2006 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2012 Honda Fit
To start off, 2012 Honda Fit 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, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu (240 HP @ 5800 RPM) has 123 more horse power than 2012 Honda Fit. (117 HP @ 6600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu should accelerate faster than 2012 Honda Fit.
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, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu (327 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 183 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Honda Fit. (144 Nm @ 4800 RPM). This means 2006 Chevrolet Malibu will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Honda Fit.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Chevrolet Malibu | 2012 Honda Fit | |
Make | Chevrolet | Honda |
Model | Malibu | Fit |
Year Released | 2006 | 2012 |
Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3900 cc | 1500 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 240 HP | 117 HP |
Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 6600 RPM |
Torque | 327 Nm | 144 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 5-speed automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4790 mm | 4105 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1694 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1524 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2499 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.1 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 40 L |