Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
FYI guy on another board, after the bankruptcy got a ecotec/A6 combo Aura for $15,500, sorry but nothing can touch that. He was a Lexus/bmw man. He admits its a step down, bit still a good car and cheap.
I bought a 2011 2LT in April knowing I would put 25k-35k a year on it. I also have a large family and would occasionaly need to fit my kids in the back.
I have a very easy 130 mi round trip (country roads) commute. I am kinda disappointed with the MPG (27-28) considering I barely stop, but have hills. I would have opted for the 6 cyl if I had it to do over just for the extra power, but the 4cyl is ok.
I can vouch that it handles well after hitting two deer in 6 months. Both repairs were around $2500 ea through the dealer. The stereo could be better with the sunroof open and windows down, but thats being picky. I hope to get 200k mi. Knowing the resale, I had no intention of trading it in until it's on its last legs.
I also drove a Sonata and Accord. They might have handled better and had better resale, but I got more features for a lesser price (sunroof, remote start, heated seats, etc..)
By domestic standards, the Malibu/Aura have nice plastics. The Ford may be a bit nicer, but it was a lot better than the Chryslers. The Malibu interior has a dealbreaker detail for me, however. I simply cannot stand the turquoise IP lighting. It looks extremely cheap compared to the Aura's amber and white. The Malibu's turquoise display looks silly with the lighter color plastics on the Chevy's console and center stack. I've seen pics of the new Malibu and they kept a similar IP color, but it doesn't look quite as cheap.
I'm actually very critical of interior lighting, gauge design and legibility. Overall, I actually find the Malibu's design and lighting to be pretty well done. The turquoise does look a little cheap, but is very legible and easy on the eyes at night. It's not as good as the BMW and Audi's I've owned or the GTO I had (which has fantastic gauges and lighting), but in terms of regular vehicles it is pretty well done.
Thank you for all the replies. We are between purchasing a 2010 or 11 malibu and a 2011 sonata. We found a good deal on a Sonata with 30k miles, certified, for $17k (and will work on the price even more), plus low apr (5.9). The only "bad" thing about the Sonata is the color, it has tan interior and gold exterior which we don't like. We told the salesman we'd like it in black or white, and we could probably get a different car in black or white for same price.
Since the Malibu goes for around the same price, I was wondering which of the two (sonata or malibu) is a better choice overall?
I'm actually very critical of interior lighting, gauge design and legibility. Overall, I actually find the Malibu's design and lighting to be pretty well done. The turquoise does look a little cheap, but is very legible and easy on the eyes at night. It's not as good as the BMW and Audi's I've owned or the GTO I had (which has fantastic gauges and lighting), but in terms of regular vehicles it is pretty well done.
It is good, except for the turquoise. It's perfectly functional. I just like the G6's red and the Aura's amber (not so much the contrasting white with it) better. The turquoise (along with the ambient lighting the same color) must look silly with that amazing brown baseball glove-colored leather interior (which looked a lot better in the Aura).
I walked past a Malibu today with the beige interior...I really like the silver radio and center stack (reminds me of 80s cars) and I also didn't notice any fake wood trim. The Aura has silver trim here and there with the gray interior but okay-looking fake wood with the beige.
I bought a 2011 2LT in April knowing I would put 25k-35k a year on it. I also have a large family and would occasionaly need to fit my kids in the back.
I have a very easy 130 mi round trip (country roads) commute. I am kinda disappointed with the MPG (27-28) considering I barely stop, but have hills. I would have opted for the 6 cyl if I had it to do over just for the extra power, but the 4cyl is ok.
I can vouch that it handles well after hitting two deer in 6 months. Both repairs were around $2500 ea through the dealer. The stereo could be better with the sunroof open and windows down, but thats being picky. I hope to get 200k mi. Knowing the resale, I had no intention of trading it in until it's on its last legs.
I also drove a Sonata and Accord. They might have handled better and had better resale, but I got more features for a lesser price (sunroof, remote start, heated seats, etc..)
I just wanted to add, I think a 4 cylinder in a midsized car is not worthwhile(same with small subs)
Yes they get better mileage but not much. For real world conditions the engine is "rev'd out " more. While a bigger engine may not be as taxed.
Thank you for all the replies. We are between purchasing a 2010 or 11 malibu and a 2011 sonata. We found a good deal on a Sonata with 30k miles, certified, for $17k (and will work on the price even more), plus low apr (5.9). The only "bad" thing about the Sonata is the color, it has tan interior and gold exterior which we don't like. We told the salesman we'd like it in black or white, and we could probably get a different car in black or white for same price.
Since the Malibu goes for around the same price, I was wondering which of the two (sonata or malibu) is a better choice overall?
Honestly I put them in the same category. They will both have pretty comparable equipment at the same price and they both depreciate equally. There are a couple pros and cons though:
Malibu - Will carry the balance of the factory powertrain warranty 5 year / 100k miles as well as whatever is left of the bumper-to-bumper that will most likely be extended a year and 12k if you buy from a Chevy dealer. However, the Malibu is being completely redesigned for 2013 so this particular model is a little long in the tooth. The good part of that is that they worked out any earlier kinks, the bad part is, value will take a hit when the 2013's come out.
Sonata - You don't to keep the 10 year / 100k mile powertrain warranty on a used Hyundai, you will just get the balance of the 5 year / 60k mile warranty. So, the Chevy will carry a better warranty and if you drive a lot of miles it is the better option in terms of warranty. The Sonata was all new for 2011 so you are buying early into the models life cycle. Chances are a major update is another couple years away and another redesign won't be happening for 5 years or so. This means it should hold its value a little better as it will be more current 3 years from now than the Malibu. The downside is that it is an all new model and there may be issues that haven't been dealt with yet.
If it was my choice it would come down to which one gave me the overall better deal on the car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustangEater82
I just wanted to add, I think a 4 cylinder in a midsized car is not worthwhile(same with small subs)
Yes they get better mileage but not much. For real world conditions the engine is "rev'd out " more. While a bigger engine may not be as taxed.
Sent from my autocorrect butchering device.
I do have to admit that if I was to do it over again, I would have gotten the V6 in my Malibu. It would have been worth giving up a couple MPG on the highway for the extra ~100hp and not dealing with the underpowered feeling that the car has when loaded.
I do have to admit that if I was to do it over again, I would have gotten the V6 in my Malibu. It would have been worth giving up a couple MPG on the highway for the extra ~100hp and not dealing with the underpowered feeling that the car has when loaded.
I've driven a four cylinder Aura and a six cylinder Aura (the 3.5) and I actually prefer the four. The six is quick but having the air conditioner on really makes a difference. The biggest difference, however, is in the power steering. The V6's steering is too heavy for my tastes. The four's electric steering had a lot less effort and felt better to me.
I've driven a four cylinder Aura and a six cylinder Aura (the 3.5) and I actually prefer the four. The six is quick but having the air conditioner on really makes a difference. The biggest difference, however, is in the power steering. The V6's steering is too heavy for my tastes. The four's electric steering had a lot less effort and felt better to me.
I actually prefer traditional, heavier hydraulic steering, so going the other way would probably have been better for me. Though, I don't find much to complain about it with the electric steering on my Malibu, it is pretty well done and probably the biggest complaint would be that it's a little "numb" on center, but that's true of any car with electric steering.
If the choice was between the 3.5L V6 and the 2.4L I4, I would just stay with the I4 as long as it was the one mated to the 6 speed auto. There isn't much of a power difference between those two engines and the 3.5L isn't exactly easy on gas. However, the 3.6L V6 is a very different animal and is much more powerful while retaining decent MPG. I ignored my own better judgement and went with the goal of maximum MPG, which in hindsight I would have given up a couple MPG for the extra power.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
