2005 Chevrolet Malibu Reviews - Page 5 of 6

2005 Chevrolet Malibu LS 3.5 Ecotec V6 from North America

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2006
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 3.5 Ecotec V6 Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.8 / 10
Distance when acquired35000 miles
Most recent distance40000 miles
Previous carChevrolet Malibu

Summary:

Continuing the pleasant experience of the Chevy Malibu!

Faults:

The signal lights keep malfunctioning, and I believe it is a computer issue.

The cruise control will set, however I can't accelerate using the cruise control button.

General Comments:

This is a BIG improvement from the previous generation of the Malibu. It is visually appealing (though the huge chrome bar in the grille should be smaller), and intuitive.

Just like the old Malibu's, it features a V6 engine, however this car isn't as "sporty" as the last one. In my 01 Malibu, when I hit it, it sounded like it, and I like the sound of a revving engine. This model however, when you hit it you hear absolutely nothing, though I guess I shouldn't complain. It has smooth gear transitions, and has a lot of power.

The electric system is still iffy, since I sometimes have problems with my remote started not working properly, and the aforementioned cruise control issue, and signal lights. Other than that it's sound.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 30th April, 2007

2005 Chevrolet Malibu MAXX 3 litre from North America

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2005
First year of ownership2006
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 3 litre Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.4 / 10
Distance when acquired26000 kilometres
Most recent distance40000 kilometres
Previous carMercury Villager

Summary:

This is the best car I have ever owned

Faults:

Misfired requiring new direct ignition module.

General Comments:

I have rented this car numerous times and been very happy with it's performance, road holding, comfort and cargo flexibility.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 18th November, 2006

2005 Chevrolet Malibu LS 3.5 V6 from North America

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 3.5 V6 Automatic
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.6 / 10
Distance when acquired16000 kilometres
Most recent distance20000 kilometres
Previous carChevrolet Malibu

Summary:

Great value for the money

Faults:

No problems since I've owned this 05 Malibu sedan.

General Comments:

I was forced to shop for a car after our 2003 Malibu (which worked great) was totaled off in an accident. I intended to buy an import and gave it a good try, but after many weeks of test driving all sorts of cars, none could match the value this 05 Malibu has.

When equipped with the full airbag package it's one of the safest mid sized cars on the road, rated in the top 6 and is the only domestic on that list. The Saab 9-3 is at the top of the list and the Malibu is based on the same platform as the 9-3.

Quiet, solid feeling, handles great, the V6 has plenty of power and is a gas miser. I consistently get 30mpg city driving. The motor has high torque so feels stronger than some higher hp engines. The electric steering is fantastic, a very progressive design that may be too progressive for some. The body fit and finish is perfect and the looks are sleek, classy and unique enough to separate it from the endless lookalikes out there.

It's very smooth and quiet on the highway. The fastest I've had it was 160Km/hr and at that speed it was vibration free and quiet.

Have had many comments from people who love the looks, the value, the feel and the safety rating. I have to agree!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 6th June, 2006

7th Jun 2006, 08:50

For some reason this review on a 2005 model got put under the 2004 heading. Just to be clear, this is a 2005 model built in late 04 and as such it has many or all of the bugs that affected the 04 models resolved.

7th Jun 2006, 20:37

Just a note: I understand what you mean about the car feeling stronger than other "higher horsepower" cars. I assume you mean the "benchmark" Accord and Camry, which are advertised at 240HP/212 torque and 225hp/240tq respectively, both from smaller engines (3.0L and 3.3L). But Honda, Toyota, and others rate those figures "at the flywheel," which means they lie. (They multiply their figures by about 1.37 to obtain that "flywheel" rating, assuming a 27% drivetrain loss. GM rates them at the wheels, no multiplication required. If your GM 3.5L were rated by Honda, it would be advertised at 271hp and 301 lb-ft torque (those numbers look familiar? Look at Nissan's advertised figures for the 3.5L 350Z). So, your engine is indeed stronger, with more torque and horsepower. For any naysayers, just take a "240hp" Accord and a 200hp Malibu to a dyno, and see which one gets higher numbers. And about the 350Z, yes, 0-60 in 6 seconds, but with short gears. The Malibu would smoke you with those gears; more torque, lower RPM.

I drive a 1992 Olds Cutlass Supreme, 140hp and 185 torque at the wheels. For Honda, that's 200hp and 255 torque. Your car has 220 lb-ft of torque at 3200 RPM, mine has 185 at 3200. Guess what? Your car is faster than mine. But an Accord with 155 lb-ft. at the wheels? Who knows.

Average review marks: 7.8 / 10, based on 19 reviews