2006 Chevrolet Malibu Ls Sedan 4 Door 2 2 Liter Engine One Owner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.

EcoCar2 is on the hunt for a better, cleaner Chevy Malibu [w/video]

The students spent three years transforming an ordinary Chevy Malibu into a revolutionary vehicle. Not far from the building where General Motors once invented the Chevy Volt, a dozen or so college students are standing on the blacktop alongside a test track, watching a professional driver push the limits of a plug-in hybrid car they've built that's far more radical. These students, from Colorado State University, have spent the past three years transforming an ordinary Chevy Malibu into a revolutionary vehicle. At first glance, it still looks like a regular sedan. But under the hood, they've installed a hybrid powertrain that contains both hydrogen and electric power sources. Even by the standards of the Department of Energy competition they're participating in, it's an outlier. That's exactly what they had in mind. "We didn't want to come here and tell them how to build a better Volt," said Tom Bradley, faculty adviser for the Colorado State team. "They already know how to do that. We can tell them how to think about these possibilities in a whole new way." After three years of work, it all comes down to this. The Colorado State team was one of 15 that came to GM's Milford Proving Grounds last week for the final stretch of the EcoCar2 competition, which challenges regular college students who have no automotive experience to do nothing less than reinvent the American car. The teams have come from across North America, and include schools like Ohio State and Virginia Tech that have a long history of participating in similar competitions, and schools like the University of Washington and Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University that are here for the first time. After three years of work, it all comes down to this. The teams have operated 24 hours a day for almost two weeks here at the Proving Grounds, running a gamut of tests that include a 310-point safety inspection, emissions and energy-consumption tests and road tests, in which professional GM drivers ensure they're road worthy. The winning team will be announced tonight in Washington D.C. Revolutionary cars, ordinary package While other green-car competitions encourage extreme designs, this one comes with a somewhat constraining twist: Yes, students must improve fuel economy and reduce emissions, but in the end, they still have to have a car that would appeal to mainstream customers. In practical terms, that means they must keep conveniences like air conditioning and trunk space.

GM won't really kill off the Chevy Volt and Cadillac CT6, will it?

General Motors is apparently considering killing off six slow-selling models by 2020, according to Reuters. But is that really likely? The news is mentioned in a story where UAW president Dennis Williams notes that slumping US car sales could threaten jobs at low-volume factories. Still, we're skeptical that GM is really serious about killing those cars. Reuters specifically calls out the Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Sonic, and the Chevrolet Volt. Most of these have been redesigned or refreshed within the past few model years. Four - the LaCrosse, Impala, CT6, and Volt - are built in the Hamtramck factory in Detroit. That plant has made only 35,000 cars this year - down 32 percent from 2016. A typical GM plant builds 200,000-300,000 vehicles a year. Of all the cars Williams listed, killing the XTS, Impala, and Sonic make the most sense. They're older and don't sell particularly well. On the other hand, axing the other three seems like an odd move. It would leave Buick and Cadillac without flagship sedans, at least until the rumored Cadillac CT8 arrives. The CT6 was a big investment for GM and backing out after just a few years would be a huge loss. It also uses GM's latest and best materials and technology, making us even more skeptical. The Volt is a hugely important car for Chevrolet, and supplementing it with a crossover makes more sense than replacing it with one. Offering one model with a range of powertrain variants like the Hyundai Ioniq and Toyota Prius might be another route GM could take. All six of these vehicles are sedans, Yes, crossover sales are booming, but there's still a huge market for cars. Backing away from these would be essentially giving up sales to competitors from around the globe. The UAW might simply be publicly pushing GM to move crossover production to Hamtramck to avoid closing the plant and laying off workers. Sales of passenger cars are down across both GM and the industry. Consolidating production in other plants and closing Hamtramck rather than having a single facility focus on sedans might make more sense from a business perspective. GM is also trying to reduce its unsold inventory, meaning current production may be slowed or halted while current cars move into customer hands. There's a lot of politics that goes into building a car. GM wants to do what makes the most sense from a business perspective, while the UAW doesn't workers to lose their jobs when a factory closes.