There are few segments which are as important and competitive as the mid-size sedan segment. The body style is outsold in the United States only by Detroit’s full-size pickup trucks and consumers have no shortage of options when looking for a vehicle in the segment. Almost all automaker’s mid-size sedan offerings are strikingly similar in performance, value and fuel economy too, making Motor Trend’s mid-size sedan comparison especially important.
For their comparison, MT rounded up some of the segment’s strongest offerings. Their group consisted of the 2014 Chevrolet Malibu, 2014 Kia Optima, 2015 Chrysler 200, 2014 Mazda6, 2014 Honda Accord and the 2014 Nissan Altima. MT noted this was one of the most closely matched tests they have ever featured, saying they were “astonished” at how competitive the segment was and how there simply was no car in the test which could be considered bad. However, they did stick the Chevy in last place behind the Nissan Altima.
MT says the Chevy came in last for a number of reasons. The biggest contributing factor could have been its 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine, which MT says “makes a bad buzz over 3500 rpm and, because of the wide, tall gearing, the car tries to sit in fourth gear on the freeway.” It also delivered the third slowest 0-60 mph acceleration time and the worst real world fuel economy, returning 26 mpg combined. They also lambasted the Malibu for the “cramped rear seat” and “hard, dreary” interior plastics. There were some redeeming factors though, such as the ride and handling, 7-inch infotainment screen and relatively low road noise.
To see how the full test panned out and to read more on MT’s reasoning for ranking the Malibu dead last in the mid-size sedan segment, read their full comparison here.
Comments
No surprises here. MT has placed the Malibu dead last in their earlier comparison test. This is simply a restatement of their earlier impression of this car.
At the end of the day, the consumers make the final judgement; customer satisfaction seems to be relatively good for the Malibu. Nevertheless the Malibu’s appeal is what’s hurting it. And in this regard, GM does have work to do.
Good looks aren’t enough.
Unlike GM engineers, and GM die hards who would drive a Yugo if it wore a bowtie, these reviews actually involve people driving competitor’s rides and the result should come as no surprise. Many other automakers are run by true car guys and not business fat cats and bean counters and it shows in the products they create.
How dare them complain about the interior!!! i test drove a 2013 Honda Accord and the interior in that felt like it was made out off recycled tupperware containers!!! I ended up purchasing a 2013 cruze because everything felt good to the touch… looks like im gonna have to make my own review videos
Not to mention the Altima’s interior! To be honest, the Optima isn’t a very good sedan anymore either.
Sonata doesn’t look nice at all…… so does that newly refreshed camry.
Having done Interior Perceived Quality in the automotive sector for three years prior to my graduation as a Mechanical Engineer, some of these comparisons baffle me.
From a PQ standpoint, the Malibu’s interior is very well done. Nissan, Honda and Toyota have lagged seriously over the years on their interior quality (i.e. interior plastics directly next to each other that do not match even remotely, and feel very cheap and have an outdated color/grain), so to see these comments from Motor Trend only further proves their incompetency in some cases when it comes to determining what actually makes for a “quality” interior.
Looks like they need to bring some fresh blood in, or coordinate a workshop with companies that perform PQ analyses.
See what i mean!! They always bash on gm for using “cheap plastic interiois” I strongly agree with you when it comes to the feel of each product. I feel that these guys that do the reviews kiss a lot….. A LOT or rear end
After renting a 2014 Malibu last week I can definently say I saw this coming. Its embarrassing enough to be sitting in one as a rental, i cant imagine owning one…
GM definently has work to do, they need to start by removing the “typical GM” hard plastic that is so overtly abundant, and the rough running engine. Gas engines shouldnt idle like a diesel.
Sorry, GM makes some nice vehicles, but this isnt one of them.
I see some of these complaints as legit. To me this should be reason enough to get the next one here post haste and do a better job of it so this “mistake” of an offering can be put behind them.
Well the new one is already in the works.
GM knew what they has and knew what it was going to do. This is really an old design that was show in private back in 08-09. They could not move ahead with it till they got a few other things done after the Chapter 11.
Rick Wagoner spent what money GM had left and poured it into cars like this the ZL1, XTS and some in the Alpha Platform to leave GM something to work with after the bail out. While not great products it was better than no products.
Note Chrysler is just now getting to new cars like the 200 and Dart but are still living off old refreshes on the other cars. They had nothing ready or close to ready and it too this long for Fiat to just get to where GM was a year after the bail out.
The old Malibu was way over on time and they moved this car ahead to beat the Fusion as GM knew what they had and what Ford was coming with. The Malibu Refresh was in place before the Malibu came out and was why it got moved ahead as they were not going to wait for the small fixes.
GM was already planning to move ahead with the new replacement and make due with this as well as they could. It was just one of those deals where they had to play the cars they were dealt. While not the home run we would have liked it was better to get on base than to be totally left behind like Chrysler was selling the older 200 at massive discounts.
This is just not another case where you can just take what you see on the surface as there is a lot more to the story than just that.
The Regal and Malibu should see a replacement much sooner than you think as the Regal while not ancient it is old in market terms. It is in need to get a new platform.
I think what hurt most here is that the precious model was one of the class leaders and losing that has cast a shadow on this car. This is the Jan Brady of Malibu’s Not bad but not Marcia.
Please, Malibu’s problem have never been about needing a new platform. (The average shopper knows nothing of platforms; this is why Toyota gets away with using a 2003 platform for Corolla.)
The 2008-12 Malibu was called a “Super Accord” by Motor Trend, and this had a lot to do with the wheel base and road manners of the Epsilon platform.
Epsilon was not in desperate need of replacement & was versatile enough for any makeover.
Unfortunately, GM wanted a World Car to show that they, too, could play like One Ford. I remember the pathetic global online unveiling and Chevy acting uber proud.
Platform reduction is a bean counters dream and this is what inspired the 2013 Malibu world car.
I am sure you remember some of this, Scott.
What you forget is the platform is all about what the issue is.
The platform represents hard points of the car and what you can and can not do with things like wheel base but more importantly how to control weigh.
I have the longer wheel base on my 08 and more rear seat room but I pay a price for it with weight that pays a toll on MPG.
A new platform would be able to offer new structure that would offer less weight, More MPG and more room.
As for the world car it was Chevy not just the Malibu was the target.
This is kind of like the VF where they reduced weight but were limited with the platform. Where it will be replace with a Alpha of similar size and lose weight.
It is not what you build but how you build it.
Quess my writing wasn’t clear because I understand the purpose of platforms. The last gen Epsilon based 2008-12 Malibu consistently ranked among the to three in various publications, was not significantly heavier (MPG was not dramatically improved) and had a far larger wheel base.
Epsilon 2 is better for global markets where its 110 wheel base is actually a plus. In the markets Mazda 6 & Mondaro are seen as too large.
I think the new 200 should’ve been what Malibu suppose to be except for the suspension in this case. I still honestly don’t know how Motortrend still thinks the backseat is not roomy since in the picture it looks just as roomy as any others that they posted though.
GM should have followed VW & built a NA only Malibu. It could have rested on an enhanced Epsilon platform. Any loss in scale would have been offset by increased volume.
Let’s also remember that Epsilon lies at the base of Fiat’s US Compact platform.Yes its been tweeked, but this excellent platform endures & will endure for many years to come.
New platforms don’t always mean progress.
Actually the Fusion is pretty much what Ford took from the 08 Malibu and made an updated version of their own. It has similar proportions and Elements about them.
If the Malibu had come out in 2010 it would have been fine but now every one has pulled ahead again.
I do not think the backseat is bad it is just not as good as the others. The one with less room is always going to be pointed out as a negative.
The problem in this competitive group is the distance from the top to the bottom is very little as they all have very good entries. The ranking will remain in flux and change with each new model.
This is a bit sad for the Malibu. I do hope that GM engineers are following these reviews with a keen eye, because GM must correct these types of blunders. How the hell could GM engineers work on an engine, with out noticing that damn buzzing issue? Worst yet, why the hell could they have made improvements to the engine and transmission, and the car is still so slow?
Further, why the hell is GM engineers just not nailing their cash cow projects?
Look fellas, the Malibu is one of the best looking midsize cars available, so at least for 2015, just work out these flaws so that the Bu would still attract some buyers while silencing the critics a bit.
it definitely needs a longer wheelbase if not about the same wheelbase as impala
How can it be the slowest when it has the the most power? How can they average 26mpg with the 2.5i when my 2.0t is averaging 28mpg? The interior is quiet, solidly built, spacious, and intuitive. The exterior is one of the major reasons I bought the Malibu! There is really no body roll, the brakes come on very nicely, and the throttle control is perfectly calibrated. The Malibu needs to get what it deserves. I am sick of “professional” reviewers calling my vehicle a piece of crap. Is it perfect? Absolutely not! Could it be better? Hell yes it could, but it is still a darn nice sedan in the segment.
Well said Edgar,
I believe the optima deserved last place next to the 200 in my personal opinion. Motortrend has a big hate on for the Malibu.
My Order:
1. Accord
2. Mazda 6
3. Malibu/Altima
4. 200
5. Optima
Its kind of crazy that the set the accord in first place…. specially when it has a cvt transmission on it…. motor trend them selves said a cvt trans on a car makes it boring and dull to drive…. i feel like im driving a golf cart to be honest… exept that engine makes an noice like… eeeeeeeEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeehhhhhhhhhhhhhh and never shifts… hahahaa
I sell and love the Malibu, as do most of my customers who come in to look in this mid-sized category. Without reading the review (yet) I can say the only knock I have on it is truck opening / perceived space. Most like the “4 Door Camaro” styling.
The emergency (short) mid cycle refreshes to the front seatbacks to improve back seat room, the center console / cupholder move and front restyle to match the ’14 Impala are all hits in my opinion. Yes, in hilly PA, my 2011 only gets the same 26 or so mpg, but 31 on the interstate at higher speeds. I’ve driven 6 cyl Impalas over the same hills that get over 30, numerous times, so the 2.5 might be too anemic for my commute.
I’ve sold an electrical engineering professor a 2014 who is returning 31 in mixed driving over huge hills into mountainous northern PA and upper 30’s to 40 on turnpike driving.
I think the marketing of the car could be better. The “Richest Guys on Earth” ads seem to be a little off target.
I have a 2012 Malibu. I especially like the back seat room. Very unhappy with the new “small” back seat. Also unhappy with small trunk opening and engine with low power.
The 2008-2012 has a 15.1 cubic foot trunk while the 2013- Malibu has 16.3. The 2008-2012 2.4i engine has 169HP/162FT-LBS while the new 2.5i has 196HP/186FT-LBS. Even the 2.0t has 7 more HP and 44 more FT-LBS at lower RPM than the old LY7 3.6L. Compared to the 2008-2012 Malibu, the backseat is smaller, but is understandable as it is now on a shorter platform.
I own a 2010 with a 2.4, I like mine. Although an older model, it has a very well put together interior. I average 24-25 in the city with it, but that’s with a heavy food. Out side the city, country driving, I could easily achieve 30+ mpg.
So, I don’t know where they come off with that crap. The new 2.5 has direct injection and a power bump. It’s pretty much the same engine. Maybe they should change their testing, or head up to Sanilac County, (north of port huron about 40 mins). Spend a week there driving around, see what your mileage goes to then.
I for one like the Malibus. However, I would own one with the 2.0 Turbo and the LTZ trim like I currently have.
Kiel sums up just how much the “new” Epsilon 2 Malibu was not a great or even moderate leap forward from the preceding model.
Epsilon 2 Malibu was all about global scale and higher margins. The new GM needed to demonstrate that they were capable of building a truly world car for the newly globalized Chevy. Fusion was Ford’s first truly global mid-sized offering, and GM top brass wanted to beat them to the punch.
Malibu is a compromise offering in that its smaller than average wheel base is actually an attractive selling point abroad. Companies like Mazda have had trouble selling American spec cars globally, and GM was hoping to please a variety of audiences. They would have been better off copying VW with their NA specific Passat or making thirty own rules and accepting risk like Ford with Mondaro.
Yeah. The real leg room is less than desirable, trunk is large but has a small opening. Other than that, I have no complaints. The design, fit and finish is nice, in my opinion. The 2.4 @ 169 hp is more than enough for me. I’ve test drove a 14′ and the 2.5 is more than enough power and no less refined than the 2.4. A 4 cyl will never be smooth in comparison to a V configuration. That review is kind of unfair.
Also, the 14′ comes standard with start/stop technology. How the hell did they not acheive a better combined fuel rating? Mashing the gas doesn’t get you there, conservative driving does.
My first thought about the reduced back seat room was that a “bean-counter” decision was made to reduce the back seat space to drive sales toward the Impala and Buick. You know…”if you want back seat room you have to buy a more expensive car”…very sad. Instead of getting another Malibu it has me looking…for alternatives with more back seat room and a bigger trunk opening.
By global standards, the Malibu wheel base is perfect….not to big or to small.
In markets like Europe, where roads are tight and gas is costly, cars like Mazda 6 are seen as to big, and this was on GMs mind a they developed Malibu.
Problem is Americans want size. A car like Insignia never stood a chance here as volume mainstream offering & neither did Malibu.
Chevy would have lost scale but would have been better off doing a radical refresh make over on the old Epsilon platform.
Motor Trend is so predictable. I know who will take first place in a comparison test before I’ve read
the article. Their only concern is 0-60’s, G forces and high revs, nothing relevant to the average
consumer. I have a 2009 Malibu and have had numerous compliments on the roomy interior,
the stylish dashboard, the smooth, quiet ride, and yes, plenty of back seat room. The 2.4 is as quiet
as any V-8 I’ve ever owned with excellent gas mileage. After five years of ownership I have had zero problems.
For a truly objective appraisal on any vehicle look to more serious publications.
No renewal for my subscription to Motor Trend.
I think the Epsilon 2 LWB gets more praise than the swb epsilon 2 platforms.
I just replaced my 2011 with a 2014 due to my ’11 being demolished for hail damage. (My 3rd Malibu starting with my ’65 SS Convertible in 1976)
I took it on a longer cruise yesterday for first time after wrestling the wheel from my wife.
Impressions on the 2.5 eco versus the 2.4L: the 27 or so HP and the 31 extra ft/lbs of torque are instantly noticeable and gee whiz fun between lights, although I am a conservative driver. I averaged 28 in mixed but hilly PA driving, up about two on my regular commute, which includes a long uphill that made the 2.4 scream and downshift, but not the 2.5. I look forward to putting it on the interstate to see if it surpasses the 31 or so I would get in the ’11 in that situation.
The start stop works great, but does not engage every time, as designed, so it is a little confusing, especially to my wife and a customer I sold a ’13 to last week. When it works, it works, albeit with a little bumping around when you release the brake, which will take some getting used to.
I love the interior room, the 5″ less wheelbase, which gives the car a more sporty feel and a shorter turn radius (my wife’s lone complaint about the ’11). It is not noticeable in the front especially; in fact, the front seats go back almost too far!
Console is much improved without the roll-top that was always open and collected dirt in the hundred lines in it. The cup holders being split rather than the side to side arrangement allows us to have 2 large commuter cups without them bumping together or leaning precariously towards both our laps like leaning towers of Pisa. Two Cellphone slots work great, as does the USB charger slot inside the console, with a notch cut out thoughtfully to route a cord through it. The faux wood grain in a gray color is awesome, as well.
The 7 ” myLink screen is worth the price of upgrade alone, with the colorful and changeable display and the next generation Bluetooth, which allows audio streaming from phones and other devices, text messaging and answering from the radio, voice activated station changing (who needs to touch buttons!) weather, closest gas and movie info, all with one-toucj dialable phone numbers, and color rear camera, of course.(no gridlines)
Other pleasant content surprises going from 1LT to 1LT: Homelink for garage door opener added, auto-dimming rearview (to kill the monster trucks and fog lights in clear weather behind me) Turn signal indicators on the outside mirrors seen only on higher level cars in the past, more room in the doors for water bottles or umbrella storage, inconvenient rear cupholders for the mother-in-laws starbucks moves from the floor to a new seatback mounted and huge armrest located in the center of the rear seats. Remote start remains in the package, but a stylish new “switchblade” key and fob, with a rich-looking gold-raised bowtie on it, is a small but nice touch. Heated mirrors are new to the standard LT list too.
A few minor observations, the bumping of the brakes when stopping and restarting will take some getting used to; it’s not unlike some of the regen pedals i have felt in the Volt and Priuses I have driven and sold, and a bump, and what feels like a downshift going down that same long hill I mentioned earlier, what seems to me like regenerative braking, although I can’t be sure, and is the reason I jumped on this forum to find out (before I crack open my Product Source from GM on my day off to see for sure). I also would have like the ’13′s electronic E-brake and am unsure what the reasoning behind the reversion to mechanical handbrake.
All in all a great ride and upgrade from the 2011, in power, technology, gas mileage and front seat amenities and hip and shoulder room and visual styling. I’ll leave the back seat review to my picky mother-in-law
They just did another comparo and it was last again. I was looking at the stats they list and it did well there. It goes head to head with all the others’ by these numbers and measurements. I just think they’re being A-holes like all the other rags to justify themselves for being that way about it to begin with. 🙂
what the hell is this guy smoking? He must be getting paid by a competitor because this guy is an idiot. I have owned the malibu 2014 for two years.
1. worst 0-60? what are you talking about?!?!? compared to compititon the power on the malibu is phenominal. I have only ever been beat in a race by v6 performance cars. and I have felt the power of the ford, kia, toyota, and they really don’t come close. most midsize sedans are using the i4 so that has nothing to do with it!
2.buzz sound is correct. Doesn’t bother me when I’m blowing past people though…
3.if i’m not flooring it I routinely get 34mpg avg. [that is based on actually calculating at the pump, not off the led display, which is pretty accurate and pretty] so that’s BS also…
4.Also, rear seats are very roomy. if there was a complaint I had with rear seats, it would be with the angle at which you sit makes it hard to sleep, other than that, nothing. In fact whenever I drive people, the first thing the say when sitting in the back is, wow it’s really roomy, way better then my *insert car*. SAM MCEACHERN is an lier!
5.also dreary interior? what! I have a two tone interior with padded synthetic leather! how is that dreary compared to the monochrome toyta, kia forte, ford focus. It’s insulting how dumb this review is.
6. bang for buck, you can’t beat the Malibu. in it’s class and price range, I couldn’t find anything nearly as nice. I spent months searching and trying cars but i’m fully satisfied by my purchase, so Sam, you keep getting paid by whatever inside deal you have while use consumers who aren’t sheep will buy a very nice high end car with great value and a 5 star safety rating.