Is the Malibu really that bad?

The Fusion is a nice car and deserves to be ranked in the top three (IMO).

Regarding the legitimacy of the article, the ratings were all subjective… very subjective. I read it too, and thought it was strange that they gave the VW high marks for performance when it was the slowest accelerating of the bunch.
There were a few other instances where one car was praised for the same thing another was lambasted for. I’d take that article with a tiny grain of salt, as it is fairly obvious that they went in to the tests with preconceptions that clouded their judgement.

Based on the article, some things GM could evaluate for themselves, is the calibration of the Malibu shift points and it’s comparison to the others. I’m not sure that other publications agree with Motor Trend on this comparo…

@Brian_E is spot on. The ratings are as subjective as subjective gets. In addition, the article praises the Altima’s chassis… but only makes a brief mention of how good it is on the Malibu, even though it’s the class leader when it comes to ride & handling; not sure if it matters in this particular class, but that’s my opinion.

In addition, the rear-seat legroom — another major contention of the editors — seems fine to me, having spent slightly less than a week with the car and having sampled the back seat.

Ultimately, the transmission calibration doesn’t matter in this segment. It does in the performance-oriented 3er/ATS class, though.

Also, keep in mind that MT selected the Passat (with its chintzy interior) as their car of the year. Need to defend their choice somehow, right?

@Vic1212 You don’t think the Volt deserved to be COTY?

Well, I think MT is one of the most unbiased auto magazines out there. I usually read multiple reviews from different sources of the same car, if their all saying the same thing, its probably true. In the end, only your personal experience really matters, no one can really tell you how good or bad a car is, since perception varies so much, especially since there’s no truly bad car on the marker right now.

And on the COTY award, keep in mind its only for all new cars, which means the pool is somewhat limited, and I dont see the COTY award as the award for the best car in the class. For example, the Volt is not, right now, a car that is the best, a cruze is a much better value than the volt. However it completely deserved the award for a multitude of reasons I will not discuss. The award is for whats new, whats daring, whats revolutionary( volt, evoque ) In a similar sense, the Passat was a huge improvement over the previous gen Passat and was WV first serious attempt at the mid size market, and its a pretty competitive car.

And Passat sales are still low compared to the rest of its class, but their growing pretty fast.

@babersher That’s understandable, but does the Passat really deserve the award? Is it revolutionary? Will it improve (a lot of) people’s lives? Is it daring?

I don’t think so.

The Passat is cheap, it has rattles up the wazoo, it’s no longer a global vehicle (a step backwards for Europeans who now have a smaller vehicle), and it is worse than the outgoing (global) model. Perhaps it will result in more sales… but that could have been accomplished by building the global Passat in the U.S.

In my opinion, the new U.S. Passat doesn’t deserve a COTY. I understand that the pool is limited, but there’s always a third choice for a good publication to forgo a COTY selection altogether if the contenders don’t deserve it.

In my opinion, the 2.5 is the best engine out of the cited MT comparo (above). Not sure what about it they didn’t like. If anything, it’s better than the old and outdated 2.5 5-cylinder (they still make those?) from VW in the Passat.

Well, ok , the Passat was not the best choice for the award, I think the 300 should have gotten it.

I think the Passat got such high marks because expectations going in were low and it was much better than the last gen.

The 5 cylinder will be replaced by a 4 turbo soon, I think.

Yes sir, the 5 will be replaced with a boosted 4-banger within the next two years. But even so, it got MT’s choice in the shootout, even though it’s a piece of garbage. The engine is the least competitive engine in the shootout — it’s inefficient, coarse, and loud — yet a vehicle powered by it was somehow voted first place… how does that work?

That, and I don’t think the new North American-market Passat is better than the vehicle it replaced. The B8/B9 Passat is a much better car, albeit a bit smaller and more expensive. I’m not trying to be difficult, I just think there’s some glaring inconsistencies with MT’s 1) mid size sedan shootout that ranked the Passat first and the new Malibu dead last, and 2) awarding the new Passat COTY 2012 even though it’s a step backwards compared to the last-gen model (that still sells, very well — mind you, in Europe).

Agreed, Vic.

I would also ask the MT folks if the criteria they used for the midsize sedan comparison really resonates with the consumers that are buying these cars. Does the average segment customer even care about the things we’re talking about here, such as ride/handling, power/acceleration/engine refinement, or the quality of interior materials? What about backseat space/legroom?

Personally, I’ve yet to see a discerning midsize sedan buyer who can tell the difference between GM’s old-school V6 line (found in the 8th-gen Malibu) and a much better engine (like the 2.4 found in the Regal). I’m speaking from experience here thanks to a couple of friends — as long as the car starts, runs, looks ok, and does so in a trouble-free manner, it should sell well.

Heck, the Camry came to prominence by NOT being the segment leader in anything, except for (maybe) reliability. It wasn’t the biggest, the most powerful, the most fuel-efficient, the most fun-to-drive, the most safe, or the most-technologically-advanced. It didn’t have the best interior materials or the most attractive styling. But it sold — and brought Toyota to prominence.

That’s not to say that automakers should give up trying to build better cars, but I keep coming back to MT’s shootout and wonder if the buyer would actually LIKE the things MT editors disliked.

@vic1212 Yupp, I did see it. The review, and the shootout, seems to have been executed with haste — which is never a good idea when ranking cars.

Are you referring to the negative comments regarding the shootout on the MT Forum?

Agreed. Ironically, the Accord is as far away from a sporty vehicle as it gets. A total “meh” — disconnected, not very nimble, and imprecise.

Well, I shopped the Malibu, and I bought that “Chintzy”, “cheap”, “overrated” Passat. So have thousands of people. Granted I bought a TDI, not the 5 cylinder, but 45 mpg talks. My family loves it, but I still prefer my old 03 Passat.

@heidelbergjohn How are you finding the cheapened cabin compared to your 03?

Did you guys hear what happened with Hyundai/Kia last week? Fuel economy rating cuts across the board. That’s what you call “shoddy engineering”.

Luckily, GM doesn’t engage in these practices. I have a feeling the same applies to Hyundai/Kia power numbers. While the new ‘Bu Turbo makes 259, my guess is the Sonata Turbo makes less than that — not the 270+ that it’s rated.

You know, every new-gen FWD Hyundai I’ve ever driven had some kind of a handling/steering issue. The Sonata does “drift” on the highway — I’ve experienced this first hand; but what ticks me off the most is that the FWD Hyundais have very disconnected steering and handling that can’t keep up; the steering is too light and the handling is poor. Overall, they’re still a generation behind the big boys.

I don’t doubt it.

Not sure about the Genesis sedan, but the coupe I drove for a few days was excellent. A few squeaks and rattles were persistent, but the driving dynamics were stellar — something the next-gen Camaro (and Mustang) should aim for.

As for the Fusion, I’d subtract 50-150 lbs for the AWD system. That’s just an estimate, of course, but that’s what I’ve been hearing.