2005 Kia Optima vs. 2012 Chevrolet Malibu
To start off, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Kia Optima. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Kia Optima would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Chevrolet Malibu is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu (252 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 114 more horse power than 2005 Kia Optima. (138 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu should accelerate faster than 2005 Kia Optima.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu (340 Nm) has 141 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Kia Optima. (199 Nm). This means 2012 Chevrolet Malibu will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Kia Optima.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Kia Optima | 2012 Chevrolet Malibu | |
Make | Kia | Chevrolet |
Model | Optima | Malibu |
Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2360 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 138 HP | 252 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6300 RPM |
Torque | 199 Nm | 340 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4730 mm | 4872 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1786 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2852 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 7.8 L/100km | 9.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 61 L |