2011 Mercury Mariner vs. 2012 Chevrolet Malibu
To start off, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2011 Mercury Mariner. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2011 Mercury Mariner would be higher. At 2,500 cc (4 cylinders), 2011 Mercury Mariner is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Mercury Mariner (171 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 2 more horse power than 2012 Chevrolet Malibu. (169 HP @ 6400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2011 Mercury Mariner should accelerate faster than 2012 Chevrolet Malibu.
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, 2011 Mercury Mariner (232 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 15 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Chevrolet Malibu. (217 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2011 Mercury Mariner will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Chevrolet Malibu.
Compare all specifications:
2011 Mercury Mariner | 2012 Chevrolet Malibu | |
Make | Mercury | Chevrolet |
Model | Mariner | Malibu |
Year Released | 2011 | 2012 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2500 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 171 HP | 169 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6400 RPM |
Torque | 232 Nm | 217 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4458 mm | 4872 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1806 mm | 1786 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1778 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2619 mm | 2852 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 8.4 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 62 L | 61 L |