As Chevy‘s Malibu Turbo makes its way to dealerships this month, owners and potential buyers alike should be pleased to know that one of the tests performed by GM development engineers on the car involves subjecting the turbo-charged sedan to extreme heat and cold weather conditions.
The Tests
As you may have already known, GM conducts its extreme weather testing at its Climatic Wind Tunnel (CWT) in Warren, Michigan. Engineers take vehicle development and validation testing to the extremes in the CWT, with the Malibu Turbo having withstood blizzard and hurricane conditions to test the car’s powertrain cooling, cabin heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems to the harshest weather conditions found from Death Valley, California to Denali, Alaska. The boosted ‘Bu suffered through temperatures as low as negative 40 degrees and as high as 140, with the coldest environment ensuring that the air cleaning system — which contains multiple barriers that block water molecules (snow, ice, water) while allowing air to flow freely for engine combustion — works as it should.
The CWT also contains a dynamometer that can simulate driving at high speeds while subjecting the car to extreme weather conditions. The facility is capable of simulating real-world driving by placing weight burdens, such as hauling a fully-loaded trailer up a steep incline, by applying resistance through the wheels of the dyno. Perhaps more exciting to some is the fact that the dynamometer is capable of simulating driving speeds of up to 155 mph.
All in all, the lab puts the vehicle under 39 different procedures, including rain, snow, ice, high wind, high speeds, electrical systems test, interior, exterior, and fuel economy tests, among others.
The Advantage Of The Tunnel
By performing the development and validation tests in the tunnel instead of outside, engineers reduce safety risks and traffic interactions that are commonly associated with conducting tests on public roads. In addition, the tests are repeatable and don’t put the development crew at the mercy of Mother Nature. We also imagine that using the Climatic Wind Tunnel rather than traveling to remote locations to find extreme temperatures and weather conditions accelerates development and keeps costs down at the same time.
The Beneficial Outcome
We don’t know of any other manufacturer that subjects its vehicles to the same kinds of torture testing, which ultimately assists GM in delivering vehicles with improved quality and durability. Unsurprisingly, the Malibu Turbo has performed well in all of the tests, a quality that some of Malibu’s competitors may not possess. The car’s engine cooling system, for instance, was developed in the tunnel and tuned to the car’s specific powertrain heat outputs and airflow characteristics to deliver optimal performance even in extreme weather and temperature conditions. In fact, the system is designed to allow wide open throttle acceleration at scorching temperatures found in the Death Valley — with the turbocharged powertrain being validated at the location.
Priced from $26,950, the Malibu Turbo cradles GM’s new 2.0 liter turbo-charged Ecotec (LTG) engine making 259 horsepower and 260 lb.-ft. of torque while delivering 21 MPG in the city and 30 MPG on the highway.
In this video, GM Engineering Group Manager for thermal testing at the Climatic Wind Tunnel, Ben Cruz, explains more about the CWT:
Comments
I always knew GM had the superior built vehicles, but I think that the new Malibu is worse than the competition in most other aspects. For instance, the new Ford Fusion has a lower drag coefficient, lighter weight, and henceforth is more fuel efficient and nimble. At least the Ford is still American.
Like many other new Fords, the new Fusion has been folded into American/European engineering. Likewise the Chevrolet Malibu is a world-class car with components designed around the world.
The thing is, you definition of worse is purely subjective. Chevrolet is actually offering a type of mid-sized sedan that some other manufacturers are starting to abandon. The new Malibu has stately, mature styling and a relaxed aura. I could say the same in regard to the 2013 Honda Accord, the Subaru Legacy, and (to some extent) the Volkswagen Passat. The Fusion, on the other hand, carries the trendy new four-door-coupe shape. It also has avant-garde styling (similar to the Kia Optima and Hyundai Sonata) and looks a lot more expensive than it is.
But whether one product is better than the other is purely based on opinion. The only objective advantage I would cede to the Ford is that it offers competitive rear space, while the Malibu is down compared to the rest of the class and has rear-space figures that are in danger of being surpassed by its little brother, the Cruze.
Well-said, Kyree. This is what I’ve been preaching for the last several weeks. Automotive enthusiasts may love the aggressive styling of the Fusion, but I wonder if that’s even a quality that the target market desires, or even cares for in the first place.
As far as the Malibu’s disadvantages go, the ‘Bu may be a bit short on rear seat room, but the Fusion is definitely short on headroom thanks to its coupe-like design. In addition, the Malibu is at a real-world disadvantage by not offering a full hybrid (or even Voltec) variant compared to the 47 MPG all-around Fusion, but everything else is purely based on personal preference, subjectivity, and taste.
Personally, I don’t want a car that tries to be an Aston Martin (Fusion). As such, I’d rather have the more tasteful and classy Malibu.
I would rather have the new Malibu as well. Having sat in both, the Malibu fits like a glove and has a more substantial and planted feeling. The Fusion, on the other hand, seems cold and uninviting (to me), and its finicky electronics are not comforting either. Moreover, I do not think that the four-door-coupe look will age well. I am already sick of seeing Hyundai Sonatas and wouldn’t even think of purchasing one.
I laughed when they said -40 like thats something no one will expirience. I ave personally had to shovel a sidewalk in -40, thats without factoring in windchill.
@ Kevin fusion is not American it is made in Mexico look at VIN it starts with 3. The Malibu is built in Fairfax Kansas and Detroit Hamtramck Michigan. And the VIN starts with the number 1. And Ford still hasn’t made any payments on that 5.9 billion Dollar bailout. GM paid everything back April 21, 2010
Have you seen a map? America is a continent, not just a country
America is The country not a continent. There is a continent called North America and there’s a continent called South America. And there 2 places that are not continents called Central America. Lebanon Kansas is in central America.
@ Main Wayne
The new Fusion actually uses two factories, one in Mexico, one in Michigan. Also, all these financial problems do not show how Chevy still has a better mid sized car. I love Chevy, but I think the new Malibu is not competitive.
Kevin — is that really the way we measure mainstream midsize cars today — by their light weight and nimble nature?
If so, I wonder how the Camry and Accord still maintain their #1/#2 spots in the segment. That said, the Malibu — to me — is the most fun to drive out of the entire segment, even though it’s slightly heavier than the Fusion. It’s that “additional weight” that plants the car at high(er) speeds; this can be experienced in the Cruze compared to say an Elantra. The Chevy is as steady as a rock on the highway, while the Hyundai gets kicked around like dust in the wind.
But I’m guessing that the “fun to drive” or “nimble” aspects are very low on the priority list of “regular” prospective buyers in the segment; instead, these people likely look for safety, comfort, fuel economy, price/value, before anything else.
Of course, but fuel economy is closely related to other things, such as weight and drag. The Fusion Hybrid can manage the EPA rating of 47 MPG, at only $1000 more than the Malibu Eco, which only manages 37 MPG, and only on the highway. That extra 10 mpg will more than pay for the extra $1000 to buy the Fusion. Of course, these are the most basic models of each, but the specs speak for themselves. Also, no doubt the Malibu is a handsome car, but the Fusion looks like an Aston Martin/ Jaguar mix!
I have heard good things on the handling characteristics on the Malibu, but equally on the Ford as well. I guess its a matter of opinion in the long run however.
In terms of comfort and safety, we can assume nothing of the Ford since it has yet to be tested. However, on the comfort front, the Malibu has been scolded for its lack of rear seat room and love-it-or-hate-it front seats, while the Ford has received more consistent reviews, generally positive in terms of room and comfort.
Dont get me wrong, GM is my favorite brand, and it pains me when it loses to a Ford. I still believe, however, that the new Malibu just isnt as competitive as it should have been. And in terms of comfort, fuel efficiency, and value, it seems to be beat.
Sure, the light-hybrid Malibu Eco is no match for the Fusion (full) Hybrid… but start comparing the non-hybrid offerings of both models, and the playing field is quite equal.
On the comfort front, I’m not sure if the folks performing the comparison tests are of Sasquatch-like stature, but I (5’8 or so) fit into the rear of the Malibu with no problem whatsoever. The Fusion may offer a bit more legroom in the second row, but its head room is abysmal thanks to the sloping roofline.
I’ve discovered that the best test of (consistent) rear seat room comparisons is to adjust the driver/passenger seat where you would drive the car. Then hop out and get in the back seat — and see how you fit. Doing just that, I fit just fine in both the Malibu and the Fusion — but I could feel my (sometimes big) hair touching the Fusion’s headliner. For some reason, very few reviews point that out.
Either way, I’d rather drive the elegant new Malibu than the wanna-be-Aston Martin Fusion… even though it does look more aggressive (which I wonder if it’s something that the average buyers wants in the segment).
All of that is some great insight. I myself am on the taller side, so needless to say the backseat of any midsized sedan is uncomfortable for me.
The bit about the headroom in the Fusion is something I have seemed to overlook. Thanks for that insight.
I think the fuel efficient minded buyer will still go for the Ford, and I still think the Chevy is worse off on efficiency than the Ford. That being said (and as you pointed out), the Malibu is more elegant, and more handsome. If I was less concerned about efficiency (mind you, still concerned, its just not priority #1), opting for a Malibu Turbo LTZ would be a much better package than the Fusion 2.0 Turbo.
Still though, how many people get fully loaded cars? Plenty do, but more people opt for the fuel efficient route when buying a midsized sedan. That, combined with the Aston styling (yes, it is a wannabe, but it still looks cool!) may lure buyers to the Fusion more.
I do thank you for the insight, however. It has raised my current thoughts of the Malibu in a more positive direction
Kevin — always a pleasure! A couple of things to consider:
1. The base Malibu is on par with the base Fusion in fuel economy. Both are rated at 22 city/34 highway. However, the Malibu’s all-new 2.5 Ecotec is direct injected and has more power (197 hp/191 lb.-ft. of torque) than Ford’s 2.5 Duratec (175/175). So not only is the Malibu’s 2.5 equivalent to the Fusion’s base 2.5L, it also makes more power.
2. The Malibu Turbo is slightly less efficient than the Fusion EcoBoost.
The Chevy and its 2.0T is preliminarily rated at 21/30 to the Fusion’s 22/33.
However, the Chevy makes more horsepower (259 hp) than the Fusion (240 hp) but is slightly shorter on torque (260 lb.-ft.) than the Fusion (270 lb.-ft.).
3. The Fusion offers a 1.6 EcoBoost that is currently unmatched by the Malibu. It is the most efficient non-hybrid Fusion, rated at 23 city/36 highway. However, it’s rather weak — making 176 hp. and 184 lb.-ft. of torque. By comparison, the Malibu Eco mild-hybrid makes 182 hp and 171 lb.-ft. of toque and is rated 25 city and 37 highway. Since both the 1.6T EcoBoost and the Malibu Eco are a step up from the respective “base” engines, the Malibu Eco is either better or equal to the Fusion’s 1.6T.
All in all, here’s the rundown:
– Base engines: Malibu wins (same fuel efficiency, more power)
– Mid-level engines (Malibu Eco, Fusion 1.6T): Malibu wins (more efficient and more powerful)
– Top-level engines (2.0T): Malibu loses slightly, since it makes nearly as much hp as it loses to the Fusion in torque, but is slightly less efficient than the Fusion.
– Full Hybrid: Malibu doesn’t offer a full hybrid, so it loses fair and square to the Fusion here.
Besides interior room, which we measured here…
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2012/10/just-how-spacious-is-the-2013-chevy-malibu/
… everything else, such as styling and design, is subjective and can’t be compared on paper. My take-away from all this is that the Malibu is more than competitive in head-on comparisons with the Fusion, but needs to offer more in top-level power or fuel efficiency while adding a Voltec-like powertrain to the mix.
It is always interesting how some investigation can change an opinion. You are certainly right that the 2.0 could use a little boost in efficiency, and that a more advanced hybrid should be available, but my previous doubts of the Malibu have certainly changed. I have heard good things about both the 2.5 and the 2.4 eAssist, so hopefully these are good selling points.
As you mentioned, looks definitely are a matter of opinion. Personally, I prefer the Malibus interior to that of the Fusion. I have heard complaints about the faux wood, but considering the price, its not a concern. till think the Malibu is more classy looking, and very handsome, but the Fusion still turns heads. But still, all a matter of opinion.
I definitely appreciate the info though, it changed my opinion of the Malibu quite a bit.