Malibu vs Taurus: rental face-off

JohnRW1621 wrote: It was often common that the rental companies would offer a "free upgrade." Back in my hey-day of renting, Hertz loaded up on Escapes because SUV's were what people wanted. Most were 6 cyl. Then, gas hit $4. They were charging a premium for Corollas with 30+ mpg and if you rented the cheapest car you got a 19 mpg Escape. .

I remember this issue with all rental agencies. I rented a subcompact/compact on multiple occasions only to have them give me a flavor of SUV. Ugh....

Another tip is to check your insurance before you rent. My AMEX and USAA regular car insurance give me all the coverage I need. Dump the overpriced daily coverage...

Also---- be nice and polite

Rental clerks deal with pissed off people all day. A little kindness and a joke about "bumping me up" will occasionally work. This is especially true if they have a bunch of higher-end cars sitting around.

Also, when gas prices spike---no one wants the SUVs. I've been offered to bump to an SUV often, but have never taken it.

Thanks everyone!

I will go with the Taurus then. I know it might not be a Taurus when I get there, but I've often been told to reserve the smallest car that is acceptable to you. They always give you something bigger when they don't have what you reserved.

I used to rent all the time on business, but that was 10 years ago...I'm feeling out of touch.

I had the um, opportunity to drive a 2013 Chevy Malibu (an LT2 non the less!) and I can say that it was absolutely terrible. First, visibility was appalling, it had very small windows, a high sill, a high cowl and tiny mirrors; this did not make for a nice drive through Atlanta traffic. Second, there was absolutely no steering feel whatsoever; none. With the electric power steering, you could (and I did, to test it) drive of the rumble strips and not feel anything through the steering. Third, the transmission was always hunting gears and bogged the engine around town but then revved way to high when you encountered an incline. There were a number of slight inclines on the highway where the car downshifted to fourth and reved up to 3500rpm or so at 70mph. Fourth, the fuel mileage was actually quite terrible for what it was. With the tires inflated properly (I had to add air), the AC off, the DRLs off and the transmission manually locked into 6th. gear, I reset the fuel mileage and only got 27.5mpg at 70mph and I didn't touch the brakes once.

Also, try "rentareck". They are much cheaper than any other rental company I have seen. Although they got their start renting jalopies (hence the "wreck") they are actually quite decent now; until I get done with them.

As to the Impala, remember that they have 300hp now.

Sky_Render wrote: Malibus are tiny.

Only in America.

Mmadness wrote: First, visibility was appalling, it had very small windows, a high sill, a high cowl and tiny mirrors

This pretty much describes every car sold in America today.

I had a Malibu rental for a week and I was quite impressed. It had a 2.4 and enough jam to move that car around pretty good and get excellent fuel economy in the process.

Sky_Render wrote: Or, if it's an awesome rental car agency, a Crown Vic.

Yeah because Vic backseats are cavernous. Spoiler alert: they're not.

Osterkraut wrote:

Sky_Render wrote: Or, if it's an awesome rental car agency, a Crown Vic.

Yeah because Vic backseats are cavernous. Spoiler alert: they're not.

Most rental companies will have some town cars around but no one really takes them. Gas mileage is crap and the "premium" class has better options now like Caddy's and occasional bmw or Lexus.

I'll definitely be watching this thread!

We're tentatively planning a road trip this fall/winter. I've been crunching numbers and comparing fuel economy vs seating and storage space trying to find something that will return enough mpg to make it cost effective to rent (as opposed to driving the Burban), yet offer enough space for a family of four to travel a total of 2,500 miles sans roof rack and trailer.

So far the Focus looks pretty good, but I'm not sure it will have the needed storage space.

Hints for cheap rentals

1 Priceline

2 aaa and costco have rental discounts

1. Search around for rental discount codes from corporations. I know my corp has a discount code with Avis that is available for personal use. I've never had an agent check my employment to verify I am ok to use that code.

about a year or so ago we upgraded to a crow vic... an extra $30 or something for the week... well worth it... HUGE car, HUGE trunk, super comfy interstate mobile roomy, fit 6 people (4 adults 2 kids) for a few runs around town

Osterkraut wrote:

Sky_Render wrote: Or, if it's an awesome rental car agency, a Crown Vic.

Yeah because Vic backseats are cavernous. Spoiler alert: they're not.

Yeah. CrownVics are actually pretty tiny out back but I think they've been out of comission for a while now. However, it should be noted that the CrownVic's brother, the TownCar won Car and Driver's Rental Car Olympics almost entirely because it went from 0-60 in 9.2 seconds; in reverse.

Don't forget your SCCA membership can get you a discount at certain rental car agencies. However, I've found that rentareck is still by far the cheapest.

Osterkraut wrote:

Sky_Render wrote: Or, if it's an awesome rental car agency, a Crown Vic.

Yeah because Vic backseats are cavernous. Spoiler alert: they're not.

try sitting in one when you aren't cuffed once- they gain a lot of room when they take out the aluminum/lexan divider and your hands aren't cuffed behind your back..

I think this should be a GRM faceoff. They should rent one of each and put them through their paces head to head

novaderrik wrote:

Osterkraut wrote:

Sky_Render wrote: Or, if it's an awesome rental car agency, a Crown Vic.

Yeah because Vic backseats are cavernous. Spoiler alert: they're not.

try sitting in one when you aren't cuffed once- they gain a lot of room when they take out the aluminum/lexan divider and your hands aren't cuffed behind your back..

My parents owned a civilian one. If my tall dad sat in the front, reasonably tall me was chewing on my knees in the back. That's not a lot of room. The Vic has huge front passenger room and a huge truck... the space had to come from somewhere, and they chose the back seat as the sacrifice. Not to say that there isn't room back there, but the Vic, which is a full foot and a half longer than the Taurus, has only an inch more rear leg room. When coupled with it's fair gas mileage, it's no rental recommendation.

Osterkraut wrote:

novaderrik wrote:

Osterkraut wrote:

Sky_Render wrote: Or, if it's an awesome rental car agency, a Crown Vic.

Yeah because Vic backseats are cavernous. Spoiler alert: they're not.

try sitting in one when you aren't cuffed once- they gain a lot of room when they take out the aluminum/lexan divider and your hands aren't cuffed behind your back..

My parents owned a civilian one. If my tall dad sat in the front, reasonably tall me was chewing on my knees in the back. That's not a lot of room. The Vic has huge front passenger room and a huge truck... the space had to come from somewhere, and they chose the back seat as the sacrifice. Not to say that there isn't room back there, but the Vic, which is a full foot and a half longer than the Taurus, has only an inch more rear leg room. When coupled with it's fair gas mileage, it's no rental recommendation.

so you're saying... more room up front, more room in the back and more room in the trunk...

mom and dad rented one in the mid 90's to get all 5 of us and our luggage across FL to get to our truck at the docks (we'd PCS'd from Panama and shipped our suburban ahead of us)... while not fun to have 3 kids ranging from 12-16 in the back seat (me being over 6 foot at the time) I can't complain...

the MPG isn't great but if you keep it the cruise control on at a reasonable speed it's not bad... i'd get another one in a heart beat if I needed the space... the room to price value is great... if they still have them.

donalson wrote:

Osterkraut wrote:

novaderrik wrote:

Osterkraut wrote:

Sky_Render wrote: Or, if it's an awesome rental car agency, a Crown Vic.

Yeah because Vic backseats are cavernous. Spoiler alert: they're not.

try sitting in one when you aren't cuffed once- they gain a lot of room when they take out the aluminum/lexan divider and your hands aren't cuffed behind your back..

My parents owned a civilian one. If my tall dad sat in the front, reasonably tall me was chewing on my knees in the back. That's not a lot of room. The Vic has huge front passenger room and a huge truck... the space had to come from somewhere, and they chose the back seat as the sacrifice. Not to say that there isn't room back there, but the Vic, which is a full foot and a half longer than the Taurus, has only an inch more rear leg room. When coupled with it's fair gas mileage, it's no rental recommendation.

so you're saying... more room up front, more room in the back and more room in the trunk... mom and dad rented one in the mid 90's to get all 5 of us and our luggage across FL to get to our truck at the docks (we'd PCS'd from Panama and shipped our suburban ahead of us)... while not fun to have 3 kids ranging from 12-16 in the back seat (me being over 6 foot at the time) I can't complain... the MPG isn't great but if you keep it the cruise control on at a reasonable speed it's not bad... i'd get another one in a heart beat if I needed the space... the room to price value is great... if they still have them.

For the size and weight of the Crown Vic, the back seat is quite small. I also was forced to use the "leg room" stats from Edmunds.com, and while on paper apparently the Vic has an inch on the Taurus, at least in my personal opinion the rear leg room is downright horrible, I'd place it only slightly better than the back of a Subaru Impreza. I hated any time spent back there, mom's quadcab Dodge was more comfortable.

The MPG isn't impressive even with cruise control considering the car's complete lack of thrust (rated at 16 city, 24 highway, 19 combined? A Chevy Astro does 16 combined! [fun fact: the Vic and the Astro weigh about the same!]). As I've said before the Vic has one real purpose: transportation where price is the only driving factor. Which wouldn't happen with a rental.