Currently browsing category

Chevrolet/Chevy Trucks

2012 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1

Vehicle: 2012 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 with 6-speed automatic
Price as tested: CDN$61205

Performance: Is this the best Camaro ever produced? We will have the answer right after this review.

Bolt on an Eaton supercharged onto GM’s venerable Big Block Chevy V8, which has 6.2 liters of goodies on your right foot at driver’s disposal. Its basically share the same amazing hardware as its Corvette ZR1 silibing. That means the ZL1 is capable of producing an amazing 580 stallion, and most importantly, 556 lb/ft of torque. While the standard 6-speed manual is sweet and delicate, our tester’s 6-speed manumatic is what most customers would take with the ZL1, according to GM. This auto has been heavily modified to suit ZL1′s performance characteristics, as the gear ratios are well-spaced and low enough for awesome acceleration. It doesn’t lost anything when it comes to engine responsiveness even with only 6 gears. The paddle shifters on the steering are a delight, as its able to override at any gears, for proper downshift before entering a corner. ZL1 has joined the rank of 911, which have automatic provides faster 0-100km/h than its manual counterparts. In ZL1′s case, its only 0.1 second quicker than stick shift. The desired result is definite rush of power right from the get-going through the redline, with the reliability of proven OHV technology, which isn’t anything shabby compares to more modern DOHC. Eaton supercharger’s instant throttle rush has added the join of driving, as it doesn’t have those annoying turbo lag. 3.9 seconds from standstill to 100km/h to be exact, even if it has to carry 4120 lb. :)

Handling: While we have seen many claims from famed Japanese and German sports car manufacturers betting themselves on Green Hell’s track time, its unusual to see an American muscle car there. That has proven how great domestic muscle car’s chassis and suspension engineering are these days. The days of straight-line performer is over for muscle car. In for the very capable and entertaining drive. Rear-drive and near perfect weight distribution certainly help the course. With GM’s well-engineered magentic ride suspension, along with 5 PTM modes, which rank for as civilized as daily driving to “5″ ultimate track driving setting, the ZL1 is one entertaining driving beast in all conditions. In “1″ setting, its as comfortable as a V6 Camaro. With “5″ full track setting, its a beast unleashed on any race track. All those have tuned the suspension and steering to suit each flavor, which has to be judged as one of the most compelling and compliant adjustable dampers in the business. The steering is sharp and precise, at any setting at any given time. The body motions are well-controlled, while both understeer and oversteer are superbly tempted. Most of all, GM’s ESC managed to stay out of the equation until absolutely necessary. Push ZL1 through its paces, you have to wonder American muscle cars have gone a long way. That also has explained why it managed to get Green Hell’s 7:41:27 around the Ring.

Brakes: With 4-wheel large Brembo brakes and standard ABS, ZL1′s braking performance is simply world-class. The stopping distance is short, while pedal always feels solid and well-modulated. Its also fade-free after lots of harsh stops, while ABS acts perfectly.

Interior: Inside, the biggest highlight has to be its ZL1 exclusive leather sports seats and boost gauge. While those sports seats provide great thigh and back support, when pushing ZL1 through the paces. The boost gauge should placed on top instead of below of the dashboard. As usual, there are large amount of hard plastic galore in Camaro’s interior ambience. The dash design which needs a rehaul for better looks.

Cramped backseat, trunk space and poor sightlines continue Camaro’s form-over-function styling exercise. But for the way it looks, who cares about those compromises?

Conclusion: Without a doubt, ZL1 has to be the best Camaro ever. Although its more than 10 grand over the Camaro V8, it worths every single pennies. The amount of engineering attention given to ZL1 have paid the dividend, when it comes to driving pleasure and track performance.

Competitions:
BMW M3
Dodge Challenger SRT-8
Ford Mustang Shelby GT500

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2012 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1
=====================================
Performance: 5/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 5/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 2.5/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 2/5
Value-for-money: 5/5

Overall rating: 4/5

2012 Chevrolet Orlando

Vehicle: 2012 Chevrolet Orlando 2LT
Price as tested: CDN$24895

Performance: When an Orlando isn’t available anywhere in Orlando, here it is Chervolet’s Canadian-exclusive people mover.

Consider Orlando’s competition, it doesn’t come as a surprise that it comes with only one single powertrain. However, it doesn’t share the form of small turbocharged 4-cylinder as its chassis architecture, Cruze. What the Orlando received is GM’s 2.4 liter Ecotec DOHC 16-valve motor from Equinox crossover, which is good for 174 ponies and 171 lb/ft of torque. In a nutshell, this engine is only adequate to move our 2LT tester’s 1616 kg of curb weight around its wrist. While the amount of refinement and smoothness are up to the snuff in this people mover segment, which is currently held the post by Mazda5. This Ecotec is only able to enough to move 5 persons adequately while 7 barely. That’s not to say Orlando is sluggish, its not yet been able to classified as undepowered but adequate seems to be the best description. However, its smooth 6-speed maumatic has done more than enough works to keep Orlando moving toward Disneyland. Thankfully, the 1st and 2nd gears are short enough to keep Orlando launching urgently, while 3rd and 4th would keep its merging with freeway. 5th and 6th would keep it crusiing comfortably on highway. If you just want to get the max out of the Orlando, its manumatic mode would help keep the engine in boiling mode all the time.

Handling: Its hard to fault Orlando’s architecture as it shares with the excellent Cruze compact. That means the chassis is both rigid and solid, with a great foundation for suspension components to hang its hats. When it comes to people mover, Orlando’s dynamic equation is about as good as its benchmarked Mazda5. While Mazda5 certainly provides more driving fun through the twisties, not that you should do that with the whole family inside. Mind you. :D Its European influence through its chassis tuning has shined through the corners. The electric power steering provides positive yet responsive feel and feedback, its also relatively precise to the point where it reminds me more of a Cruze than an Orlando. There is terminal understeer while body motions are well-controlled. Suspension is well-damped, with provide supple ride quality. That means its comfortably compliant while absorbing all the expansion joints, roughness and washboard pavements where we called Canadian roads. With GM’s excellent Stabiliztrak stability control, its able to eliminate understeer and oversteer, when a good daddy suddently got naughty when pushed Orlando too hot in a corner.

Brakes: With full disc brakes all around and standard ABS, Orlando mananged to stop itself commandably. The stopping distance is short, while pedal feels crisp and alive. In the past, GM brakes tend to feel numb and spongy. Orlando’s brakes always have some lives to its feel and feedback. Add to the standard ABS which doesn’t have any unwanted intervention, it wraps up its sound dynamic package.

Interior: The front of the Orlando has been very well layout. As it got everything else from a nice set of climate control and stereo, which are both ergonomic and initutive. The use of materials and fit-and-finish have been equally well, although we still found quite amount of cheesy plastic on the dashboard. What I am not really fond is the graphics on the dashboard, which look kind of gaudy in a rather clean interior.

The biggest highlight is the spacious 2nd row seats, which provide spacious head and legrooms while seating 3 persons across comfortably. The 3rd row provides decent legroom but headroom is at a premium for my 170cm height.

What makes the Orlando seperates from its major rival is the luggage space. With both the 2nd and 3rd row fold down completely, it has wagon-ized 1594 liters of luggage space, which is very impressive. The more impressive aspect is the whole cargo floor is completely flat, with a single inch above the floor, when all the seats are completely fold-down. The 2nd row is also able to fold down 1/3 or 2/3 when its time to travel with 4 or 3 persons occassionally when its time to go to Ikea for a cupholder. When it comes to versatility, Orlando is very much like a Cruze wagon.

Conclusion: The Orlando would serve 95% of all the consumer’s needs and wants. Although the powertrain is barely adequate to move its heavy curb weight, its the interior layout and luggage space which would appeal to consumers. Add to the fact that its European influenced handling and ride compromise, with attractive feature content to the mix. Perhaps Mazda5 has finally met its true rival…..:)

Those in Orlando will certainly missed the opportunity to purchase such a nice people mover.

Competitions:
Ford Transit Connect
Mazda5
Scion Xb
Kia Rondo
Mitsubishi Outlander

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2012 Chevrolet Orlando
=====================================
Performance: 2/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 4.5/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 4/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 5/5
Value-for-money: 4.5/5

Overall rating: 4/5

2012 Chevrolet Sonic LTZ Turbo

Vehicle: 2012 Chevrolet Sonic LTZ Turbo
Price as tested: CDN$21990

Performance: The Aveo has came across as one of the worse cars I have ever driven, its so nasty to drive which I can put it on the same list as original Kia Sportage and Dodge Nitro. GM has promised lots of good things about the Sonic, a subcompact which Chervolet has high hopes.

While the base 1.8 liter DOHC 16-valve motor has 135hp and 125 lb/ft of torque, which is more than enough for a subcompact. Its the 1.4 liter turbocharged 4-cylinder which is the engine of choice. It has 3 more horses and, more importantly, 23 lb/ft more torque than the 1.8 liter motor. Since both are based on the form of Ecotec engine architecture, the level of refinement and smoothness have been well-proven in Sonic’s bigger brother. The form of a small turbocharged engine provides desired result, when it comes to performance and economy. On the one hand, it doesn’t have the annoying turbo lag one associates with small 4-cylinder turbocharged engines. On the other hand, it delivers exceptional fuel economy even when pushed it to the max. During the day of our test drive, it averages 5 liters per 100km, which is nothing short of amazing. Along with an efficient powertrain comes a well-ratioed 6-speed manumatic gearbox. While the low 1st and 2nd gears are short enough for peppy acceleration, along with eliminating turbo lag. 3rd and 4th are always keeping the engine in its sweetspots. 5th and 6th have made for a comfortable highway cruising overdrive gears. That’s even if our loaded LT has to carry around 2800 lb.

Handling: If you still have distaste about how nasty the Aveo drove, you can completely forget about it. The Sonic is everything but when it comes to dynamic equation. It began with a stiff and rigid chassis, which serves as a great foundation for suspension components to hang its heads. The nasty chassis flex of the Aveo has gone for some rigid chassis refinement. When pushed the Sonic through the twisties, it exhibits terminal understeer while body rolls have been well-mannered. It all have done while providing some driving feel and feedback, which you won’t find in its predecessor. The amount of feel and feedback through the electric power steering has translated into driving fun. This translates into a dynamic package which is, finally, the equal of the Fiesta and Mazda2. Suspension is both sporty and comfortably compliant, while absorbing all the bumps and roughness with ease. On the other hand, GM’s excellent Stabiliztrak provides helping hands, when it comes to eliminating understeer, when pushed the Sonic to the max. Dynamically speaking, Sonic is able to put smiles on driver’s face which its something its predecessor can only be dreamed of. It has really shown how top notch engineering is able to translate a poorly executed car into an exceptional car. Sonic is the prime example.

Brakes: While Aveo’s brake pedal is infamous for being numb and spongy, Sonic’s braking performance continues to impress. While its still relying on front discs and rear drums, with standard ABS on our LT Turbo variant. The stopping distance is short while pedal always feels firm and solid. The pedal actually have some lives to its travel, which is something you have never heard of in the Aveo. ABS doesn’t step in unnecessarily is an added bonus.

Interior: Fold the rear seats completely flat, the Sonic has 30.7 cubin inch of luggage space. When they are in the upright position, it has 19 cubin inch. The hatch opening is wide and squared, which has made the luggage area rather spacious consider its physical dimensions. Add to the fact that it comes with a privacy cover and rear washer wiper, it pretty much wraps up the whole versatile equation. There are also some party tricks which have spoken for Chevrolet’s attention-to-details in Sonic’s interior refinement. You can extend the cargo space by flipping the cargo floor lowered into the bottom, as well as hiding the privacy cover behind the rear seats instead of removing it.

Both the use of materials, fit-and-finish and design have made a huge leap forward over its predecessor. The velour seats feel well-foamed and comfortable. All the HVAC and stereo are placed ergonomically on the center console. However, I am not fond of its digital instrumentation gauges. The row of warning lights surrounding the digital instrumentation gauges just look plain gaudy.

There are enough space for 2 adults at the back of the Sonic, however, just don’t try to put the 3rd one in the middle.

Conclusion: After driven the Sonic, its no wonder Chevrolet decided to ditch the Aveo nameplate. That’s because the Sonic is as far apart from the Aveo as possible. The Sonic not only has a competitive powertrain, it handles like a diggin with a sharp-looking exterior. It is finally a match for any top-tiers in the subcompact segment.

Competitions:
Mazda2
Ford Fiesta
Honda Fit
Hyundai Accent
Kia Rio
Toyota Yaris

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2012 Chevrolet Sonic LTZ Turbo
=====================================
Performance: 4/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 4/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 4/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 4/5
Value-for-money: 4/5

Overall rating: 4/5

2012 Chevrolet Volt

Vehicle: 2012 Chevrolet Volt with Premium Trim Pkg w/ Graphic Door Trim and Rear Vision Camera w/ Park Assist Pkg
Price as tested: CDN$45485

Performance: The single biggest headache for driving any EV is range anxiety. One always have to think how long they can travel before running out of juice. Unlike internal combustion, which you can fill up gasoline at a gas station. EV has to plug-in for recharge for electricity. In Volt’s case, however, Chevrolet has designed a tiny 4-cylinder engine to supple gasoline for electricity to recharge. This gasoline engine has about 80hp but need to use Premium fuel.

What happens if an owner only use about one single tank of gasoline per year? Chevrolet engineers have designed a system, which allows the Volt to use all of the gasoline, under a year period. It will dried it out by itself, while reminding driver to refill that small tank of gasoline again.

Just like any plug-in EV. The 16 kWh lithium-ion batteries can be charged by both 120 or 240 voltage outlets. On a fully charged Volt, GM claims its about to go up to 80 km. However, our testing reveals its about 55-60 km/h, which is enough for 90% of the driving public. That means if you commute long distance between home and work, the small gasoline engine would step in eventually to save you from calling tow-truck home for recharging. While the tiny 10 liters gas engine might sound small, its actually work perfectly fine before any of those annoying range anxiety kicks into your mind when running out of juice.

That leaves a single area worths debating, on whether Volt is a full EV or a plug-in hybrid. I consider Volt as a full EV with the gas motor as assistance. That’s a neat execution, as most car driving public, yours truly included, would feel helpless without anywhere to recharge the batteries. With the assistance of a gasoline engine, the batteries would recharge themselves while milking over with gas home.

Exactly like other EV, it has only a single speed to choose from its variable ratio gearbox. Mesh the light throttle, the Volt takes off in silent which need to get used to after driven internal combustion engines. Combining 149hp and 273 lb/ft of torque, Volt takes off in a silky manners which only an EV is able to do. 273 lb/ft of torque is amazing even if Volt is weighting in at 3781 lb. Most of the weight it has to carry are those batteries, motor and all those sophiscated engineering in between.

What is most impressive, however, is that driver can choose between “electric”, “power” and “mountain” modes. The “electric” mode is able to use energy is its most conservative style, while “power” and “mountain” would squeeze out more for maximum performance. “Electric” would best serve on city driving, while “power” reserves for highway usage and “mountain” is pretty obvious. :)

Handling: Volt is based on GM’s worthy Delta 2 architecture, which is plain famous for its rigidty and stiffness. In Volt’s case, it needs to occupy all those lithium batteries along with motor in front and anything in between. GM has slightly modified this architecture for EV purpose. The desired result is as good as it gets. While you won’t find the handling prowess of a Corvette, Volt has done for what its worth as an EV. The car feels well-planted when driven through corners. Its a pleasant EV with ride comfort as a major priority. Its able to absorb all the bumps and roughness with ease. While there are safe understeer and body rolls aren’t too far away, Volt is a far from being a wet noodle when driven hard. I expect Volt to be a nasty driver, in all revelation, it handles as decently as an Delta 2 vehicles this architecture is based on. While the only drawback is the steering. The electric power steering just devoid of any feel and feedback, it feels like a plastic joint has loosen between the steering wheel and wheel below. The response is more than adequate, so does precision.

Brakes: While many would have lamented GM’s regenerative braking system, Volt’s pedal feel and modulation are actually perform better than expected. It doesn’t have all sorts of numbness one expects from regenerative braking. The pedal feels crisp and alive, with ABS steps in at the right time.

Interior: Considering the fact that Volt is a hatchback design, its amout of luggage space is somewhat of a disappointment. While we forgive the fact that there are 16kWh of lithium-ion batteries beneath the trunk, the luggage space is comical for Volt’s physical dimensions. Its enough for 4 persons with small handbags, possibly with 2 different chargers, in case the motel you are going to staying in have plug-in chargers. Its a pity consider the 40/40 split fold-down rear seats don’t help much neither.

The same goes for the lack of leg and headroom at the back of the Volt. With the center tunnel, Volt’s backseat feels cramped. But you certainly feel very cozy with the center console given the smallness.

All the switchgears are finished in high-quality tactical feedback, right from the auto climate control to the stereo system. The center console also hosts a large display for showing how the batteries are recharging to how much juice left, before the gas motor steps in for assistance. It all have done in an initutive and user-friendly manners. A proper gearlevel also gives driver a sense of changing from P to R, even if only one gear would keep the EV moving instead of pushing buttons like other EVs do. Other than some of the dash materials remain “enviroment friendly” or rather cheesy, as well as the design is a bit too blocky, stylistically speaking. Volt’s interior is generally well executed.

The pet peeve, however, has to do with its elevated rear roofline which limits rear sightlines.

Conclusion: “Leading edge” has never been a description for GM. Volt would definitely change people’s perception on GM’s innovation of cutting edge technologies. This EV has great engineering and technologies all packed together, in a manners, in which all have been executed in world-class fashion. In which GM really have revolutionized the EV world with such a remarkable, game changing machinery.

Competitions:
Nissan Leaf
Mini E
Mitsubishi i-MIEV

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2012 Chevrolet Volt
=====================================
Performance: 5/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 4/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 5/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 4/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 2/5
Value-for-money: 4/5

Overall rating: 4.5/5

Long-term test drive: 2011 Chevrolet Cruze LT Turbo

Vehicle: 2011 Chevrolet Cruze LT Turbo with Convenience Pkg, Connectivity Pkg, TPMS and Sunroof
Price as tested: CDN$24130
Total mileage of the entire test: 520km
Fuel economy: 6 liters per 100km (70% city/30% urban cycle)

It used to be when use the words to describe Chevrolet. Words like remarkable, class-leading and cutting edge are never in the dictionary. Things start to get significantly better after Chevrolet launched the impressive Malibu in 2008, followed by the Equinox in 2010. With the introduction of the Cruze compact, its so good that we at Directshift has given it a runner-up status in the overall COTY.

We finally have a chance to pit a Cruze with the impressive 1.4 turbocharged engine through a weekend long test drive. The result is as impressive as our first impression. Although we are still not too fond of its abrupt down and upshifting with its automatic gearbox, 6 gears to be exact. Another area is where the gearbox feels a bit rough when the engine is cold. Those are the oversight of Chevrolet engineers given how superbly engineered with the Cruze. With 138hp and 148 lb/ft of torque while returned only 6 liters per 100km is extremely impressive, considering the fact that this is not a diesel nor hybrid of any kinds.

Another area which impressed us most is the ride comfort. GM compact used to ride very choppy but return with poor handling, as we have experienced with those Cavalier and Cobalt of the past. With the Cruze, its European influence through its chassis finesse have made its ride quality exceptionally well. In fact, it rides as good as any of the class leaders from Hyundai and Ford. On the other hand, it doesn’t lost much when it comes to handling sharpness. Yes, it doesn’t handle as sharply as Focus and Mazda3. But it yields the same kind of sure-footness and driving manners as good as Elantra while exceeding those of Corolla and Civic alike. Its really an extremely balanced package which provide a near perfect bland of handling prowess with supple ride quality.

If you thought the internal quality of Malibu is impressive, Cruze is even more impressive. Everything is relative to price, BTW. :) You won’t find any kinds of these classy plastic and velour in GM compact of the past. With the Cruze, its really put Jetta to shame in this regret. The materials are both soft-touch, have nice tactical feedback with classy plasticized moulding in all the switchgears. The velour feels expensive and very supportive. The soggy and cheaply made seats of GM compacts have finally put them in misery. Great job, General. :D

It was a lofty goal when GM proclaimed Cruze will be a contender in the fiercely competitive compact segment. GM has achieved that very goal successfully. Its not only its able to put many of those well-known names to shame, in terms of execution. Corolla and Civic quickly come to mind. Its able to put GM on the top of many consumer’s mind when shopping for a great compact. The bottom line? Cruze is as good as anything else from Mazda, Ford and Hyundai. :D

If there is one wish. Its Cruze hatchback should arrive at no better time given its sedan silibing’s successful first year launch.

Likes:
Efficient turbocharged engine
Balanced handling and ride compromise
Fuel efficiency
Interior build quality

Dislikes:
Automatic gearbox’s shifting program
Price when loaded
Base engine

Competitions:
Mazda3
Ford Focus
Honda Civic
Toyota Corolla
Hyundai Elantra

2011 Chevrolet Cruze Eco

Vehicle: 2011 Chevrolet Cruze Eco with TPMS
Price as tested: CDN$19364

Performance: Whenever anyone saw the word “Eco”, “Economy” has to be the first word which comes to mind. With the introduction of the economical version of the highly praised Cruze, Chevrolet is about to pit the gasoline-powered “Eco” versus anything else from both the turbodiesel and hybrid arena.

While the Eco features the same state-of-the-art 1.4 liter DOHC 16-valve 4-cylinder as the LTZ, there are details which aren’t anything but significant for this puppy to achieve its excellent fuel economy. 138hp certainly has enough get-up-and-go for most daily driving, its the 148 lb/ft of torque which provides the most needed: torque, on everyday driving needs. The result is a small car which provides suprising amount of performace without losing any sorts of refinement and smoothness, which usually associate with cars costing twice as much. In the past, you won’t hear the words “refinement” and “top notch NVH” when talking about General small cars. Since the advant of the Cruze, these words can be pretty much describe this superbly engineered product perfectly. This is just going to prove American has the resources and engineering prowess to produce a great small cars, as long as they have the right guts to do. As for the Eco, its 6-speed manual has specifically tall gear ratios to suit its fuel economy purpose. The result is the Eco revs at a very relaxing rpm even if we are driven at triple digit set of speeds. It all done in a very elegant and comfortable manners. The clutch is light and progressive, yet all the gear ratios have been properly placed for Eco’s intended purpose. Especially the top three gears are specifically calibrated as overdrives. Along with the low-resistance tires and improved aerodynamic pieces, its able to achieve an ultra impressive 4.5 liters per 100km during on day of testing. This is nothing short of amusing given its 3010 lb curb weight, which is 167 lb lighter than those of equivalent LTZ turbo with the same powertrain as the Eco.

Handling: Before we start discussing about Eco’s dynamic abilities, we need to clarify the Eco is intended to compete with the likes of hybrids. Its pretty much well-known that hybrids are nasty to drive but ride comfortably. Although the Eco doesn’t impress us as much as we last test drove the Cruze turbo, it does provide a smitten surprise when compares to its hybrid peers. The compliant suspension with low-resistance tires have provided decent enough grip without losing the forte ride comfort of the Cruze architecture. On the other hand, its electric power steering provides decent enough feel and feedback. Its delightfully precise and responsive to driver input. When pushed the Eco, its very obvious that Eco is tuned toward comfortable ride than edgy handling. That’s despite its handling is confidence-inspiring without feeling like wet noodle, as in previous Cobalt and Cavalier. There are plenty of understeer when pushed into corners, which doesn’t come as a single bit of surprise. However, body motion is very controlled. When you combined with a fail-safe dynamic setting and a sublime ride quality, which is both supple and controlled, its easy for driver to concentrate on getting the best possible fuel economy. That’s exactly what the Eco is intended to do. If you are those who are looking for world-class driving pleasure while saving fuel, VW’s TDI twins are definitely the best alternative to both Eco and hybrids.

Brakes: Unlike so many of its hybrid counterparts, Eco’s braking feels firm and solid. It doesn’t have hybrid regenerative braking system’s spongy feedback to the driver’s right foot. It provides a firm and solidly modulated brake pedal feel travel all the way. Along with the 4-wheel discs and ABS as standard feature for only 19 grand, it makes Eco a very irresistible package as a whole.

Interior: The Eco continues Cruze’s impressive interior theme. In the past, you won’t be able to put exceptional build quality and GM compact altogether. Nowaday, you can. The Cruze is such a car. The use of materials and fit-and-finish are top-notch, which are good enough to put many of its hybrid rivals to shame.

With a low liftover, minimal wheel instrusions and 40/60 split fold-down rear seats, Eco’s practicality means you can have a cake and eat it too. :D

Conclusion: When you consider the fact that Eco isn’t any kinds of turbodiesel or hybrid, while its still able to achieve its factory claims fuel economy of 4.6 liters per 100km is nothing short of a technological amusement. All have done without sacificing the responsive performance, exceptional ride comfort and daily livability of Cruze. The icing on the cake is its price. Its several thousand dollars less expensive than equivalent hybrids, which is more than enough to justify the purchase of an Eco over any of those gasoline + electric experiments.

Competitions:
Honda Insight
Honda Civic hybrid
Toyota Prius
VW Golf/Jetta TDI

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2011 Chevrolet Cruze Eco
=====================================
Performance: 4.5/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 4/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 4/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 4/5
Value-for-money: 5/5

Overall rating: 4.25/5

2011 Chevrolet Camaro Convertible

Vehicle: 2011 Chevrolet Camaro V6 Convertible with Rally Pkg and 6-speed Automatic
Price as tested: CDN$38964

Performance: For a ragtop, Camaro is as good as it gets. Our tester comes with the base V6 instead of the uplevel V8, which latter we think its the real deal. While the 3.6 liter DOHC 24-valve is able to drink Regular gas, while having advacement right from variable valve timing, direct fuel injection to electronic throttle. It doesn’t have the engine note of its more powerful V8. When mesh with the GM-esque light throttle, its engine sound just doesn’t feel Camaro-ish. On the other hand, its a very good V6 even by muscle car standard. That’s because it has a good 312 ponies and 278 lb/ft of torque to get the Camaro going. Even if it has to carry 3769lb, which it isn’t light by any standards. The Camaro takes off without hestiation with its 6-speed manumatic. While the automatic provides crisp shifts, while willing to both up and downshifts. Its paddle shifters aren’t engineered to allow any down and upshift except going for the manumatic mode. That’s a pity given how well engineered the whole Camaro package is. GM should give its paddle shifters to override at any gears, for proper downshifting, before entering a corner or merging on a fast freeway on-ramp. The refinement and NVH of this V6 powertrain is nothing short of world-class. If you think 312hp is just not enough, there is always a 426hp LS3 6.2 liter V8 in the option list.

Handling: Any good convertible has to begin with a stout structure, the Camaro is certainly one of them. GM engineers have stiffened up all the right places (especially A-pillars) which need to stand up the rollover when the rollbars activate. That makes the Camaro a very solid convertible without feeling like a wet noodle. In the past, Camaro convertible tends to have plenty of cowl shakes when driven over a slight bumps. The new one feels completely solid and flex-free even when driven aggressively on the railroad tracks to washboard pavement. On the other hand, it handles surprisingly well given its a convertible. The near-perfect rear-wheel-drive balance mated with a good set of suspension, it makes for a convertible which is both comfortable while handles delightfully. The ride is comfortably compliant which is able to absorb all the nasties, while the dynamic equation matched up to back up its good looks. The steering provides good feel and feedback without feeling any of its dartiness as last Camaro convertible. The body rolls are well-tempted with understeer and oversteer, are all fully controlled by GM’s world-class Stabiliztrak ESC.

Brakes: With 4-wheel discs and standard ABS, Camaro stops like what it should be. Unlike GM of the bad old days, which had spongy brake pedal. The Camaro provides sure-footness pedal feel with plenty of modulation in the entire travel. The stopping distance is short, while pedal always feels solid and fade-free, even after a couple of hard stops. Add the ABS which steps in at the right time, adds up to the hallmark of a good braking system.

Interior: The biggest issue with Camaro convertible has to be its luggage space. Just like its cramped rear seats, its luggage space is a classic example of form-over-function. The liftover is high with tall side sills and huge instrusions. If you are intended to bring all four’s luggages, think again. Even when bringing two persons on a weekend getaway, you better think twice of using what kind of luggage style before packing into the pack of the Camaro. Or, perhaps leave a few toothpaste to buy at your destination.

When the roof is up, the rear seats feel cramped. Another problem is the rear sightlines which is simply horrible to begin with.

Up front, Camaro is a right driver’s car environment. All the controls are within easy reach, with nice set of analog gauges and climate control is easy to use. My only wish is for those secondary gauges which placed higher up on the dashboard, instead of below the shifter. However, everything else have been hammered by some rather cheesy plastic on the dashboard. Pity. :(

Conclusion: There is nothing like driving a gorgeous convertible on a hot sunny day. The Camaro convertible fits that bill perfectly. The combination of classic good looks, comfortable ride without losing a bit of driving fun add up to the whole equation.

Competitions:
Ford Mustang convertible
BMW 128i convertible

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2011 Chevrolet Camaro Convertible
=====================================
Performance: 4/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 4/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 3/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 2/5
Value-for-money: 4/5

Overall rating: 4/5

Short test: 2011 Chevrolet Aveo

Vehicle: 2011 Chevrolet Aveo LT with Premium Sound Pkg, Sport Pkg, 4-speed automatic and ABS
Price as tested: CDN$21110

2011 marks the end of both the Aveo and its nameplate. Why Chevrolet is so desperately needs to get rid of the Aveo in flavor of the new Sonic nameplate really have demostrated how unremarkable this GMDAT-developed subcompact fare agains its tough rivals.

Considering the fact that the loaded Aveo costs $21 grand with ABS optional, while you can get a similary equipped but class-leading Fit with it as a standard feature. The most pitiful about Aveo’s braking feel suffers from the same fate as the “old GM” product, which means they are spongy and completely lack of any feedback. It takes lots of pressure to take the Aveo from any speed to a halt.

Even though the 4-speed automatic’s fuzzy logic program is very smart in Aveo’s case, its very much willing to up and downshift to compensate for Aveo lack of well-honed refinement. Having do with 4-speed automatic while Fit already have 5-speed automatic. Yes, both Mazda2 and Toyota Yaris are still having to do with 4-speed automatic. At least both Mazda and Toyota have a far superior dynamic abilities than this little Chevy does. This 108hp and 105 lb/ft of torque have enough grunt but certainly not up to today’s refinement.

Dynamically speaking, Aveo’s suspension is tuned toward comfort rather than sportiness. Its certainly far from the sportiest car in subcompact class: Mazda2. The limit is benign and body rolls are very obvious. Steering feels numb and imprecise. However, the chassis is strong enough to compensate for its lost of any driving pleasure. Aveo is best for those who are seeking for appliance than anyone who is looking for driving pleasure.

Without any proper factory rebate, its a very tough job for GM to get those Aveo off the dealer lots. That’s because any properly loaded Aveo with ABS already escalated into its competition’s range. Add to the fact that both Honda Fit, Ford Fiesta and Mazda2 already considered as class-leaders, GM has no choice but to bring the whole program back to the drawing board. As demostrated by their effort on Cruze, the Sonic seems like a very promising solid bet.

Likes:
Comfortable ride
4-speed automatic’s fuzzy logic program
Base price

Dislikes:
Unremarkable handling
4-speed automatic
Price when loaded
Optional ABS

Competitions:
Honda Fit
Toyota Yaris
Ford Fiesta
Mazda2
Nissan Versa

2011 Chevrolet Cruze

Vehicle: 2011 Chevrolet Cruze LT with Convenience Pkg, Connectivity Pkg and RS Appearance Pkg
Price as tested: CDN$24720

Performance: From so many years, many consumers would have thought GM is unable to produce any competitive compact car. Will the new Cruze prove them wrong? We will find out after this test drive.

The Cruze is powered by one of two engines. The base version is an Ecotec 1.8 liter with 136hp and 123 lb/ft of torque. While this engine is adequate for most occassions, its the uplevel 1.4 liter Ecotec turbocharged mill that is the engine of choice for anyone shopping for a Cruze. Both engines come with variable valve timing and DOHC variety. Not only does this engine provide the same kind of refinement and smoothness, as the 1.4 liter turbocharged benchmark slots into VW Golf elsewhere in the world. It doesn’t have the usual roughness and noise one associates with GM Ecotec of the old days. In fact, this is a worldclass powerplant that is able to run with any cars in its class. On the other hand, this mill’s 138hp and more importantly, 148 lb/ft of torque, move this car with authority. All have done without annoying turbo lag, as one associates with small displacement turbocharged engine. While the variable valve timing enhances both mid and upper range on the powerband.

If the only letdown is the GM’s GT-60 6-speed manumatic gearbox. While the manumatic is smooth and coordiated during shifts, which is up to GM’s usual high standard on engineered great automatic transmission. Its the gearbox programming that Chevrolet engineers need to get back to drawing board before losing any potential customers. In just a few seconds, this 6-speed gears up from 1st right to 6th in a quick shift. While this is great for fuel economy as the gearbox is always on “overdrive”, it doesn’t allow for any downshifting until driver gets their hands on the maumatic side. This combination only makes the turbo engine feels sluggish when pushed. I meant “feel” but the “actual” performance doesn’t reflect that trend. On the other hand, when its on manumatic mode. Cruze’s automatic always on 4th gear. GM has learned this from Toyota’s playbook on hanging the gearbox on 4th gear for fuel economy reason. Given its a manumatic, the control should be the driver instead of that damn computer. Its the driver who control the car, not the computer. Until GM figures out the proper way of automatic gearbox programming, the 5-speed manual with nice throw and progressive clutch is a far superior choice in this new Cruze. This alone, however, would lost some customers. As GM predicts over 90% of Cruze will be sold with automatic gearbox. Considering the fact that Cruze is a great car to begin with, its a pity if it lost potential customers just because of the stupid gearbox programming.

Handling: The Cruze is based on GM’s worldwide Delta 2 platform. Considering the fact that this platform has been well-proven for its level of rigidty and ruggedness around the world, also bond well for WTCC motorsports. No one would ever doubt Cruze’s dynamic abilities is anything but putting smiles on driver’s face. In terms of handling abilities, the Cruze is able to challenge anything else in its compact class. The electric steering provides excellent feel and feedback, with enough precision. The ride quality is comfortably and supple. Our LT comes with optional sports suspension which adds firmer springs and shocks. The result is a compact car that handles very much like a sports sedan. Push the Cruze through corners, the Cruze reacts with delightful feedback through the driver without the usual numbness one associates with GM compacts of the past. There are minimal understeer and body rolls are well-controlled. Add to the fact ths Stabiliztrak is one of the world’s best ESC, its really hard to get Cruze loose except driver is doing reckless behaviour. In short, the Cruze is a very well-engineered dynamic package.

Brakes: With front discs and rear drums on our LT turbo tester, Cruze is able to performance accordingly when it comes to braking performance. The stopping distance is short while pedal always have some lives to it. Unlike GM compact in the bad ole’ days, the pedal feel is crisp and linear. Its also fade-free after a couple of harsh stops. Best of all, ABS doesn’t intervene unnecessarily.

Interior: If you thought the previous Cobalt’s interior is made from Lego-ish plastic, the new Cruze is anything but. All those cheaply made plastic with edgy surfaces have gone with high-quality plastic trim pieces. The use of plastic materials are world-class. There are soft-touch plastic around the dashboard and door panels. The cloth seats are comfortable, with nice thigh and back support. All the instrumentation gauges are clear and analog. Stereo placed above HVAC is an ideal ergonomic placement. All the controls are initutive, including the optional Bluetooth function. The form-follows-function theme of the interior flows through one side of the door panel to the dashboard, all have done with classy materials which make an interior felt like a much more expensive ride. The cheap and cheesy interior of past GM interior has come classy and feel expensive all in one sentence. Its really put Corolla and Civic’s interiors ashamed, while its able to match the class-leading Mazda3. All that said, its a very high praised indeed. :D

While the trunk is nicely carpeted with wide and squared opening, also score well with 60/40 split fold-down rear seats for maximum cargo capacity. The trunk hinges remain the poppy leever hinge type which means it crashes into any groceries down inside.

Conclusion: Those who thought GM is able to produce any competitive compact entrant certainly haven’t driven the Cruze yet. The Cruze is GM’s world-class entrant into the fiercely competitive compact class. It has a superb combination of a good powertrain, it would be great if GM is able to address the annoying automatic programming for next model year. The handling and ride compromise is sublime. An interior that is able to match the competitions, even beaten some of them. That is easy to explain why Chevrolet Cruze won Directshift’s small car of the year, as well as the runner-up as the overall car of the year. :)

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2011 Chevrolet Cruze
=====================================
Performance: 4/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 4.5/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4.5/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 4.5/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 4/5
Value-for-money: 4/5

Overall rating: 4.5/5

Long-term test drive: 2010 Chevrolet Malibu LS

Vehicle: 2010 Chevrolet Malibu LS
Price as tested: CDN$25345
Total mileage of the entire test: 650km
Fuel economy: 9 liters per 100km (70% city/30% urban cycle)

If there is one GM product that is able to challenge the best of Japanese’s domination in the mid-size segment, Malibu is definitely the one. Chevrolet has made no bones that everything else that Honda and Toyota can do, they can do it much better. That has proven in our long-term Malibu LS with Ecotec 4-cylinder engine. Even without the need to upgrade to a hybrid or V6, this 4-cylinder is as refined as any Accord with 2.4 liter or even Camry with the revised 2.5 liter. 169hp and 153 lb/ft have done what it should do with a 4-cylinder mid-size sedan while returning impressive fuel economy. Even with 3415 lb curb weight, the 5-speed automatic moved the Malibu with authority.

When it comes to handling, Malibu scores exceptionally well. Not only does the steering is precise and return good feedback, the suspension no longer have the loose feel one used to in General products. The ride quality is exceptional, which absorbs all the bumps and roughness like in any luxury cars costing twice as much.

The interior is superb, as it uses world-class materials right from the comfortable velour seats to soft-touch plastic on the dashboard. All the controls are logically placed, without even the need to check out owner’s manual for direction. Initutive and user-friendly best describe Malibu’s excellent interior.

The Malibu is definitely a great car even at its base form. As it got plenty of power with only a base 4-cylinder, handles exceptionally well and interior is a good place on a long trip. Those who are shopping for an Accord and Camry, while overlook such a great car would be a pity.

Likes:
Handling and ride
Performance
Interior quality and ergonomics
Price/value

Dislikes:
Slightlines
Not available with AWD

2010 Chevrolet Equinox

Vehicle: 2010 Chevrolet Equinox LTZ with 3.0 V6 and power sunroof
Price as tested: CDN$39565

Performance: The Equinox is powered by 2 sets of engines. The base version comes with a 2.4 liter DOHC 16-valve Ecotec with 182hp and 172 lb/ft of torque. Although this little 4-cylinder mill comes with both direct fuel injection and variable valve timing, given Equinox’s weight of closing in at 4000 lb, it can barely move it adquately. The engine of choice in this ute has to be the uplevel DOHC 24-valve 3.0 liter V6, which also come with both direct injection and variable valve timing varieties. Along with the smooth shifting 6-speed automatic, which is the usual GM norm, it moves the Equinox with authority. Not only does the shifts are crisp and always on the right gears, it matched Equinox’s 264hp and 222 lb/ft of torque perfectly well. The only drawback is the paddle shifters only allow to work in “Manual” mode, which means driver isn’t able to override the system in “Drive”. What a pity. This V6 is a smooth operator in all rpm, as its level of refinement, flexability and NVH are on par with anything as good from the 6s from Toyota and Honda. The throttle response is quick and linear, without the usual abrupt feel once we associate with GM throttle tip-in. The most delightful fact is this powertrain is able to move Equinox LTZ’s 4171 lb/ft of loaded leather-lined luxury with authority, as it provides decent mid to upper range thrust without losing punch. Even though maximum torque arrives at 5100rpm seems high, its 222 lb/ft would make this heavy compact ute moves as it should be off-the-line with ease.

Handling: The new Equinox is not only have the right powertrain, it also needs to have the right dynamic qualities in order to match the rest of the class. Chevrolet does it wonderfully well with the latest redesign. It all begins with a stiff and solid chassis that is complete free of cracks and rattles. Then give it a well-calibrated suspension, springs and a competent all-wheel drive system. In terms of AWD, Chevrolet has given Equinox a system which is proactive instead of reactive, which is a godsent for both active safety and Canadian winter. This system incorporates itself into GM’s highly respectable Stabilitrak stability control. Its very hard to get Equinox out of lines except the driver has done some very nasty behaviour. The body motions are well-controlled, although there are some body rolls. As with all SUV, there are understeer when pushed. The steering provides decent feel and feedback, which track path exceptionally well with precision.

Brakes: With 4-wheel discs and standard ABS, the Equinox stops with authority given its hefty weight. Unlike the previous Equinox which have numb pedal feel. This one’s brake pedal feels alive all-the-time. The pedal feel and modulation are excellent, which decent stopping distance. Best of all, ABS only kicks in whenever driver needs it.

Interior: The back of the Equinox is impressively laid-out. It all begins with a wide door opening for easy cargo access. Fold down the 60/40 split rear seats, one can put anything else as large as a refrigator into the Equinox without any problem. Best of all, the cargo floor is completely flat after fold-down. It shows how much thought GM has put through the developement of this vehicle. If there is one drawback, however, its the front passenger seat isn’t able to fold flat. If its able to do that, the Equinox can put in a 4X8 plywood inside without any problem. There is also a nifty feature at the back of the Equinox. The automatic door closing switch can adjust the height of which the driver wants the lifegate, there is another that have the same function on top of the center console. So one can adjust the right height for your height and your garage. If there is one drawback, its the rear tailigate doesn’t open independently.

Another impressive area is the rear seat. Not only does it have the longest rear and headroom in its class. Chevrolet has designed a rear seat that is able to move forth and back 200mm to improve both leg and cargo space.

While the original Equinox comes with some cheap and nasty plastic, the new one finished off in a very classy fashion. There are plenty of classy and high-quality plastic materials on the dashboard and door panels. The interior color choices in the Equinox is as classy and bold as the Malibu sedan. The leather seats are covered in quality hides, which is soft and supple. In terms of comfort, those seats hug the driver really well with nice back and thigh supports. Both the automatic climate control and stereo are placed ergonomically. The climate control works effectively and efficiently. In a nutshell, its a very user-friendly interior design.

Conclusion: The Chevrolet Equinox used to be a poor proportion in the compact SUV segment. Not anymore! The new one has everything to compete with both Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V. It got plenty of power, handles exceptionally well and come with a nicely finished yet versatile interior. If the Equinox is any indication, it means the “new GM” is heading into the right direction with excellent product. All they need to do is to get customers back into their showroom.

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2010 Chevrolet Equinox
=====================================
Performance: 4.5/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 4.5/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 4/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 5/5
Value-for-money: 4/5

Overall rating: 4.25/5

2010 Chevrolet Camaro

Vehcle: 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS with Inferno Orange Trim Pkg, Rally Sport Pkg and sunroof
Price as tested: CDN$45545

Performance: As with any American muscle cars, the new Camaro is available with both a V6 and V8. The subject of our tester, of course, is the SS with General’s very well-proven 6.2 liter pushrod V8. This V8 is good for 426 horses and 420 lb/ft of torque. When it comes to torque, there is nothing comes quite close to traditional American pushrod V8. And this Camaro is a perfect example. The maximum torque of 408 lb/ft arrives at just 4500 rpm might seem high on paper. The excitement and joy of dropping the anchor is no comparison. There are just plenty of power whenever you want to rev this baby. Only if fuel prices are a main concern, the V8 should be the engine of choice in the Camaro range. After years of evolving the pushrod motor, GM has engineered this OHV engine to have world-class refinement and smoothness which are able to match many of the world’s finest DOHC V8. Matched with this engine is a smooth 6-speed manual gearbox. The throws are short and precise, without the mushy and numb feel as in the previous Camaro. The same goes for the progressive clutch which provide decent feedback. Best of all, the gearbox provides excellent ratios for both low-end acceleration and top-end highway cruising. Although the Camaro V8 comes standard with cylinder deactivation system, we are only manage to get an average of 15 liters per 100km.

Handling: With a newfound rear-drive platform and a well-calibrated suspension, it makes the new Camaro handles as sweetly as any rear-wheel-drive European counterparts. Unlike the previous Camaro, which is primarily a quarter miler. The new one is a very capable sports car when you pushed through hairpins. Along with an excellent chassis that is strong and solid, the ideal 50/50 weight distribution and a supple suspension make it as a good driver’s companion on black top twisties. The steering provides feel and feedback that you only found in a Porsche. On the other hand, GM’s Stabiliztrak has provided a high threshold as enthuisasts want to push the Camaro harder through corners. Its also acts as a helping hand whenever driver rears its ugly heads. Both the body rolls and understeer are minimal, while the Stabiliztrak allows enough thresold for a bit of oversteer. The biggest surprise is how good Camaro rides on all the roughness and patholes we called Canadian roads. The ride is firm but far from being harsh. It is a sports car that you can drive on a daily basis. The whole driving experience is very sophiscated and refined, something we can’t imagine while driven its forebears, which were cruel and rough around the edges. In the past, muscle car stands for rude and cruel straight-line cruiser. Nowaday, they have transformed themselves into a sophiscated yet classy sports car. The new Camaro is the best testament to this transformation.

Brakes: With 4-wheel discs and standard ABS, the Camaro’s braking performance certainly match up with its performance counterparts. Unlike GM’s brakes of the past, the new Camaro’s pedal feel actually has some lives to it. The pedal feel and modulation are excellent. The ABS doesn’t have any unwanted intervention as with any of the previous General products.

Interior: While its generally understandable that GM wants to reincarnate the original Camaro, when it comes to exterior and interior styling. It just doesn’t transform good enough when it comes to ergonomics and “feel good” factor. Let’s forgot those cheap and hard plastic that have been surrounded the Camaro’s center console and dashboard, which is unacceptable consider how good Chevrolet have done with Malibu’s materials. Another problem is all the gauge layout seems too oddball, even those climate control knobs don’t feel particularly user-friendly even if they are easy to figure out. However, those sports seats are comfortable and very supportive. Not to mention the rear sightlines are almost non-existence. Even for an enthuisast, a rear parking sensors are needed in this Camaro.

As with any sports car, the backseat of the Camaro is cramped and hard to get in. Same goes for the tiny trunk.

Conclusion: Chevrolet has done a wonderful job with the new Camaro. Not only does it look great, it also have enough grace and pace to match. The sweet powertrain, an awesome chassis and superb brakes. The best of all, it got a price tag that could make it a new performance bargain. One has to wonder. If GM has injected just a bit of magic of this Camaro into other products, they probably wouldn’t end up in bankruptcy court today.

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2010 Chevrolet Camaro
=====================================
Performance: 5/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 5/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 3/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 3/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 2/5
Value-for-money: 5/5

Overall rating: 4/5

Special feature: What should GM do to restructure themselves?

With the Bush adminstration announced to provide short-term loan of 17.4 billions of bridge loan to both General Motors and Chrysler Corporation today. GM will be the one to watch as Chrysler, whose future remains in doubt, given their lackluster product portfolio. As for Ford, this company already on the restructuring process of cutting dealers and improving their products significantly in recent years. It should be the most healthy and strongest down the road.

So, what do we at DirectShift think of how GM should restructure themselves in order to survive? GM products have improved significantly in the last couple of years, since Bob Lutz and Rick Wagoner have taken the helm of this company. The biggest improvements have to be the exterior and interior styling, dynamic abilities, refinement, use of materials and level of fit-and-finish. Take the Chevrolet Malibu and Cadillac CTS, these 2 cars are head-and-above those of their unremarkable predecessors.

With General currently having 8 brands but with less than 20% of market share, they have to reduce to 3 brands maximum in order to substain its profitability. It isn’t like 2 to 3 decades ago when GM still had 50% of market share to substain the profitability of so many brand overlapping each others.

Here is what we think which brands should go and stay within GM’s portfolio:

Hummer: With full-size SUV sales in the toilet, this brand should ditch as soon as possible. It has absoultely no viable future holding for Hummer whatsoever.

Saab: Before GM became the major stockholder of this once-proud Swedish niche carmaker, Saab products have flair, character, performance and dynamic qualities with its tiny but interesting 2 product line-up. This brand is the classic example of how an American giant mismanaged an unique Swedish brand. They simply have milked their current line-up for way too long with infusion of new technologies and designs that used to be the hallmark of Saab. The rebadging of previous Impreza and Trailblazer as 9-2X and 9-7X also have pissed many long-time Saab loyalists without gaining new customers. While 9-3 and 9-5 were once considered as contenders to German heavyweights when launched couple of years ago, they haven’t aged gracefully with all of their competitions received new design or already facelifted. GM should sold Saab back to Swedish company, by maintaining its uniqueness and niche. We are pretty damn sure Swedish firm will know how to manage Saab far better than what GM did. Give this company enough resources, their engineers are able to come out with innovations to stand out.

Pontiac: This is another GM brand that should be going away. The Solstice can give it to Chevrolet as Corvette “Junior” and G8 replaces Impala as Chevrolet’s flagship sedan. There aren’t any vehicles in this brand that aren’t overlapping with other brands.

Buick: Except for Mainland China, Buick doesn’t have much brand recognition and cachet anywhere in the world. While keeping the exciting Mainland Buick portfolio like the upcoming Opel Insigina rebadged Regal, take the entire Enclave/Lacerne/Allure with it to China. Kill this brand in North American market.

GMC: GMC is basically a rebadged Chevrolet Truck. This is the classic example of how GM loved to have product overlapped each others. Kill GMC and leave Chevy Truck is more than enough. Even with only Chevy Truck, its market share and profitability are enough to substain its market share given both full-size truck and SUV sales are tanking.

Saturn: GM have got Saturn really really right in the last 2 years. This company will be well-served as an alternative to another affordable European brand: Volkswagen. All the Astra, Aura, Vue, Outlook and Sky are all great cars. It will also be served well for customers who want more European flavor as an alternative to more mainstream Chevrolet. Given Ford will be bringing the European models like the Fiesta and Kuga sometimes next year, By merging Saturn with European Opel, Saturn will likely be the one that customers will cross-shopped. Its going to be sad if GM decides to ditch this brand. As Saturn has the freshest and strongest line-up in the industry right now.

Chevrolet: This has to be the mainstream brand that GM needs to tackle Honda and Toyota. The new Malibu has proved to be a real contender in mid-size family sedan segment. The upcoming Cruze is going to be a hot contender. Electric car Volt, performance-oriented Camaro and Corvette all serve as its halo cars.

Cadillac: The new CTS has proved Caddy is coming back. CTS-V is a really wonderful sports sedan that can easily give any AMG, RS and M a-run-for-their-money. GM should market Cadillac as a comfort and luxury-oriented brand instead of performance-oriented brand, say Lexus/Mercedes versus Audi/BMW/Infiniti/Acura. Their core products should focus on both refinement and comfort. Leaving the V-Series to go after performance crowd is more than fine as halo cars. First the new CTS, the upcoming SRX also looks promising.

2009 Chevrolet Aveo5

Vehicle: 2009 Chevrolet Aveo5 LT
Price as tested: CDN$15770

Performance: With Aveo’s 1.6 liter DOHC 16-valve 4-cylinder engine, you won’t expect breathtaking performance. But with the latest generation, Aveo has scored with variable valve timing for better fuel economy and responsiveness. This little mill is good for a 106 horses and 107 lb/ft of torque, which is a slight improvement over its predecessor’s 105 and 103, respectively. The refinement of this GMDAT build engine has been better than expected, although it remains noisy at higher rev. 107 lb/ft of torque is decent judging by its maximum torque arrives at 3600rpm. Throttle response is acceptable. However, we found Aveo’s biggest shortcomings: manual gearbox, remain intact. The 5-speed’s throw is long and clutch isn’t so progressive. Gates aren’t exactly well-defined. There is a sense of rubbery feel through the manual gearbox. Its a surprise for a little car to have better automatic gearbox than manual gearbox, Aveo is the case. Aveo’s 4-speed automatic has always been a surprise in previous iteration. With the improved fuzzy logic program, it actually learns driver’s right foot quickly and efficiently through driver input. The 1st gear is low enough to enthuisastic launch in this little mill, 4th gear is tall enough for cruising although 5th is a welcome gear. 2nd and 3rd’s fuzzy logic programs have set delightfully well for mid-range. If you are looking to buy an Aveo, take the automatic gearbox.

Handling: The Aveo has confident if not entertaining dynamic qualities. The steering feel light but vague, while the turn-in is acceptable. Its suspension is comfortably compliant that put more emphasis on ride comfort than driving enjoyment. It feels a tad too soft through corners, with lots of understeer and body rolls. However, its ride is surprisingly comfortable and compliant. Just wish for more rebound damping when driven through patholes and rough pavements.

Brakes: Aveo is standard with front discs, rear drums but ABS as an available option. The braking feel and modulation are acceptable if not spectacular. Even if its an entry-level car, GM should make ABS standard across the board instead of making it an option. GM shouldn’t cut corner when it comes to active safety feature in small car. You can afford a small car doesn’t mean you can’t afford to be in a safe car.

Interior: The materials and fit-and-finish have been much improved in the latest Aveo. You still can find plenty of hard and cheap plastic materials abound, however, the level of execution have taken a huge step forward over its predecessor.

When it comes to ergonomics, the stereo is smart enough to placed above the climate control unit. Instrumentation gauges are clear and analog, while all the power items standard on our uplevel LT tester.

Conclusion: The 2009 Aveo marks a quantum leap forward over its predecessor, especially when it comes to engine and interior ambience. Here lies the rough. If you add the optional feature like ABS, Aveo’s price can escalate into the Fit and Yaris level. Which, on the other hand, are much better driving cars with more solid quality reputation.

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2009 Chevrolet Aveo5
=====================================
Performance: 2/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 2/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 3/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 3/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 3/5
Value-for-money: 2/5

Overall rating: 2.25/5

2008 Chevrolet Malibu

Vehicle: 2008 Chevrolet Malibu LTZ with power sunroof
Price as tested: CDN$36055

Performance: The new Malibu is powered by 1 of 3 engines. The base version is a 2.4 liter 16-valve Ecotec 4-cylinder with 169 hp and 160 lb/ft of torque. A level above is the Malibu Hybrid, which has 164 hp and 159 lb/ft of torque respectively. The highlight of our tester is Malibu’s full-flaged model, LTZ, that comes standard with a 3.6 liter V6 24-valve with Variable Valve Timing and DOHC. When it comes to engine quality, GM’s garden-variety family sedan was never able to reach the high standards set by Honda and Toyota. With this new unit, this Malibu has both performance and refinement to match the best of its Japanese rivals. In terms of performance, this unit is good for 252 horses and 251 lb/ft of torque which has to be one of the most powerful engines in its class. Mesh the gas pedal and the Malibu launch with authority. 251 lb/ft of torque arrives at 3200rpm certainly helpss that a lot. Its throttle response is a much linear type than the usual American oversensitive variety, which is a truly refreshing change. When it comes to refinement, smoothness and quietness, it also rated as top-tiers even with compare with Camry and Accord’s exceptional 3.5 liter V6s. The 6-speed automatic is up to GM’s usual high standards of producing excellent automatic gearbox. The shifts are crisp and smooth. Thanks to the nifty paddle shifters come standard on our LTZ version, it also encourages manual shifting on the steering, for more spirited driving experience. However, this manumatic still has a protective nature which tends to up or downshifts whenever an enthuisastic driver wants to rev it pass redline. What GM should do is to adapt CTS’s more aggressive shifting program into this Malibu, it would make a perfect match for this sweet powertrain.

Handling: As impressive as new Malibu’s powertrain, its driving dynamics is equally astounishing. I have never used the word astounishing to describe the driving experience of GM family sedans because they were so uninspiring to drive. Began last year with the awesome Saturn Aura, GM really has started to build family sedan with great driving abilities. The new Malibu shares the same rock-solid foundation as the Aura, which is a stiff, stout and completely rattle free platform for suspensions to hang its hats. When it comes the suspension, GM engineers have done a wonderful job on caliberating the right amount of firmness with suppleness for handling, as well as softness for ride comfort. The result is amazing as its suspension is sporty and capable to handle twisties without sacificing the ride quality one expects from a family car. At the same time, it provides the joy of driving which never been seen on previous Malibus. It is so capable we actually enjoyed pushing this Malibu through corners even on rainly days. On the other hand, the rack-and-pinion steering provides eager response during turn-in. Not to mention excellent driving feedback and precision. Although there are safe understeer and body rolls are expected in a family sedan. Its Stabilizatrak finally acts like what it should be. This stability control finally doesn’t step in until absoultely necessary, which cannot be said with the same system in previous GM products.

Brakes: Malibu’s braking prowess scores another point after its driving dynamics and performance. The stopping distance is short while the pedal feel is firm and solid, without all the numbness we usually associate with Malibu of the last decade. Its also fade-free after a couple of hard stops during fall’s rainy weather.

Interior: When it comess to interior quality and design, Malibu is a radical change. Gone are the nasty plastic materials with poorly layout. The new Malibu’s interior is anything but. All the materials are superb quality, with a touch of tactical and expensive feel that is more in line with a VW than a Chevrolet. The use of interior colors is another refreshing change from blend to cheerful. Our tester comes with a tasty Cocoa/Cashmere leather, which GM could only dream of using this color scheme a couple of years ago. The leather quality is soft and supple, with a tense of firmness, for good support. Both the auto climate control and stereo are covered with high-quality switchgears, which both are ergonomically layout. If there is one drawback, however, its the needle on the instrumentation gauges are hard to read due to its style-over-function instrument color. If GM is able to adapt a cleaner background color on the instrument, this interior would be flawless.

On the backseat, both the head and legrooms are spacious. Its able to sit 2 comfortably at the back with 3 as a little more squeeze.

With 60/40 fold-down rear seats, Malibu’s cargo space is huge despite of the high liftover. The use of an uninstrusive hinges show how much attention GM has given to the new Malibu.

Conclusion: The new Malibu is, indeed, a truly wonderful car. It has proved GM is really able to produce a family sedan that is able to run with the best from Honda and Toyota, with significant price advantage. Both the Accord and Camry should start to worry because this Malibu is able to eat up their market share in the long run.

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2008 Chevrolet Malibu
=====================================
Performance: 4.5/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 4.5/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4.5/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 4.5/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 4/5
Value-for-money: 5/5

Overall rating: 4.25/5

2007 Pontiac Wave sedan

Vehicle: 2007 Pontiac Wave Uplevel sedan with 15″ wheels
Price as tested: CDN$17085

Performance: Wave is basically Pontiac’s version of Chevrolet Aveo. Both Wave and Aveo share the same underpinnings, right from the body panels to powertrain. The only differences are the grille and badging. Don’t expect any remarkable performance as Wave motiavtes by a 1.6 liter DOHC 16-valver 4-cylinder little mill with 103 hp and 148 lb/ft of torque. The engine always feels breathless and noisy at any engine speed. That’s despite the refinement and NVH already much improved over the previous car, its still not on par with class leaders in subcompact class. During acceleration, the horn and stereo are useless given how noisy it is. On the other hand, its 5-speed manual has to be some of the worse I have ever driven. The throws are long, gates poorly defined and ratios set too high. Not to mention the clutch travel is unprogressive. Take-off engagement point is a nightmare as one never able to find where to grab the clutch. To describe the clutch and shifter feel as poor simply as an understatement.

Handling: Ride quality is surprisingly supple for an econocar with basic suspension setting. That means front MacPherson struct and rear beam axle. The suspension absorbs poor pavements without transferring too much impact harshness into the cabin. However, its handling dynamics remain unremarkable. With tons of body rolls and understeer when pushing into any twisties road. The optional 15″ tires don’t make much difference than 14″ in the same circumstances. Steering feels rather numb and need constant correction with side crosswinds. Its very obvious Aveo is tuned as a comfort-oriented econocar than a capable handler.

Brakes: The front discs with rear drums provide acceptable braking feel. Its quite a refreshing change with GM’s typical mushy pedal feel and long stopping distance. However, making ABS as an option is an absolute unacceptable act even for an econocar costing 17k.

Interior: Aveo is pretty well-equipped for an econocar. It got everything from power windows, locks, mirrors and some smart ergonomics. Stereo has placed on top of the quality HVAC knobs. Although those velour seats have “rental car” feel, its actually pretty comfortable. For an econocar costing 17k, the use of materials and build quality are much better than expected.

Given its a subcompact sedan, its cargo layout is definitely a compromise. Even if it already got 40/60 split fold-down rear seats, you still can get much accessible space within. A nifty tip for those buying an econocar, while choosing between hatch and sedan. Hatchback has always been a more versatile choice.

Conclusion: Wave is a surprisingly drivable car consider it starts at 15k and a loaded one costing below 20k. This review also sums up the year of subcompact car. We started to review Yaris sedan, Caliber, Fit; up until Versa and Wave. The last economy car which will be available at similar price range, will be VW’s reintroduction of Mk4 Golf 2.0 as Citi Golf, this fall.

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2007 PONTIAC WAVE
==================================
Performance: 1/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 2/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 2.5/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 2/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 1/5
Value-for-money: 2.5/5

Overall rating: 2/5

2006 Chevrolet Corvette Z06

Vehicle: 2006 Chevrolet Corvette Z06
Price as tested: CDN$98050

Performance: Corvette Z06 has always been the American standard of a proper sports car, the same goes for the latest iteration. For 2006, Z06 continues to up-the-ante with a 7.0L LS6 pushrod V8, which has a whopping 505 horses and 637 lb/ft of torque. Powerful is an understatement for this kind of performance. There are amazing torque and hp in each rpm, which never felt its gonna slow down at any speed. Even the maximum torque of 637 lb/ft arrives at 4800rpm, you have no problem but spin tires at 2rd or 3rd gear. Going from north to 100 km/h in under 4 seconds could also well be the fastest car I have ever driven. Speaking of its 6-speed stick shift, GM still refused to get rid of the annoying skip shift feature. In order to save fuel, GM decided to let the environmentalist decided which gear to shift. This skip shift feature is very irriating. You really have to slam on the gas and clutch pedals in order to avoid into 4th gear. Once you drive hard from 1st, 2nd and 3rd; you won’t save any gas anyway. On the other hand, the clutch is progressive with proper weight for such a high performance machinery. Gear change, however, feels rubbery and throws are long for a sports car. If you “drive” it properly without going into skip shift, this 6-speed also scores with nicely set gear ratios.

Handling: Z06 has all the right ingedients for being a great sports car. Everything from a rock-solid chassis to awesome Active Handling System. With this AHS, flat cornering is just the beginning to describe how great Z06 handles. The steering is sharp, precise and responsive; its also weighty enough for sports car of this caliber. The Magentic Select Ride Control also contributes to Z06′s civilized ride as a daily driver. If you select “Tour”, Z06 can become as civilized as any sports sedan out there. However, if you select “Sport”, Z06 is truly a beast with its track-ready setting. Although the ride quality feels a bit choppy on washboard pavement with “Sport” setting, this is just a little sacifice for enjoying a sports car with such an excellent rebound damping. There are almost no body rolls and oversteer is easy to control. In a nutshell, Z06 could well be the best handling American car out there.

Brakes: Z06′s brakes are equally impressive. With 6-piston front brakes, 4-piston rear brakes and cross-drilled rotors. The stopping distance is nothing short of astounishing. Let alone its pedal feel rivals those best of Porsches, which already considered as the benchmark in the industry. They are fade-free after a couple of hard stops while ABS won’t kicked in until absoultely needed.

Interior: Inside Corvette Z06, its a typical driver’s car environment. The instrumentation gauges are clear and analog. Stereo placed above the effective auto climate control for excellent ergonomics. The sports seats are of superb back and thigh supports. Not to mention the driving position is easily found and adjusted. However, the use of interior materials are completely unacceptable for a sports car of this caliber. There are just too many hard plastic with hollowing sound. GM still doesn’t know how to produce a proper interior when they can produce a great sports car. Its just not a totally satisfying package.

Conclusion: The Corvette Z06 could well be the best American car ever made, or the best car GM has ever made. If GM is willing to give a quarter of an effort for developing Z06 into any of their products, its future would be much brighter in the near future.

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2006 CHEVROLET CORVETTE Z06
==========================================
Performance: 5/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 5/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 3/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 3/5
Value-f0r-money: 5/5

Overall rating: 4.5/5

2005 Chevrolet Cobalt LT sedan

Vehicle: 2005 Chevrolet Cobalt LT sedan with 4-speed automatic transmission
Price as tested: CDN$23545

Handling: The Cobalt is based on the same chassis as the highly regarded European Opel Astra. The level of stiffness and ridigty are impressive for a vehicle of this price range. Its stiff, solid, refined and completely free of chassis flex. The dynamic quality is as impressive as the chassis itself. When pushed through corners, it has a very inspiring and confident feedback through the chassis. The most surprising dynamic trait is Cobalt’s electric power steering has the right feel and responsiveness that are lacked in similar steering system of other GM products, despite it still has the featherweight during transition. The body rolls and understeer are under very well-controlled. While Cobalt still exhibits some safe understeer that is typical of most econocars, it got the fun and entertaining feel through twisties due to GM engineers’ smart use of damping rates and suspension stiffness. Although the rear suspensions remain beam axle, it has to be considered as one of the better beam setting I have ever driven. Thanks to the excellent use of damping, Cobalt’s ride comfort has to be rated with cars that are 2 times more expensive. It absorbs bumps and expansion joints with a touch of firmness that are usually found in European sports sedan, while combining the level of suppleness that is usually find in Lexus.

Performance: As impressive as the dynamic quality, Cobalt’s Ecotec 2.2L is another piece of fine engineering. Its not only this Ecotec feels much more refined and quiet than all the Ecotecs units I have driven before. It also has the level of responsiveness that you never been able to find in most domestic econocars. The throttle response is typical GM quick. With 155 lb/ft of torque arrives at 4 grand, it doesn’t look impressive on paper but certainly feel quick in real life. The only drawback is the roughness at the top of the rev range. The engine note sounds unrefined and noisy compares to more refined powerplants in Corolla, 3 and Civic. As usual, GM’s 4-speed automatic is quick to adapt up and downshifting. The fuzzy logic is smart and won’t let driver hunts gears.

Brakes: The front discs/rear drums with standard ABS provide pedal feel that could only dream about in its predecessor. It has the kind of firm and solid pedal feel which are very European-like. The modulation is easy while the stopping distance is short. Unfortunately, its only standard on our uplevel LT and performance SS. GM should make ABS standard across the board if they want the Cobalt to be more competitive in this segment.

Interior: The use of materials and build quality are nothing like its predecessor. Everything from the power window switch to climate control knobs have a tactical, high-quality feel. The instrumentation gauges are clear and analog, with a standard trip computer that is unusual in this class. The driving position is easily found with tilt and height adjustable seat. The seats are comfortable and very well-supported. My only drawback, however, has to do with where GM placed the remote trunk button. Instead of place it on the driver’s door or on the floor, they decided to put in it the cubbyhole!. As for the backseats, there are decent head and legrooms.

The cargo space, however, has been hammered with extremely high trunk liftover. When you need to load a heavy cargo into Cobalt’s trunk, good luck! The use of uninstrusive trunk hinges and 40/60 split fold-down rear seats can certainly make the grades as long as you can load them in.

Conclusion: The Chevy Cobalt, as well as its corporate twin, Pontiac Pursuit, have made a significant forward over their crappy predecessors in every areas. They also prove GM is able to engineered great econocars that are not sold for cheap price alone. These twins have enough merits to go against the best from Japanese and Koreans without using any factory rebates or low lease rates. Those who think GM is never able to produce excellent cars certainly never driven Cobalt.

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2005 CHEVROLET COBALT LT SEDAN
============================================
Performance: 4/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 4.5/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 4/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 2/5
Value-for-money: 4/5

Overall rating: 4/5

2004 Chevrolet Optra LS 4-door

Vehicle: 2004 Chevy Optra LS 4-door with 5-speed stick
Price as tested: CDN$17465

Performance: The Optra is powered by only 1 engine. A 2.0L 16-valver D-Tec a.k.a Durable Technology that bumps out 119 hp and 126 lb/ft of torque. Suffice to say, this is an adequate powerplant. It has enough low-end torque for signal take off and freeway merging, however, the story is completely different at high rpm. This engine is unwilling to rev and, when you really rev it, it becomes very noisy. The overall refinement is more than acceptable in its price range. The 5-speed stick has to be one of the numbest units I have ever driven. The throws are long and ungainly, gates are poorly defined. This tranny is also easily misshift because of the vague motion. On the other hand, it got decent set of ratios and a progessive clutch.

Handling: In terms of dynamics, Optra is a pleasant surprise. The steering provides pretty good road feel, both off and on-center despite its on the light side. The suspension is firm while providing supple ride quality, just a slight bit of roughness when going through expansion joints. There are acceptable amount of body rolls and understeer when pushed.

Brakes: The Optra comes with 4-wheel discs with optional ABS. The pedal feel is better than average. It got decent pedal balance during emergency stops while the effort is easily modulated. However, GM should make ABS a standard feature across the board considered its base price starts at somewhere above 16k.

Interior: The interior is very well layout. With decent set of instrumentation that are clear and analog. The switchgears have a very high-quality tactical feel. While you still can find some hard plastic in a couple of areas, the general ambience feels pretty expensive considered this car just opted out above 17k. The velour seats are comfortable, providing decent back and thigh support. The velour material also feel more expensive than the price suggested. The biggest surprise has to be the details. There are nice carpeting in some cubbyholes that stop the stuff from sliding around when pushing through corners. However, that’s not without drawback. Thanks to Optra’s Daewoo origin, it continues Korean’s “hilarious school of stereo button design philosophy”. All the buttons are tiny and hard to see. They are simply mickey mouse design. If the buttons are mickey mouse, the knobs control the volume and “tune/seek” are barely larger then mickey mouse’s nose.

The back seat has plenty of head and legroom, you also got a large center armrest.

The trunk has a low cut off for easy luggage access. It also has 60/40 split fold down rear seats. However, it stucks with instrusive trunk hinges that have always been a “no no” in my book.

Conclusion: The Optra is an econocar that has a real potential. It has a good chassis, really good dynamics, nice interior and an acceptable powerplant. Thanks to Daewoo, Chevy finally got an econocar that is competitive with its Korean and Japanese competitors. Its also the first Chevy that match the rest of the econocar “bar” set by the stiff competitors.

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2004 CHEVY OPTRA LS
==================================
Performance: 2.25/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 4.25/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 4.25/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 4.25/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 4/5
Value-for-money: 4/5

Overall rating: 3.75/5

2004 Chevy Malibu LS

Vehicle: 2004 Chevy Malibu LS
Price as tested: CDN $25905

Performance: The Malibu LS is powered by a 3 and a 1/2 liter OHV V6 that bumps out 200hp and 220 lb/ft of torque. While this pushrod engine still lacks the refinement of competitors’ SOHC and DOHC V6 engines, it provides more than enough power for daily driving. The throttle response is typical GM quick. The same goes for the 4-speed auto tranny. Its shifts are smooth and crisp although I found it hunting between 2nd, 3rd and 4th gear. GM should give Malibu a 5-speed auto which is more competitive with the rest of the segment. While Accord, Camry and 6 are all offer 5-speed auto,Chevy fell behind the rest of the pack in engine packaging. On another note, this 3.5L V6 not only fell short of refinement compares to Camry, Accord and Altima’s 6s. It also doesn’t feel as refine as GM’s venerable 3800 Series 2 pushrod engine.

Handling: Since Malibu shares the same Eplison platform as 9-3SS and Vectra, it doesn’t come as a surprise its a stiff structure. Even though Malibu shares the same chassis as 9-3, it doesn’t feel to have the same stout struture when pushed through corners. The electric power steering feels numb, featherweight, completely lack of feedback and has slow response. Every time I turned the wheel, it feels like the software for EPS has died. When I pushed the car through left and right transition tests, the steering has a dead feel on center and slightly stiff off center. This EPS feels as worse as the unit in the last Ion I drove. Another problem is this steering needs slight correction when going straight, especially on highway speed. The ride quality is acceptable although it doesn’t feel as comfy as an Accord or as firm as a 6. However, it needs more rebound damping when going over washboard pavement and expansion joints. As usual, it has plenty of understeer and body rolls when pushed.

Brakes: The front discs/rear drums provide better than average pedal feel. The ABS kicks in appropriately. The pedal modulation feels better than many GM cars preceding it.

Interior: Inside the Malibu, there are tons of hard plastic on top of hard plastic on the dashboard. The texture of the wood trim looks even more faux than many others’ faux wood trim. Although the switchgears have some pretty decent quality feel, the knobs are loose on our tester. The velour has a low-rent rental car feel. In other words, its texture has a rough and low-quality feel. The driving position feels more like seating on top instead of in a car thanks to its flat seat. On the other hand, the instrumentation gauges are clear and analog. The auto shifter slightly tilts toward the driver is a smart idea. The stereo placed above the climate control is another smart idea from GM. Back seat space is more than adequate.

Malibu’s trunk uses instrusive trunk hinges for cost measure. While its good at save money, its never been a good idea on my book. It also has a high liftover that is not very good for loading.

Conclusion: Although the Malibu has improved significantly over its predecessor, it still fell short of the competitors. Suffice to say, it barely match the bar sets by the rivals. GM needs lots of efforts before Malibu becomes a real Camcord, Altima, 6 and Passat competitors.

OVERALL VERDICT FOR 2004 CHEVY MALIBU LS
===================================
Performance: 2/5
Handling and ride/fun-to-drive: 2/5
Interior/ergonomics/user-friendliness: 2.25/5
Fit-and-finish/build quality: 2/5
Cargo/accessibility/layout: 2.25/5
Value-for-money: 2/5

Overall rating: 2/5