The 2004 Chevrolet Malibu Is The Worst Of 2000s GM Distilled Into One Car: GM Hit Or Miss

Misjudging a segment can have funny results. Sometimes, the result is a complete overachiever with disappointing sales like the Volkswagen Phaeton. Sometimes, the result is something with swimming pools full of character even if it isn’t as dialed-in as its competitors, like the Jaguar F-Type. Sometimes, a car’s just ahead of its time and history vindicates it, like the original Acura NSX. Oh, and sometimes you end up with the 2004 Chevrolet Malibu. I bet you wish that you didn’t have to think of this car today. Welcome back to GM Hit Or Miss, where we peel back the layers of GM’s pre-bankruptcy product planning in an attempt to understand the ultimate question: Why?

In 2003, the midsize sedan market was in the middle of an arms race. Nissan was cranking out as many 245-horsepower Altimas as it possibly could, Mazda was showing off gadgetry and handling prowess, the Honda Accord was objectively better than ever before, and the Volkswagen Passat was a full-fat German family sedan with four-, six-, or eight-cylinder power. For the first time since the revolutionary 1992 Toyota Camry, the most popular passenger car segment in America was in the midst of a shakeup, and any determined manufacturer could make huge strides.

It just so happens that in 2003, the Chevrolet Malibu was ready to be replaced. Based on the N-body platform, it was perfectly in-tune with the needs of the late 1990s, but the new millennium demanded more, and GM recognized this yearning. So, the automotive giant hatched a cunning plan: What would happen if they were to take a Vectra and make it worse?

Yes, the 2004 Chevrolet Malibu was the first U.S. marque-branded vehicle on GM’s Epsilon platform, but certainly far from the only car on it. The sixth-generation Malibu has a litany of global relatives including the Opel and Vauxhall Vectra, the Saab 9-3, the Cadillac BLS, the Pontiac G6, the Saturn Aura, and surprisingly enough, the Fiat Chroma. That’s quite impressive when you consider that all of those vehicles are more appealing than the Malibu, a true feat of disgusting mediocrity made possible by pre-bankruptcy GM’s dysfunction.

The Vauxhall Vectra is a deeply anonymous car, but the Malibu was downright ugly at launch. From the plastichrome schnoz to weird sweeping character lines over the arches that go absolutely nowhere, the sixth-generation Malibu is awkward at every angle. Sure, the car it replaced was almost featureless aside from peanut-shaped headlamps, but I’ll take boring over unsightly any day of the week. However, the Malibu’s exterior styling is nothing compared to its cabin.

This mass of hard, unpleasant, woefully chintzy brain matter grey plastic was what GM decided mid-aughts customers deserved. Look at it: The panel gaps visible from the International Space Station, the pitiful askewness of everything on the door cards, the central air vents looking like a cheap humidifier. Sure, the seats were comfy, but how much does that help when every other interior component is an advertisement for better life choices? Adding insult to injury, the 2004 Malibu has a less-attractive, cheaper-feeling interior than the car it replaced. Seriously, just look at the old fifth-generation N-body Malibu’s cabin.

Admittedly, that’s not a phenomenal cabin, but the pillar-mounted air vents are neat, and there’s a nice enough mix of colors, vinyl-clad panels, and acceptable fake wood here that it doesn’t seem terrible. I wouldn’t balk if a fifth-generation Chevrolet Malibu was my rental car in 2002. Plus, it also had reasonably comfy seats.

With the horsepower war in the midsize segment raging on, you might expect Chevrolet to have put a particularly strong optional engine in the 2004 Malibu. Although stronger than the standard 145-horsepower 2.2-liter four-cylinder engine, the day-one upgrade was a 3.5-liter 60-degree pushrod V6 making 200 horsepower and 220 lb.-ft. of torque. Good going, GM. You really showed the competition how it’s done. Oh, and I hope you like four-speed automatic gearboxes because that’s all you’re getting.

Alright, so the powertrain lineup was a disappointment ranked somewhere between dropping your ice cream and the finale of “Game of Thrones,” but that Epsilon platform is a promising set of bones. After all, the Saab 9-3 drives pretty well and newer Epsilon-platform cars are alright, so maybe the 2004 Chevrolet Malibu redeemed itself on the open road? Well, not quite. Upon the Malibu’s introduction, Car And Driver noted some ride quality concerns.

Although the rigidity is supposedly improved, we didn’t get the sense that our Malibu was as tight and solid as a 9-3, or an Accord, for that matter. After any significant bump, we felt aftershocks reverberating through the car, resulting in a “gut jiggle” sensation from the driver’s seat. Maybe this isn’t the structure flexing but rather some suspension component whose frequency is poorly matched to the body’s and is therefore exciting the structure like a plucked guitar string.

Guess what? Every clapped-out Malibu today rides exactly the same as it did when new. Who’d have thought? Oh, and don’t think a jiggly ride resulted in good handling because it didn’t. The electric power steering is vague, and body roll is sufficient enough to classify the Malibu as a single-use ocean-going vessel.

So far, it seems like the sixth-generation Chevrolet Malibu was a way for company bosses to punish middle management, rental car companies to punish customers, and brand loyalists to punish themselves, mostly because it was. However, not all sixth-generation Malibus were created equally. Sometimes, you just need to take it to the Maxx. You didn’t think I forgot about the Malibu Maxx, did you?

This was essentially the last mass-market midsized station wagon from a mainstream American automaker, although there’s some debate over that wagon moniker due to the weird stepped hatch. Still, this was a practical family car with 22.5 cu.-ft. of trunk space and some neat available features.

On the more practical side of things, the rear seat could fold, recline, and slide, the front passenger seat could fold flat, and the cargo cover could be used as a table. As far as more lavish amenities go, the rear seat occupants were treated to their own sunroof, and you could even get rear seat entertainment in the Malibu Maxx. All in all, it was an exceedingly practical family car that was unfortunate enough to inherit questionable styling, a low-rent dashboard, and a subpar driving experience from the regular Malibu sedan.

Oh, and then there was the Malibu SS, because this was the era of Maximum Bob and GM Performance, so everything needed a sporty version. Granted, the Malibu SS was more flash than substance as its 240-horsepower pushrod V6 was outgunned by segment leaders, and its four-speed automatic out-geared. Car And Driver managed a zero-to-60 mph run in 6.9 seconds, which doesn’t look brilliant next to, say, the sub-six-second dash afforded by Nissan’s medium-spicy Altima 3.5 SE. Still, at least it got hydraulic power steering over the regular model’s electrically-assisted rack.

Handling and ride? There’s still some learning to do. For such a modern suspension, the Maxx SS’s supplies a leaden ride in the style of Big Three performance packages of yore. Over bumps the floor shivers with impact clunks and resonant vibrations. There’s always an acute sense of the metal in motion down below.

Oh dear, that’s not good. On the plus side, the handling of the SS was much improved over the standard model. On the minus side, fit-and-finish was still atrocious. From one-grit mold lines unsuitable on even the cheapest patio furniture to an inherent feeling of flimsiness, the cabin of the Malibu SS was a pretty terrible place to be. Perhaps Car And Driver summed it up best when it said, “There’s this sense that if you turned the car over and shook it vigorously the entire interior might fall out.”

Coinciding with the 2006 launch of the Malibu SS, the standard car got a facelift that deleted the chrome nose and made Chevy’s midsizer substantially less offensive to look at from the front. The shit character lines down the profile remained, but at least this revised rental special wouldn’t make you want to do a technicolor yawn if you saw one coming up in your rearview mirror. After the 2007 model year, the sixth-generation Malibu was semi-retired for the 2008 model year as the Malibu Classic before mercifully being taken behind the woodshed and put out of its misery.

Car And Driver reported that Bob Lutz confidently stated “The importance of this car is the demonstration that General Motors will do world-class automobiles.” Sorry Bob, this ain’t it. The sixth-generation Chevrolet Malibu is a deeply flawed car, an indisputable miss, and perhaps the most prominent symbol of GM’s pre-bankruptcy race to the bottom. I don’t hate many vehicles, but I despise what the standard four-door sixth-generation Malibu stands for. It was a miss of colossal proportions, as evidenced by the vastly-improved seventh-generation Malibu that won hearts across America. Pre-bankruptcy GM was capable of so much better, so long as it actually tried. Cheap shit is still both cheap and shit. With a high enough price tag and stiff enough competition, everyone will eventually get fed up and splash more cash on something better.

(Photo credits: Chevrolet, Honda, Mazda, Nissan, Volkswagen)

Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.

• The Boosted, Rapid Chevrolet Cobalt SS Deserves Your Respect: GM Hit Or Miss

• The Original Cadillac SRX Was A Marvelous Sports Sedan-Based Nightmare: GM Hit Or Miss

• The Final Chevrolet Monte Carlo Looked Faster Than It Was: GM Hit Or Miss

• The Pontiac Vibe Was Very Nearly Flawless: GM Hit Or Miss

• The Toyota Cavalier Was Doomed From The Start: GM Hit Or Miss

Got a hot tip? Send it to us here. Or check out the stories on our homepage.