2006 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2012 Ford Taurus
To start off, 2012 Ford Taurus is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Chevrolet Malibu. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Chevrolet Malibu would be higher. At 3,900 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet Malibu is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford Taurus (365 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 125 more horse power than 2006 Chevrolet Malibu. (240 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford Taurus should accelerate faster than 2006 Chevrolet Malibu.
Because 2012 Ford Taurus is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Chevrolet Malibu. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Ford Taurus will offer significantly more control. 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 Ford Taurus (474 Nm @ 1500 RPM) has 147 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Chevrolet Malibu. (327 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2012 Ford Taurus will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Chevrolet Malibu.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Chevrolet Malibu | 2012 Ford Taurus | |
Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
Model | Malibu | Taurus |
Year Released | 2006 | 2012 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3900 cc | 3500 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 240 HP | 365 HP |
Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 327 Nm | 474 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 1500 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | AWD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4790 mm | 5154 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1935 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1542 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2868 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 9.1 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 72 L |