Paolino

Haha, I figured I was the only nut who obsessed on interior light schemes. I am a HUGE fan of the direction GM is going with illuminating the interior at night. Hey--the Lucerne doesn't even have ambient lighting but I took a friend in one a couple of years ago and the first thing she commented on was how much she loved how everything "glowed a cool blue, and was so neatly and brightly lit up." These little things are eye catchers, and garner "oohs" and "ahhs". Hopefully the illumination will be on all trims, or at least 1LT and above. I can't imagine it costs them much too much to do.

Its hard to describe in a few words... its been around since the Quad4 used it, IIRC... here's a description... Wiki Thanks... I never even thought to check Wiki. You're right.. hard to describe in a few words lol

Uh... this has incandescent taillights? I'm confused. Are the LED ones only for LTZ trim?

What does "lost foam" mean?

Those effects can be duplicated with fiber optics-style plastics and side lit plastics... the source of the light can be centralized and the source of the light LED or incandescent. Brightness is not really an issue, as I feel taillights are already WAY too bright. I'm fine with LEDs... but I agree with Balthy in that blatant LEDs as points of light dropped willy-nilly as a tailight are ugly and overused. Everything seems to have JC Whitney lighting glued on it from the factory. I don't think Balthy would have any problem with those examples... as the LEDs aren't just piles of little dots. Well, maybe the Volvo. Personally, I'll be putting LEDs behind the lenses of anything I restore because they FINALLY have LED's that trump the 1157s, they do last longer and they light faster. Behind the lenses, though, they look like old school incandescents... the best of both worlds, IMHO. I agree entirely. I preferred the last DTS' taillamps... they were LED, but you couldn't see the dots. It was just a solid wall of light.

Yup

For parity with the Camry and Accord, the Malibu needs to lose 250~300 lbs. Help me out understanding this one: Camry 4c/6a - 3307 Accord 4c/6a - 3395 Malibu 4c/6a - 3415 And the mags would easily say, "The portliest one of the bunch," and not think twice

Okay, maybe nitpicking, but can GM do something about Chevy's 5-spoke wheels? It just seems like same in, same out. At least the current gen has nicer (and different), LTZ wheels.

EDIT: Didn't like how I came off and need to keep my mood to myself and talk about the car: Like the car, really do. Love the interior and wood elements. It's a shame that the trim they showed was probably around $30,000. The presentation however I felt the teaser was more exciting... I'm not sure why, maybe all the lights sounds and CG got to me and got me ramped up--maybe it's my mood. Anyway, think it'll do well. Let's hope GM markets this well.

Wow... 287hp (at a LOFTY 6800rpms and 258lb-ft at 4400) 3.6L DI V6 with the 6-speed auto. Wasn't expecting that high of an output. They got rid of the 2LT, leather only on the LTZ. LT gets 17" wheels, LTZ 18", and LS gets new aluminum 16". 2 new colors: Crystal Red Tintcoat, Black Granite Metallic Bluetooth standard on all trims (packaged on Fleet Models) That's all I see marked as "NEW"

Any chance if they snazz it up a bit and throw a nice powertrain in it, I could still get a 1-year old one for like $8-9,000 off?

8:30PM, EDT.

Uffa, don't joke. I would just hope that with the updated powertrain they could afford just a tiny modification to the exterior to freshen it slightly and update the interior appearance and maybe throw a feature or two in like offer navigation, the black tie from the Malibu that has USB support, etc. I'd also like to see Auto Climate Control make its first appearance on this generation.

My guess is that it'll get the LF3 engine. 3.0 bi-turbo V6. If there is no new tranny, then it'll be stuck with 300 lb-ft and perhaps between 300 and 360 bhp. If there is a stronger variant of the 6T transmission look for about 360hp/360lb-ft even. Not bad... BMW 535 class in in power. Although the DI V6es need a bit of work in the NVH department. BTW Dwight, just have to say I love reading your posts... you have some awesome ideas and I find you very knowledgeable. I appreciate that you try to think outside the box and come up with products we want. Unfortunately, I've heard about the NVH issues of the DI V6's. It's a shame... GM knows how to build a damn good engine, if they could just fine tune a couple of things they'd shut the critics up.

If they build it, I will come.. I think you misspelled a word there

Well, after seeing the blue one I like it a little less... I'm hoping it's a photo prob and not the car. It looks a little pudgier and less athletic than the red one. Time will tell.

Well, I understand what you're saying and I partly agree with it, but you can't say that it sounds a little off when someone says, "Yeah, I just bought a RWD $26,000 Chevy Impala with a 330hp V6 and 8-speed tranny," and the next guy says, "Really? What's up with GM?! I just spent over $37,000 for RWD Cadillac CTS with a torqueless 270hp 3.0L V6 and 6-speed auto that gets poor fuel economy... WTF?!" Or how about the guy who spent almost $35,000 on his LaCrosse CXS and is ticked that the Impala has real wood as an option, but his highest trim and soon-to-be most-expensive sedan for Buick, doesn't have that as an option? Maybe it's nitpicky, but again, it feels off.

Different markets. Buick is attracting Lexus buyers and this Impala is attracting old school types who value power, interior space and RWD. For this reason, I'd cut a bunch of the luxury features. I think some of the extras Dwight is piling on are just exuberance. Adding the 50 hp to the non-AWD LaCrosse is going to overwork the Traction Control light. Yes, but you're talking about a large and heavy "new luxury premium car" getting 182hp standard and the Impala, a Chevy, getting 330hp standard. If the Impala is this nice, why wouldn't it go after Lexus buyers as well? Wouldn't that take Buick buyers away? I'm sure there are Lexus buyers that want power and premium features. It just seems backwards to me. In this example (and don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a nice RWD Impala back), I feel there would be 3 engine choices, and either a smaller V6 or less powerful 3.6 would be standard... with a 6-speed auto. Again... he brings up an 8-speed auto in a base Impala, cheaper than the most-expensive Malibu, and having more gears than any Cadillac... it just seems like it would never happen.

The problem is, your base Impala offers 148hp MORE standard power than the base LaCrosse, 50hp more than the most powerful engine offered on the LaCrosse, 2 more gears in the tranny, more speakers than the base LaCrosse, and then your premium package offers luxury features not even available on the LaCrosse, is more fuel efficient and is $1,000 cheaper than the LaCrosse.

Wasn't the Cavalier a POS? And not everyone wants to show off. Some are happy with what they own, for themselves. And some buy for practicality.

I feel the rest of the car will remind them it's not the old Malibu, and uh, who cares if my neighbors think I bought a 5-year old car? It's not for them. What matters is the overall presentation, in which this car to me looks fresh, handsome, athletic, and from what I can see on the inside, a vast improvement.

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.

I was hoping it'd be the updated ECOTECs... make a slightly bigger splash than saying, "The 2013 Malibu will be powered by the 182hp DI 2.4L". I rather see something like, "The 2013 Malibu is said to be powered by GM's new 2.5L DI Ecotec putting out 200hp, and updated turbocharged 2.0L found in the Regal and Verano, putting out 240hp/270lb-ft," or something like that.