GM claiming 47 mpg in malibu hybrid

1.8 L gas engine. Wow, that's small.

I wonder if it will have better headroom than the Camry for me.

 

Let's see it on www.fueleconomy.gov.

Bob Wilson

 

Only 47?
So, obviously we can expect "Green Car Reports" John Voelcker to write another article;
"Why Can't Other Hybrids Copy Prius's Hybrid Running?"

I hope the mpg's are that high. It'll be a drag if GM pulls a "Ford" ... puffing up their EPA (ah la C-Max) when in fact it's based off some not-quite relevant algorithm.
Wait . . . . GM wouldn't do that . . . . right?


.

 

Yea, Ford claimed that for the Fusion too.......until they got caught "fudging" the math and gave owners a "rebate" for the deception.

It might be possible under ideal conditions. I've gotten close with the Fusion a few times but the average is nowhere near 47.

Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

It's direct injection with higher compression. So it can harvest more energy and power from the fuel than an equivalent sized port injection engine.

Hope someone asks if they they did the full five EPA test cycles.

Auto Show Comes To NY With Some Exciting New Vehicles - CleanMPG Forums coverage of the New York show has some tidbits on the new Malibu in general.

4 inches added to the wheel base, and it lost 300lbs of weight.

The ICE model is expected to get 27city/37hwy mpg. It has the same 1.5 Ecotec block used in the new Volt, plus a turbo. It will still have start/stop, which I assume won't change much from the system in the current model. That one uses a second deep discharge lead acid to run accessories while stopped, so less wear on the starter one.

One of the articles mentions the hybrid battery is under the trunk floor. Perhaps a full 60/40 rear seat then?

 

This car looks good and efficiency seem to be high. I just hope they don't screw it up with the tailpipe and evaporation emission.

1.8L ICE used instead of 2.0L in Ford Fusion hybrid and 2.5L in Camry Hybrid.

MPG seems to be in reverse order, 47, 42, 41. I doubt it can get 47 MPG in the real world but should be higher than the competition. We'll have to wait for detail of the drivetrain and the official EPA figures.

 

The Malibu is effectively the same as the Honda Accord hybrid:

Malibu: 48/47/45 (city/combined/highway)
Accord: 50/47/45

The difference in the city rating vs. the combined and highway is presumably due to rounding issues in the math. The actual figures are more precise but they just release the whole integer mpg.

0-60 mph:
Malibu: 7.8 seconds
Fusion: 8.1 seconds (unofficial)
Camry: 7.6 seconds
Honda: 7.2 seconds

The Camry hybrid weighs close to 3,600 pounds. The Fusion hybrid is about 3,600 pounds. The Honda Accord hybrid weighs about 3,550. The Malibu hybrid appears to be around 3,300 but I haven't seen an exact number yet.

 

Accord Hybrid should be 48 MPG combined. It is 47.75 MPG to be exact.

Malibu Hybrid combined is 46.65 MPG.

 

Source?

You can't just plug in the 50/45 city/highway from the Accord and the 48/45 from the Malibu and calculate 47.55 and 46.65. The actual city and highway test number are very unlikely to be whole integers...

 

I used the rounded 55% City and 45% Highway figures. Would the unrounded decimals make a difference? I doubt it.

 

The Accord hybrid is 50city/45hwy/47combined, and Fuelly users are off from the combined by about the same factor as those with the Prius.

The hybrid system in the Malibu hasn't been announced going into a more aerodynamic/lighter sibling. So GM can't use the bait and switch loop hole Ford did with the Fusion and C-max. They still could go the 2 EPA test cycles and estimate the rest through math; which over estimates for hybrids compared to doing all 5 tests. Ford also had some errors there that effected some ICEVs in addition to their hybrids.

Ford and Hyundai are the only makes to recently get caught with overestimated ratings. I don't see reason to not think these released numbers won't be close to the official ones at this point.

They could if the Accord's city is 49.5 and the Malibu's 48.49.

 

If the Honda Accord numbers were 49.6 city and 44.6 highway then their combined would be 47.33 mpg.

If the Chevrolet Malibu numbers were 48.4 mpg city and 45.4 mpg highway then their combined would be 47.05 mpg.

Obviously, both the Accord and Malibu combined mpg numbers rounded to 47 mpg so the difference is within 1 mpg and the Accord is ever so slightly higher.

 

Yes, indeed. I also used 44.51 and 45.49 for highway. Both came about rounded to 47 MPG.

 

Accord is still faster.

I think Malibu Hybrid will shut those anti-hybrid GM fanboys and eventually convert them to hybrid fans.

It can break down more walls than Japanese hybrids.

 

Just looked at fuelly for Accord Hybrid. Didn't get aggregate MPGs but most report over 40mpg and some over 45.
Last time I saw an aggregate it was about 43.5 mpg which must be tops for non plugin midsize sedan.
Too bad they aren't more common. I rarely see one.

Wouldn't ya know I just saw an Accord hybrid touring

 

One thing to keep in mind is that the Accord hybrid is new so the cars that are out there will probably have been mostly operated during the winter months thereby leading to artificially low mpg.

I usually ignore the first year of results for a new model at fuelly.com for that reason.

 

Maybe. IF it is able to sustain a better reliability record than the Volt.

 

I sure hope so!

The key is the small traction battery pack, 1.5kwh, this is an excellent way to go. Smaller traction battery that only needs to provide braking and single acceleration energy ... really the way to go.

I drove our 03 Prius into work and it is obvious we aren't really tasking the traction battery. What this means is a smaller traction battery that only needs to handle optimizing the engine will bring a whole bunch of cars into the 45-55 MPG range, a much larger pool than a couple of 100 MPGe models.

Bob Wilson