2006 Chevrolet Impala

rayainsw

http://media.gm.com/division/2005_prodinfo/powertrain/whats%20new/PWT%202005i%20LS4.doc

jpstax1

I cut and pasted the information on the DOD system from the above link:

"The key to DOD’s efficiency and virtually imperceptible operation is a set of special two-stage hydraulic valve lifters, which allows the lifters of deactivated cylinders to operate without actuating the valves. These lifters, used only on the cylinders which are deactivated, have inner and outer bodies which normally operate as a single unit. When the engine controller determines cylinder deactivation conditions are optimal, it activates solenoids in the engine lifter valley which direct high-pressure oil to the switching lifters. This oil pressure activates a release pin inside the lifter which allows the outer body of the lifter to move independently of the inner body. With the pin is released, the outer lifter body moves in conjunction with camshaft actuation, but the inner body does not move, thus holding the pushrod in place. This prevents the pushrod from actuating the valve, thereby halting the combustion process. Because the vibration and acoustic dynamics of the V-8 and V-4 modes are different, the exhaust system of DOD-equipped vehicles is tuned to compensate for the changes."

Oh boy! It would appear that if a release pin were to break, or the ECM would mess up and send false readings to the system, bad things could happen to the motor. I'm going to delay buying a car with DOD until they work out the bugs.

vanman1

So long as DOD really works and is reliable, I would be in for sure. I love the idea of a 303 hp V8 for almost V6 mileage.

charts2

I don't see the savings with this DOD technology.....GM claims that the best you can get is up to 12% increase in fuel economy and thats at certain highway speeds...........I drive less then 20,000 miles a year and 12 -15,000 are city driving......DOD only works at optimum highway speeds......If you drove 15,000 highway miles a year and the DOD worked 75% of the time thats roughly 12,000 highway miles its working......You get 32 highway miles to the gallon.....12000 divided by 32 = 375 gallons of fuel used.......maximum 12% savings (as GM claims) thats about 40 gallons of gas a year saved ..at $2.25 a gallon the DOD might save you $90.00 a year.........the technology to build DOD into the engine isn't free! so where are the savings, unless people believe they are single handidly improving the air quality. Ya right! I will remember that next time I pass an 18 wheeler with black smoke pouring from both stacks. DOD is just another gimmick that can break down, that will need costly repairs at my expense when the warranty runs out......

vanman1

DOD from my understanding does not add much $$ to a car unlike hybrid technology. Any gas savings is good. Honda uses the technology in their high end vans also,

rayainsw

" I don't see the savings with this DOD technology.....GM claims that the best you can get is up to 12% increase in fuel economy and thats at certain highway speeds

DOD is just another gimmick that can break down, that will need costly repairs at my expense when the warranty runs out...... "

Well, 12% here – 12% there, these incremental improvements do add up.

My take is this:

In the GXP I just bought (motor = identical), the DoD technology allows over 40 HP and TQ increase in the same weight vehicle with a 1 MPG highway ‘penalty’ vs. the GTP with S/C 3800 V6. (Oh, and I also get a terrific V8 exhaust note!)

If, in the real world of highway cruising under light traffic conditions, this translates into 28 MPG instead of 25 MPG – and another 40 or 45 miles of additional range on a tank, these seem like good things to me.

No, clearly the DoD technology is not ‘free’. What hardware improvements that result in fuel economy gains are free? Once the development and tooling costs are amortized over a large number of different vehicles utilizing this technology, the incremental cost is likely no more than the supercharger added to the 3800 V6. Another example of adding additional HP & TQ while maintaining reasonable fuel economy - compared to (for instance) just adding displacement.

I happen to like the fact that the DoD 5.3L LS4 V8 allows me to enjoy significantly enhanced acceleration with only 1 MPG loss in highway fuel mileage compared to that S/C 3800. I’d personally rather give up 1 MPG than 3 or 4.

DoD, variable valve timing, variable intake tracts, etc. – such incremental improvements in technology that allow improvements in performance while meeting ever stricter pollution requirements, combined with highway mileage that was only a pipe dream not so very long ago = good times for me.

Just my take.
- Ray
Preferring more power and more torque with more MPG to ???

vanman1

Given the mileage numbers, I may just buy a V8 Impala. My one concern is the reliability of DOD, but there are other DOD systems out there that seem to be running just fin so it's only a tiny concern.

charts2

DOD has nothing to do with performance..DOD technology only enhances fuel economy without performance suffering, it doesn't ad performance.....your getting 43 more horsepower because you now have a 5.3 V8 rather then a Super Charged V6. The supercharger was a very expensive option on the 3800 and required maintenance every 25,000 miles. The 5.3 V8 is a derivative of the 6.0 and 7.0 Litre Chevrolet small block that the 2006 Corvette uses, and has a history that started back in 1955 as the 265 cubic inch V8. For the average driver like myself who drives probably 5-6000 highway miles per year $40.00 savings per year over 6 years will not pay for this technology for me.......Drivers who drive 20,000 + highway miles per year would reap benefit over the initial cost of the device. Maybe over the next 2 or 3 years GM can improve this DOD to match or beat the 20% fuel savings that Chrysler now offers with their engines.

exalteddragon1

GM Slashes Prices on Most 2006 Base Stickers
Date Posted 06-20-2005

DETROIT — In an effort to wean buyers from big incentives, General Motors will cut the base prices on most of its 2006 Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac and Saturn models.

The company has not released prices for Hummer, GMC and Saab. Cadillac prices are expected to increase slightly.

Prices are not being cut across the board, according to Automotive News. Prices for the Chevrolet Corvette, Cadillac XLR and Hummer H3 will not change. But in other cases, the price cuts are sizable. A 2006 Chevrolet Impala LS will start at $20,670, a reduction of $1,680, not including the destination charge.

GM is moving away from its previous strategy of raising sticker prices and then offering big incentives on its models. The new approach is called "value pricing." It is designed to lure Internet shoppers, who, in the past, may have bypassed GM vehicles because they were searching only for the lowest base price, not the heftiest incentives.

GM has pacified its dealers, however, by raising the wholesale discount on options and accessories.

What this means to you: Consumer will play fewer games for GM deals, at least for the time being — but watch the prices on accessories.

Here is the link:
Click Here its on Edmunds

At 20.5K This big sedan looks very attractive, and no games means less sticker shock (AKA G6)

frasierdog

While I initially wanted a DOHC, the 3.9L may well prove to be a very nice drivable engine. I would like to see the torque curve for the 3.9L.

The interior of the 2006 Impala looks quite nice. Similar to the 2006 Buick Lucerne. It is up to date and comfortable. Much better to me than the Grand Prix.

I am really looking forward to driving the Impala just as soon as a dealer gets them in.

I really wish Chevy would up the warrantee to 5/50k. With Hyundai at 5/100K, I do not see why this would be a problem. I expect my cars drivetrains to last 150K with no problems. How long does Chevy expect the car to last?

rayainsw

First: I realize that DoD does not ** directly ** improve acceleration performance.

Given that GM has “CAFÉ” issues (as do all manufacturers who sell cars here in the US), and given that I would prefer 27 or 28 MPG highway to 12% less, DoD offers an avenue to provide a substantial gain in acceleration (approx 0.7 to 1.0 sec in the quarter mile) over the 3800 S/C GTP CompG version of the same Grand Prix - with NO degradation in rated highway fuel mileage.

Second: Yes, I understand that I have better acceleration because I have a 5.3L V8 rather than the S/C 3800. The point (for me) is that partly due to DoD, I can enjoy that enhanced performance capability without suffering any significant fuel mileage penalty. And GM can offer that performance for (what I perceive to be) a VERY competitive price.

And third: I do not see where the DoD is costing me much of anything. Pricing of the 2005 GXP compared to the 2005 GP GTP CompG, given all the additional equipment upgrades included in the GXP suggests to me that (at least in this case) DoD costs the consumer very little, indeed.

I typically drive something close to 17,000 or 18,000 miles per year. Probably 10,000 miles of that is at what I’ll call ‘highway speed’ – say 65 – 80 mph. Again, if I achieve 28 instead of 25 (12% more) for those 10,000 mile, I’d save something like $100 year.

So that was certainly not my sole (or even primary) ‘justification’ for the purchase of a DoD equipped vehicle. What I see is that implementation of this technology allows GM to offer a higher performing (clearly, quicker accelerating) vehicle with essentially the same gas mileage as (in this case) the lesser performing GTP CompG version of the same car.

I also like the additional flexibility offered by the additional (12%) range on a tank when I do drive primarily highway.

Although I find the history of the small block V8 interesting, I see no bearing on the merits of DoD.

Obviously, you will buy (or not buy) whatever you want, for whatever reasons make sense to you. I am just trying to give GM their due for developing and producing this technology, at what I see as a very reasonable price.

And last: I will defend to the death your right to think differently.

- Ray
Enjoying DoD-ing . . .

Fuel Cost Calc:
10,000 miles at 25 mpg = 400 gal.
10,000 miles at 28 mpg (+12%) = 357 gal.
Saving = 43 gal times $2.25 = just under $100 year. Or about 2 bucks a week.
Or maybe 3 weeks of driving for free (gas-wise) each year.

charts2

Its a great time for Chevy to run ads that show 9 of their cars getting better then 30 mpg highway. The Impala is the top selling car for Chevrolet and GM, This refreshened 2006 with lower pricing should also be a hit. a heritage that started in 1958. With gas prices still moving higher (oil near $60 barrel) the craze for SUV's is soon to come to an end. GM makes most of their money on trucks, I believe 55% of sales are trucks, but if gas prices stay high the Impala will reap the benefits of people who want a large modern sedan, who are not willing to pay for poor fuel economy and penalty for high CAFE numbers of a Suburban or Tahoe.

I believe the 2006 Impala's will be on dealers lots sooner then expected. This program of paying what employees pay for 2005 models has been a huge hit. Its main purpose was to clear out backlogged inventory. Its a bigger success then GM thought it would be and remaining 2005's are flying out the doors. Chevy started full production of the 2006 Impala's June 13th so they might move through the system faster now that 2005 models will become scarce very soon...

justgreat47

all brake systems are highly prone to warpage of the rotors IF the barkes are not bedded when the car (or the brakes) is new. do a google serach on "bedding in the brakes" and you'll find plenty of info on why you must do it and how to do it. it's kinda fun, if you don't mind getting up early one morning. it's also a learning process as you can explore the performance of your brake system and know better how it will perform in a panic situation. jackg 90seville 97k

justgreat47

very good point about dod and it's limited application. like yourself, i drive mostly on local roads and need a system that would allow cylinder deactivation at idle and low engine engine speeds. i have no qualms about the reliability of dod, it wouldn't stop me frorm buying one now, but the limited use of dod wouldn't help my mileage at all. interestingly, if you look at the mileage numbers for the hybrid cars such as the ford escape, they get better fuel economy around town than they do on the interstate. at low engine speeds and light throttle application, from a stop light or sign, the drivetrain runs on ONLY the battery...now that's cool, in my book.
jackg 90seville 97k

vanman1

I took a close look at the pictures on the Chevy web site. I am convinced that this will be a great sedan. Given the lower MSRPs for 2006 and the vastly improved car, I can't see how this car can be anything but a success. It could be a bit more exciting to look at I suppose, but I'm looking at the LTZ or SS which both have nice wheels, exhausts, interior and tons of nice features not to mention big HP.

I have officially added the Impala to my list of replacements for my Intrigue. A Chevy with a nicer interior than my Olds for less money, how could I not be impressed.

chris65amg

I also believe that this will be a success for GM. It's cheap and it actually looks good! Proof positive that GM can turn itself around.

exalteddragon1

Would take that $1,000 they dropped the MSRP by and give the Impala an interrior to Compete with the Avalon.

It is awsome that they lowerred the price and its correct that a new car that is better than the one it replaces (anything is better than that last impala) with a lower price will score. I Just Thinkthat with the new V8 GM has the power and refinment to compete with the new Toyota motor they just need the interrior. I saw a trim with fake wood in the impala and its nice, but i have to agree with many people that the Avalon looks more professional.

People may not cross shop these cars, but its the Chevy flagship sedan, and ill bet anything most of us here would pay the extra $1,000 if we could get a 2006 impala with an Avalon interrior.

At least it will smoke the toyota in the drag stip, and not break the bank either.

jcooley

I found the LS is 21330 + dest. LT is 21860 + dest. 3.9LT is 24760 +dest. LTZ is 26870 + dest. SS is 27130 + dest.

micweb

You said:

I found the LS is 21330 + dest. LT is 21860 + dest. 3.9LT is 24760 +dest. LTZ is 26870 + dest. SS is 27130 + dest.

That sounds like good pricing - competitive with the Dodge Charge which is being priced at 22,995 with ABS, 3.5 V-6, and stability control. Previously the Impala was priced outside of my price range, except for periods with high rebates. This will make a difference to me.

307web

???

Just get a Lucern then.

frasierdog

"Just get a Lucern then."

The 2006 Impala has an interior very similar to the Lucerne. The only real difference I can see is that the Buick has auto A/C.

In this case, the 2006 Impala has a leather interior that to my eyes is as nice as they come. The Avalon interior is different, not better. However, I would like the auto A/C.

307web

The Lucern should have a nicer interior than an Impala. We will have to wait until production models are released to see if it is significantly nicer or just marginally nicer.
Even the Lucern probably won't have as nice of an interior as an Avalon, but it should be cheaper in price, so people will say it is "good enough for the price."

vanman1

Impala will start thousands less than the Avalon so I don't think a direct comparison is fair. That said, the new Impala has nothing to be ashamed of. From what I can see in the pictures, the interior is very nice and materials look to be of high quality. A more direct competitor is Camry and again, Impala shines.

With the DOD V8 option, remote start, flip and fold seats and other features, Impala should be very competitive in the sedan market. Given the current model sells well as is, the 06 should be a huge seller for Chev.

alpha01

I dont understand how you can so narrowly define competitive vehicles, your logic is bizarre. You also think that the LaCrosse is a Camry competitor. So then, by a transitive property, is not the new Impala a compeitor of the LaCrosse?

Your contention is that the Impala is thousands less than an Avalon, so therefore its not a competitor. Well, then how do you justify the Camry being a LaCrosse competitor, since the Camry starts at $19K, when the LaCrosse starts at $23.5K? If you think in terms of features parity, the Camry is still about 2 grand less than a comparable LaCrosse at current MSRP levels.

That the current Impala model sells well is due to HUGE incentives and fleet sales, not due to the goodness of the aged (debuted in 2000) design. That said, I think this new Impala is going to be a very competitive entry, my only point being that its competitors are more numerous than you state.

~alpha

chris65amg

People are weird. I, for example, am currently cross-shopping a host of small luxury/sport sedans with large higher performance sedans. I'm not trying to say that people will inevitably cross-shop the Impala and Avalon, but the higher trim levels will definitely get cross-shopped. I see the Impala as also being a competitor to the higer-end Camcord. That's good for Chevy, because if they can make it so the Impala competes with so many models, they are bound to snag some people anyway.

The competition for a car is only defined by what the consumer may also want. Econ 101.
Sure there are some cars that are more likely cross-shopped than others, but price range cannot clearly define a playing field for a car.

navigator89

So then, by a transitive property, is not the new Impala a compeitor of the LaCrosse?

I wouldn't say so. The Impala is more of a sport sedan, or at least it tries to be one. The Lacrosse is more of a quiet, luxury sedan. Sure, someone might cross shop them, but that doesn't make them competitors.

I think this is where the midsize sedan segment gets divided. You have sport biased sedans, and quiet, luxury like sedans. Midsize sport sedans would be Altima, Maxima, 6, Fusion, Impala, Charger, G6, Grand Prix. Quiet/luxury sedans would be Lacrosse, Camry, Accord, Sonata, 300, Amanti.

These cars will get cross shopped eventually by anyone. But that doesnt make them competitors. Any buyer will decide if he wants to go sport or luxury, and then buy.

vanman1

"your logic is bizarre"

First of all, I said it was not a direct competitor since Avalon's base sticker is thousands more than a base Impala. Same can be said for the LaCrosse. When a guy is at a Toyota dealer and looks at a Camry and then an Avalon, he doesn't directly compare them either? Impala and LaCrosse both start around the same area as a Camry so that's a more direct comparison. Is that so hard to understand? There is a difference between a direct competitor and cars like the Avalon or the Maxima which sticker much higher to start.

vos

Glad I got my 2005 Impala. The new one looks like any other run of the mill sedan.

alpha01

I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think the Impala, LaCrosse, and Lucerne are all more or less likely to be cross-shopped with different trim levels of Avalon and Camry, for example.

My point is that some here feel that for one reason or another, any of the above arent competitors with other cars, when thats simply not the case. I think cross shopping is fairly broad.

~alpha

alpha01

"When a guy is at a Toyota dealer and looks at a Camry and then an Avalon, he doesn't directly compare them either?"

Yes, he (or she for PC-ness) then would seem to directly compare the two. I see no reason why an Impala LTZ with options, for example, couldnt be directly compared to an Avalon Touring. Certainly, the SS as well... the vehicles are similar size, similarly powered (with the Avalon splitting the difference between those two models), etc. Simply because base model vehicles start with different equipment levels doesnt mean that other models, with similar features, cannot be compared.

I do think its interesting that the less expensive Impala gets a better base engine than the more expensive Lucerne, which soldiers on with the 3800 that began life, IIRC, in 1962.

~alpha

1487

I can't believe people are complaining about the Impala's interior. It looks great and it's a superior design to the Avalon. I'm not sure why people think the Avalon's interior is so great but I am not feeling the plastic metal trim and the unnecessary control covers. I like the simplicity of the Impala's interior and I am glad it looks nothing like the Avalon's. Maybe it's an age thing but the Toyota interior is way over the top.

jae5

Don't mean to drag out the DOD topic, but was wondering if any of you had information on the following concerning DOD :confuse: :

1. Since the pistons are still pumping in the deactivated cylinder, and considering there is a tight seal between the piston rings and the cylinder wall, what about the "air" that is in the cylinder? I'm guessing that as the DOD comes "on line" the exhaust valve is open to let the last of the 4-stroke-cycle to complete (intake-combustion-power-exhaust stroke), but would there still be some volume of air, exhaust, whatever, left in the chamber? Or is the exhaust valve open slightly to allow scavenging, if needed?

2. To kind of go along with the first question, am I right to think that the fuel injector and the soil are deactivated as well for the DOD cylinders.

3. Is there adequate oiling in the head for the valves that are deactivated when in DOD mode? Will there be enough "splashing" of oil from the other rockers and pushrods to keep the non-active components lubricated?

4. Already discussed somewhat, but what of DOD or pin failure. Will the system default to a "normal" engine mode, where the engine will run on all 8 cylinders? Or will it fail and stay in a DOD, where you're in 4-cyl mode all the time?

Again, these are just a few things that are off the top of my head from reading the posts here. I've read in auto industry and enthusiast magazines about DOD and MDS, but none explained these factors very well, if at all. Just would hate to have GM relive the V8-6-4 scenario.

vanman1

I agree with you on the Lucerne Should not have a 3800.

I think the number of people cross shopping Camrys and Avalons is minimal and even less so with Impalas and Avalons. Of course it can't be proven, but the 2 cars are just not direct competitors other than both being sedans. Indirectly all midsize and large sedans could be cross shopped but the number just are not substantial or significant.

vanman1

Impala interior looks really good, but some people will have to complain about something. I love simple quality interiors and this car has one.

57chevrolet

"I do think its interesting that the less expensive Impala gets a better base engine than the more expensive Lucerne, which soldiers on with the 3800 that began life, IIRC, in 1962." ~alpha
(In response)
"I agree with you on the Lucerne Should not have a 3800."
vanman1

This may be a little off topic, but...what are you complaining about the 3.8 for???:confuse: My dad had a 91 Buick Park Avenue. He sold it when it had 295,000 miles on it, and its still going strong. You ask any knowledgeable mechanic, and he will say, "Oh yeah! Those 3.8's will go forever." Why would you mess with success?

frasierdog

"Those 3.8's will go forever." Why would you mess with success?"

The 3.8L is not a class leading engine. It's noise, vibration and harshness (NVH) levels are much too high. It's is time to move forward with a better design.

The 3.8L can not compare to the NVH levels of the 3.6L used in the LaCrosse.

It is time to let the 3.8L die.

rayainsw

“The 3.8L is not a class leading engine. It's noise, vibration and harshness (NVH) levels are much too high. It's is time to move forward with a better design.”

I have wondered for a while now why the decision was made to go with the 5.3L V8 rather than further develop / tweak the 3800 S/C to roughly the same HP / TQ levels. (As many, many owners have done.) This would have been relatively straightforward to do – and would likely not have required significant underhood ‘adjustments’, as were clearly needed to fit the 5.3L V8 where only V6s had lived before.

My guess is that there were 3 aspects that conspired against this approach:

1 – The 3.8 / 3800 has indeed been around for a long while. Though updated in many respects, some fundamental issues regarding NVH may have been deemed not worth trying to correct.

2 – The S/C 3800 running at this power level may not have been capable of achieving the fuel mileage of the N/A 5.3.

3 – Emissions may have also been a factor.

Again – these are just (not very educated) guesses. But a FWD V8 is an interesting choice. And I am looking forward to instrumented tests of this drivetrain in the Impala.
- Ray
Happy with the choice of a 5.3L V8 - as in my GXP . .

chris65amg

I have heard stories about those 3800's lasting quite a while. However, that is not common knowledge to the regular guy (or girl, for PC-ness). A lot of people will look at the 195 hp figure in the Lucerne and not be impressed, even if it will be ticking away at 150k+ miles some day. I guess people don't want to have to wait for their rewards.

FWD V8 is very interesting, and I'm also eagerly awaiting tests and whatnot.

dieselone

My dad's 2000 Park Ave's 3800 blew 2 head gaskets, had the plastic intake crack, not to mention the rest of the car fell apart way before 100k miles. I've driven 3800 v6 powered cars alot and I've yet to find one redeeming quality other than maybe fuel ecomomy. But that is mainly due to gearing.

vanman1

I have no issue with the 3800 itself but when the competition is offering cars with 240+ hp, 200 isn't all that impressive. Impala gets a 3900, why not Lucerne?

I love the look and interior of the Lucerne, but as it stands, I would save money and get a nicer engine in an Impala LTZ.

vanman1

) LT 3.9 MSRP = $25,420
What you get: The LT will be standard with the 3.5, but apparently the 3.9 is available too. Standards include 17" alloy wheels, ABS, a spoiler, fog lights, remote start, all power goodies including drivers seat. Option prices include heated leather with a power passenger seat for $1,095, a 6 CD for $295 and a moonroof for $900.

2) LTZ 3.9 = $27,530
Additions over LT 3.9 = The heated leather package, heated mirrors, Home-link, fold down rear seat (which may be optional in other models), auto-dimming mirror, and get this...BOSE

3) SS = $27,895
Option prices and standard equipment appear to be the same as the LT 3.9, except for where the SS obviously steps up over the LT (aka 18s, etc).

nosirrahg

Back when the 2000 Impalas came, they came in two "flavors" - base and LS. It took a few years before we saw an SS model.

Any thoughts on the 2006 Impala being available right off the bat in FOUR trim levels? Seems like typically a manufacturer introduces a car with a couple of levels, then in a couple of years when the new has worn off, they introduce higher-end variant(s) with more power and features, to more or less breathe new life into an existing product and extend it's life a few more years before a total redesign. Would you say this was a direct response to Mopar's introduction of the 300/Magnum with HEMI power from the start (as well as the new Charger)? And if so (which is understandable), what are they going to do when these cars have been out a couple of years to revive interest in them?

rayainsw

“Any thoughts on the 2006 Impala being available right off the bat in FOUR trim levels? Seems like typically a manufacturer introduces a car with a couple of levels, then in a couple of years when the new has worn off, they introduce higher-end variant(s) with more power and features”

The Impala SS drivetrain hardware components were produced in some numbers in a limited & late run of 2005 Grand Prix GXPs. (I bought one – of something less than 1,000 2005s produced, according to some reports.) Aside from a slight restriction due to insertion of the V8 into the rather tight quarters under the hood, I am not aware of any issues that would affect SS availability at startup.

As of 15 June, according to Arifleet the ONLY restrictions for the Impala are:

2006 Chevy Impala

The following colors and/or options are restricted at startup:

(22U) Superior Blue paint
(68U) Glacier Blue paint
(42U) Dark Tarnish Silver paint
(21U) Laser Blue paint
(53U) Antique Bronze paint
(AM3) Leather bench seat

“what are they going to do when these cars have been out a couple of years to revive interest in them?”

An excellent question. I am very curious about this myself. The 303 HP / 323 TQ in these cars appears to be right at the limit for street manageability & live-ability in any FWD car. More power would not seem likely. I can think of many additional options that GM might add, but without the major (** MAJOR **) change to a RWD or AWD platform, I’d be surprised if they continued to add significant HP / TQ anytime soon.

- Ray
5.3L V8 FWD Beta Tester . .

micweb

An earlier posting (not by me) said:

I found the LS is 21330 + dest. LT is 21860 + dest. 3.9LT is 24760 +dest. LTZ is 26870 + dest. SS is 27130 + dest.

But you said, part:

) LT 3.9 MSRP = $25,420
What you get: The LT will be standard with the 3.5, but apparently the 3.9 is available too. Standards include 17" alloy wheels, ABS, a spoiler, fog lights, remote start, all power goodies including drivers seat. Option prices include heated leather with a power passenger seat for $1,095, a 6 CD for $295 and a moonroof for $900.

2) LTZ 3.9 = $27,530

Is there any consistency between these two reports? Did you report pricing on the LT 3.9 with some options?

I am really hoping for something more economical than the 300/Charger/Five Hundred.

chris65amg

I would pick a Charger just on horsepower to price ratio. 23k gets you 250 horses. Yay. My wife is also looking for a full size sedan and she's waiting until the latest round of GM's and the Azera get out.

exalteddragon1

Is foreign now, and I just hate the way they were bought, tricked and decieved. Most of the Auto press didn't care.

For this reason, I will never buy a dodge/chrysler product.

Also, for about the price you could get the 250hp charger, you could get the 303hp V8 Impala (base after a light discount). If the V8's start at 27K like people on this board are saying, then isn't it better to have a V8?

vanman1

I have no idea, what you see is what I do. There is no more info.

SS mileage is estimated at 17/27 which is nothing to sneeze at with 303 hp.

jcooley

The difference is the $660 destination price.

chris65amg

Some people would be willing to pay a couple thousand more for a RWD 340hp V8 in the Charger, but I agree that the Impala does indeed present an exceptional value.

vanman1

The Charger is a 4 door so it certainly will be a direct competitor. It will be interesting to see how they will compare on refinement, quality of materials and handling.

I have seen a couple of Chargers now, pretty nice looking car.