2006 Chevrolet Impala

dispencer1

You are right about the DTS. The gas mileage on the road is about the same but my experience with the '03 Deville is that it gets about 15 around town. The Impala gets 17-20. It is funny - back when I was looking around at Malibus in 2001, I drove a number of GM cars including a Lumina (old fashioned and I felt cramped in it), Alero (I'd had a '94 Skylark and it felt about the same), and Intrigue (very hard ride - perhaps it had a performance suspension. Anyway it was stiff and uncomfortable which suprised me because the Impala, Century, etc all rode comfortably). I needed something so I bought an '01 Malibu from Hertz. It was essentially trouble free for 90,000 miles when I sold it and bought this new Impala. It is tempting to keep moving up in price on a car like Impala. I wasn't looking for a luxury car. I have one. I just wanted something that was nicer than my Malibu. I got the 3.5 litre engine because it got better gas mileage in town than the 3.9 and I don't normally take this car on the highway. I got the Bose stereo, ABS, Traction Control, and the flip and fold rear seats. I could have gotten the LT3 but was concerned about the ride with the 17" tires and didn't want the 3.9 but could have lived with it. When you get up to the high 20's on an Impala it is close to the base models of much more prestigious cars such as Lexus, Avalon, and even a Caddy CTS but the CTS sizewise is about like a Malibu. It also has a "performance" suspension -I frankly don't like the way it rides. I used the new Malibu LT as a benchmark and shopped around that price give or take a grand. The Impala felt like a bigger car all around and the interior was nicer although the door panels on my vintage '86 Silverado pickup are nicer. I once had an Olds Silhouette (1998) and I was lucky to have had the GMPP. The car was a bunch of junk. My wife's new Odyssey is 50 times the car.

wold_77

I have had my 2006 Impala SS since November 2005. I have 5,000 miles on it, at 3,000 I put synthetic oil in the car. I drive it like a vette since I drove it off the show room floor. I have no complaints about the car. I have owned 3 different years of Impalas 2000, 1995, 1969. I think this is the best Impala chevy has built yet. Do not like the front wheel drive but the trans seems to be able to keep up with my heavy foot. I have not done the brake recall yet but I will decide to do that soon. A friend and I go out to rural roads on the weekend and he has a 2000 M3 BMW and the car has no problem keeping up in the corners or strait aways. I think the sqeek redution tape is a joke for the TSB on ip noise but what ever works. GM warranties not to worried I have owned many GM cars and trucks never had any major problems such as engine or trans under 100,000 miles. I have had minor problems but nothing to make me change my mind about GM cars. GM car like to be driven hard but make shure you take care of them in return such as servicing at the correct time. Long time GM owner!

charts2

By the time you have wrung out your 06 Impala SS you will be ready for the RWD one coming for the 2009/10 model year. GM is talking about a larger Impala with options up to 400+ hp LS2. GM says it will be bold like the Chrysler 300 was when it came out, with retro enhancements from the mid 60s Impalas. GM has admitted that many of their currant models are bland and they want to get back to aggressive styling and leadership like they were 35/40 years ago. I believe the new Impala will be built in Oshawa Ontario, along with the new Camaro that is almost a sure bet.

wold_77

I would love to get my hands on a rear wheel drive impala again. We will see what GM comes up with, would not be surprised if it turns out to be a hybrid!

jcooley

Has anyone been able to register their 2006 Impala's Vin number on the owner center website at gm.com. I've had mine 5 months and its still says the Vin number is not in their records.

jz68

Same thing here. I've had mine for 4 months and still no record of my Vin.

quietpro

Ditto...same here. I've had mine 3 1/2 mos. I just tried again last night. Attention to detail seems to be lacking a bit.

06fasst

i was able to sign up about one week after i purchased mine if that, plus you may want to try sending them an email, they sometimes repond quicker to that, i love the site!

golfnut5

I noticed the new 2007 Camry has a new 3.5 V6 with the following output 268 HP / 248 Torque mileage = 22/31. The Impala's V6's are as follows: 3.5 211 HP / 214 Torque mileage = 21/31, 3.9 242 HP / 242 Torque milage = 19/27. Why does the Chevy 6's have such a low output when compared to the Camry? Is this a technology gap? If it is, the gap is large.

quietpro

Before you start dissin' American technology, you may want to go a little further than max output numbers. There is a lot to be said for the power curve. If an engine has a flatter curve, meaning near peak power throughout the RPM range, then it will be much more impressive than an engine with a high peak of power in a limited range of RPM. The 3800, which is a very old engine (42 yrs if I'm not mistaken), had been fine tuned throughout the years. It wasn't impressive technologically speaking, but it was a very smooth engine delivering respectable power and torque even though it's peak power is only 200 hp. I don't have a lot of knowledge of the three engines you're mentioning here but it is possible the lower Chevy numbers may make for a larger power band.

golfnut5

quietpro,

I am not dissin American technology, just wondering why the difference in numbers. Posted below are comments from a recent Edmunds V6 family sedan comparison test.

"The 2007 Camry is a do-it-all automobile, the one that pleases Mom and Dad and impresses the boss without embarrassing the kids. The V6 Camry makes the dash to 60 mph in less time than a recent BMW 330i did, it was nearly as quiet as a Bentley Flying Spur at idle and wide-open throttle, and its 22 city/31 highway EPA fuel economy rating matches that of a four-cylinder Honda Civic Si. Pretty impressive stuff to say the least".

venus537

GM pushrod V6 engines are not known for their smoothness. Not compared to the V6s from Honda, Toyota, Nissan and GMs' own 3.6 DOHC anyway.

The pushrods may match the OHCs power band at the low end but not at higher RPM.

So yeah, the new Camry's V6 is more than a match to the V6s that propel the Impala.

imidazol97

>22 city/31 highway EPA fuel economy rating matches that of a four-cylinder Honda Civic Si.

Do you think Edmunds reviewer was trying to twist the point by comparing to a 4-cyl Si rather than the 4-cyl which is rated 30/40 by Edmunds here? We know Edmunds loves the Toyotas. The Camry looks butt-ugly. Especially the butt. What an odd-looking trunk lid... Saw some while on vacation this week.

imidazol97

Do you have a graph of the torque vs rpm and of horsepower vs rpm for the Toyota's motor.

The graphs for GM's motors are available online. Most people drive in a way that the torque at lower speeds is relevant to the feel of the power of the car rather than horsepower rating which peaks at a high rpm value.

venus537

No I don't and I'm too lazy to get one.

I'm not disputing what you're saying about low end torque. Just saying that the toyota's 3.5 isn't deficient in that regard.

jnt

It is not GM that does not have the OHC technology, they chose not to use them for certain vehicles For example, Cadillacs and certain Buicks, Saturns have OHC V6, V8 engines while the rest (Chevy, Pontiac, GMC,..) make due with OHV engines. It is cost issue for GM: OHC cost more than OHV due to engine complexity. But GM and Chrysler OHV engines are among the best of it kind. Chrysler Hemi V8, Chevy Small Block V8 (on Corvett, Tahoe, Silverado) and the GM 3800 V6 are among the best for power and fuel efficiency. Of course, GM also has its share of bad OHV V6 (like the 3100, 3400 and their ancestors)

Other companies (Toyota, Honda, Ford (except on some vehicles), Hyundai,...) decided to apply OHC across the board to lessen the cost per unit and simplify their options.

Remember the basis of Internal Combustion engine has not changed for 100 years. In fact, OHC (in today mordern cars) was available in one Indy racing car in 1930's. Automotive technology has changed at the snail pace. Most of the advancements in the last 20 years are the application of Electronic control (Fuel injection, Direct Injection, ABS, Traction control...). Excepting the recent advancement of Electric and Hybrid, things are kind of boring in this industry. That is why the Japanese are so good at making cars: they improve them to dead since the auto technology is not obsoleted every 2-3 years like in PC business. Have your seen any Japanese company succeeding in PC business?

jt

jz68

As jcooley said, take a moment and shoot an email to GM. I emailed them Friday night at 3am and by 12pm the next day my VIN had been entered. Pretty impressive email support

vanman1

Torque is what you should look at when buying a car. Horsepower is less important. No doubt Impala is down when you compare 3.5L to 3.5L. The 3.9L is more comparable for power but with the 4-speed you suffer a little on mileage vs Camry.

Hopefully Impala will get the new version of the 3.5L for 2007. It's rated at 224hp and 220 ft lbs. of torque. I think GM should be able to get more out of the 3.5L even if it is an OHV design.

Still, cheapest V6 Camry is $23,040 MSRP where you can get a base V6 Impala for $20,990 MSRP.

quietpro

I got my VIN in the GM Link system by emailing as well. Mine was done in a few hours. Thanks for the tip, jz68.

charts2

Latest from GM is that this current 2006 Impala style will be available for 2007 & 08 and the next generation Impala will start production sometime in 2008 as a 2009 model. The next Impala will be larger, much more aggressive looking, more upscale, with options including Corvette power, possibly AWD and a Hybrid model. The Malibu that is due for a major refreshening will take over as the mid sized chevy. I doubt GM will make an engine change on the Impala for 2007. I would believe only minor changes for the next two model years. Torque numbers equate more to acceleration. Horsepower more to top end performance. Torque is a much more important number for 0-60 times.

jz68

An AWD Impala with aggressive looks and corvette power? I was pretty sure that my next car would be the new Camaro, but if this is true I might just be in another Impala.

charts2

Latest word from GM is that as of right now the #1 plant line in Oshawa Ontario will close in 2008. It currently makes the Pontiac Grand Prix and Buick Allure. The #2 line makes the current 2006 Impala/Monte Carlo but is scheduled to close in 2009 and the next generation Impala/Monte Carlo and the new Camaro almost a sure thing will be built there. GM is speeding up tooling for these new generation cars to catch up with the competition especially Chrysler who has had great success with their bold RWD automobiles. Do'nt be surprised if a rush is done to get the new Impala to market sooner. possibly late 2008 as a 09 model. Approval for the new Camaro will probably be announced within a couple months.

balich

Folks,

I need honest opinions on the following ... THANKS IN ADVANCE!!!

What are your thoughts on the 3.5L engine
Does it accelerate well ?

Any known issues on the 1st batch of Impala's off the assembly line ? Where looking at one that was manufactured on LATE '05 as a '06 Model.

We are looking at a 1LT w/ following options: front buckets, sunroof, Alum. wheels, universal home remote

Price $20k out the door .. thoughts ?

quietpro

Balich,
I've been an Edmund's forum junkie ever since I discovered it (shortly after buying my '06 Impala SS). Most of the issues mentioned so far have been annoyances although there are a couple larger issues which seem to be sporadic. The annoyances are: clicking sound in or behind the dash and heated seats deactivating randomly. There is a fix (TSB) for the dash clicking. I don't think they've nailed down the heated seat issue. There is also an issue with the Bose sound system where static or hiss is heard at low to medium volume levels. Some say it's no big issue but several of us (me included) feel it's unacceptable. There have been a couple entries about spontaneous battery drain but it seems to be isolated.
As for the 3.5L engine, my nephew owns a 1Lt and he loves it. But, he's moving up from a four cylinder in his last car. It has respectable performance but is no hot rod. I think you'd be best served by taking a long test drive and see what you think. I think it has ample power for the average driver.
Overall, I love my Impala. My last car was an '02 Monte Carlo SS (which is built on the same platform). There are many improvements in the '06 in fit and finish, suspension, and of course engine choices. There are three '06 Impalas (SS, 3LT, 1LT) in my family and all of us are pleased. $20K sounds like a good deal. I hope this helps.

golfnut5

jnt,

Thanks for information. Seems like Toyota keeps raising the bar.

nosirrahg

I tend to agree that the current Impala style is to be short-lived. When the 2000 model came out, they only offered a base model and an LS...took a year or two (maybe more, I can't remember) to get an SS version. Generally speaking manufacturers introduce special editions of a vehicle to prolong its shelf-life, breathing hoped-for new life into a model that's perhaps starting to lose some steam. When the 2006 model was introduced with multiple models (including the V8SS model), I wondered where they could go next, since they came out of the starting gate with so many options. But if this update proves to only be a 3-year run, that could explain things.

ivanadrivealot

Regarding your question on the 3.5L, here are some thoughts from a 3LT (3.9L) owner, who also test drove several 2LT's and LTZ's before choosing:

The 3.5 engine has plenty of pickup, at least for everyday driving on a mostly empty car (one or two occupants, and an empty trunk). I'll defer to 3.5L owners, but would be much more concerned for fully loaded trips with the family and loaded trunk when trying to accelerate quickly up hills, around semis, etc.

Also, two of the 3.5L engines I drove in the Fall definitely exhibited the problem of extended cranking required when the engine was hot (right after the test drive). There's now a TSB for this. But at the time, that problem greatly concerned me and helped me choose the 3.9L. Even the salesman was surprised by it, sitting next to me when it happened. If the PCM reprogramming cures it, that's good news.

Now with that said, if you're worried about the price of gas going up and up, then the 3.5L is probably a good selection. IMHO, the E85 feature only has worth if you're actually able and want to use it. You'll lose mpg with E85, perhaps up to 25% by one account I read, because it doesn't pack as much energy per gallon as regular gas.

If you fully load up the car with family, pet, luggage, gear, etc., for trips, then I'd recommend the 3.9L. Even fully loaded, it feels like it has more power and refinement than the 3.5L in an empty car, and provides a very confident ride (like when you need to power past somebody in a hurry to get out of a problem). Yes, you take a hit in the mpg department which will cost you a few extra dollars per week, but so far it's been great.

Lastly, take a look at Healey's review in USA Today, as I found his comments to be pretty much right on the money:

"Models powered by the 3.9 V-6 have a sweetness about them, a combination of precision and comfort, that makes you think GM has broken the code. The others aren't bad, but the 3.9-equipped cars seem to have the right mix of power, stability, smoothness.

The 3.5-liter base engine is taxed on hills and when the car's loaded, even though it's more powerful than in the previous Impala. Think twice before you choose it."

I thought this was a balanced review, being neither overly critical nor forgiving.

Anyway, the above was my thinking when I went shopping last fall. If fuel economy is your overriding concern, get the 3.5. If not, the 3.9 gets my vote. Yes, I wish it got better gas mileage, but it has performed well for my needs and preferences thus far. After all the test drives, I was just left with the impression that the 3.5 was slightly underpowered for this car. Not bad, mind you (I've definitely driven much worse in rentals/loaners), but not great either.

Hope this helps.

poncho167

I have only driven the Malibu with the 3.5 L engine and think it is a hot rod in that car. Very quick, but smooth exceleration with above average economy.

raym0016

I will agree. I have driven the malibu with the 3.5 and that car is a fun car to drive. I don't know what the differnce in weight is but that has to have something to do with it. I am very impressed with the malibu. That car with the 3.9 would be a hot rod much like the G6 GXP.

chats1

Just to let you know the Pontiac G6 does not come in a GXP, but a GTP -- big difference. The Pontiac G6 took the place of the Grand Am. The Grand Prix comes in the GXP. And, also I believe the Pontiac Solstice will be coming out in a GXP. I have a 2006 Grand Prix GXP. My GXP has a 5.3 engine and 303 horsepower. It is very very fast.

rayainsw

"Just to let you know the Pontiac G6 does not come in a GXP, but a GTP -- big difference."

A GXP version of the G6 was shown at the NY Show.
- Ray
Preferring the V8 GP GXP - assuming the show car was close to what is eventually produced . .

chats1

Thanks, Ray. I didn't know that. I also prefer my V8 GP GXP. I don't like the rear-end of the G6. The Solstice is supposed to come out though in a GXP, right. I saw my first Solstice Convertible on Saturday. It was a beauty. But, for me I prefer front-wheel drive because of the snow. Thanks for correcting me. I didn't know that they were going to make the G6 in the GXP.

dispencer1

I've seen the 2007 Camry. The interior rivals the Avalon on the $26k model but the car still looks about the same size as a Malibu. In my estimation, Camry will be the best seller for '07. I really can't figure out why GM can't produce something that at least looks like a Camry inside. I am not concerned about the "smoothness" of the engine. My Impala drives just fine -perhaps I'm not sophisticated - an engine is an engine, but the interior on the Impala doesn't compare in the least to the new Camry or a base Avalon. The fabric upholstery is too light - it will look terrible after a few years in households with kids -the door panels are plain and look like you could clean them off with a hose. Don't get me wrong - I bought a 2LT and like it - it is a great car and probably rides smoother than a Camry. It is also bigger than a Camry -it is virtually the same size as an Avalon but $5k cheaper. GM compares the Malibu to a Camry and shouldn't. There is no comparison.

dispencer1

Any word from GM on what they are going to do with the Cadillac DTS in 2008 or 9? Hopefully there will be a body change. The present 2000 body (with the '06 update) is getting a bit long in the tooth.

charts2

You won't see any interior changes or significant upgrades to the Impala until the next generation cars. There might be one or two new exterior colors and maybe an additional color for the interior but that will be about it. We must not forget that Chevrolet is the entry car division of GM. Buicks would compare more to Camry/Avalon upscale interiors. GMs focus is now on the RWD or AWD 2009 Impala. The next generation Pontiac Grand Prix might be called the G8. Current Grand Prixs will cease production in model year 2008.

dispencer1

I think that this is a fine comment about the 3.5 vs the 3.9. I bought the 2LT with the 3.5 because most of my driving is around town. I'll take the car to Dallas this weekend and I'll see what it is like for passing. I'm usually the only occupant. I think the decision depends on what the car is used for. If this was my only car -or a "first car" , I'd probably get an LTZ or 3LT with the 3.9. In my case, it is essentially a second car so I didn't need the luxury stuff - leather, sunroof etc. I've got a Deville for road trips. I did get the flip and fold rear seat, ABS/Traction Control, and the Bose Stereo. This is a good all-around car -much nicer than a Malibu. The 3.5 is fine for the driving I do.

vanman1

The Malibu is starting to get a little dated now but it still great for value in base form especially. The Impala is bigger than Camry and the Camry slightly bigger than Malibu (but not much). GM does not make an absolute direct competitor to Camry (size/engines/features), but thats ok.

Impala needs more upgrading for 07 IMO and Malibu needs a refresh inside.

New to the mix, the new Saturn Aura looks awfully decent compared to Camry. Beautiful interior, standard safety galore and slick looks to boot. The new Fusion is also a nice machine, I want to try one at some point.

Interesting times in the sedan market again!

[Deleted User]

The Malibu is supposed to be the Camry (and Fusion) competitor. The Impala is a bigger car--almost exactly the same size as the Ford Five Hundred (and the Dodge Charger). The back seat may be a bit tight, but it is still rated full-size by the EPA.

Of course people may cross-shop among the intermediates and full-size models. But when a car like the 500 or Impala is 10 or more inches longer than the Fusion or Japanese competitors, that really is a significant size difference for many buyers.

gened1

Both an 05 500 and an 06 Impala. While the exterior of both might be almost the same the 500 is by far the more spacious interior wise. The sightlines are great, the command seating worth every penny. Instrumentation is top notch (tho I do miss the onstar and built in phone of the Impala) and the back seat is an added plus.
Gene

poncho167

I have never been in a 500, and don't find the car particularly attractive (kind of bland), but I have heard it does have a good sized interior though some writers claim the fit and finish could be better.

gened1

Yourself. Don't rely on me or other people to tell you what you can learn first hand. Then come to your own conclusions. I just stated my first hand opinions your results may vary.
Gene

[Deleted User]

The 500 is very, very bland. Putting the new Ford 3 bar grill on the 2008 will not change the blandness.

The 2006 Impala is a bit better than the 500 (and certainly better than the 2005 Impala), but just a bit. They are not cars anyone buys for the looks. Neither are they cars that people will look at because they stand out. At least the Dodge Charger gets looked at because it is polarizing. A lot of us find it ugly, but some people think it is "different" or "funky." And of course you can get a hemi.

imidazol97

Had a Milan and Impala pass me on the interstate this morning. The Impala looked better. The Milan had a, well, 300 look to a puffed up trunk lid and a Camry look to the taillights.

nosirrahg

I bet/hope the next generation Impala falls more into the Charger camp style-wise; I think the current Impala is unoffensive enough, but it is too bland, with too much of an Asian influence to the exterior. At least the 2000-2005 model is immediately identifiable as an Impala; I have to look twice at the new ones sometimes to see if it's a Malibu or an Accord.

Admittedly I'm biased as a 2000 Impala owner, but when the 2006 came out I felt it went too conservative. To me the 2006 is more of an evolution of the previous generation Lumina than the '00-'06 Impala.

poncho167

I agree, the new Impala is nothing to look at but is very functional. I too like the previous style better.

charts2

GM has come a long way the past 2 or 3 years in making their products more reliable and functional but so have the other manufacturers. GM has to concentrate on making each of their models more distinctive. Currently the Malibu SS, Monte Carlo SS, and Impala SS all basically look the same from the front end. I do believe the next Impala will move away from the cookie cutter look of most foreign competitors, and GM will get back to finding their roots in making exciting products again like they did when they were #1 back in the 60s. Chrysler is the talk of design and performance right now, Chevy has to hit a home run to be competitive in the future. This generation wants more then functionality they want styling/performance all in one package, something to set them apart from everyone else. Hopefully GM will deliver.

exalteddragon1

The 2007 Impala will get the new 3.9L V6 with VVT and DoD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Remember that the older 3.9L (or last years engine) did not have Dod, now with Dod hyway milege soulh improve, as well as milage at idle.

To further improve fuel economy, they should make it out of an alluminum block, but what they are doing now is a very good thing.

PS no mention on the 3.9L HP changes...

quietpro

The 3.9L already has VVT (variable valve timing). It's possible it will get a minor hp boost as more data becomes available but I doubt it will a large increase.

DOD is helpful but it won't help mileage at idle. It only "engages" at light loads while cruising. Judging from the way it works on the 5.3L, it would cause the engine to run rough, if at all, at idle.

exalteddragon1

The cyllinders should be cut off at idle. GM should have solved the problem of "rough" running at idle, since thats what they held back the V6 for in the first place.

Very interesting as it seems GM's Iron Black OHV is becomming more tech advanced than the DOHC. LOL, meybe the DOHC will also get DoD???????????? :surprise:

Now THAT would sell cars.

jz68

I have an 06 Impala SS and decided to clean out my interior today. I had the 4 doors opened and the radio playing at low volume. I finished after around 25 minutes and then tried to start the car. There was not even enough power left to turn it over.

Doesn't 25 minutes to a drained battery seem unreasonable even with the Bose system? :confuse: