Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2006 Chevrolet Impala

189111314113

Comments

  • dan165dan165 Posts: 653
    I saw the Impala SS article in Motor Trend last night and I think the car is growing
    on me. When I first saw the pictures on the net, I didn't like them much but looking
    again, I think the car looks pretty good, though understated for sure. I can't see how this car would not sell 20,000 + units projected with ease. A lower than expected MSRP, Displacement on Demand economy and a gorgeous interior make this a sure win for Chevy. Well done!
  • navigator89navigator89 Posts: 1,080
    The interior sure is gorgeous, especially when you compare it to the current Impala. IMO I think the current Impala's styling is better than the new one's. However looking at pictures on the Chevrolet website, the Impala's interior is drab and downright ugly. In fact the interiors of most Chevrolets look ugly, except the Equinox, SSR and Corvette.

    But I'm glad to see the 2006 model has a great interior, worthy of competing with anything in it's class. The best part is the new steering wheel, which looks a lot better than the Cavalier like wheel on the old model.
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    The pictures on the chevrolet.com web site are even better.

    http://www.chevrolet.com/impala06/
  • chris65amgchris65amg Posts: 372
    do you think that the Impala will compare against the Five Hundred and Avalon? Just curious. I think it'll be an Impala, Avalon, or Five Hundred for my wife's next car.... possibly Azera, Charger or 300, but I don't know.
  • cartwrightcartwright Posts: 10
    Hi folks, I'm new here and was just wondering about the following: Why does the MPG differ between the Chevy US site and the Canadian one for Malibu and Impala. For example, the US site states that MPG for an Impala LS is 20/30 and the Canadian one says 24/39. Any help would be appreciated.
  • jcooleyjcooley Posts: 46
    Edmunds.com has 20/32 for the LS with the 3.5 engine.

    Is the 2005 Buick LaCrosse essential the same as the 2006 Impala but with the older engines (3.8 and 3.6)?
  • micwebmicweb Posts: 1,617
    Imperial gallons are larger than US gallons.
  • charts2charts2 Posts: 618
    The reason for the difference in MPG between CANADA & the USA is because: In Canada we don't use the Gallon as a measurement anymore. We are metric in Canada & use litres per 100 kilometers travelled to determine mileage (kilometers) ...In Canada our road speeds are measured in Kilometres per hour, our air temperature is measured in Celcius. When its 90 degrees somewhere in the USA its about 33 Celcius here.... We don't use ounces/pounds for weight measurements we use grams, kilograms......Canada converted to metric about...25 years ago, then we used Gallons as a measurement and our Canadian (Imperial) gallon was 25% larger then the US Gallon, for those that didn't know........back then our quart was 40 ounces where the US quart is 32 ounces, our pint was 20 ounces and the US pint is 16 ounces.......Someone who made the comparison about Gallons is using the old way of measurement......in reality the 2006 Impala and Malibu get the same US MPG per gallon in both the USA and CANADA.......when using the American gallon as a measurement.....
  • ehaaseehaase Posts: 328
    "Is the 2005 Buick LaCrosse essential the same as the 2006 Impala but with the older engines (3.8 and 3.6)?"

    No, the Impala uses GM's W body (dates back to 1988 Cutlass Supreme, Grand Prix, Regal), while the LaCrosse uses GM's G body (dates back to 1995 Aurora, Riviera).
  • hammen2hammen2 Posts: 1,313
    No, the Impala uses GM's W body (dates back to 1988 Cutlass Supreme, Grand Prix, Regal), while the LaCrosse uses GM's G body (dates back to 1995 Aurora, Riviera).

    Wrong... the LaCrosse is NOT a G-car, it's a W-car, though that platform has seen significant upgrades over time, and there have been different variants of it. I know the Impala was on a different variant of the W-body than the Grand Prix/Regal/Century... I suspect the LaCrosse is on the same variant as the current (2004-up) Grand Prix. They are built in the same assembly line (Oshawa, not sure if #1 or #2), whereas the Impala and Monte Carlo are built on a different assembly line at Oshawa...

    --Robert
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    hammen is right, all W's. Some how the Impala does seem like a bigger car though.
  • ehaaseehaase Posts: 328
    You are right. I misread the post. I shouldn't post so early in the morning. The Lucerne is a G body. The LaCrosse is a W body. I think that the 2006 Impala, with a roomier interior and more powerful engine options, will be a better car than the LaCrosse.
  • cartwrightcartwright Posts: 10
    As of now, I'm considering the LS or LT Impala. It's too bad they don't come standard with ABS. Heck, even an LE Camry has it. The low end torque (220 @ 2800 rpm) is very impressive in my book. Hopefully, that will mean fewer downshifts while climbing hills. Having the Malibu's fuel economy doesn't hurt either. I've read early G6 reviews that report the 3.9L to be less than 20 MPG. I hope that's not true.

    The Ford Fove Hundred has the space but is it really worthy it? Who wants to haul families with a whiney engine? The CVT is borderline dangerous in 0-30 takeoffs, not good for wanting to turn-to-clear head-on cars. It's rumured that the 3.5L duratec should be out in 2 years because of delays. It does have a shorter stopping distance than Impala and Avalon. It's turning radius is lousy. I do hope Impala gets an even tigher one. One particularly disturbing thing about the 500 is that it only has one selectable gear, hardly ideal for decending mountains. See for yourself:

    link title

    The only thing that'll hurt most is the crummy resale value of choosing GM or Ford while forgoing, say, Toyota. The good thing is that you can always knock off a fair bit of the sticker at GM dealers, as opposed to Toyota.

    PS. Thanks for your help with MPG guys. Very informative place, this forum.
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    I think ABS should be standard on all trim levels, it is only standard on the LTZ and SS. On the flip side head curtain side air bags are standard which should give the car excellent crash tests. GM is making ABS standard on all LaCrosse trims so maybe they will do the same for Impala.
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    Many people on here have been comparing this car to the Charger. MT has tested one in it's latest issue and just like the 300C the handling numbers are modest. I thought the charger was supposed to be sportier but I see little evidence of that in the test. RWD has many advantages but the Chrysler cars are tuned for comfort and have undefeatable stability control which limits their handling. While you won't experience any torque steer in the Charger, the handling limits between the cars will very similar. On top of that the Impala offers a superior interior and larger trunk.
  • chris65amgchris65amg Posts: 372
    That's a very risky statement. Have you driven a new Impala SS?

    The Charger is sportier than the 300, especially in its top trim.
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    Obviously I havent driven the Impala SS but the old impala served up handlind limits similar to that of the LX cars and I would assume this one will be better. The GXP has only been tested by one magazine but it's handling and braking were pretty good. The impala wont be as hard edged but it should be comparable. C&D said the charger in R/T trim was slightly sportier than the 300 but the ride suffered as a result. To the average driver I doubt the differences between the two cars will be noticable.
  • jcooleyjcooley Posts: 46
    When will the 2006 Impala be at dealers?

    Are any of the other cars (charger, 300, ford 500, avalon, lacrosse, etc.) that people are comparing the 2006 Impala to capable of six passengers?
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    2006 Impalas should hit dealers in sometime in August.
  • navigator89navigator89 Posts: 1,080
    The new Impala comes to dealers by September 2005.

    I'm pretty sure that none of those cars can seat six. Seating six in a car is only possible with two bench seats. My 1993 Taurus could seat six, in pretty good comfort. Now the current Taurus is back to 5 seats.

    You cant have six in a car if you have a console shifter, or those storage trays. The new Impala has a console shifter, so no six seats.

    If you do want a six seater, get a Crown Victoria/Grand Marquis. Better yet a Town Car, I believe they're copying the employee discount.

    But your best bet for a six seater would be a used car, like a Roadmaster, Caprice, Century, Park Avenue, Roadmaster, Delta 88, 98, Deville, Taurus/Sable.
  • charts2charts2 Posts: 618
    I believe the 2006 Impala will start filtering into dealers lots before the end of July....The 2005 chevrolet models are moving so fast with this employee discount that 2005 inventories are drying up fast......they started production on the 2006 Impala's June 13, over 3 weeks ago.......they can produce over 5,500 per week at near full capacity....
  • jcooleyjcooley Posts: 46
    The LT does come with a SEAT, FRONT CLOTH, 40/20/40 SPLIT-BENCH (STD) Code: AN3 so I think it will seat 3 in the front as well as the 3 in the back.

    Got that from chromecarbook.com from my credit union link.

    I will only need to have six in the car only about 5% of the time and I think the 2006 Impala would be a good choice. I think the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis is to large for me to drive around all the time but some of the other may work too.

    Thanks for the car choices.
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    From what I have heard they won't start shipping till late July but if 05 supplies do start drying up they may ship sooner. I was in Oshawa last week and I was looking out for an 06 on the local roads but I didn't see any.

    :-(
  • I have a Lumina 1996 and it's head gasket is leaking. I've decided to take the plunge and buy another car. It's time. Had Lumina since 1998. Great riding car, but seating is too soft for me.......anyway........

    I went car shopping at local dealership today, and drove Malibu, Monte Carlo, and Impala. Out of the 3, I really liked the Impala, so inside I went to get some pricing.

    With the GMAC discount now in effect, I can get a 2005 Impala LS with 3.8 engine, leather interior, bucket seats, heated, sun roof, improved sound system, etc., taxes, title, license, registration fee, doc fee..........for around $23,800. Should I buy, or wait for 2006?
  • frasierdogfrasierdog Posts: 128
    "Should I buy, or wait for 2006?"

    If you are super thrifty, read cheap a$$, buy the 2005.

    If you want the nicer car with the better engine and better interior buy the 2006.

    2006 LTZ with all amenities will invoice for $25,515.

    Personally, I can not get around the awful interior of the 2005.

    And since I spend most of my time while driving INSIDE the car, this seem like a valid argument for the 2006.
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    The 2005 is a quality car and certainly all the bugs are long gone but the interior leaves much to be desired in my eyes.

    If you can wait, I would go for a 2006. Should be a better all around car for not much more money.
  • jcooleyjcooley Posts: 46
    2006 Impala will be $1000 or 1.9% for 36 months or 2.9% for 48 months or 3.9% for 60 months.

    www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0507/08/D01-241288.htm
  • chris65amgchris65amg Posts: 372
    I don't think they'll need incentives to sell them. Didn't they already slice the price of the Impala by $1K?
  • mrrogersmrrogers Posts: 391
    My current 2004 Pontiac Grand Prix has a Cark 91 hands free car kit installed for use with a Nokia 3285 cell phone. The car kit includes an external antenna mounted on the rear window. I intend to order a 2006 Impala, and I see that OnStar is standard. I have no interest in using the OnStar system. I intend to get the car kit installed in the new car. Is it possible to utilize the OnStar antenna mounted on the roof of the car for my hands free car kit? That way I would not need the rear window antenna.
Sign In or Register to comment.