.-ft.). Back in January, there was this little leak of the powerplant lineup for the upcoming Caddy ATS. Among those engines is 2.0 liter turbo good for 270 hp and 250 lb.-ft. of torque — so it’s not difficult to imagine some boost modifications for more power.

          I think the Regal GS is a mistake for the Buick brand — no matter how fine a vehicle and/or driving experience it may be.

          Reply
  3. I would say they should do V6 in high performance version. If they want to do it on all 4 bangers it’s either they kinda keep the Malibu’s weight down or putting more hp in the 2.0 turbo greater than 255. More of putting the hp around where the Sonata/Optima is or better.

    Reply
  4. I think not offering a V6 is absolutely fine. The 2.0 Turbo can be tuned out to have over 300 horsepower, and 300 lb-ft of torque. The 3.6L V6, on the other hand, only tuns out to about 275 lb-ft of torque. The longer stroke of the 4cyl is responsible for this.

    The Sonata and Optima have been roundly praised for their engines, and if you drive the turbo, you definitely aren’t wondering why they didn’t put the 3.8L from the Genesis Coupe on the vehicle.

    Good call on this one, Chevy.

    Reply
    1. Right! The Sonata Turbo makes 274 horses — with a twin-scroll turbo. And while it’s not as great of a handler as the (present-generation) Malibu, it’s still very respectable for a 2.0 liter.

      I can only imagine what GM’s superior engineering will do — especially with the all-new Malibu on the updated Epsilon!

      Reply
      1. Exactly!

        The Sky Redline and Solstice GXP vehiles made 290/290 with the GMPP fully warrantied stage 2 turbo upgrade kit.

        It’s unthinkable that GM can’t do better half a decade later on the Malibu (or anything else for that matter).

        Reply
  5. Just as long as a 250+ hp four banger is offered im fine. Leave the V6 engines to the full-size Impala, then offer a V8 on a RWD model based on the Caprice.

    -iluvamcars

    Reply
  6. Absolutely a mistake to not offer it. How do I know? Because there isn’t one sitting in my driveway. Chevy wants to market the 4banger to the youngsters, that’s fine with me let them pay $35k for a car approaching 3, 600 lbs with a 4 cylinder with a Fischer price turbocharger. Just don’t expect anything special ever from Chevy in the performance department, you will never see a 300hp turbo four in the Malibu and especially the Cruze so long as the Camaro is hanging around with the same numbers. Mediocrity seems to be the name of the game at good old GM and if they stop selling because people get fed up with it the government will just bail them out and take it out of my check ANYWAYS.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel