Toyota Nation Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
straight cash homie
Joined
·
21,325 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Warning, GM post :eek:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/malibu-dreaming-why-cant-chevys-mid-sizer-vanquish-the-impala/
It looks like the Malibu is finally outselling the Impala. There’s been a lot of discussion, here on TTAC and elsewhere, as to why that hasn’t been the case all along. After all, the Malibu is the shining example of New GM’s ability to compete on an even footing in the marketplace with relevant, modern product, while the Impala was originally engineered in 1986 and has an interior made entirely of recycled Tupperware. Every “car person” in your life, from the neighbor kid who drives a slammed Civic EX Coupe to your IMSA Patron GT3 Cup-racing podiatrist, knows the Malibu is the smart choice.

I’ve been driving GM10 and W-body cars since I first rented a 1990 Cutlass Supreme sedan for a Spring Break trip (to Chicago, dammit, not Daytona Beach) twenty years ago, and I know them pretty well. It had been a while since I’d driven a ‘Bu, however, so I snagged an el-cheapo 1LT 2.4L/six-speed from Budget Rent-A-Car and put 1100 miles on it over the course of four days. Perhaps the Malibu would explain to me why it hasn’t left its ancient showroom mate in the dust.



This is the basic Malibu interior. The materials and execution aren’t terribly different from what you would find in the base Fusion. There’s that same combination of dark-grey plastic and silver-finish accent, but the Malibu is more obviously “designed”.



This is the Impala interior. It’s clearly from a different school of design. What stands out to me is that the Malibu interior, combined with the significantly more narrow passenger compartment, works to “envelop” the occupant. The Impala, by contrast, offers far more room to maneuver one’s body. When properly seated and adjusted in the vehicle, neither car impinges on me personally (I’m 6’2″ and 225lbs) but the Malibu doesn’t give me the impression of room to spare, while the Impala does. The same is true of the back seat; the Malibu has enough room, while the Impala has more than enough.

One particular gripe about the way the Malibu “fits”: the rather fast windshield line brings the intersection of the roof and windshield uncomfortably close to my head. It doesn’t touch, it isn’t really cramped, it just feels cramped.

Now let’s talk transmissions. The Malibu’s standard 2.4L/six-speed tranny combo is just fine for very slow-paced driving, and it returns more than 30mpg any time you’re on the freeway. Up the pace a bit, and it becomes easily confused. I ended up really disliking this transmission over the course of a few days running around downtown Toronto. It’s almost always in the wrong gear and the throttle/gearchange synchronization is miserable, leading to bucking and odd behavior on the fly.

The Impala has two fewer gears and benefits from base and optional engines that deliver much more torque than the Malibu’s. As a result, there’s less transmission work going on and it’s rarely confused on the move. The Malibu has less wind noise, while the Impala is mechanically quieter. Your choice.



Nobody’s going to buy a Malibu for cargo room, that’s for sure. Trunk space is another Impala strong suit, as is trunk access through a decklid that is longer and taller than than of the smaller Chevrolet. The Impala is just large enough to be a cramped police car and/or taxi, which opens it up to fleet and municipal sales opportunities denied the Malibu.



I prefer the far more modern styling of the Malibu; it just looks so much more modern in its proportions and detailing. The revised Impala isn’t hideous, however, merely generic in a kind of previous-gen-Accord way. I liked the previous model better, style-wise, but this one is okay, and your opinion may differ.

In the real world, the cars are priced pretty closely. There’s almost always more money on the hood of the Impala, and when you correct for equipment (V6 et al) the Impala is probably cheaper. If you’re simply looking for the proverbial most car for the money, don’t bother with the Malibu.

Let’s sum up. In the Impala’s corner, we have

* More spacious
* More cargo room
* More standard power
* Mechanically quieter

In the Malibu’s, we have

* Far more “modern” inside and out
* Better fuel economy
* Available four-cylinder and six-speed transmissions
* Styling

I would also suggest that the Impala will be more reliable in the long run, being made of simpler components that have seen far more real-world mileage. When we look at the lists above, it seems to be to be a conflict of tangible versus intangible. The Impala has more and does more, but the Malibu is simply better somehow.

I have a few theories about why the Impala refuses to fade away.

Theory #1: The Malibu is designed to appeal to “import intenders”. Those people end up buying imports. The Impala is designed to appeal to “domestic intenders”. Those people end up buying an Impala.

Theory #2: The design superiority of the Malibu doesn’t impress people as much as automotive journalists think it should. Real buyers prefer interior space to Motor Trend’s endorsement.

Theory #3: The Impala has been a generally decent car for a long time, and it’s been more or less the same car for over a decade. The Malibu was a dead nameplate before being resurrected on a straight-to-rental yawner and a chrome-faced oddity. It will take a few years for the nameplate equity to come back.


Of the three theories, only #3 helps explain why the Malibu is finally pulling away from the Impala in the sales race. I’d be interested in hearing your theories, but I suspect it comes down to this: No matter what the people from the color rags and big websites say, people will still buy the product that appeals to them. For better or worse, the Impala continues to appeal. You can call it a case of stupid flyover country hillbillies buying the crappy old throwback, or you can call it a case of smart consumers buying a tried-and-true product with their hard-earned money, but it’s still a case of consumers making their own decisions. How can that be bad?
Theory #1: The Malibu is designed to appeal to “import intenders”. Those people end up buying imports. The Impala is designed to appeal to “domestic intenders”. Those people end up buying an Impala.

While the Malibu is one of the better sedans on the road, this segment is just filled with too many tough competitors, especially the "beloved" Camry, despite its growing flaws. The reason above probably explains why the Malibu has not conquered the Camcord. The Fusion and Sonata are also eating the 'Bu's lunch. But the ultimate hurt was the Impala, because really they shouldn't be competing for the same customers. I guess its a good thing that the Avalon isn't cannibalizing Camry sales.
 

·
Registered
1986 Toyota Cressida
Joined
·
4,512 Posts
Both cars are in need of an update or preferably an overhaul. However the Impala is pretty good in that its design was purely to be as spacious and as inexpensive as possible. I don't think it has any real competition in being as inexpensive and as spacious as can be despite its age. The Taurus is the only car that is attempting to take this away from the Impala.

The Malibu...when it came out it was pretty good. I guess the problem was it didn't push far enough(one could argue it still had to split its budget with the G6 and Aura). When I first drove the Malibu, its domestic competition was rather weak with the really awful Sebring and the old Fusion which was slow and bland. The Hyundai Sonata/Kia Magentis at this time was just average, not that good. It seemed pretty good then, feeling above average. Today, all of those cars except the still really awful Sebring have been either overhauled or vastly improved. Now the Malibu feels a bit average, sure the Camry, Accord and Altima have aged just as much but they're stronger names allowing them to still sell despite their age. Aside from these the only weaker cars left are the Galant and the Sebring/Avenger, the Galant hasn't been updated in ages and the Sebring is still truly horrible.
 

·
CRESSIDA!!!
1984 Toyota Cressida
Joined
·
5,632 Posts
Both cars are huge staples at the Enterprise lot. Most of the Impala's sales are to rentals, it shouldn't come off as a shock that it normally outsells the Malibu. It's the new Ford Taurus. The car was dated and uncompetitive when it was introduced and hasn't been updated since. The Malibu's retail sales mix is better, and the car itself is better, but it also still has a high amount of rental fleet sales.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
11,513 Posts
Both cars are huge staples at the Enterprise lot. Most of the Impala's sales are to rentals, it shouldn't come off as a shock that it normally outsells the Malibu. It's the new Ford Taurus. The car was dated and uncompetitive when it was introduced and hasn't been updated since. The Malibu's retail sales mix is better, and the car itself is better, but it also still has a high amount of rental fleet sales.
Lol, so true
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,021 Posts
I can attest to the Malibu being small on the inside. I've been in the drivers seat of a few of them and there is far less room for the driver than there is in my Corolla. My right leg is shoved far left into an uncomfortable position by a combination of the overly wide center console/stack and the narrow driver space.

Also, the reason the article compared the 4-cyl Malibu to the 6-cyl Impala was cost. A Malibu with the V6 no longer has any price benefit over the Impala.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top