By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Dispencer1 you give conflicting information. One minute your upset the Impala doesn't get recognition in comparison testing and in your post #1720 (check it out) you say: " The Impala is a relatively cheap full sized car that holds 5-6 people, rides well, has a good sterio but has HIGH depreciation because the Impala is nothing special. NOTHING SPECIAL! If its nothing special you say then I guess in comparison testing the Impala would be near the bottom in your view. "The Impala's interior doesn't even compare with the interior of the top of the line CAMRY or CAMRY SOLARA" you say. (the car you dumped you say). "GM needs to get its act together". "Chevrolet produces a good durable rental car, but thats about it" "Many of you are expecting too much of this vehicle". Dispencer1
Classifying the Impala as a durable rental car, but thats about it you say, would indicate to me that your impressions of the Impala are similar to the car magazine testers. Not at the top of their class & could do much better.
I rate the Impala higher then you do.
2/3 of Russia is in Europe, 1/3 (Sibir) in Asia, by area. By population it is about 85% to 15%. All Russian automotive plants are in Europe, mostly on the Volga river and in Moscow.
However, to name Russian cars European would be the same as to name Brazilian cars American. Legally right, but wrong in substance.
Sorry about the conflicts. I don't sleep with photos of the Impala under my pillow. It is just a car -better than some, worse than others. I think it is a fine choice for the money. I'm getting tired of replacing window strips however. They just did the driver's side Friday and it started screeching on Saturday. I sprayed it with Armorall and it stopped. We will see how long that lasts.
Off topic: I wouldn't mind owning the first month of the 1953 Playboy magazine. I am not a big fan of Marilyn Monroe but with her on the cover it commands big bucks.
I also have to thank Priggly, he's the reason I own an Impala SS.
Last year he mentioned the car on volkswagenvortex.com and his praise prompted me to take a look. As it turns out, I need the space for three car seats, so a Passat wasn't even an option. However, it's been 7 months and I'm still very happy with my SS.
Thanks!
John
I'm confused with the 300. Every car writer thinks it is really neat. It looks stubby to me with a grossly oversized grill . The little side windows make you feel like you are in a cave. MT tested the 300, Lucerne, and the Montego and thought the styling of the 300 was best. I sure didn't. I liked the Lucerne minus the silly portholes and the Montego looked streamlined too. I hope that the RWD Impala doesn't try and copy the 300.
So, I drive my 1998 Buick LeSabre 4 door back and forth to work and it gets 24-26 mpg with a 3.8L engine.
Per the dealer at the 9500 mile service, they ran out of reasons why it gets at best 22mpg, so they offered me the phone number of a rep at Chevy.....shoot me now.
Additionally, it was forecast that by the end of 2008, GM will produce as many as 200,000 vehicles globally with direct injection technology, and by 2010, GM projects one out of every six GM vehicles in North America will be equipped with a direct injection engine.
The application of direct injection technology to the 3.6-liter VVT engine – a member of GM Powertrain’s family of high-feature V-6 powerplants used on cars and trucks around the world – contributes greatly to a 15-percent increase in horsepower over the current levels that range from 240 to 267; an 8-percent increase in torque, and up to a 3-percent improvement in brake-specific fuel consumption (BSFC). An approximate 25-percent reduction in cold-start hydrocarbon emissions is also achieved.
With direct injection, precisely metered fuel is delivered directly to the combustion chamber, which has a cooling effect in the chamber. Cooling the incoming air charge enables a higher compression ratio, which also improves engine efficiency. Less fuel is required to produce the equivalent horsepower of a conventional port injection combustion system.
“The 3.6-liter VVT with direct injection will be our highest specific output non-turbocharged V-6 engine, as well as one of the most fuel-efficient offerings in our high-feature family,” said Tim Cyrus, chief engineer for high feature V-6 and Northstar V-8 engines. “It’s the latest example of our strategy to continue to reduce emissions and improve fuel economy without sacrificing performance.”
This is GM’s third engine with gasoline direct injection. The announcement of the 3.6L VVT V-6 with direct injection comes on the heels of the introduction of GM Powertrain’s Ecotec 2.0-liter four-cylinder Turbo engine with direct injection on the 2007 Saturn Sky Red Line and Pontiac Solstice GXP roadsters. Also, since 2004, a naturally aspirated Ecotec 2.2-liter direct injection engine is equipped on Opel models in Europe.
How direct injection works
Direct injection differs from the fuel delivery process of a conventional engine by delivering fuel directly into the engine cylinder, where it is mixed with air. The combustion process of conventional fuel injected engines uses air and fuel that partially evaporates in the intake port or intake manifold prior to being introduced into the combustion chamber. Direct injection is a continuation of the evolutionary process of moving the fuel introduction point closer to the cylinder to improve control.
With the 3.6-liter VVT with direct injection, fuel is introduced directly to the cylinder during the intake stroke. As the piston approaches top-dead center, the mixture is ignited by the spark plug.
The fuel injectors are located beneath the intake ports. The intake ports only transfer air, unlike port fuel injection, which flows air and fuel, thus increasing efficiency. D irect injection also permits a slightly higher compression ratio than if the fuel were delivered with conventional fuel injection. The result is better fuel consumption at part and full throttle. The engine uses conventional spark plugs similar to other high-feature V6 engines.
A high-pressure, returnless fuel system is employed. It features a high-strength stainless steel fuel line that feeds a variable-pressure fuel rail. Direct injection requires higher fuel pressure than conventional fuel injected engines and an engine-driven high-pressure fuel pump is used to supply up to 1,740 psi (120 bar) of pressure. The system regulates lower fuel pressure at idle – approximately 508 psi (35 bar) and higher pressure at wide-open throttle. The exhaust cam-driven high-pressure pump works in conjunction with a conventional fuel tank-mounted supply pump.
Direct injection’s fuel delivery enables very efficient combustion to help reduce emissions, particularly on cold starts – the time when most tailpipe emissions are typically created. Also, direct injection permits a higher compression ratio – greater than 11.0:1 in the case of the 3.6 – which has a positive influence on fuel economy.
3.6-liter VVT DI
The 3.6-liter VVT DI is based on GM Powertrain’s sophisticated 60-degree dual overhead cam (DOHC) V-6 engine. It is the latest member of a growing family of GM Powertrain V-6 engines developed for applications around the world, drawing on the best practices and creative expertise of GM technical centers in Australia, Germany, North America and Sweden.
Features found on the 3.6-liter VVT DI include:
-Aluminum engine block and cylinder heads
-Dual overhead cams with four valves per cylinder and silent chain primary drive
-High-pressure, engine-driven fuel pump
-Advanced multi-outlet fuel injectors developed to withstand high pressure and heat
-Stainless steel, variable pressure fuel rail
-Four-cam phasing (VVT – see description below)
-11.3:1 compression ratio
-Aluminum pistons with floating wrist pins and oil squirters
-Polymer coated piston skirts
-Forged steel crankshaft
-Sinter-forged connecting rods
-Structural cast-aluminum oil pan with steel baffles
-Electronic throttle control with integrated cruise control
-Coil-on-plug ignition
-Advanced direct injection capable engine control module (ECM)
-Optimized exhaust manifolds with close-coupled catalytic converters
-Fully isolated composite camshaft covers
-Outstanding noise, vibration and harshness control
-Maximum durability with minimum maintenance
-Common manufacturing practices for efficiency and exceptional quality
-Four-cam phasing
The 3.6-liter V-6 VVT DI employs four-cam phasing to change the timing of valve operation as operating conditions such as rpm and engine load vary. The result is linear delivery of torque, with near-peak levels over a broad rpm range, and high specific output (maximum horsepower per liter of displacement) without sacrificing overall engine response and driveability. When combined, direct injection and cam phasing technologies enable an unmatched combination of power, efficiency and low-emissions in gasoline V-6 engines.
Cam phasing pays big dividends in reducing exhaust emissions by optimizing exhaust valve overlap and eliminating the need for a separate exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system.
By closing the exhaust valves late at appropriate times, the cam phasers allow the engine to draw the desired amount of exhaust gas back into the combustion chamber, reducing unburned hydrocarbon emissions. The return of exhaust gases also decreases peak temperatures, which contributes to the reduction of oxides of nitrogen (NO x) emissions. In tandem with the dramatic 25-percent reduction in cold-start hydrocarbon emissions brought on by direct injection, th
I hate it when GM waltzes along. They need good press, they need better engines.
Whats it gonna take for them to fire full steam ahead!?
And they need to raise their warranties-now
Speaking of your Buick -I ALWAYS got 30 on the road with my '94 and 2002 LeSabres. The 3.8 is the best engine GM makes. The LaCrosse with the 3.8 would have been a better deal than this Impala.
1. The 3.6L direct injection, high tech engine will be reserved only for Cadillac and Buick models. The 200K covers the annual V6 volume for CTS, STS, LaCrosse (they do not use this name in Canada, BTW), and Lucerns. And they sell it to Suzuki to put in the XL-7 (Equinox clone, using the low cost Chinese imported 3.4L V6)
2. Chevy will soldier on with the low cost, "high value" pushrod V6's : 3.4L, 3.5L, 3.9L V6 for some years to come yet. They have to get back the tooling investment on these engines yet (probably 10 years min)
That is the thing that upset me about GM: they are withholding the best (engine, styling, transmission) from Chevy. They forgot that Chevy is the one responsible for the bulk of the company volume. May be they should use the Toyota's approach: implement the best on the volume vehicles. The new technology may be a bit more expensive, but it spread out on larger volume and that will drive down the cost quicker. Even their low life Scion vehicles have VVT engine.
jt
The problem is that the competition makes similar engines for their chevy equivalents. This is changing as GM is really doing right by its high value strategy, and with VVT and DoD, the pushrod V6's will give nothing to the fancier alumium blocks. Buyers can even brag about the DoD tech, as most DOHC's do not have that feature!
What is left, is for chevy to figure out how to do 3 valves per cyllinder for the OHV's. That would further refine the engines. For now, this is excellent and cannot be understated, the lower costs of these engines help GM be competetive as best it can.
The High feature engines getting DI is excellent, as buicks and cadillacs need a 300hp V6 to keep up with the asians and leave the europeans in the dust bin of history.
A good dead is how the previous gen. V6 3.6 is getting into pontiacs and Buicks. I would love to see a base lacrose 3.9 VVT DoD with 233hp, and a mid and uplevel 3.6L with 260+ hp. The Pontiac G6 is getting a 252hp version, and so is the aura. Sounds good. Gm is moving, and that benefits us all, as consumers, as workers in any company (since GM indirectly provides millions of jobs) assiciated with GM and as Americans.
Here in New York, managers are worried about GM because a GM collapse could cause serious reprecussions on the entire banking and finance indutries who have serious funds tied to GM.
A good GM is good for all of us, and I am so happy they took the lead with DI in the 3.6, just a few paces behind toyota, and infront of everyother company offering DI in such a high output, and cost effective package with VVT and the DOHC V6 format.
Has anyone here noticed a thumping in the trunk everytime they brake? I noticed it today when I had to drive her somewhere.
I don't think that the Impala engines, number of speeds in the transmission, or things like that are critical to the success or failure of this car or any other midsize sedan.
Finally, a post I can relate to! I bought my '06 LTZ under a little bit of "duress" (needed a car after Hurricane Katrina drowned my '03 Impala LS), but I also did specifially choose my LTZ - I wanted an up-level Impala but I specifically didn't want the SS/V8; was concerned about having an early-edition of the DoD setup. I also looked into the fact that the 3.9 was new, but that it was rated at 242 horses, so it would have plenty of get-up-and-go, and hopefully a little better gas mileage than the V8.
So far after 12000 miles my LTZ has met my expectations. Gas mileage averages around 26 in pure highway driving, and the 17 or so in city driving is perfectly fine with me given my lead-footed driving habits.
More to the point of the purpose of this point (the initial quote above), while technology does fascinate me to a certain extent, I'm more interested in whether the car and engine meet my needs (sufficient power and adequate enough gas mileage), and whether it will be reliable long term with few if any repairs if I do my part on the regular-maintenance end (so far so good). I also "know what I bought" in terms of my realistic expectations for an American-built car (i.e., stuff DOES happen, quality MAY be an issue on some components, and I paid $24K, not $40K); hence the extended warranty I bought.
How is your oil usage?? Are you burning any?
Gary
One more thing, someone asked recently about oil use in the 5.3L, I think. Mine used about a quart over the first 2000 miles. I changed oil at that point and I only buy Mobile 1. With about 3000 miles on Mobile 1, I haven't noticed any oil usage.
I have to disagree with you. If the customer isn't aware of these features directly then they're aware of these features indirectly by how the car drives down the road better.
Manufacturers don't come up with these features simply for the sake of bragging rights (but I have to admit that's partially true in some cases), they do it because they think it will improve the driving experience of the car.
Sure, your typical car consumer doesn't know the difference between an OHC and OHV engine. But they most likely can tell the difference on how they perform.
Kudos to GM for implementing these new features in their 3.6L engine. I'm sure most consumers won't know or even care about the new technology, but they will appreciate the improvements in the engine. And that is important in the success of a car.
1. Fuel Efficiency of the car
2. Smoothness of the engine
3. Shift Quality of the transmission
4. Tightness or Softness of the ride
5. Acceleration around town and hwy driving
Customers are not stupid. That is why they are buying more car based SUVs now than the good old body on frame vehicles nowaday. Majority probably do not know that the RAV4 is the car-based vs. Explorer being a truck-based SUV. All they know that the RAV4 is easy on their pocket book as far as gas purchase is concerned. Those who buy Lexuses or Buicks, expect the dead quiet car environment. They do not care how both companies go about things
As auto engineers or executives, it is their duty to translate these simple requirements into the system design.
If someone says they expect 50 MPG and still meet California emission control standard in 2010 for example, car makers know that current Diesel engine design is out and Hybrid with OHC gas engine is more likely the only option.
GM is killing the legendary 3800 engine because more and more, it is tough for them to meet future emission control standard without doing an expensive redesign.
jt
If this was not a second car I would have gotten the 3.9 because I would use the car for long distance trips.
So on the Impala thumbs up or down?
Thanks
Fuel mileage seems to be less than advertised with the 5.3L and 3.9L but I haven't heard any complaints on the 3.5L. Seems to come down to priorities, power vs. efficiency. Driven at legal speeds, highway mileage gets close to the EPA numbers but most people drive faster and economy suffers.
That's my $.02.
IMHO the '06 Impala is a "best buy" in its LTZ and SS configurations in the sports sedan arena. I have nothing but praise for the Impala SS.
I was also thinking of the 2007 Toyota Camry (more money) but it appears at the moment there is major problems with the V6, 6 speed auto trans. Is it just me or are the Asian, Japanese cars over rated because they all seem to have major issues in the past and present.
The Asian cars are overrated, overhyped and overpriced. Take a gander at the new Camry and Lexus ES 350 boards and check out the comments on ongoing transmission issues, viz. hesitation. The 4-speed GM transmission does NOT hesitate. In the SS the power is right there and right NOW.
Take a look at the Acura TL boards where some owners complain bitterly about harmonic vibrations (a "feature" of the car), rattles, poor quality vinyl dashboard prone to early fading, poor quality leather prone to early cracking and stretching, etc. Or peruse the BMW and M-B boards to see the many complaints of technology guffaws such as i-Drive or poor mechanical reliability, and all at exaggerated premium prices.
The situation with the imports, including both the Japanese and the German, is that now that they have captured market share their quality is falling and they have become apathetic. This is the exact reverse of the situation which existed 20-30 years ago when the domestics which had market share had become lax and the imports, then struggling to "make it" in the domestic market, offered increasing reliability and value. This of course now makes the domestics the better buy as their reliability and value quotients have had to rise to fend off the competition and the two have essentially switched positions compared to previous.
There is a lag period in the market between realization of today's falling quality and the strong reputation of the past. The same phenomenon occurred with Mercedes-Benz. It took some time before that brand's dismal quality of today impacted the previous reputation of prior solidity and reliability built up over many years. Same for VW. Most buyers are not savy enough to peruse the internet to inform themselves of the experiences of present day buyers but these days in view of all the information available there is really less chance of making an uninformed decision.
Chevrolet Impala: Warranty/Extended Warranty
Thanks for your cooperation!
Good luck on that 25-27 mpg estimate. My GXP has made several long highway trips, the only time I came close to 25mpg was on a day with no headwind, and mostly flat roads. It is possible, maybe, if you keep it to 70mph or less, my mileage was 21-22 at about 80-83mph.
My highway/city mix is similar to yours, around 21.5 if the city driving is kept to about 20% or less of the fuel tank.
Not complaining, the GXP is a fun car. Just don't get sucked in by the sticker on the window and look for 28mpg.
Mike
Regards
Quig
Something I hadn't thought of...if your battery is in the rear, are there posts under the hood that would allow you to jump start the car from either the front or the rear? It'd actually be kind of nice if you could, since invariably when my battery goes dead I'm pulled into a spot, and you can't get cables to reach all the way around.
I could live with a Bose issue. I couldn't handle some message light every time I headed off somewhere. I trust the dealership/ service department that I work with and they assure me that if I trade this one off.......I want another Impala LTZ.
The service writer told me that mine is the only one that they have seen on a regular basis. One other one has had a few minor issues, but that this is the best overall car from his standpoint that Chevrolet puts out. The general manager says the same thing. It's just that they don't want my car.
This is the third Impala that I have owned. The '03 sold me after some issues with the first one (an '02). When someone asks now about my car, my answer is, "I love the car, but hate this particular one." It was pretty bad when the service people knew it was mine before they even saw the dropoff notice.
I am still not sure about the air conditioning, but it seems to at least be putting out cool air now, rather than the warm fan air from Memorial Day. That is also my frustration. It does something and then by the time it makes it to the shop there doesn't seem to be a problem.
I stated in an earlier post, on the mechanical issues I have learned to ask ONSTAR to run a diagnostic. (If they detect a problem they keep it in the system for 5 calls.) That way, when it is not in the car's memory, I have someone to back up what the stupid car was trying to tell me.
By the way, the gas mileage yesterday for strictly highway driving was 30+. It dropped to 24 when I added the in town driving needed, but needless to say, I was pleased.
I like it better in the trunk, personally.