Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

2006 Chevrolet Impala

1…1415171920…68

Comments

  • quigquig Member Posts: 16
    I'm looking at buying a 06 Impala with variable valve, my wife and I are retired with travel plans, will the variable valve make a big differents in our mileage. I'm not buying a SS model just standard V6 with limited options pack.

    Thanks
  • deminindeminin Member Posts: 214
    We, too, are spending out childrens inheritance. I think the variable valve feature is present in both V6's in the new Impala. Its purpose is to give decent fuel mileage, yet allow for some extra HP if you need it. We have the LTZ with pretty much everything except the sunroof. So far, our highway mileage is in the 26-27 MPG range, which is acceptable for the power this 3.9L engine has. We haven't taken any long trips yet, but I am quite happy with the comfort and handling of this LTZ. It has excellent seats, and a slightly tighter suspension which is a real plus for some of the 2 lane rural roads we drive regularly. It doesn't wallow around on the road like some of the softer riding cars do. Before you buy, try to check out one of these LTZ's. They come with nearly all the options standard, and are not much more expensive than an LS or LT with a few options. They even put outstanding tires on the LTZ...Goodyear Eagles LS2's with a UTQG of 400AB.
  • ckyeungckyeung Member Posts: 9
    We just got our 06 Impala with the 2LT package Saturday. It was awesome. We traded in our 01 Tracker (our faithful servant then), and was thinking about the Equinox. But after test-driving the two vehicles side-by-side, we decided on the Impala. We hoped to have AWD, but the long wheel base and low-profile and immensely better handling (probably because we are comparing car to SUV) compensate for that. On top of that the Impala is $2,500 cheaper...
    We have the 3.5L which is fuel-flexible. That means we can use E85 fuel, which is at least 50 cents cheaper than regular unleaded. In the State of South Dakota, where corn ethanol production signifiies the local economy, that makes me feel really good. I don't think the 3.9L takes E85. We feel the 3.5L has more than enough power for us even the speed limit is 75 in SD.
    The car came equipped with XM radio, 6 CD changer, fold-flat rear seat (very neat), ABS, steering-wheel audio controls. The remote starter rocks! The car is very comfortable and has a high level of refinement (at least by Chevy's standard).
    We are very happy with our purchase, and hope the solid feel of the car is not short-lived.

    Happy motoring!!
  • ivanadrivealotivanadrivealot Member Posts: 35
    Just picked up sharp 3LT in Dark Silver Metallic with Ebony Cloth interior and the brushed sterling appliques this weekend. Got the 3.9L and 17" touring tires, spoiler standard, 6-seater option, along with the Bose upgrade. Took everything else as standard, as it was very much the feature mix I was looking for, balancing cost with features.

    It's basically the sister car to the LTZ without the heated leather seats and without a few amenities like heated/auto-dimming mirrors. Despite all the "bland styling" comments online, I got plenty of head turns and nice comments this weekend -- this color combination with the 17" rims and spoiler is luxurious-looking without looking frumpy.

    First thoughts:

    Ride is very stable and smooth, fairly quiet, very little lean in turns. It's a VERY easy car to drive, particularly at high winds as it has pretty good aerodynamics (including the "zero decibel" side mirrors which were pretty good on noise). There's still some road and wind noise of course, but quieter than my previous cars.

    No noticeable wallow or float so far, which is consistent with my test drives. Chevy found a very nice balance in-between the rougher sporty rides of the Grand Prix and the boaty rides of some larger luxury cars. It's like they took the best of both worlds in this particular engine/tire/suspension mix. Better control and ride than the non-CXS Buick LaCrosse models (which do wallow and float on the highway).

    VVT 3.9L puts out plenty of kick, esp. for on-ramps. 17" touring tires take a nice bite out of the road and add to the overall refinement. All around a smooth ride with substantial power. Real easy to get up to 80 mph on the freeway without realizing it, it's that smooth and powerful. IMHO, the 3LT/LTZ is definitely the "sweet spot" for the best balance of overall value and luxury in the lineup. Don't get me wrong, the V8 SS had me thinking about it for a while, but I seriously doubt its MPG ratings. SS drivers have reported here that they're not getting anywhere near those numbers -- don't forget that they are GM numbers, not the EPA. The 3.9L provides plenty of power with only a moderate hit to MPG compared to the 3.5L (which I felt was somewhat underpowered, particularly when I'd load up the car for a family road trip).

    The main reason I got the cloth seats was my back. I test drove at least 3-4 Impalas from August to early October with the stiff leather and promptly got a middle/lower backache in under 10 minutes. Cloth just felt better. I agree the early '06 Impalas had far too obtrusive lumbars (too much of a hump in my back, even at lowest lumbar setting), and the stiff leather only made it worse. I noticed the cloth had more "give" and since I ordered out for this, it feels like it has the revised seat mentioned in Healey's USA Today review at: link title It's a good, well-balanced review, and I agree with pretty much all of his comments and conclusions -- it's a good guide to the 06 Impala.

    Fit and finish, for what I paid, is excellent, particularly as Chevy has historically been the more "vanilla" value line for GM. Kudos to Chevy for figuring out how to work in a nice clean and respectable interior for a value price.

    The upscale radio with Bose is well worth it. Crystal clear jazz, voice, and instrumentals. Fiddling with the manual EQ Bass/Mid/Treble/Fade provided much more substantial sound for rock/pop. Good bass, with some thumpin' on some songs, but not others. If you're looking for deep rumbling bass, this isn't how it was geared -- more for a finely balanced overall sound with very rich clarity. But the bass is there and adequate, it just won't shake you out of your seats. Which is pretty much the signature Bose sound balancing.

    iPod line-in jack definitely impacted my purchase decision -- it's about time!!! The iPod sounds great through the Bose, far better than I expected. Love the radio buttons on the leather steering wheel -- always wish it had more, of course, but very fun and safer driving. Just discovered holding the steering mute button for two seconds launches the OnStar system for calling, etc. -- so you don't have to take your eyes off the road to push the mirror button. Little touches like this abound in the interior.

    Also very cool that you can purchase additional packaged minutes for hands-free calls that are good for a year, so I don't have to worry about using or losing them. I have a cell phone, but it's nice to have the additional service for backup in case I don't have my cell phone with me. At this point I plan to renew the OnStar after the first year.

    So far, I can confirm two prior concerns with the radio:

    1. There are only two settings via the EQ button -- talk and manual. Which is fine by me, because I have always ignored the EQ presets on every car I've owned and tweaked the settings myself (all those "genre presets" are pretty worthless from an audiophile's perspective). I greatly enjoyed the quality of the sound playing classic rock, jazz, easy listening, talk, etc. I would've kicked myself for not getting the Bose upgrade. Hey, can anyone tell me where the last two speakers are? I found the two tweeters in the front posts, the two in the front doors, and the two in the back dash. So where are the other two?

    2. There is a slight hiss from the radio at extreme low volume levels. That doesn't bother me as I usually either have the radio on somewhere in the middle volume, or off.

    The quickstart card mentions a separate Bose supplement, which was not included in my package, so I'll have to check with my salesman to get it. Is there a separate manual for the radio?

    I'm not looking at the gas mileage yet, as I've been idling a lot while learning all the cool functions (radio, DIC, OnStar, remote start, etc.), so it's still in the teens. Remote start is awesome, particularly as I'm in the Midwest with winter coming. ;)

    It's a little strange to realize one loses the back trunk key lock as well as the one on the passenger door. So if your key fob battery dies (although the DIC provides a low fob battery warning), you better hope the driver's door lock isn't frozen.

    Also, with the 6-seater option, the shifter on the column blocks the left edge of the radio disply in Drive, so you have to look around it to read the far left part of the display. Small annoyance, but it's there. I went for this option for the longer and much softer, comfortable arm rest. I also wanted more leg room and the center console is more limiting although sporty.

    Overall, I'm very pleased with the 3LT. I'm somewhat concerned about buying a first year model (think version 1.0 for software), so I got the 72/100 extended warranty as I'm expecting some bugs/defects along the way -- those usually tend to pop up with wear and tear at higher mileage.

    Tips for GMS e
  • ivanadrivealotivanadrivealot Member Posts: 35
    Sorry, my first post got cut off, so here's the rest:

    Overall, I'm very pleased with the 3LT. I'm somewhat concerned about buying a first year model (think version 1.0 for software), so I got the 72/100 extended warranty as I'm expecting some bugs/defects along the way -- those usually tend to pop up with wear and tear at higher mileage.

    Tips for GMS employee discounts: Besides the standard $1,000 rebate, there is an additional $1,000 discount for GMS buyers in November (it's not on the consumer GM web site). Also, we received a coupon certificate from GM in the mail this month for an additional $500 off (we're previous GMS purchasers), which added up to a very nice $2,500 off still early in the model year, in addition to our GMS discount, so we saved a bundle. Couldn't match this value-to-feature ratio on comparable competitors, that's for sure.

    Also got the car pretty quick, about 4 weeks from order to arrival at dealer. Dealership used one of their allocations for me to help speed it up, nice service.

    It helped that I really did my homework on the features, did lots of test drives, etc. And I'm glad I waited to order exactly what I wanted, as I benefited from some additional incentives that were not there in October.

    It's still just a baby, but I'm thrilled with it and without knowing more about reliability at this point, would recommend it. If you want a lot of the luxury touches and drive feel of the LTZ, but want to save some money, the 3LT is a worthy choice.
  • triogemtriogem Member Posts: 32
    would you guys like to share some buy experience?

    How much did you pay?
  • ckyeungckyeung Member Posts: 9
    Some details of the deal that I got:

    2LT with ABS, XM radio, 6CD changer, Fold flat seat (now that we have this feature, it's a must-have), Engine block heater

    MSRP = $24,790
    GM red tag price = $22,207
    (You can get these numbers from Chevy website)

    Dealer's discount brought it to $22,000. And I got $2,000 off from my GM card. So the final sales price of our Impala is $20,000. Probably not the lowest price possible, but the very friendly and patient salesperson makes a big difference in our decision to buy the vehicle. Still an incredible value compares to similarly-equipped Camry/Accord. Don't think that we will buy a Ford. We have an excellent local dealer. That makes the buying experience quite enjoyable.
  • quigquig Member Posts: 16
    Good info. guys on Impala (Thanks Deminin) Question for all can I order a 3.9L in a 2LT package? I noticed on a GM build site there was no option for it.(2006 Impala)
  • quigquig Member Posts: 16
    Ivans. Where did you get the $1000.00 additional discount for gms buyers in November? And what is GMS?

    Thanks
  • triogemtriogem Member Posts: 32
    3.9 engines are only for 3LT and LTZ
  • deminindeminin Member Posts: 214
    It sounds like you like your '06 as much as we do. Here's a tip on the hands free phone....don't add minutes for the first 60 days. Just a couple of days before our 60 days was up, OnStar called, and offered an additional 100 minutes for $20...half price. We had only used about 5 of the original 30, so they extended those minutes also. We not have 125 minutes, good for one year, for $20. Its a nice feature to have for important phone calls, and certainly a lot safer than driving with a cell phone in the ear. BTW, the reception is excellent.
  • wombmasterwombmaster Member Posts: 3
    :mad: Well, I live in NJ, I leased the 2006 Impala, 2LT with the 3.5L and all I do is highway mileage.
    The gas mileage is a consistant 22mpg at 70 mph, now with 1500 miles, truly a disappointment. (pos) My 2002 Intrepid, [why did they discontinue this...:( ] with a 2.7L, driven the same, had 25-26mpg.
    The fact that GM can get away with the posted bogus gas mileage is absurd, like GM.
  • ivanadrivealotivanadrivealot Member Posts: 35
    As far as I know, the GMS discount is the highest discount program for GM employees and their families. I have no idea what the "S" stands for. To answer your other question, my salesman at the dealership told me about it -- I'm guessing he learned about it when checking to see if the rebates/incentives went up in November.

    I believe you pretty much need a family member who works at GM or an eligible supplier whose employees also qualify for the GMS employee discount pricing. There's also a "supplier" discount for outside suppliers, but it's not as great a discount as the GMS pricing. But better than nothing.
  • ivanadrivealotivanadrivealot Member Posts: 35
    Interesting that they said it was half price. I was told by my salesman at delivery that the price for the extra 100 minutes was $20 and that it was good for a year.

    I was thinking about that package until I heard Verizon Wireless users can also somehow associate their America's Choice Plan with the car's cell phone number. Then I believe you can use your Verizon airtime minutes instead. Was advised to request this through Onstar instead of Verizon, as Verizon reps may be unlikely to know about this special option and may mess it up.

    Will try to post more after I talk to them. Another nice benefit, to be sure.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,147
    When they said that Verizon minutes were applicable to your OnStar minutes, I considered getting Verizon. But then I found at that time the plan worked only in certain parts of the US. And it wasn't many. I just got a cellphone setup instead that works best for me and mine.

    There may have also been a requirement about the analogue/digital type of equipment in the car (I have an 03 model).

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • obriend21obriend21 Member Posts: 12
    First off, GM (or any other manufacturer) does not make up its MPG - the EPA does, so your beef should be with them.

    Secondly, the EPA numbers are ESTIMATES, not hard facts. Engines can vary, so it may be normal for your engine (no consolation there, I know). From experience, the GM cars I've had in the past almost always exceeded the EPA numbers, but I may have just been lucky.

    Finally, your engine may just need a little longer break-in time than most.
  • rayainswrayainsw Member Posts: 3,192
    "First off, GM (or any other manufacturer) does not make up its MPG - the EPA does, so your beef should be with them. "

    The manufacturers test their own cars - according to EPA procedures.
    They submit the data to the EPA.
    The EPA audits (inspects & monitors records of) some testing.

    http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/40p0600.pdf

    - Ray
    Guessing that manufacturers would not want to be found out of compliance by the EPA . .
    2022 X3 M40i
  • deminindeminin Member Posts: 214
    Your salesman was probably trying to sugar coat the price of this in-car service. The Onstar package that came with our car quotes the $40 for 100 minutes price, and the cost comes down as you buy larger blocks of time..however, it is still quite expensive on a per-minute basis. We had a cell phone for a couple of years, but it was proving to just be a huge waste of money, so this in-car phone will be a decent compromise for important phone calls.
  • csandstecsandste Member Posts: 1,866
    Since you can get a year of prepaid wireless (1000 minutes) from T/Mobile for $100 that's pretty expensive for emergency use.
  • kcdkcd Member Posts: 6
    My 2006 Impala LS w/less than 1000 mi has a rattle (almost like sputtering) that come from the engine compartment that is most noticeable when accelerating from dead stop. It's also less noticeable during low speed acceleration. Has anyone experienced this type of problem?
  • dardson1dardson1 Member Posts: 696
    except I've had 3 Tahoes and know Chevy can make a handsome and dependable vehicle. I saw an interesting sedan in the parking lot today. I didn't know what the heck it was until I saw the badge up front. About time GM stopped counting beans and started making handsome cars. The new Impala looks as though it belongs in the new century. Hope it lives up to it's good looks.
  • deminindeminin Member Posts: 214
    We went to the city this week to visit the kids for Thanksgiving. Going up, we took the state roads, and held the speed between 60 and 65. We got 26.3 MPG in our LTZ with the 3.9 engine. Coming back, I took the Interstate and give it a little better run....80 to 85 MPH, and got 24.2 MPG. I changed the oil/filter at 1000 miles, and I'll change it again at 3K. When it gets to 6K, I'll change over to synthetic oil, and I fully expect to start getting the rated 27 MPG by then.
  • charts2charts2 Member Posts: 618
    It takes several thousand miles to break in an engine in a new car.....It took over a year before I was getting maximum fuel mileage numbers from my Impala LS that I bought back in 2001. I am sure you will notice a difference several months from now.
  • ivanadrivealotivanadrivealot Member Posts: 35
    Deminin, my results on a '06 3LT (same 3.9L) this week were very similar while driving for Thanksgiving. Drove it several hundred miles each way on the interstate.

    Resetting the average MPG on the DIC at highway speeds (to erase the lower city mpg numbers):

    Averaged between 26.5-27.3 mpg around 60-63 mph. Rpm's were in the upper teens (1800 or so).

    Averaged between 23.5-24.3 mpg between 73-77 mph (for testing purposes only). Rpm's were in the lower 2000's (2200 or so).

    At first I was disappointed with the lower mpg's at higher speeds. But then I remembered hearing/reading somewhere in the orientation CDs or manual that we'll lose roughly 1 mpg for every 5 mph over 60 mph, or something like that. (Isn't 60 mph the speed they use to arrive at the highway rating?)

    So if one averages 75 mph, then expect to lose 3 mpg from the rated highway 27 mpg average (assuming it's rated at 60 mph), for a net 24 mpg. The faster one goes over 60 mph, the lower the average mpg, or so the theory goes.

    Break-in info: I've got between 600-700 miles on the car now. I started the trip between 100-150 miles on the odometer.

    Considering that my engine probably isn't fully broken in yet, I'm thinking these mpg numbers aren't out of whack. Naturally, I'd like to seem them higher.

    However, I still think the Impala's higher speed mpg numbers would benefit greatly from a 5- or 6-speed transmission. Probably the easiest way to eek out a few more mpgs on the highway by lowering the rpm's.
  • deminindeminin Member Posts: 214
    Thanks for verifying your mileage....it looks like we are both seeing similar results. If this 3.9 behaves like most engines, its mileage will begin to improve somewhere between 3 and 6K miles. I, too think that the highway mileage could be improved by the addition of another overdrive gear. The final drive ration on the 3.9 engine is fairly low, compared to the 3.5. The 3.9 has more than enough power to support a higher gear. Perhaps in future models, GM will add that.
    Here's a couple of tips that might come in handy. GM recommends 30 pounds of air in these Goodyear Eagle LS2 tires, but Goodyear rates them at 35 pounds. I am currently running 33 front, and 30 rear...and may boost that to the full 35 in a few weeks to see if there is any difference. Having the tire pressure monitor in the DIC is a handy feature...and it compares right on the money with my good digital guage.
    For those of you who like to do their own oil changes, the oil filter is easy to get to. It mounts vertically at the front of the engine, and you will need one of those "cup" type filter tools to get it off...the frame makes it very difficult to get to the filter with a strap type tool. I use only WIX filters, and the number for the 3.9 engine is WIX 51522. The NAPA Gold filter (made by WIX) is 1522. Wix costs a little more ($7), but I'm convinced that they do a better job of cleaning the oil.
  • ivanadrivealotivanadrivealot Member Posts: 35
    First, I really like my '06 3LT. Handles very nicely (no surprises), lots of power, etc. The interior is very nice as well. No major complaints so far. GM did a good job overall with the redesign.

    However, after driving a new 3LT for a short while, I have a list of minor design annoyances just in case anyone at GM is monitoring this list:

    Sun visors are too small, both horizontally and vertically:

    There is too much open space to the left of the driver's visor which lets direct sunlight come through when the sun is positioned in the upper left corner of the windshield -- it's happened, and it's bad. Driver's visor (and probably passenger's too) needs to be wider and have a pull-down extender vertically. Duh!

    Needs more windshield tint at the top:

    Because of the small visors, the windshield could use more sun blocking along the top ridge. There's some black cross-hatching up there, but I wouldn't have minded having a nice thick band of darker tint along the top. I've had that in other cars and it makes a difference.

    Shifter blocks radio display:

    With 6-seater bench option, the stick shift on the column obscures the left-hand side of the radio display for my height while in Drive. I have to move to peek around it to see that part of the radio display.

    The radio/Bose speaker/amplifier option needs more bass:

    It has bass, and I suppose it's best described as a balanced "Bose sound". But occasionally I just want it to RUMBLE and it doesn't. It comes close at times, though. However, it just takes a fair amount of fiddling with the manual EQ and fade settings to eek out more bass, so that leaves me wanting a bit more. Don't get me wrong, it's a nice sound system with very clear tonal quality, and I love the line-in jack, but this is my main complaint with it.

    Ride was stiff and bumpy, until:

    I reduced the cold tire pressure from 35 psi on each tire (set at the dealership) to between 31-32 cold psi. Otherwise, I was literally jolted over every rut on the highway with the 17" rims and Goodyear touring tires. It just felt too stiff and hard. Noticeably smoother and forgiving now. Now when they warm up, the tires are between 33-34 psi according to the DIC. The door sticker lists 30 psi on all four tires, and I believe that's a minimum psi.

    Now for the good:

    My biggest concern when ordering, the driver's lumbar support, apears to have been nicely addressed by GM on the newer production models. I almost didn't buy the Impala based on very early models' seats. The lumbar just stuck out too far and was extremely uncomfortable, even when fully deflated (this was consistent between 4-5 early Impalas I test drove). I thought, "How am I going to be able to drive this if the seats give me a backache?"

    I was even prepared to take it over to a local upholterer to add some padding if necessary. After reading Healey's Impala review on USAToday.com, I took a chance. He said that beginning with cars made in August, GM was changing the driver's seat accordingly. So I ordered a new one to ensure the newer seat, and kept the upholsterer as a backup plan.

    Well, after driving 3-4 hours each way on the freeway with the new stock cloth seats, my back was supported very nicely, and I couldn't believe it -- no backache. I even pumped up the lumbar about 1.3 cranks to get a little more comfort. The firmer cushioning actually felt good on the long trip, and I suspect it'll probably hold up better in the long run (hopefully less sag).

    Anyway, that's my list for now. Again, these are mostly minor annoyances, as I love the car. Feel free to add to it -- perhaps GM may even learn from us, the customer. What a concept! ;) I hope this helps other buyers as well, since your discussions helped my decision process.
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    Any chance of the Impala getting the 3.6 DOHC as the La Crosse and the CTS? It's been one of the best V6 engines I've driven, with the best of the 3.8 OHV and the 3.5 DOHC.

    How does the 3.9 OHV drive compared to these engines, if anyone has driven them too?

    TIA
  • micwebmicweb Member Posts: 1,617
    I don't think the 3.6 DOHC will make an appearance in the Impala; the 3.5 and 3.8 engines have been a staple of this line since inception, and this year they actually did a major overhaul of both engines by converting to variable intake valve timing and boosting the 3.8 to 3.9.

    It isn't clear whether the 3.5 and 3.9 are actually even newer than that; I have heard, but been unable to confirm, that the 3.5 and 3.9 in 2006 are actually totally different from the 3.5 and 3.8 in prior years, and that both new engines derive from the recent re-engineering of the V-6 in the Malibu.

    So, in either scenario, Chevy has already invested a lot in upgrading the base and one-level up engines in the Impala; certainly the performance is a lot better than in the 2001 Impala, for example. The new 3.5 is about as powerful as the old 3.8, and the 3.9 is about as powerful as the old supercharged version of the 3.8.

    Plus, there is the 5.3 "short block" V-8 option.

    I don't think, therefore, that the 3.6 DOHC will make it out of the Buick family into the Impala.
  • hammen2hammen2 Member Posts: 1,284
    boosting the 3.8 to 3.9

    Just to clarify, the 3.9 is not based AT ALL on the 3.8. One is a 60 degree V6, the other a 90 degree V6.

    --Robert
  • micwebmicweb Member Posts: 1,617
    Do you have any additional details on the 3.5/3.9?
  • jpstax1jpstax1 Member Posts: 197
    I test drove a black Impala SS back in late August and loved its off-the-line acceleration, but was a bit concerned by some noticeable torque-steer. I'm seriously considering buying one next spring, but read that the DOD system also has some problems. So I'd to know if anyone has bought an '06 SS, and if so, whether you've had any problems with your car, especially the DOD system? Thanks in advance.
  • micwebmicweb Member Posts: 1,617
    Where did you read the DOD has problems? I haven't heard about any problems on the Chrysler system, so I figured maybe they (the collective automobile world) has worked out the problems this time around. Honda even has one on its minivan.

    I tend to bite the bullet and buy an extended warranty if there is a lot of new technology in any cars I buy. The factory extended warranties are transferable to your future buyer.

    I think whatever "bugs" are in the SS will be minor relative to the enthusiast desire for this car in the aftermarket. But, that's just my educated guess.
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    Both the current 3.5 and 3.9 are derived from the old 3.4, OHV 60° V6, with Aluminum heads.

    The 3.5 DOHC was an all-Aluminum 90° V6 and the 3.8 OHV is an all-Iron 90° V6.

    It sure is nice that the new engines got variable intake and valves, but multi-valve and cam phasing are the best thing after sliced bread. :D

    Don't get me wrong, I have a 3.8 Bonneville and a 3.5 Intrigue and I love the off-the-line punch of the former and the passing power of the latter, but I found both virtues in the 3.6 La Crosse.

    Has anybody driven a 3.6 La Crosse and the 3.9 Impala yet? Perhaps I should... ;)

    TIA
  • deminindeminin Member Posts: 214
    Has anyone driven the Lacrosse and Impala...........

    When we were shopping for a new car a couple of months ago, we drove the Lacrosse CSX. We looked at several cars, and it was coming down to a choice between the CSX and the Nissan Maxima. The only CSX's that the dealers had in stock were all dark colors, and we wanted a light color. Plus, the seat and interior in the CSX just didn't quite fit me right...subtle little things that would have probably been an aggrevation over time. Thats when the dealer pointed us towards a Light blueish gray Impala LTZ. The interior immediately felt better...the seats fit my old body better, and we both liked the appearance, etc. Taking it for a modest test drive, I could not tell much difference between the power and handling of the two cars. I could break the rubber loose at a traffic light in both the CSX and the LTZ...and neither had the horrific torque steer of the SS. Doing a fairly severe steering wheel whip at about 40MPH...to simulate swerving to miss a dog, etc., produced a controllable body lean and both cars recovered quickly and handled my little "test" well. I did notice, however, that the salesman double checked his seat belt, even though I warned him that I was going to test the suspension.
    Bottom line...both the CSX and LTZ appear to be excellent cars, and the differences are minor. Personal preference and a couple of thousand less for the LTZ were the deciding factors on our choosing the LTZ.
  • ivanadrivealotivanadrivealot Member Posts: 35
    FYI, Wikipedia has more info on the Impala's 3.5 and 3.9 engines, at: GM High Value engine

    I believe the 3.5 is the LZE engine (note the E85 fuel capability), and the 3.9 is the LZ9.

    I test drove the 3.6 LaCrosse CXS, the 3.8 Series III CXL, the Impala 3.5 and the 3.9 -- each at least twice. Ended up buying the 3.9 Impala 3LT (same as the LTZ for engine, suspension, tires, and rims).

    The 3.6 LaCrosse CXS is an impressive car. Lots of acceleration and the upscale touring suspension is sweet. Tighter in all the right places, yet very smooth where it needs to be.

    The two lower LaCrosse models are completely different cars in driveability and feel. For instance, the CXL's 3800 Series III engine paired with the sloppier suspension was noticeably slower and had too much wallow and float. I floored it and the front end jumped all over the place -- almost lost control on a country road, so it was quite unsettling. That didn't happen with the CXS. The CXL also nose-dived in moderate to heavy turns, where the CXS was more stable.

    Really liked the CXS inside and out, but thought it was substantially overpriced for the smaller size of the car. At $30,000 MSRP, I felt one can get into a better class of automobile for the money (so did the Consumer Reports review). It's still a beautiful car, though.

    Comparing the 3.6 CXS and the Impala 3.9 directly: The CXS was a bit quieter from the inside (Luxury-focused Buick worked a bit more on the sound deadening, to be expected over the value-based Chevy). Driveability-wise, both were very stable cars to drive. I could jerk both around and experienced very little body lean. Both had great power and acceleration, a testament to the new VVT designs over the old standard pushrods. Nicely tuned suspensions on both, and I like their stability -- no unnecessary surprises under heavy accleration or turning. I'd give the nod on the smoother ride to the Buick.

    Given the smaller size/weight of the LaCrosse, I'd say the 3.6 VVT is to the LaCrosse what the 3.9 VVT is to the Impala. In the end, I wanted a larger passenger compartment to fit my family more comfortably and have room for loading it up on long trips (Impala has a noticeably larger trunk). It just would have been too tight with the LaCrosse, especially in the back seat, and I saved a chunk of change by going with the Impala.

    I liked the overall looks and interior comfort of the Buick, including the standard leather seats, power lumbar pump, climate control, etc., many of which were missing from the Impala's equipment list. However, being an avid iPod user, the Impala's new line-in jack and Bose system was very compelling.
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    Ha, I didn't know that I could find such information on GM engines in Wikipedia! :surprise:

    I drove the La Crosse and was underwhelmed by its tight rear seat, especially when compared with the Regal. But the quality of the interior materials were a fine surprise.

    Thank you for sharing your experience in such a detailed way. ;)
  • drat19drat19 Member Posts: 28
    Envandro wrote: "I drove the La Crosse and was underwhelmed by its tight rear seat, especially when compared with the Regal. But the quality of the interior materials were a fine surprise."

    Sadly, the Impala suffers from the same tight rear seat. If your plan is to carry adults back there regularly and you (as the driver) are more than about 5'6" (and thus have your driver's seat pushed back accordingly), consider other cars (such as the Hyundai Sonata) with a more roomy rear seat. However, I don't carry adults in back regularly, so this shortcoming did not deter me from buying my Impala LTZ, which after 3500 miles is still performing to my high satisfaction.
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    What's going on at GM? :confuse: My test is to adjust the driver seat for my height of 6'5" and then sit behind it. I don't buy cars which don't pass this personal test.

    I would fit even in the back seat of my Alero, but wouldn't in the La Crosse, a far larger car. I sit comfortably in the previous Impala and Grand Prix, now it seems that both updated models did away with rear seat room. :cry:

    After a stream of American cars, it's becoming easier and easier to see myself driving an import... :surprise:
  • charts2charts2 Member Posts: 618
    The 2006 Impala lost about 1 1/2" leg room on the new model. For a large car it should have proper leg room. I noticed this also when I took out a 2006 SS in August and noticed the difference from my 2001 Impala LS.

    For sure the last couple generations, people have been getting taller/larger. I hope Chevy addresses this short coming in the next generation Impala.
  • ironjasperironjasper Member Posts: 21
    To address a couple of issues. I just bought an Impala SS, and so far the DOD has been working flawlessly.

    Secondly, there is a slight amount of torque steer, but even when you really "get on it" to pull out, or leave a light, it isn't that bad.

    Third, I'm 6' 2" tall, and when I have the front seat where I'm comfortable, I can also sit comfortably in the back seat. I certainly wouldn't call it a Limo, but it's not that tight. Plus, I can get 2 car seats for my twins + a booster seat in the middle for my 3 year old. :)

    So far, I'm very please with the car. My only slight complaint is that the front seats don't have enough side bolstering, and you tend to slide around on them a little bit when you are driving quickly.

    The car however seems to handle very well. Granted, I'm not auto-crossing the car, but it does seem to stick to the road well in the turns.

    Just my 2 cents.

    John
  • charts2charts2 Member Posts: 618
    My point about the leg/foot room is if someone in the front has the seat all the way back, and many people over your height do the foot room is noticeably smaller then the previous 00-05 Impalas. Check out the bolstered seats in the 2006 Pontiac GXP. I know a lot of car testers have indicated that the SS should have front seats with more side support. Maybe in 2007 they will address this. I have seen a lot of 2006 Impalas lately. GM indicates that they are slowly reducing the number of their vehicles sold to fleet. Down to 30% for the 2006 model year, this might help resale value down the road on these cars.
  • ironjasperironjasper Member Posts: 21
    Yeah, I will agree with that, if I put my seat all the way back the rear leg room is a little tight. I've actually never been in an older Impala however, so I can't compare my 06' to anything else. I needed the width of the back seat to accomodate my three car seats, that's where it's pretty good.

    I actually thought about the Grand Prix, but I'm not really crazy about the way it looks. I really like the clean look of the Impala.

    Plus, I'm not sure the Grand Prix has the I-pod input on the radio like the Impala, I couldn't find any information about this on the web page.

    It's a moot point now, I bought the Impala SS and I'm VERY happy with the car. I really look forward to driving the car whenever I get the chance.

    John
  • evandroevandro Member Posts: 1,108
    The thing with the La Crosse was more than numbers: they didn't look too bad on paper (37.6"), but actually seating there it was disappointingly small.

    The Impala sports the same measure, but I hope that the shape of the seats perhaps makes a difference.
  • vintagevintage Member Posts: 5
    I am 6'2" and when trying to sit in the back seat of a new SS I could not get out, my feet became wedged between the left and right seat adjusters. There is no room to turn your foot side ways to get out, you must lift up. Such a nice design on the outside but useless on the inside, very disap :sick: pointing
  • tina5tina5 Member Posts: 11
    I finally took delivery of my new Impala LTZ on Wednesday. So far I have only put 75 miles on it. But I'm very pleased with the car. It handles very well and I think the interior is just awesome, especially the radio controls on the steering wheel. That makes life so much easier. And I know I'll use the heating in the seat every morning. It feels so good. I really really love this car. Tried out the built-in phone, hehehe, just for the fun of it. Anyway, the only thing I find a little bit annoying is (like others mentioned before) the static on the radio. If this is such a great radio why does it produce the static sound. It just shouldn't be there. It bothers me. Hopefully they come out with a fix at some point in time.
  • jpstax1jpstax1 Member Posts: 197
    [quote]Where did you read the DOD has problems? I haven't heard about any problems on the Chrysler system, so I figured maybe they (the collective automobile world) has worked out the problems this time around. Honda even has one on its minivan.[unquote]

    I swear I read a post somewhere from an '06 SS owner. He complained his car was occasionally stalling. He said the dealer's mechanic traced it to the engine's DOD system. I searched all the forums I usually read, but can't fine it. I'll keep searching. If I do end up buying one next spring, I'll be sure to get the extended warranty like you suggested. Added insurance in case the DOD fails.
  • jcooleyjcooley Member Posts: 46
    See message 553 in this thread. They talk about their SS stalling but don't say the DOD is causing the problem.
  • zjimzjim Member Posts: 51
    I'm going to definitely be buying an '06 Impala. I'd like to buy the SS, but I'm concerned about the gas mileage, especially considering that it burns premium fuel. What say ye who owns one?
  • vanman1vanman1 Member Posts: 1,397
    Don't have to use premium, V8 runs on regular ok. Just a few less HP.
  • vanman1vanman1 Member Posts: 1,397
    I'm only 5 11" but I found the back seat not much worse than any other midsize. Only car I have seen with an amazing back seat is the Malibu Maxx.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles