regfootball

one source i read or heard said yes its a 200hp engine. 2.5 litre.

the interior theme doesn't mesh w/ Beetle to me, aside from the idea that its a nice interior by itself. it's an upgrade. i like this better than i thought. really the whole thing falls apart with the crappy 5 cylinder. again, vw wants to force you into the turbo or diesel. instead of just giving you a good basic 4 pot to start with. it is a nice option to have this now though, a slightly more practical Beetle. I'd prob take this over a golf 3 door.

missed this announcement! congrats, I LOVE the cruze eco......am jealous! PICS

Bingo! the Malibu will become relevant. this is classier than the Optimata.

love the taillights. overall there is nothing that is disagreeable on the exterior and it is very nice. Like it a lot. I do think i would have taken advantage of a few opportunities.....i would have actually done some sculpting on the headlight covers to give a bit of angry to the face but i am sure that would make them more succesiptible to damage and be more expensive and less aero. the hood is a bit too tall and oversculpted, but that does not mean what is there isn't handsome either. I would maybe like to see the grille not so high and hint maybe at a bottom breather look perhaps. Nesbitt sure likes that cirrus version 4 trunklid. i think they could have given the car even bigger hips in the rear actually. inside has lots going on and doesn't look bad but it does look like its riddled with typical GM interior finishes. I was really hoping for something more European in direction. I'll wait til i see the finished look. I doubt it would keep me being interested in the car. Great to see GM embrace tech. 200hp 4 with 35+ mpg. They got the message. This car is looking like it has the goods to bust the floodgates open for chevy. I see this car doing bangup business, taking from all competitors.....accord, camry, altima, sonata, fusion.......... key points, nice style, larger interior, larger trunk, more tech, more comfy, better mpg, better perf, more refined. Chevy is addressing it all. Even though this car is not outlandish or even bold the shape of it will not hold it back. Love the car, I really do. Now i know another option for my GM card when I see the heavenly day I can unload my crappy cobalt.

1 year update approaching fast.

the Impala is the one that gets tweaked again. !!!!!! I think its wise they try to keep the Malibu fresh. The Impala gets the king of the hill v6 now to keep it on the top of the pecking order. The Malibu with its new bod will still garner PR press more than an MCE of the current one, even though the current one is a looker. The big thing chevy accomplishes with the new design is it fixes an puts away the fatal flaws of the current car. Cheap interior, small trunk, low seating, tight back seat, closed in feel. The new car will improve on a lot of that stuff. By bringing the new car, Chevy gets in the habit of coming out with a new version of its most important cars on regular product cycles, not milking them for 10 year lifespans.

Interesting...when I look at the two I see completely different proportions, completely different design aesthetics, and completely different details. See, the outgoing Malibu is very slab-sided, formal and flat on the sides and rear. Trying to ape the Passat, maybe? But the new one is a lot more expressive, muscular, and less "reserved"-looking. The only thing I am not sure about on the new design is the fog light surrounds and the lower air intake: seems to look a little more "expensive" on the outgoing model, especially if the horizontal bar is body colored and not chromed. Current Bu was a well done Phaeton rip off with a chevy grille and scrunched to fit the Eps platform it was given.

That's impressive because I've read reviews stating the new 2.4L DI in the Sonata is a bit coarse. I haven't experienced one myself. This too is the one major complaint I have seen on the Sonata. They feel the engine while powerful is very unrefined. I did laugh the other day a co worker drve a new Turbo Regal. He told me since GM is building them in Germany they must be buying engines from BMW. He never drove a 4 cylinder with that much power and as quiet in a GM car. I broke the news to him it was a Ecotech similar to what was in my HHR he was shocked. I told him it was a good engine and the quiet tuning really makes the Buick special. I hope the new Bu get much of the same quiet tuning that the Buick receives. I think the Sonata's issue is more that they have not put hardly any sound attenuation in the car, and the chassis is not heavy enough to give it a bank vault feel. So you are hearing volume and sounds that you would hear from any other engine if it were in the Sonata with not a lot of sound attenuation. Turbo Regal is a super nice ride with the engine the way it is now. The whole car is a step up and over the Sonata. Not sure why the buff books bitch about it.

AWD optional, sure

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/03/review-2011-dodge-grand-caravan/ I would have to say, Michael is really pretty much spot on here......

lmao, before i even saw your post, the first thing i said, "how many will they sell" Love the concept. the market is just so programmed these days though

ha, they already corrected the photo! turds! teases!

not too shabby. at least it'll have trunk space and rear seat space. i can definitely wait for this.

word. Chrysler polished up the turds quite nicely. I cannot stress enough how valuable the introduction of the Pentastar and the rollout across all its lines at once is to Chrysler's survival. Never would I have considered any Chrysler before except for maybe the Magnum. Between the engine and improved interiors quality across its lineup, they are definitely on the radar now. For me at least. And now, they are bucking a trend where so many cars are going 4 cyl only. The Avenger etc. having the v6 at such a low price point right now, may be a market differentiator. Avenger says 29 mpg highway. If I can run a sub 6 0-60 with 30 real world mpg on road trips then dude, i may need to get me some of that.

TESTED 2011 Dodge Grand Caravan Express FWD MSRP 24,830 +/- 3.6 Pentastar v6 6 speed automatic HIGHS powertrain revised interior including good controls and ergonomics things like gauges, radio, climate control, shifter, vastly improved and deliciously simple interior space, duh, it's a huge box decent ride and handling, does not feel like a barge decently quiet inside not terrible visibility considering a big beast of a van lots of folks like STO N GO updated styling outside looks less dowdy, the grille and rear in particular are nice improvements price! / get more value than the price LOWS considering price point, not a bunch really a little bit more noise suppression may be ok those second and third row seats still look unnatural and uncomfortable (even though I did not sit in them for 200 miles) this model i could not adjust driver seat height.....so the whole thing feels too tall a bit too many dark surfaces (but that can be alleviated with color choice) A little more low end grunt / torque in the engine at times would be nice but that is really just nitpicking at this point Really one could say all wheel drive should be offered again on this vehicle SUMMARY I will add some commentary later and this was a short drive, but I really was primarily interested in all the improvements with the interior and powertrain. My basis of comparison was other past minivan tests, as well as the similar Routan, which I liked a lot about it, but felt it was unfinished. I have to say the new Dodge's are indeed better than the Routan back then, and overall the van felt like a nice piece. No booming interior, no interior cheapness in places to distract you. The engine and tranny are perfectly matched and entirely appropriate to this vehicle. Not too much or too little power. Shifts smooth, refined. I'm glad Chrysler simplified their powertrain mess of the GC. The ride and handling were comfortable and yet not a floater or mushy. I am guessing alum wheels and bigger tires would have felt even better but really I didn't slalom with it.....and neither would anyone else. For road trips it felt nice. I would give it a B or B+ on interior noise level but it was not egregious at all. Seat was comfy, I just wanted to move it down, if I had a power seat then I could do that. I loved the simple radio and climate controls. The new shifter moved better than before, and was not sloppy loose like before. Good job, you've changed my mind about shifters up on the dash. The steering wheel felt nice and meaty. Visibility was nice for a van. Touch points all felt pretty good even though a wider armrest would be ok. It's a bit of a joke that a 24,800 dollar vehicle can be this simply useful and now up to date in the powertrain dept. This is no stripper, it just gives you the basics. If you don't need power doors and other gimmicks, then you get every penny of value out of this vehicle. Families on a budget may have a new ride. Maybe minivans will make sense again. The Mainstreet edition adds a couple more items and is not much more price. The Crew packs it in but now it pushing close to 30k. In my mind I think this Express version will experience some popularity. Really, are there any valid objections to this vehicle now? I am now interested to see how that Avenger does with this engine for under 25k. I bet it has serious scoot. I floored this van and 85+ it was not breaking a sweat. It did it without complaint and to be honest quieter and more smoothly than a few prior GM vehicles with a 3.6. Just sayin....... FINAL GRADE Because of the value component of the Express and Mainstreet I will give it an A- with the primary knock being the big box style, even though its improved. Crew I would evaluate separately because the price is higher and I would need to drive one later. Good job Chrysler. You made a lemon into lemonade, there is hope for you yet. That Charger in the showroom its interior looked a lot better in cloth than leather, too. Nice job.

i've owned an Aztek, an oval Taurus, etc....... i've heard lots of commentary......

How many times have you "pointed out a couple of flaws" with the sweeping generalization "cheap interior" ?? Oooo, the door panels are 'less than stellar' so the entire interior is "Cheap" These are your words, not ones I am attributing to you. Again, if the goal of commentary is one of improvement, we should be accurate, not generalizing. Otherwise, how to progress? Something will bug a few reviewers (isn't it their job to find things to harp on, unless it's German??) on the next Malibu interior, which seemingly may only need nicer door panels over the current car, and yet again someone will dub it a "cheap interior". I object to the hyperbole & the generalizations - they need to stop. We're still stuck on the same degree of terminology as back when -for EX- some japanese interiors were measurably nicer than some American interiors. Then, "cheap interior" and 'crappy' and 'horrible' and such terms had weight. Now the gap is usually imperceptible, and the terms are overwrought. But address specifics and we can all agree more readily. I agreed to what you pointed out where I found it to be legitimate, so I am hardly "totally dismissing" all comments. Larger trunk, more interior space, nicer interior (not much room for improvement there IMO) are all good moves forward. It doesn't take a few rag reviews for manufacturers to know this- look at the accord or 3-series bloating over the years. Unfortunately, taller roof & rear deck aren't moves forward- they are compromises. And I said 'dislike', not 'hate'. But that impression is a result of the hyperbole, which distorts your impressions. in most builds, the accord's interior is a steaming pile of turd.

well perhaps C&G needs to obtain a press Eco for you to sight see and visit the rest of the C&Gers with..........

patriot and compass are not real jeeps to me, but as entry tools into the brand I guess I see why Jeep has them. The Liberty to me while Jeep looking is dated and now half baked. If we compare the refinement and quality aspect of the Liberty and new Grand Cherokee, the Liberty simply doesn't measure up. I'd endorse the Liberty if Jeep gots is $h! together and polished it off.

holy crap just because i point out a couple flaws with a GM car, I am harping on it? Holy $h! you all are sensitive. For the record, if you read user reviews and road tests of many other sources of the Malibu, you will find those exact concerns repeated en masse. Edmunds, any of the car sites, etc. And if that weren't enough, since Chevy is making the 013 Malibu with a larger trunk, taller roof and rear, nicer interior and more space inside, maybe that ought to give you a clue that Chevy's own feedback is telling them that's what customer's want also. For the record, I like the Malibu a lot. But its really head in the sand to totally dismiss common concerns about the car. As with everything in life, your results will vary. As for my own opinions, they are non-negotiable by others. And as far as saying I hate the car, since you're wrong, I would simply ask you not put words in my mouth. Have a nice day. The Malibu's primary problem as far as people's impressions on the interior may lie with the door panels. If I am not mistaken, all levels of Malibu trim have the less than lavish door panels.

grand vitara! carry on........ quite stunning, congrats to her on the new Terrain, that is really sharp.

cruze eco is a fun car, and the tranny and engine are matched for best taking advantage of each other. i would bet 45 mpg is possible in certain conditions. plus its comfy and well made. here's hoping that pans out for your sister.

Wrangler, Liberty, GC diesels would be neat. Compass and Patriot, um, not really. I'd just kill the Liberty actually. Entirely.

because uptight well to do white folks are the ones who actually complete surveys? VW's image will be running on fumes once they get a lot of the new Jettas and 012 Passats out there. That ought to kill their best brand image for awhile once people experience the cheap interiors.