Filed under: Spy Photos, Sedans/Saloons, Chevrolet
Details on the '08 Malibu are sketchy at the moment
Last week brought the best spy shots of the 2008 Malibu to date. We're pretty encouraged by what we've seen so far, which is much better than the boring rental-fleet staple that currently wears the moniker. Today, The GM Source has published a Chris Pauwels sketch (above) of what it's believed the next-gen Malibu will look like once it loses its anti-spy camo for good. Pauwels' work, readers may remember, last graced Autoblog when we published the 2008 CTS rendering he did for The GM Source. According to the site, that rendering is a "dead ringer" for the production CTS, and if the Malibu sketch is similarly spot-on, there's plenty to be enthusiastic about.
We're big fans of the Chevy SS Concept-inspired grille, and if the coupe-ish rear end that Chris predicts is accurate, then the new Malibu should look as good leaving as it does arriving. The GM Source states that it shares its architecture and powertrain choices with the current car, so don't expect anything radical there. No matter. The appearance overhaul should work wonders. Between this and the new CTS, the General could be sitting pretty when MY '08 rolls around.
[Source: The GM Source]
Editor's Note: The Car Connection has recently received a new photo of the '08 Malibu from Mrs. Priddy and Co. Included with it are details about a verbal altercation that ensued when a GM employee confronted the photog during the unauthorized photo shoot.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Howard Kerr 11:16PM (8/06/2006)
Autoblog and most of the posters were SO SURE last week that this was the next Impala.......
I do have to admit, that if this car was available RIGHT NOW, it could sell as well or even better than the '07 Camry. Unfortunately for GM, Honda should have it's next Accord in showrooms about the same time as this car arrives. Of course, if I were Honda I'd hedge my bets/sales, by introducing the Accord before Chevy gets this car to market.
Ford better have a damn good re-style of the Fusion ready for '08 as the Malibu will surely take sales from the Blue Oval team.
Reply
Dan 11:40PM (8/06/2006)
I dunno, it looks pretty rental fleety to me.
Reply
Speed42 11:58PM (8/06/2006)
I think the last time a Chevy Sedan sold as well or better than a Toyota was probably sometime in the early 70s.
this sketch, as Dan said in comment #2, is destined for rental parking lots nationwide.
And Honda is not, I'm sure, worried. At all.
Reply
Josh Oliver 12:05AM (8/07/2006)
The fact that General Motors has closed the quality gap I'm sure has no bearing on your thoughts at all, eh #2 and #3?
It's odd how GM puts forth vehicle after vehicle that either matches the competition or trounces it, yet....it's "still just not that good enough."
I feel like it sucks to live in America right about....yesterday. We can't support our own brands.
Reply
nzw8qr 12:15AM (8/07/2006)
I think that looks awesome, build it like the picture and I'll buy one
Reply
Larry 12:25AM (8/07/2006)
Josh,
Before you make such statements as "We can't support our own brands", let me tell you I most certainly have. In the process of me working, only to make car payment after car payment, I have come to the sound conclusion that GM does not support me, the customer.
In the past 20 years I have been screwed over countless times. Recently I just sunk a grand into a new transmission.
Was GM there for me? Absolutley not.
Stop seeking pitty and build me a product which truely does "trounce" the competition. Maybe then I will return, but not a moment sooner.
In the meantime, I work much like you and make the best purchase decisions I can with the choices I have. What does that mean? It means my payments go to Toyota.
Reply
buckeyeguy 12:40AM (8/07/2006)
>> It's odd how GM puts forth vehicle after vehicle that either matches the competition or trounces it, yet....it's "still just not that good enough."
I agree that GM is making better products but it seems like there's always at least 1 well documented flaw per vehicle that hurts them when people cross shop. Examples: G6 - the numb steering feeling (I owned an Alero - GM years of bad comments on this system but designed it into the new anyway). Sky and Solstice - they'll be a success but the lack of room for even golf clubs is a problem. Current CTS and many others - the interior. At least they are making progress on the last example.
Part of the problem is that the comparable GM typically sells for $2000-$3000 less (discounts, lower MSRP, etc). Were it not for the Koreans, GM could do this and win the value war. However, to compete with Honda and Toyota on the total product they need to position their cars to sell at the same price. Basic math: selling a car for $2000-$3000 less requires $2000-$3000 of corner cutting somewhere. And this isn't even taking into account the lower manufacturing costs that I'm pretty sure that Honda and Toyota take as higher profit margins.
It's really a chicken and the egg situation. You have to have a good reputation to charge an equal price but you have to charge an equal price to not have to cut the corners that reduce the reputation.
Reply
Jeff R. 1:10AM (8/07/2006)
#2 and #3-
Well, I sure don't hear you guys saying that the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry look like rental cars, despite the fact that both of those cars have unexciting and predictable styling- gee, do I sense a blaten anti-GM bias? Bear in mind that in the family sedan segment, those vehicles aren't intended to look very exciting, they're designed to be safe, reliable and comfortable transportation. And many of today's family sedans do those things well, the Malibu included. And despite what you two think, the styling appears to be pretty nice anyway.
#1- I do agree with you, Ford could be facing more trouble with sales due to the '08 Malibu. The Fusion looks nice and has been a good seller so far- but the family sedan segment is very important in the car market and Ford has to keep the Fusion competitive with continuous improvements, updates and re-designs when needed. But given Ford's total lack of direction and terrible decisions, Fusion sales might end up taking a backseat to the Malibu or many other cars in its segment.
Reply
Steven T. 2:08AM (8/07/2006)
The design changes are certainly a meaningful improvement on the existing Malibu, which -- let's be honest here -- is not a terribly inspired design. I particularly like the forthcoming version's more aggressive front end and the return of the iconic two-circle taillights.
That said, the recent round of spy photos suggest that the overall design (e.g., roofline, side sculpting, etc.) is entirely too similar to other recent GM cars. In addition, the rear door shows signs of having an awkward dog-leg shape.
In other words, it is absurd to argue that this is somehow a breakthrough design. If the Malibu is going to challenge Camry and Accord it is going to have to display exceptional engineering, build quality and marketing savvy.
Reply
Chris 2:40AM (8/07/2006)
I was driving home from northern Michigan today and passed three Fusions that weren't really covered up but two of them had a funky camo scheme on their hoods. You could see a signifigant bulge in the center of the hood but that wasn't what gave away the special nature of the car. The sound, it was incredible! These two Fusions were sporting dual exhaust as big in diameter as a Mustang GT and both sounded alot like one. I really think Ford is getting more serious about cars and performance models. The Fusion is too good of a car to let slide, it's certainly no Ranger!!!
Reply
Finished.Law.School 3:08AM (8/07/2006)
They added Cobalt tail lights and changed nothing else. I suppose now GM thinks that it is edgy.
Stupid fools.
I it is likely, as always, that the UAW losers gluing this boring car together will make sure that it is of shit quality.
Reply
Desiri 3:48AM (8/07/2006)
Please tell me that I can still get one with an old iron block lump and 4-speed slushbox. //sarcasm
Reply
Robert 3:53AM (8/07/2006)
Hey Chris #9
Maybe it is the Fusion SVT with it's hood bulge similar to the Mazdaspeed 6?? Or the Fusion with the news 3.5L V-6 (although Mark Fields said that this wasnt going to happen maybe it will).
Reply
Richard Warren 5:34AM (8/07/2006)
Hey Larry, what year vehicle is that transmission failure in? How many miles? What model vehicle? And what failed?
Hey, Finished.Law.School. Exactly what the fuck is your problem with the UAW. I've seen a lot of right out school laywers cause a lot of grief for clients. Feel bad because your sheepskin is not buying you a better position in life? A UAW woker might cause a problem with a car, but a wise ass laywer can screw you up for life. Perhaps the best failure would be a brake failure as you walk across the street. As they say it would be a start.
The car looks pretty good on paper. Will it sell? We all know it will, just depends on the number.
Reply
Kit 6:19AM (8/07/2006)
Cool, thanks for this information
Reply
Finished.Law.School 6:53AM (8/07/2006)
Richard Warren, considering you have over 800 posts here I would've thought that you of all people do not need to be told about how the UAW operates in a manner that is NOT efficient, productive, effective or worthwhile. The UAW is the largest contributing factor to the downfall of the US auto industry.
Yes, stupid people like Wagoner and their stupid decisions do not help but it is the heavy handed actions and anti-business methods of the UAW which have led to high costs for US autos and low quality as well as shipment of labor to Mexico.
Should I not lambast the UAW when they proudly spend their 8 hour shifts watching TV and playing cards instead of being productive and actually possessing a work ethic?
Why else and how else can you explain Korean and Japanese auto companies trumping US manufacturing in this sector?
There are only a few places left where people think that GM and Ford are the best and that is likely due to people having some sort of personal connection to the company or is due to ignorance and/or prejudice. The vast majority of the US population thinks that GM and Ford are shit and the overall sales numbers and public sentiment prove this despite the constant arguments that are made on Autoblog. I blame this on the UAW.
Does that answer your question?
Reply
Davey in D 7:22AM (8/07/2006)
GM makes great cars and those of you that continue to bash just show your ignorance, do any of you drive cars? Most of you sound like a bunch of kids that have nothing better to do than sit all day on your computers. This survey came out today, GM leads more catagories than any other manufacturer.
WORD TO THE SMARTASSES;
If you don't know what you're talking about "Shut the Hell up."
http://autos.msn.com/advice/article.aspx?contentid=4020223
Reply
JZeke 7:27AM (8/07/2006)
On a less incidiary note...
I took part in the "Rev-it-up" racing program this weekend in Miami, this year sponsored by Chevrolet. For those not familiar with the program, participants get to take out performance product on cone courses, and sit and generally experience performance cars. This year, the product was everything SS from Chevy, and the Vette.
Let me just start by saying Chevy (and by extension GM) has made huge strides with their cars. By and large the plastics were of decent quality, fits and finsihes were nothing to be ashamed of and the driving was pretty good.
That being said, its easy to see where the competition will continue to walk all over Chevy. The Cobalt, in SS guise was decent, but the interior was lower rent than a Civic or Corolla. The handling required a rough hand to extract the most from it, and interior room and stowage was limited.
The Impala and Monte Carlo are still fairly tragic. While better built than ever, the designs are weak, the interiors very rental and the combination of heavy FWD V8 with a 4speed automatic and soft suspension does nothing for me. All the handling grip is mechanical, i.e through the tires. These big cars have a very long way to go.
The Malibu Maxx SS however was actually pretty sweet. It had a unique look, a rorty engine with good shove, tight handling and lots of room for 4 big guys. I was impressed. Of course the highlight was the Corvette.
NICE. The Corvette may still be a little ho-hum interior wise, but here's a great way to drive 400hp. Its fun, smooth and easy to get into. All SS products should feel like this.
Then there's the Z06...
Lets just say if you ever get to hear a Z06 launch, wait til it hits 4500rpm... all hell breaks loose and the scenery changes from a blur to hyperspace. Incredible. THATs what American engineering should be about. Only $65,000 and you get a fun ride thats easy to drive yet can easily warp your frame of mind. Awesome.
So there you have it. With any hope GM will loosen the purse strings for their new designs and spend the money on getting the feel right. The ingridients are there.
Reply
Steve B. 8:08AM (8/07/2006)
Lets face it... what it comes down to is that a car is a status symbol. People consider a car to be a part of clothing almost; it's a way that one projects an image to the world.
Take suits. Does someone want a suit that screams "rental?" If the prices were the same, and you were buying a tuxedo, would you want the one that every zit-faced high-schooler wears on score-night, or the one with far higher brand appeal?
For most Americans, an American branded car holds far lower appeal than a Japanese or European brand. While the reasons are more complicated that could be expressed in a one liner, it seems that nobody wants to be labeled a tool. Driving an American car screams to the world that one is too stupid to do research, too lazy to change habits, or has built a red-white-&-blue head of nationalist steam like a rabid Toby Keith.
This is markedly less so in Flyover America, but they tend to lag about 20 years behind the times anyway.
Reply
Richard Warren 8:11AM (8/07/2006)
Finished.Law.School,
"Why else and how else can you explain Korean and Japanese auto companies trumping US manufacturing in this sector?"
You are aware, are you not, that the majority of vehicles made on the face of this planet are made by union members? Other than China, and some states here in the US.
To blame the problems of the domestic auto industry on the UAW is a simplistic viewpoint.
Management decides:
What to build
How to market it it
How to advertise it
How the corporation is run
What the stockholders get
Where to build the plants
Who supplies the parts for the vehicles
What division gets sold off and at what price
Decides what funds get funded
Decides on the CEO compensation
OK,s piss poor engineering and design
Signs dealership agreements
Hires the managers in charge of the plants
Decides on the content of the vehicle
Decides what chances to take for liability
Hires and promotes the same cookie cutter-old boy network
Determines what shall be badge engineered
Sits back and allows market share to dwindle and does nothing
Signs off on those UAW negotiations year after year after year
Decides what to outsource
Decides what technology to promote
Who decides on buyout options for employees
Let's see, the union membership screws the badge engineered, poorly engineered, poorly designed parts together.
Management then turns around, and blames the union for it's high legacy costs, that THEY SAID YES TO, because they were too weak over the years to say no. If you have problems in a plant with union workers, you change the plant manager, enforce the rules of the company, within the guidelines laid out by the union (THAT MANAGEMENT SIGNED) of the union and fire the bastards causing the problems to help create a good situation for the good workers.
Something else, have you noticed that the American plants are better in efficency, that's right and that's no bullshit. Keep in mind that that efficiency can be caused by not equipping the plants with modern equipment, just as much as if the work force is not efficient. And who lays out those plants? Management.
Management signed off on the job banks, remember that? So who is stupid? Management for saying yes or for a person to take advantage of it? Both, I'd say.
Then what about the dear old stockholders? They allow the same old manager, good ole boy network to run on and on, so long as they get theirs, it's OK.
Yep, I believe more and more you actually did finish law school. Typical laywer, looking for someone to blame other than your client sitting there saying "It wasn't me!"
The real shame is this, BOTH sides forgot that it takes a well oiled team to compete and win.
Reply