Howdy, Stranger!

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

Chevrolet Impala Real World MPG



  • quigquig Posts: 16
    I just bought a new Impala Lt 3.5 the book says break in at 500 miles should not the break in be a little more than that. and what speed should I drive it at for a good break in.
  • nosirrahgnosirrahg Little Rock, ARPosts: 872
    The most important thing to avoid is driving at one constant speed for an extended period of time. Don't use your cruise control, and stay off Interstates if you can. I'd probably avoid driving over 60MPH if possible...maybe take a long trip over the holiday on a two-lane backroad somewhere! :)
  • quigquig Posts: 16
    Thanks Nosirrahg
  • zizithzizith Posts: 11
    On straight highway driving I get 32 + a tenth or two, and 26 in town averaging about 28. I wanted to downsize from the minivan due to the gas prices (and with the middle east thing getting shakier again, it will go up some more.) Going 70 mpg drops it down to 28mpg.

    I am pleased with the mileage--after reading so many posts in edmunds, I was beginning to think that nothing but Toyotas and Hondas could get good gas mileage. I was brought up in a junk yard in Iowa, and learned to prefer Chevys, and I still do; they have usually served me VERY well over the years.

    This one is white with lots of pinks stripes and decals, so if you ever see one like that, please wave, as there probably aren't many out there with that color combo. zmartha :) :)
  • quigquig Posts: 16
    Hi question I bought a new 3.5 Lt 2 at what mileage point did you start driving over 60 to 70 MPH highway driving.(What was your mileage break in point)

    Thank you
  • prigglypriggly Posts: 642
    I am pleased with the mileage--after reading so many posts in edmunds, I was beginning to think that nothing but Toyotas and Hondas could get good gas mileage.

    I have a new SS which has less than 1,700 miles on the odometer and am currently getting 31-32 miles per US gallon at a steady 60 mph on the highway. In the city the mileage is 17-18 mpg. These numbers are exactly in line or better than EPA estimates. The car is simply great and I could not be happier with it!
  • timothyawtimothyaw Posts: 148
    60 mph?? That's pretty slow on todays American freeways! You'll get ran over, literally! With that big V8, you're wasting it only going 60!

    Toyota's and Honda's get low to mid 30's going 70, 75!
  • quietproquietpro Posts: 702
    Toyota's and Honda's get low to mid 30's going 70, 75!

    Yeah, and it only takes them twice as long to get up to that speed. :D
  • bxdbxd Posts: 186
    I don't have any hard data, but I can help you think this through somewhat. Would be nice if someone could find some manufacturer's data on it.

    Take car "A", gets 30mph on the highway, like the Impala. That means about 2 gallons per hour burned. Now that is at about 3 times the RPM of simply idling.

    So one hour of idling would consume 2/3 gallon of gas IF the engine load was similar. Which it isn't - even if the AC is on the engine has it easy just idling compared to going down the highway.

    So my (admittedly rough) guess would be about 1/2 gallon of gas per hour of idling. Maybe I'm missing some other factor that someone will point out, but I think RPMs and engine load (which affects fuel injector duty cycles) pretty much sums up gas usage.
  • giltrdngiltrdn Posts: 2
    I have been making myself crazy trying to figure out what kind of car to buy. Currently I have a Cadillac DTS and with my 90% in city driving i get between 10 & 12 mpg. I have been toying with the SS because of the cylinder shut down in stop and go traffic, but i can't seem to get a real handle on how substantial my mileage will increase over my caddy. HELP!!!....
  • quietproquietpro Posts: 702
    I have an acquaintance with an '06 SS and he drives very short distances. He gets around 14 mpg. I drive stop and go ranging from 60 mph down to stop and go and average about 16 mpg. You can squeeze out decent mileage if you can manage to keep your foot out of the accelerator but it's difficult. The SS sounds so good it's hard to resist. :)
  • Just figured I add to the discussion since I own 2 Impalas.

    My 2002 LS with a 3.8 does 30 - 32 MPG on the Highway even at 75 MPH and with the A/C on. It has been this way since the break in mileage, to now with 67,000 on it. I get around 25 to 27 city and highway. I use 89 octane, it is dog with 87!

    Compare that to the 2006 LT3 with the 3.9 which I now have 7,000 miles on. It does 27 MPG on the highway and 22 to 24 city and highway. Same speeds, same octane, same conditions.

    Even though there is not a big difference in engine displacement, I attribute this big difference and decrease in MPG for the 2006 to the way the transmission is set up for shifting. The 2006 shifts down at relatively slower speeds than the 2002. If I want the 2002 to down shift I have to put a decent amount of pressure on the pedal, where it takes only slight pressure for the 2006 to down shift. Fact is that the 2006 is going to down shift whether I like it or not, where as the 2002 I can regulate better with my foot. Fact is, I like the way the 2002 shifts compared to the 2006.

    Also, the transaxle gearing (or what was known as the rear end in the rear wheel drive cars) is different on the 2006.

    The 2002 is at about 2,000 RPM at 65 - 72 MPH where the 2006 is at about 2,300 RPM at the same speed.

    Maybe with the new 3.9 engine they had to use different shift points and gear it differently?

    Any comments are welcome.
  • Your 2002 3.8 LS has a 3.05 final drive ratio, compared to a 3.29 for the 2006 3.9 LT3/LTZ. That alone can account for up to 10% diffence in highway mileage.
  • oldharryoldharry Posts: 413
    With the 3.8, the wife gets 19 to 22 mpg around town, depending on weather (better in summer). On trips to our son's place, 150 miles all hyway or expressway, we get between 27 and 31. The computer is within .1 mpg of fill up calculations, and one trip recorded 29.4 ave mpg / 78.9 ave mph. I was very satisfied with this economy at this speed, the needle passed 90 on some stretches.

    The 96 Lumina 3.1 we had before did slightly better on fuel, but the performance of the 3.8 is good enough to be worth the change.

  • I am pondering on whether to purchase the SS with the V8 or the LTZ with the 3.9 L V6. I am commuting approx. 30 miles to work each day and would use this vehicle for commuting.

    I have read postings regarding gas mileage on the SS and how it compares to the V6's. I love the V8 and the idea of owning the SS. Given a total commute of approx. 60 miles each day that is mostly rural driving (not highway), will the gas mileage difference from the V8 to the V6's make a significant enough impact from an expense perspective?

    I currently have a 1999 Grand Prix with a 3.8L V6, gas mileage has been average at best.

    I would appreciate any responses. Your responses will have a significant impact on my decision. Thank You.
  • bxdbxd Posts: 186
    It would help to have a little more info about your commute. Average speed? Lots of stops?

    However, from the tone of your comment about your Grand Prix, you don't seem too happy about the gas mileage you get with it. Is it supercharged?

    Even if it is, an SS will be WORSE on gas than your Grand Prix. So if you're not happy with the Grand Prix the SS is out of the question. Actually even the LTZ might be too much engine if you have a normally aspirated 3.8 and want better mileage... might be looking at a 3.5 then.

    Maybe your GP isn't running up to snuff? Low 20s in city driving and high 20s in highway driving is what you should expect from it.
  • My average commute speed is approx. 60 mph. There are two stops through smaller towns. My Grand Prix is the normally aspirated 3800 V6 with 200 HP. My average MPG in the city ranges 12-17 and approx. 21-23 on the highway (approx. 65 MPH).

    I realize the new Impala SS has an EPA of 18 and 27. Just wondering how realistic this is. My driving is fairly steady at optimal mpg levels. At the very least, given the above information, I don't want to backslide for a mileage perspective if I purchase the SS.

    Any comments are appreciated.
  • nosirrahgnosirrahg Little Rock, ARPosts: 872
    FWIW as I'm considering replacements for my 2000 Impala w/3.8l, I played around in Excel and took the EPA MPG figures for the car (which I think were 20 city/30 highway) and adjusted the percentage of each until it equaled my overall average in the car - which was somewhere around 22.5 MPG, and meant @ 60% city driving and 40% highway. I can then plug in the city/highway figures of other cars at the same ratios, and figure I get a pretty accurate depiction of what a new car would deliver, based on the way I drive.

    You can also do this at your car and do a comparison with others; there's a small-print link that allows you to adjust the % of city/highway driving to get an apples-to-apples comparison. In my case I'm averaging 23 MPG, and the 2007 Impalas would deliver 24 w/3.5, 23 w/3.9, and 21 w/5.3 (indicating the 3.9 should be comparable to the 3.8).
  • quietproquietpro Posts: 702
    Here's the best I can offer. I used to own an '02 Monte Carlo SS with the 3800. With it, my daily commute would get me 18-20mpg. Some days it was an easy commute with just a few stops and 55-60 mph. Other days, a lot of stop and go and maybe 45 mph max.

    I now own on '06 Impala SS and get between 16-18 mpg on the same commute. So, for your commute, it would be safe to say you'd get about 2 mpg less with the SS than you are with your GP.

    Highway mileage was pretty similar. I got 26 mpg consistently at 75 to 80. With the SS, about 24 mpg.

    Hopefully this helps you. BTW, the SS can run on premium or regular but I've noticed no difference in mileage with either fuel.
  • bobber1bobber1 Posts: 217
    My 2002 with the 3800 now has 147,000 miles on it. It averages about 26 mpg per year on 75% highway and 25% town driving. It will get close to 30 mpg on road trips and 22 to 23 in town. Great car with almost no repairs and it still doesn't burn any oil and original brakes.

    I'm looking at getting a new Impala this fall. I've driven both the 3.5 and 3.9 engine and the 3.9 wins easily in the fun to drive category but I am just a bit concerned about the mileage. I want the stability control system and it looks like the only way I'll get it is with the 3.9 engine.
  • 02cavalier02cavalier Posts: 20
    I have checked my mileage several times now since I got my new (to me) 2004 Impala and it averages 28 combined going to and from work. Best ever was 34 on a trip w/all highway driving and worst was 23 with all city and some idling. Must say I am very impressed. :D :) :shades:
  • 02cavalier02cavalier Posts: 20
    BTW my Impala has the 3.4 engine. ;)
  • kmausskmauss Posts: 74
    Have had my 07 Impala about a week. It's the 3.5L. At this point, in heavy stop and go traffic with the AC running at least half the time, I am still averaging a little over 25 mpg. I'm sure if I were able to drive highway most of the time, it would get over 30. In a few weeks, I'm taking it on a weekend trip that will be mostly highway driving - I'll make sure to see what it's doing then.
  • You have a Impala SS?You say your getting 31-32 MPG HwY? What engine does it have in it. the 5.3L? IT's a 06? Who , if that's the case then, why is mine which is a 07 SS only getting 20.5 mpg hwy? :confuse:
  • quietproquietpro Posts: 702
    Must be driving downhill, both ways. :)
  • nosirrahgnosirrahg Little Rock, ARPosts: 872
    My guess is they're talking readout on the DIC while briefly cruising at 60 MPH on the Interstate, not an average on a complete tank.
  • prigglypriggly Posts: 642
    My mileage is now down a bit from my previous assessment. At a steady 60 mph on a flat highway with 5,000 miles on the car am getting 28-29 mpg. Still very good and in keeping with the EPA estimates. I do note that if driving up steep hills the mileage decreases which I'm sure it would in any car. After a year of ownership I haven't had one problem with the car save for the power steering assembly recall (covered under warranty) which never did result in a leak of fluid in my particular car. I remain very satisfied with the vehicle overall and think it provides superb and optimal value for the money. Love the power, smooth auto transmission, quiet and comfortable interior, throaty but not overbearing exhaust note and the excellent BOSE audio!
  • mtpetemtpete Posts: 9
    1600 mile round trip, 2007 Impala, 3.5 engine.

    Returned 32-34 mpg per tank. Best tank, 640 miles. Kept speeds at posted limits of 65/75 mph, moderate acceleration, full use of cruise control.

    Impressed with smooth powertrain, and, amazingly, comfort... no back pain after a 14 hour drive!

    Now if they'd just tighten up that suspension. Not confidence inspiring at highway speeds.

    And where's that new 2.9 diesel V6? :confuse:

    This is excellent mpg for a car of this size. Chevrolet is so very close to earning my business.
  • Freeway driving: Cruise set @ 70 MPH yields 32.5MPG. Results are even better in the 60 to 65 MPH range - anywhere from 34ish to as high as 37/38 MPG.

    In town: driven primarily for short distances of 1-4 miles = 22MPG average.

    As the previous poster stated: smooth powertrain and comfortable ride. We are very satisfied with the vehicle. Best car we've owned, as of yet!
  • rysterryster Posts: 564
    '06 Impala, 2LT, 3.5L V6. 11 months and 14,000 miles "old".

    Average 21mpg most tanks. Car is a daily driver during the week, around 60 miles per day. Mixed commute, some steady 55mph driving, some stop and go, some 35-45 suburban driving. Lots of hills.

    I have been "experimenting" recently and driving VERY conservatively. Very gradual acceleration, no mashing the gas, etc. So far this tank I am averaging 23. So I gain 2mpg if I drive like this. Without all of the hills I could probably get up to 25mpg overall.

    The car has never really been on a 100% highway trip for a full tank. I did do a 100 mile round-trip highway run several months ago, and saw about 26mpg for that 100 miles.

    All in all, a very economical car compared to my previous V8 SUV. My monthly fuel bill has almost been cut in half since I bought the Impala :)
This discussion has been closed.