Road and Track preference for sports cars, import sedans and domestic compacts was all-too obvious, as its founder and publisher John Bond clearly had no truck with large domestic cars. But occasionally a mid-size domestic was allowed into the hallowed ground, including this 1968 Chevelle Malibu coupe. But it was not the SS396 all the other buff books were testing; rather a 327-powered one, backed by the venerable two-speed Powerglide. The result was perhaps surprisingly positive.
The only reason this car was tested is because R&T’s engineering editor went to Palm Springs in it one day with his counterpart from Car Life, R&T’s sister publication. It was the sort of car they tested, not R&T, but spending some time behind the wheel on back country CA Hwy 74, he was rather impressed by its low noise, comfortable ride, good performance and handling. He decided R&T readers should know about this car. “The rest of us (at R&T) were skeptical, but once we’d tried it, we couldn’t help being impressed…it’s not bad at all”. Thus were the R&T editors lured out of their import sports car lair.
The Malibu was well-optioned for the job: 275 hp 327 V8 (5.4 L), Powerglide, front disc brakes, power steering, power brakes, wide wheels and tires, air conditioning, and the $4.75 “handling package”. The total amounted to a pretty heft $4k, but that was the reality of American cars back then: if you wanted a nicely-equipped one, you had to load it up with lots of none-too cheap options.
A key issue is Chevrolet’s continued use of a two-speed automatic: “But when you drive it, you understand how they can get away with it—the 327 is that flexible, quiet and satisfactory.” There you have it; the Chevy small block’s exceptional qualities largely compensated for that missing gear. Low gear was good up to 65 mph; plenty fast for most passing maneuvers, and good for a brisk 9.3 second 0-60 time. It was notably quicker than two of the three 1973 “Euro” GM intermediates whose reviews we posted here recently: The Cutlass Salon (with 5.7 L V8 and three speed automatic) took 11.1 seconds, the 1973 Grand Am with a 400 CID V8 (and three speed automatic) took 10.3 seconds; only the Monte Carlo (with a big 454 V8 and three speed automatic) was all of 0.7 seconds quicker.
Of course the Malibu weighed between 700 and 800 lbs less than those ’73, but then that’s…progress, right?
The Malibu’s ride and handling was “Most outstanding”, thanks to the Chevelle’s suspension design augmented by wide 6″ wheels, F70-14 bias-ply belted “wide oval” tires, and the previously mentioned “handling package”, presumably firmer springs and shocks. The result was “ride and handling about equal to that of an Alfa-Romeo sedan we tested recently” (Giulia Super). The well-controlled rear axle “stayed where it was supposed to and never hopped or juddered on hard starts”. R&T found it “possible to toss it around corners, twitching the front wheels as needed to catch the slide very much as it’s done in the Alfa”.
Somewhat surprisingly and unusual for American cars, the Malibus handling didn’t deteriorate completely on poor road surfaces. And there was a noted lack of rattles on those rough roads. A genuine American “import”. Well, until it came time to stop; the brakes got only a “fair” rating, for the same reason so many other American cars did poorly: rear wheel lockup leading to loss of control, and all due to the lack of of proper front/rear proportioning, most effectively taken care of by a load-sensing proportioning valve as used on many European cars. Improving brakes required more than just slapping discs on the front wheels.
The Malibu’s styling, all new for 1968, came in for some compliments, unlike its instruments, which were of course lacking: “reminiscent of a plastic toy”. And the Malibu’s 11-13 mpg thirst was of course nothing to crow about.
The final words, to R&T’s all-too often sneering readers: ‘Try one before you sneer”.
Shame about the brakes and the two speed trans but the rest seems quite attractive, though $3.00 per litre fuel means Id very rarely drive it.
The magic of exceeding low expectations. Also of having nothing fundamentally awful about the car, even if improvements could have been made, here and there. This is about as good as it ever got in middlebrow American car simplicity, solidity, and overall competence.
If one were shopping for an old-school daily driver, that will survive like a cockroach when all the electronics and whiz-bang stuff in the newer cars goes down, and can be repaired with trips to Autozone and a few basic tools, it doesn’t get any better than this. The auto supply stores still carry almost all of the mechanical parts for these. If you want to quietly “upgrade” the thing, a ‘70s Z-28 steering box, Impala front uprights and disc brakes, and optional SS sway bars and springs are not hard to source.
The run of Chevelles through 1972, going back to the first ones in 1964, are the best American car of that era, if one wants to simply own it, keep it, maintain it, and drive it around today. The combination of specs you see in this article is a great one, if one isn’t going all 396 Super Sport with the thing.
At age nine, I remember looking at the new ’68 Chevelles on our small-town dealer’s introduction night, with my Dad and grandfather. Right away I said, “Dad, that car’s smaller than our ’67 Chevelle”, and it was. I prefer the size of the ’67 sport coupes. The rear seat space in the ’68-72 (and also later) was ridiculous IMHO, but what do I know. People sure like the ’68-72 midsize coupes.
The Malibu does look nice, with the five-slot Rally Wheels. R&T complains about the bench seat, but I remember them looking pretty nice–padded pleating and buttons on the seat backs.
For 1968, GM put the A-body two-doors on a shorter wheelbase than the four-doors and wagons. Didn’t help rear-seat space, but customers apparently didn’t mind, judging by the sales figures.
The A body two-doors were “sportier” and more popular with buyers of the time. One reason the ’71 Mustang grew, to match these.
Want a big back seat? Get a 4 door, wagon, van, or full size car. Did a lot for sales of GM’s mid size coupes all the way to 1988.
Although, my Dad squeezed a family of 6 in his ’70 Monte Carlo a few times, how much he liked to drive it over our wagon 😉
The two-door versions of the 1968-72 A-bodies were everywhere when I was growing up – particularly the Chevrolet and Oldsmobile versions.
The ‘78-88 GM midsize coupes were much-more inhabitable in the back seat IMHO.
That’s because they had the same 108″ wheelbase as the sedans–and most had a severe notchback.
That one I remember. A photocopy from the Queensland State Library was in my files for years.
Interesting, somewhat mystery in the ’68 Malibu line–I have a letter from Chevrolet to all dealers, dated March 25, 1968, stating that a labor dispute was causing disruption of Chevy II and Chevelle interior trims and that as of that date, in the Malibu, only black vinyl interior was available. To help offer something else, a new Concours trim option was available for the Sport Coupe. This was either the Skylark Custom or Cutlass Supreme all-vinyl notchback interior, also only available in black. The Concours got deluxe door panel trim inside, some woodgrain on the dash, and wheel opening moldings and ‘Concours’ nameplates outside. I have only seen one ’68 Concours coupe in the flesh in my nearly-64 years.
I drove a ’68 Concours from 1978-1981. It had a 307 ci engine and automatic transmission. Great-running, nice-looking Chevelle. I never really knew what the “Concours” designation meant until now!
I drove a ’68 Concours from 1979-81. It had a 307 and automatic transmission. Good-running, great-looking Chevelle.
I learned to drive in a ’68 Malibu 4-door. With the 250 six, Powerglide, drum brakes, and the stock 7.35×14 tires the driving experience was not the greatest. Nice interior though.
Links to Vehicle Information Kit and then one for the brochures for the ’68 Chevelle.
https://www.gmheritagecenter.com/docs/gm-heritage-archive/vehicle-information-kits/Chevelle/1968-Chevrolet-Chevelle.pdf
https://www.gmheritagecenter.com/gm-heritage-archive/Chevelle/1968_Chevrolet_Chevelle.html
Yes, the 68 4 doors added 2 inches (to 116) and the coupes dropped 2 inches (to 112) from 1967’s 114 inch WB.
I recall reading in period magazines that GM claimed that the 114 inch span set up unpleasant vibration or resonance with standard highway expansion cracks and that going shorter and longer eliminated that. I have since come to suspect that such a statement was an attempt to put an engineering gloss on a marketing/styling decision, because I have never heard about that 114 inch problem oh highways anywhere else (including this R&T piece).
The official auto enthusiast magazine name for this phenomenon was “freeway hop.”
The ‘67 wheelbase was 115.
Powerglides are still used by drag racers. Many appeared in show “Pass Time”, on former Speed Channel. So much for “dated tech”, 😉
I changed the date on Marc’s link to also look at the ’69 Chevelle. Who knew it had headlight washers and lamp monitors as options?
Short-lived options. They also offered a fancy panty-cloth interior (Concours model) in ’68 & 9, but not in ’70-2. A few sputters in the emerging Brougham era.
Yes, the Concours Sport Sedans were in the brochures, with the frilly cloth interior, but I have never seen a single ad or brochure mention of the Concours Sport Coupe; just that letter to all dealers that someone gave me about it as a stop-gap measure due to an upholstery plant strike.
Tire chain in a can was another short lived option, see the ’69 Camaro in the pic.
Short lived options would be an interesting series of posts. Lots of comment possibilities by people who bought them and interesting new content.
My first car lol used 68 chevelle 2 dir 307, 4 speed stick. Bench seat . motor was worked. Solid lifters 327 power pack heads holly carb
Paid $1300.00 in 1970.no power steering am raido. Definitely had a big. Cam. Sea mist green.of course no a/c hand crank windows. Nice car . wish I had it now
Good article.on the 68 chevelle malibu.327.car…if they made this car in 2020 with a 68.327 motor and a 400Le overdrive tranny..Chevrolet would sell the hell out of this car.again..in the world of Tahoes and Suv….the 68 chevelle broke.the mold and raised the bar for the 69 and 70 chevelle models..in a world that no longers.need muscle cars of the 60s. .these were great cars for 4000.bucks..yeah..will all that money saved.go buy 4 cragar.wheels and some gt.goodyears.hijackers.shocks.in the back. You got a mean looking 68 chevelle malibu.car..rj
You can buy a Malibu Premier for the inflation adjusted price of the Chevelle, which would have been even more with a 396 and TH350 . It’s just as fast 0-60, handles and rides better, more reliable, etc.
…but it’s half as interesting.
Not exactly a shock that technology has improved in 54 years. That’s like comparing a 1914 car to the ‘68.
My brother had a used ’69 Malibu coupe with the then new 307 and TH350 for his daily driver. Very well balanced car. The three speed’s main advantage is in the mountains for downhill compression braking. Having driven a Powerglide equipped Impala on those grades was a choice of smoking the small drum brakes or having to waste gas using some go pedal in low. Or, holding up angry traffic behind and using turnouts.
In my opinion these are one of the best looking Chevys of the ’60’s. The combination of curved and crisp straight lines just strikes me as quite sporty. I see a coupe like this parked in a driveway on my way home from Walmart every week. I think it might be down for some mechanical repair. I was kind of surprised by the fuel consumption, I’d always thought that the 327 would return much better fuel economy than my 66 Riviera with a 425. These are cars that can be updated and improved quite a bit by an enthusiast.
All the GM A body coupes of this generation had different rooflines. Although the Chevelle/Malibu was OK, I liked the Tempest/LeMans best, followed by the Skylark.
Must have cost GM a fortune to design and tool four different rooflines for its A bodies, but this was GM at its behemoth peak. Every one of these A bodies was instantly recognizable and had its own unique personality.