Model Year | 2010 | 2017 | |
Model | Ford Mustang | Chevrolet Malibu | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 2dr Coupe | 4dr Sedan | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 2,720 mm | 2,830 mm | 0 mm |
Length | 4,778 mm | 4,923 mm | 0 mm |
Width | 1,877 mm | 1,854 mm | 0 mm |
Height | 1,412 mm | 1,466 mm | 0 mm |
Curb Weight | 1,543 kg | 1,400 kg | 0 kg |
Fuel Capacity | 61 L | 49 L | 12 L |
Headroom, Row 1 | 978 mm | 993 mm | -15 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 1,405 mm | 1,486 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 1,356 mm | 1,374 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 1 | 1,077 mm | 1,067 mm | 0 mm |
Headroom, Row 2 | 881 mm | 953 mm | -72 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 1,311 mm | 1,450 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 1,189 mm | 1,356 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 2 | 757 mm | 968 mm | -211 mm |
Total Legroom | 1,834 mm (over 2 rows) | 2,035 mm (over 2 rows) | -1 mm |
Cargo Volume | 379 L | 447 L | -68 L |
2010 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2010 | 2dr Coupe 210-horsepower 4.0L V6 5-speed manual RWD |
Very confortable seats, The stock seats hold you pretty well even in a little senmi-agressing driving. Nice position in the power seats and easy to get the just right spot. see full Ford Mustang review |
2010 | 2dr Convertible 315-horsepower 4.6L V8 5-speed automatic RWD |
The adjustability of the power seat. see full Ford Mustang review |
2009 | 2dr Coupe 300-horsepower 4.6L V8 5-speed manual RWD |
Perfect seating position for both of us. Nice cush for your tush see full Ford Mustang review |
2010 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2011 | 2dr Coupe 305-horsepower 3.7L V6 6-speed manual RWD |
Felt like seating position was "on the floor". Steering wheel had only tilt adjustment, no telescope. see full Ford Mustang review |
2010 | 2dr Coupe 210-horsepower 4.0L V6 5-speed automatic RWD |
What rear seat room? see full Ford Mustang review |
2017 Chevrolet Malibu Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2016 | Chevrolet's designers styled the new Malibu's instrument panel to appear low and out of the way, such that the front seat feels especially roomy and the view forward seems more open than in most competitors, including the Kia (the instrument panel in which seems significantly higher and more imposing). In the tested car, which had every option except the panoramic sunroof, headroom was so abundant I could have worn a fedora. The Kia Optima might have as much front headroom when similarly without a sunroof. The official specs, which often don't reflect real world differences, suggest it should have even more than the Malibu. But you cannot get a highly equipped Optima without the sunroof, as it's part of a large package on the SX and standard on the SX Limited. Though the Malibu's windshield is relatively large, you won't find outward visibility among the reasons to buy one. The Chevrolet's front pillars remain on the thick side, its instrument panel is considerably deeper than the Kia's, and the view to the sides and rear also could be more open. In the Optima, the view to the sides is more open but that to the rear is not. I did find the Cherolet's front seats more form-fitting and comfortable than the Optima's. The Kia's quilted seats aren't as cushy as they appear. see full Chevrolet Malibu review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2017 Chevrolet Malibu.