Model Year | 2016 | 2012 | |
Model | Ford Mustang | Chevrolet Malibu | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 2dr Coupe | 4dr Sedan | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 107.1 in | 112.3 in | -5.2 in |
Length | 188.3 in | 191.8 in | -3.5 in |
Width | 75.4 in | 70.3 in | 5.1 in |
Height | 54.4 in | 57.1 in | -2.7 in |
Curb Weight | 3526 lb. | 3415 lb. | 111 lb. |
Fuel Capacity | 16.0 gal. | 16.0 gal. | 0 gal. |
Headroom, Row 1 | 37.6 in | 39.4 in | -1.8 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 56.3 in | 55.9 in | 0.4 in |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 54.9 in | 53.0 in | 1.9 in |
Legroom, Row 1 | 42.0 in | 42.2 in | -0.2 in |
Headroom, Row 2 | 34.8 in | 37.2 in | -2.4 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 52.2 in | 53.9 in | -1.7 in |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 47.4 in | 52.1 in | -4.7 in |
Legroom, Row 2 | 30.6 in | 37.6 in | -7 in |
Total Legroom | 72.6 in (over 2 rows) | 79.8 in (over 2 rows) | -7.2 in |
Cargo Volume | 13.5 ft3 | 15.1 ft3 | -1.6 ft3 |
2016 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
This "why not" should not come as a surprise. Neither the Mustang nor the Audi has much rear legroom. Plus in the Mustang my head was pressed against the rear window, and I'm only 5-9. The Mustang coupe's rear seat is viable only for people up to 5-6 or so in height. The Audi has a little more rear headroom. As does the Mustang convertible. If you will be putting people into the rear seat of the Mustang, you should turn off the "easy entry" feature. When it's activated, this feature automatically motors the seat backward when the engine is shut off, reducing rear legroom to near zero. I was nearly trapped when I turned the engine off while sitting in the back seat to take photos. If you want a V8-powered coupe with a roomy rear seat, get a Dodge Challenger. Both the Mustang and the RS 5 do a better job of transporting luggage than rear seat passengers. Both trunks have about as much capacity as that of the average compact sedan. see full Ford Mustang review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 Ford Mustang.
2012 Chevrolet Malibu Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
2012 | On paper, the Malibu's rear seat is only a little tighter than those in the 2008-2012 sedan and in competing cars. In person, rear knee room would only be marginally competitive in the compact sedan segment. Sitting behind my 5-9 self, my shins graze the front seatbacks. GM is rushing some revised seats to market. But if past attempts to fix a cramped rear seat are any indication, this won't make a substantial difference. The rear seat in the Ford Fusion is roomier, if also short of the segment's quasi-limos. see full Chevrolet Malibu review |
2012 Chevrolet Malibu Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2011 | 4dr Sedan 169-horsepower 2.4L I4 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
Good legroom. Hip room is alittle tight in this year's Malibu. see full Chevrolet Malibu review |
2012 Chevrolet Malibu Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2013 | 4dr Sedan 182-horsepower 2.4L I4 Hybrid 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
This is tight if front seats are postioned at or close to the back of their range; shorter wheelbase in this model compared to prior version. Rear seat access is excellent (i.e, for infant car seats, small item transport). see full Chevrolet Malibu review |
2012 | 4dr Sedan 169-horsepower 2.4L I4 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
I'm 6'4" tall and 60 years old. I have a tough time getting in and out due to the low roof. see full Chevrolet Malibu review |
2011 | 4dr Sedan 169-horsepower 2.4L I4 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
drivers seat is hard on my back, no matter how much I adjust...seems to be missing some foam on left side bolster...taking into dealer for possible replacement of seat cushion soon see full Chevrolet Malibu review |