2008 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2009 Nissan Rogue
To start off, 2009 Nissan Rogue is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Chevrolet Malibu. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Chevrolet Malibu would be higher. At 2,488 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Nissan Rogue is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 170 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar.
Because 2009 Nissan Rogue is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2008 Chevrolet Malibu. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Nissan Rogue 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, 2009 Nissan Rogue (237 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 20 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Chevrolet Malibu. (217 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2009 Nissan Rogue will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Chevrolet Malibu.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 Chevrolet Malibu | 2009 Nissan Rogue | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Nissan |
| Model | Malibu | Rogue |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Crossover |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2401 cc | 2488 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 170 HP | 170 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 217 Nm | 237 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4650 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1670 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.8 L/100km | 9.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.4 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 60 L |
