Page 8 of 15
Re: Malibu replacement
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 6:51 pm
by kevm14
One of the links mentions the Nivomat shocks. They are awesome, by the way. My CTS-V has them on the rear, as well, and they are basically automatic/passive load leveling. It really works and without any pumps or any other BS. No ass dragging even with a load.
Re: Malibu replacement
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 6:53 pm
by kevm14
I wonder if the 19" Continental summer tires are runflats. If so that would explain the crappy ride.
Re: Malibu replacement
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 6:55 pm
by kevm14
Maybe Cadillac should take the Recaro seats from the CTS-V sedan and offer them for the 2010 Cadillac CTS Sport Wagon. In fact, maybe Cadillac should just offer a CTS-V Sport Wagon. All 11 of us would be very happy with that.
That's sad. Not far from the truth. But they made it anyway.
Re: Malibu replacement
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 8:43 pm
by Bob
Kind of high-ish miles, but not a bad price for a wagon. Most of the ones I have seen are in the low to mid-20s.
Re: Malibu replacement
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2015 12:22 pm
by kevm14
Saw this at Barry's:
http://barrymotors.com/Used-2008-Cadill ... d/25855121
I like those optional 20" wheels. The interior also looks updated from the earlier models. I kind of want this. Also got the 6L50 trans.
$15,590 is a bit too much for the budget, though, if that really is a no-haggle price. That is what Edmunds says is TMV for this in "Clean" condition, so I guess it's fair.
http://www.cars.com/go/compare/trimComp ... 10CAC114E0
Compare interior space and other general dimensions.
All 3 are within 7" total length of each other.
The Malibu Maxx comes out looking decent when you factor in the fact that it's like 900-1000 lbs lighter than the other two (which are AWD).
Fun fact:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_6L50_transmission
Check out applications for the 6L45...
Re: Malibu replacement
Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 7:04 pm
by kevm14
Saw this at Barrys driving home today:
http://barrymotors.com/Used-2009-Chevro ... d/25303468
The auto version of the LNF had 235hp instead of 260, if I believe Wiki. I think this qualifies as being interesting. I don't know if it had the handling magic of the Cobalt SS.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/200 ... -road-test
14.8 @ 99 with the manual and full power. Pretty lame out of the hole. Need to find info on the auto.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/wag ... et_hhr_ss/
235hp and 223 lb-ft @ 1650 rpm for the automatic. It sounds like they didn't test it but said GM claims a 0-60 of 7.5 for the auto. Nothing exciting really. It does sound like the chassis is good, though. FE5 suspension.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a2405/4237014/
http://jalopnik.com/334563/chevrolet-hhr-ss-part-1
http://jalopnik.com/335066/chevrolet-hhr-ss-part-2
The Jalopnik one may be worth reading.
Re: Malibu replacement
Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 7:41 pm
by kevm14
The 2.0 specifically is built like a brick shithouse so it's not as efficient as it could be. The engineers claim the bottom end will handle 500-600 horsepower stock and with girdling they are getting 1400 out of the pro drag racing block. They aren't exactly milking every last mile out of each gallon. They come with a 7 quart oilpan.
Re: Malibu replacement
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:35 am
by bill25
Do doubt, this is probably quick. It is definitely FUGLY.
It is like, they looked at the PT Cruiser and said: "Wow what a great idea, wish is was bigger!"
Re: Malibu replacement
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:31 am
by Bob
I think the manual version is the one to have. Of course as a Malibu replacement, that might not work. Why was the auto detuned? Could the trans not handle the mad power?
Re: Malibu replacement
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:41 am
by Bob