These older, mid-2000's Chevrolet Malibu's with the 3500 (3.5 L) V6 engine, which produces about 201 horsepower and the four-speed automatic transmission are decent looking vehicles to purchase.
I’d rather have the impala, still looks modern, and you can get the 3.9 or 3.6 with the 4 and 6 speed, the cool thing about this gen Malibu was the wagon and SS package they had for it, you could even get a Malibu SS wagon
@@calvin4319 Agreed, in the 2000s my father traded in his 2005 Malibu 3.5 to a 2009 Impala LT and it was a much better car (even though the Malibu was a bit faster haha).
No theyre not lol. Inefficent and slow, very boring to drive, poor fit and finish. Only incentive is that you can get them far cheaper than comparable toyota/honda used.
These older, mid-2000's Chevrolet Malibu's with the 3500 (3.5 L) V6 engine, which produces about 201 horsepower and the four-speed automatic transmission are decent looking vehicles to purchase.
I’d rather have the impala, still looks modern, and you can get the 3.9 or 3.6 with the 4 and 6 speed, the cool thing about this gen Malibu was the wagon and SS package they had for it, you could even get a Malibu SS wagon
@@calvin4319 Agreed, in the 2000s my father traded in his 2005 Malibu 3.5 to a 2009 Impala LT and it was a much better car (even though the Malibu was a bit faster haha).
No theyre not lol. Inefficent and slow, very boring to drive, poor fit and finish. Only incentive is that you can get them far cheaper than comparable toyota/honda used.
@@2007NissanAltima imagine slurping the dick of a massive international corporation
just... why?
This engine is also a sleeper too and there cheap my uncle bought a 2004 Malibu max with the v6 for $2000 88k miles
Recession era gm cars look hideous
Man how they absolutely ruined these cars over the decades... 😞
The name Malibu should have never been used for this thing..