2008 North American Car of the Year finalists announced -- which would you pick?
The North American Car of the Year (NACOTY) committee -- made up of a panel of 48 automotive journalists, of which I am not a member -- has announced their three finalists for the 2008 NACOTY award: the Chevrolet Malibu, the Honda Accord, and the Cadillac CTS.
Now, if I had to pick one of those three, there's no question in my mind: I'd pick the Malibu. It's best-in-class, I think, for interior design and engine refinement, particularly in four-cylinder form. 
The Honda Accord is great to drive, but the controls are too complex. I've only spent a bit of time in the new CTS -- I'm still waiting to get one for review -- and while I did like what I saw, it didn't strike me as a monumental improvement over its predecessor the way the Malibu is.
Meanwhile, I have my own award coming up -- the Best New Cars of 2008. I still have a few more cars to drive (matter of fact, I'm writing this from Phoenix, Arizona, where I've come to try out one of the contenders, Chevrolet's new turbocharged HHR SS). Once all the driving is done, I'll whittle the list down to what I feel are the ten best. Look for the winners to be announced right around January 1st. (You can check out last year's winners here.)
So, getting back to NA COTY -- the award will be announced at the Detroit auto show in January. Which car do you think should win -- Malibu, Accord, CTS, or none of the above? Click the "comments" link below and tell us which you would pick and why. -- Aaron Gold
Related:
- 2008 Chevrolet Malibu test drive
- 2008 Honda Accord preview drive
- 2008 Honda Accord EX-L Sedan test drive
Photos © Aaron Gold, Honda and General Motors
Comments
Hmmm … So I could buy the Malibu and enjoy what seems to be a very-much improved, all new vehicle (excitement factor), I could get the Accord for practicality and resale value, or I could buy the CTS because I want a GM rebadge with leather … and a plastic side vent.
I guess I’m too practical, because I’d have to go with the Accord. The interior may be a little puzzling, but I’ll have the next 10 years of trouble free driving to figure it out, and when I’m sick of it the Accord will still be worth something on a trade-in.
Well, I’ve driven the CTS and it hauls donkeys! Handles super too, but the styling leaves me wanting. The Accord is always a winner, but the new styling? Again, I’m left wanting. Now the Malibu, that excites me. I think it’s the swoop of the C-pillar, it’s just so….. I don’t know. And I’m looking forward to seeng what tweaks the General has made to the BAS hybrid system.
What I’d like to know is how the Cad , and Chev. even got into the running. There are sooo many other cars out there including the Accord that are far, far better then the GM duo. Are the judges, or who ever determines this on crack? UNBELIEVABLE….
Well, I just test drove an Accord EX and thought that it was nice…but not as nice as the Nissan Altima I tested last night. It’s 4 cylinder engine was surprisingly loud during acceleration and there was more road noise than the Altima. Plus, the handling isn’t quite as tight. So to me the Accord is already outclassed by a car that has been out for a year already. Maybe tomorrow I’ll test a Malibu. It sounds promising from all I’ve read and seen. In pictures, the CTS looks beautiful to these eyes. Wish I made more money…
The Malibu, with its uninspiring backside, less inspiring front fascia, but very cool interiors, just doesn’t stir my heart enough for my nod. I’m disgruntled by the gain in girth of the Accord, though the two door has some nice lines. So I guess the Caddy gets my less than enthusiastic kudos for this award. To me this is a pretty lame field, but the Caddy is the best balance of looks, performance and what I feel is a pretty darn good value.
I don’t fit in the CTS, (I am not sure what Caddy does, but it seems they do a worse than average job of packaging in interior space.) But I think it looks great - best looking caddy (inside and out) in a long time. We’ll see how the new super high pressure fuel system holds up - I know audi and mazda in their turbo’s have been having problems with it - but if you are shorter and get the normal 250hp v-6 it should be a really nice car. I sat in the Malibu at our recent auto show - yes it’s ok - certainly a nice american car. It just doesn’t I really like the Honda - the 4door reminds me of a slightly larger new Mercedes C class (especially in the lighter colors) and the coupe really is a great looking car. I sat in both and I fit in both if I skip the sun roof and the quality of the interior surfaces is beyond really anything else in the class - as nice as a lexus, maybe nicer. The only thing I am not thrilled about is the continuing increasing heft - past 3300 lbs in the 4dr v-6 now. I am seriously thinking about letting honda work out the first model year kinks and getting an 09 coupe next fall.
I refuse to vote since there are no SUVs in the race
C
Louie — Have you looked at the Malibu? It really is a nice car — not just nice for an American car, but nice, period.
Chuck — SUVs have their own awards — NA Truck of the Year. Contenders are the Buick Enclave, the Chevy Tahoe Hybrid, and the Mazda CX-9.
– Aaron
Unreliable cars should never be considered for “Best Car of the Year”.
Therefore the Accord wins, unless two other Japanese cars are made finalists instead of these GM cars. Leave out the German cars too, because they are notoriously unreliable. The one eception might be the Mini (non-turbo hardtop version only) , which is “average” for reliability according to Conumer Reports.
I meant “exception” and “Consumer Reports”
I think it is funny that everyone is asssuming that GM cars should not be compared to Honda because of reliabilty. Times have changed, GM is builing cars that have the highest ratings in reliabilty and a much better warranty then Honda.
A number of recent GM intros have been reliable according to “Consumer Reports”. They don’t have data on the new model yet,obviously. That is the reason why they can’t mark it “recommended”. Also, average reliablity allows a CR recommendation which is why the last CTS was recommended by them. By forcing to journalists to wait for a recommendation by “Consumer Reports”, you would make them wait a year while those results are being tallied. Only year old cars would be on the list. Finally, it bears remembering that the NA COTY awards are mostly about improvements in the design part of engineering - not a referendum on how many of these models will likely still be on the road in a decade and a half.
Maybe they could rename it the “North American Car of Last Year”. The NA COLY?
Well that is not that difficult. I need a reliable car with good trade-in value. So that leaves me to only the Honda (great drive, looks to get used too but extremely reliable and excellent residual values). But as the journalists involved usually are chauvinistic it will be either the Caddy (ugly looks, great drive though) or the Malibu (is there any part which is not plastic?) In that case I would go for the Caddy but the Honda is my undisputed no. 1!
The Caddy’s out of my price range - the Accord still has too much road noise in the cabin, even though it’s a smart buy - the Chevy needs a 5 or 6-speed auto tranny, which I understood was coming later.
So, for now, I’d go with the Ford Fusion V-6;
smooth, quiet, and just right power. And it’s priced right.
You people crack me up. The Accord is an appliance. The GM stuff is working on becoming an appliance. Most people are sheep that want an uninspiring car to do uninspired things. And the Caddy for the record is not just a rebadged product it lives on its own.
On reliability if that is your criteria do not buy any of these cars, every newly intorduced vehicle has issues every single one there is no way to do enough testing to fix all the gremlins in a first year run of a car.
Probably better than half the drivers on the road started driving after 1970 or so and still repeat what everyone has said since GM, Ford and Chrysler started trying to make small cars and failed miserably. But the fact is, their products are very comparable. For those saying the Honda should win because of resale value, how do you know it will be better than the Malibu in 10 years? The Caddy and Malibu may both be worth more than the Honda in 10 years. But if you have a secret crystal ball, surely you don’t need to express an opinion. You can state facts. As for Consumer Reports, it is a GUIDE, not a rule. I believe it was the issue this past April that had everything for the Dodge Charger rated as “above average” except the radio. But the entire car was rated below average??? I can’t put much stock in a magazine that says the car isn’t worth much if the radio isn’t the best.
For the record, I’m for the Malibu in this instance because it does show the greatest improvement.
And for those who say I’m too GM or too Ford, I wouldn’t buy a 1970s or 1980s Ford or GM. I never had anything but trouble with them. Foreign cars did much better. But I noticed a difference starting in the 90s and past 2000, I’ll look at any brand. Matter of fact, I’ve gone from Mazda/Toyota back to GM and Ford. Chrysler is probably better than they were but I don’t like any of their models. The ones that are marginal in my taste weigh more than a tank.
If you go on looks alone, I would vote for the Malibu, BUT having just got rid of one because of MANY problems, I would not vote for it. I tried out many models and purchased an Nissan Altima. To me it is the best all around car.
That’s my 2 cents worth.
Puting a turbo on an HHR is like putting a scope on a rubber band gun. This lame POS is one of the worst cars I have ever rented. I hate it when I get them. To the subject. None of the cars deserve the award. All three are now looser cars that you should not buy. The Accord could not be anymore bland this year and the other two are pure examples of the American Auto Industries goal of getting out of the car business. There are no winners here.
As a retiree who got out of college just in time to experience (And enjoy) the Muscle Cars of the 60’s. I realize that I have been spoiled by my love of HP so you have to take that into account for my comments.
I would go for the Caddy BUT I hate its looks.
The Malibu gets my nod over the Honda because …well.. The ad that asks “are you turned on when you turn on your car”? .. answers why I would not buy such a dull uninspiring car like The Honda…
Bob G.
As far as style I’d have to go with the Cadillac or Malibu. Even though I’m currently an Accord owner (2000), I can take or leave the new Accord’s styling (even though it’s an improvement on the previous generation). Since the CTS is too expensive for me, that leaves the Malibu. Before I bought one, I’d have to know that reliability was going to be at least average.
I don’t even look at cars with the oriental names. I’m from the old school and to me there are only American cars (remember the Hudsons, Studebakers, Desotos etc. when we used to look forward to the new models every fall.) Never have owned or will ever own anything but AMERICAN.
I’m with you “goldcar63″,I want to own American too! I won’t drive that Ford built in Hermosillo Mexico, that Chevy built in Korea or that F150 built in Canada…but I will buy that Honda built in Ohio, that Hyundai built in Alabama and the VW built in Pennsylvannia, all by Americans. Goldie, just because GM and Ford play Bob Seger music and show American flags in their ads, doesn’t change the fact that they’re multi-national corporations looking to make a buck. There’s nothing patriotic about buying their cars, actually the reverse is often true. If there’s a car you like, look at the window sticker. It plainly tells you where the car was assembled and what percentage of it’s content is American. There’s nothing sadder than a bamboozled patriot!
I cant believe anyone would pick the Malibu. I agree 100% with post #1. In 3 years that Malibu will be falling apart and it will take you 3 months to sell it for 50% of your purchase price. The Accord with the ‘complicated controls’ (get with the times) will just be getting warmed up, and if you did want to sell it, you would get 80% of your purchase price back.
80% of what, though? Hondas don’t depreciate badly but they do cost more to buy initially. Looking at Carsoup, it looks like the average ‘04 Accord EX is going for about 16,000. in my area. Since 24,000 was about an average new price on an ‘04 Accord, depreciation works out to 8,000. Not bad. More like 66.666…% retention, but not bad. New Malibus were often leaving lots in my neighborhood for about 17,000 (in ‘04) thanks to heavy dealer incentives. Now they are right around 9,500. for an 04 malibu). That works out to 7500. The end result is a much poorer residual value by percentage but less money lost to depreciation by 500. over a 3 year time frame. You may say (and you should) that you’d rather be driving an Accord even if it does cost you an extra 500 dollars over 3 years. But don’t fool yourselves. You can only put dollars in your pockets, not percentage points.
If you are trying to buy a car as an investment tool you are really in trouble. Lease your new CTS and enjoy driving the best Cadillac Since the ‘59 with the fins. I haven’t looked at the new Malibu yet but it looks to me as if GM has decided to get back in the game.
Hey hawaiian don, you should pay more attention to where the profits from the cars are going rather than where they are built.
Some of the folks here are so lost in the past they can’t think of today. You CANNOT compare depreciation and future value of a new car to an old car. Comparisons between an older Malibu and the 2008 Malibu will be completely different as the car is a completely different car this year. Now if the Malibu was just another remake of 2007, yes, there is some comparison.
And for those calling one car a piece of junk just because THEY don’t like it, keep in mind there are thousands who will. Personally, I don’t like the Caddy or the Honda and am marginal on the Malibu. But I won’t call any a piece of junk. My taste just falls in another direction. There is too much personal opinion and taste in here and not enough technical evaluation of the award being considered.
Nothing can beat the Nissan Altima with that gorgeous V6 for value. The Malibu sounds great and looks good. My problem in considering it is alternator, starter, air conditioner and all the other components. They don’t fail on Japanese cars. Even the brakes last for well over 120 ks. How long will they last on the Chevy? Reliability is always my hang-up when I consider a domestic.
Rob. Why should anyone care where the profits are going as well as where the car is built. I would buy what is best car for me period. As for profits, it is not benefitting you or I, but executive types with their high perks and packages when they are finally ousted. It seems that everyone is all for themselves weather the company does well or not. Look at Nardelli at Chrysler, he was paid $400 million just to leave Home Depot, a company that he screwed up so badly that you can’t even find any help in the stores. With his bye-bye package, Home Depot could have hired 3000 people making $30,000 to $40,000. So you might as well get what coming your way too.
Hey carlover, I agree that it doesn’t matter who builds the car or where they do it as long as they do it right. If we take a look at the new products being offered by Ford and GM we can see that they have finally built some vehicles that compete with the other models not only in engineering but overall quality as well.
I’d go for the Malibu. It seems to me to be the symbol of GM revival and really looks great. The Honda 4 cylinder is still too rough for my liking and I really don’t like its styling. I drove a Pontiac G6 last year, the Malibu uses the same front build up, engine and front wheel geometry: Well, it is excellent. So I vote for the car that will become an icon. The caddy? I like them, sharp, good handling. I just like the Bu better.
Rob, I was responding to the myopic statement of someone who has been conned by clever marketing creating a feeling that to buy a car other than a Big Three car would be unpatriotic. As to watching where the profits go, that’s easy. American Honda and all the other players are all on the AMERICAN stock exchanges. If you want a piece of those profits, buy that company’s stock. Yes these “foreign” cars are being sold by American corporations, dealing just like GM, right here in America.Creating American jobs, paying American taxes and dividends to American stockholders who are investing with them. But that’s an odd question. Has your boss been inquiring as to how you spend your bonus money for jobs well done? If not, why would you be concerned how a company spends its profits?
For those who are concerned about Malibu resale value, if you look up residuals, the Malibu has exactly the same residual value for 2008 as the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord.
Although many still do not understand, that GM’s success means a stronger economy for everyone in this country.
Go compare the Malibu build quality to a Camry, then decide which one is built better. My vote is for the Malibu. I love the CTS, but the NACOTY has to stand for something big, and the Accord is not a leap forward, more of an evolution, where the Malibu is a revolution for the nameplate, the brand, and General Motors.
I Can’t believe you guys! For my money, the one to beat is the new Dodge Nitro SRT. It’s aggressive looking, put together with care, and has the advantage of all-wheel drive for bad weather.
The Malibu is just Chevy trying hard to one up the foreign competition. And IT WORKED. Kudos to the design people for the crisp clean lines and the techies for implementing what was a VERY Foreign notion. Build good cars and people will buy domestic.
Malibu by a mile.
A true leap forward.
Leroy — Now that the Malibu has been built — and built well — we’ll see if Americans really will buy domestic…
I stepped up to the plate. Picked up a 2008 Malibu LTZ on 12-26-07. It has a better interior and more responsive ride then the Accord I test drove.