CarSpyShots
Quick Member Login:
Forgot password?
Forum Statistics:
Forum Members:
Total Threads:
Total Posts:


There are users
currently browsing forums.
  FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-01-2015, 05:18 AM
Jeremytallman Jeremytallman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 60
Default 2016 Chevrolet Malibu

Well, here is the New 2016 Chevrolet Malibu. Looks a lot better than the current one.

Reminds me of the Impala of course, only updated, in a good way. Sure does have a lot of busy lines on the sides. Looking forward to seeing more pics soon.



http://www.autoblog.com/2015/04/01/2...brid-official/

Last edited by Jeremytallman; 04-01-2015 at 05:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-01-2015, 05:25 AM
against the wall's Avatar
against the wall against the wall is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Da burbs
Posts: 10,303
Send a message via AIM to against the wall
Default

How the hell did that front get approved. It looks like someone played around with photoshop for the first time.
__________________
Fix your signature, the image was not working - admin

No - against the wall
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-01-2015, 05:46 AM
SV's Avatar
SV SV is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,082
Default

On first glance, I'm very impressed. I was a bit worried that they would play it too safe with the details but it's actually a bit daring. I'm still processing the side surfacing, it's very interesting. Proportions look great. Keeping the split grille will probably polarize opinion but I think it's well-executed here, although the lower (middle?) grill is perhaps too pointy. Overall though, 100000% more attractive than the current car. If this doesn't increase sales I don't know what will.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-01-2015, 05:57 AM
Crash Crash is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,109
Default

Well done GM. This thing looks awesome. Sure, some awkward lines in the face, but still a damn fine looking car. As mentioned above, if this doesn't fix sales ails....nothing will.

I'm anxious to see the interior.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-01-2015, 06:39 AM
SV's Avatar
SV SV is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,082
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash View Post
Well done GM. This thing looks awesome. Sure, some awkward lines in the face, but still a damn fine looking car. As mentioned above, if this doesn't fix sales ails....nothing will.

I'm anxious to see the interior.
Here you go:



http://www.netcarshow.com/chevrolet/2016-malibu/
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-01-2015, 07:24 AM
mick78 mick78 is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 8,550
Default

Looking good, but honestly, some detailing up front (bumper & grille) and surface treatment on the side seems a bit on the busy side. And the rear end (incl. d pillar and greenhouse have a lot of Audi A5 Sportback in them - arguably an attractive car - but without, as it appears, the Audi's hatch functionality. If it looks like a hatchback, why not make it one? Altogether an improvement (quite a large one) , but with room for more in my eyes
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-01-2015, 07:24 AM
caarmike caarmike is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,822
Default

This definitely takes some adjusting to. One thing for sure, it's not derivative of anything else in the segment nor a shrunken/stretched version of some other Chevy. That in itself deserves some credit.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-01-2015, 08:57 AM
63Bonneville 63Bonneville is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Northvale, NJ
Posts: 4,982
Send a message via AIM to 63Bonneville
Default

I'm loving the new Malibu design, where it 's more elegant, aggressive and Impala-like, too. The only thing that I'm let down with is the engine lineup, which seemed to humble and even be backward compared to before. That tiny 1.5L turbo-4, something the size of a loaf of bread, it taking the place of the 2.5L naturally-aspirated four, which had a higher power-rating. Even the 2.0L turbo-4 now puts out less than in the outgoing model, even though it's mated to a new 8-speed transmission. I still can't find what the output of the new hybrid model will be. OK, the body, now with applications of high-strength steel, now weighs about 300-lbs less, despite being larger, but, I would have wanted the engine lineup to be at least like the out going model or better. That's the only deal-breaker on this otherwise fine mid-sized entry. I also feel that the smaller, less powerful engines will have to work harder to maintain the loads and demands, and, as a result, that does not safe fuel, where a larger mill will handle it more with ease and confidence.
__________________
Pontiac Lives through BMW and Lincoln - via their split grills and attitude!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-01-2015, 09:21 AM
ocn75 ocn75 is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,186
Default

A huge improvement. The front is a tad busy, but it seems to all gel really well - this is the best interpretation of the Chevy split grille so far.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-01-2015, 10:10 AM
Oz Astra Oz Astra is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 63Bonneville View Post
I'm loving the new Malibu design, where it 's more elegant, aggressive and Impala-like, too. The only thing that I'm let down with is the engine lineup, which seemed to humble and even be backward compared to before. That tiny 1.5L turbo-4, something the size of a loaf of bread, it taking the place of the 2.5L naturally-aspirated four, which had a higher power-rating. Even the 2.0L turbo-4 now puts out less than in the outgoing model, even though it's mated to a new 8-speed transmission. I still can't find what the output of the new hybrid model will be. OK, the body, now with applications of high-strength steel, now weighs about 300-lbs less, despite being larger, but, I would have wanted the engine lineup to be at least like the out going model or better. That's the only deal-breaker on this otherwise fine mid-sized entry. I also feel that the smaller, less powerful engines will have to work harder to maintain the loads and demands, and, as a result, that does not safe fuel, where a larger mill will handle it more with ease and confidence.
You obviously don't have much experience with modern turbo engines. The old 2.5 mill wouldn't have produced its max torque (pulling power) until quite high in the rev range. Most modern smaller engines with turbos create their max torque very low in the rev range, circa 1500rpm and hold this on a flat line to around 4000rpm. This means it's a lot more accessible and you're not having to rev the engine as hard, getting better performance and better economy. The capacity of an engine means nothing anymore.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Black Falcon Media Group Oy