GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda...Who will sell you your next car?

1192022242561

Comments

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,055
    seat adjustments that still cannot get me into an acceptable sitting position, seats that kill my back after 100 miles?

    If I could find a seat that actually let me go 100 miles without killing my back, or thighs, or some other body part, I'd say that designer is a genius! Now I can force myself to go on much longer, but usually I'm feeling a pain somewhere after about 30-40 minutes of driving!
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    I never use pouches and compartments in any car, so I suppose I have not noticed.

    I find it very easy to get comfortable in GM cars. As I state above, Toyotas are the worst for me. Hyundais and I do not get along either.

    The best rental I've had recently for fit good mirror site, ease of use was a loaded Lincoln LS that Hertz gave me as a rewards upgrade. Not a pretty car and a bit heavy, but comfortable and very intuitive to drive.
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    But alas, human beings are individuals. And being individual, that means we are all different, and how a functional object works with one human may be totally different from how it works with another.

    Well, there are a lot of people who spend a lot of time (and presumably earn a lot of money) studying how humans react to machines.

    But your premise has merit. When people grow up using things one way, it is hard to adapt to something different right off the start.

    That said, I've never had a rental with a windshield wiper stalk control that took me as long to get comfortable with as the Subaru Outback (which was otherwise a pretty intuitive car).

    As for the Corrolla - that bane of logic1 rental agencies everywhere - no matter what I do with the seat adjustment, I cannot get the proper mix between pedal and steering wheel and control reach. I am 5' 11" and wear off the rack pants and shirts with no problem. So I would like to think I have pretty normal proportions. Maybe the Corrolla is designed more for female drivers.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    A crying shame what happened to the LS. Easily one of the finest cars to come out of the Lincoln stable in a VERY long time.

    FMC just let it wither on the vine :mad: Thw zephyr is about 75% as good a replacment...
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    Yes. I think Ford will regret that. They had a great base. They should have preservered and built on that base.

    Even now, you could do a lot worse than getting a low mileage LS at a discount from a rental agency.

    Not something I want to drop 45 bills on though.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    No doubt. I've been seeing late model Lincoln Ls's in the paper and on lots for around $20k. I'd avoid the v6, but the v8 would be a bargain.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    The V6 with the stick is actually quite enjoyable. Not extremely light and tossable like a 3-series, but an excellent alternative none the less. I've thought about picking one up for a second hand'er. With the used prices on them, they make a great bargain and I have a L/M dealership nearby that is very pleasant and great to work with. :D
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    I agree. LS was probably fixable in relatively easy way. This could be a typical Detroit - give up when you actually have some relevant product that just needs some work (Olds is another example). Zephyr is pathetic in comparison - not even close.

    Perhaps LS problem was the brand more than anything else. It was aimed at "active executive" people in a geriatic environment. I bet many people would even consider it, but a thought of being "caught" in a Lincoln dealership scared them off. Now Zephyr as a "baby LS" is fine (as a concept), but as an LS replacement - just cruel joke.

    But they needed to make some cuts and LS was a good candidate - huge discounts, not much buzz, expesive to manufacture (RWD) - just a loser in bean counter mindset.

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    The Zephyr makes a decent alternative to say an Acura TSX or maybe a TL (with the new 3.5). It would make a good entry level Lincoln and one that could maybe jumpstart the brand as an alternative to Acura or maybe even Lexus (Interiors are equally impressive IMO). But that unfortunately would make Volvo redundant... :(
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,055
    I've often premised that the Corolla is designed for apes! Now it's pretty much a given that whatever car I get in, the seat is going back all the way. I've been in a few cars with power seats where I could adjust it so far back I could barely reach the pedals, but that's mainly older stuff, like my grandma's old '85 LeSabre, or my '76 LeMans.

    But with my uncle's Corolla, when I put the seat back as far as it will go, I still really need it to go back a few more inches. But then the steering wheel is a good, long reach for me. But still comfortable. Now, in theory, they could make the seat track longer so the seat could go further back. But by the time my legs were comfortable, I wouldn't be able to reach the steering wheel!

    Also, even with the steering wheel positioned all the way up, I bang my leg when going from the gas pedal to the brake pedal, unless I contort it to an odd angle. So IMO, if you have long arms and short legs, like an ape does, this car is perfect!

    As for ergonomics, I'd say that there are some rules that would be set in stone. For instance, having to reach through or around behind the steering wheel for a control (many cars were guilty of this up through the 70's). Or having gauges mounted too far to the right (It was either Dodge or Plymouth that did this around 1955-56, to achieve a symmetric dashboard layout. It looked cool, but wasn't functional). But other things are going to be dependent on the driver's reach, which is dictated by height, length of his/her forearm, upper arm, etc. About the best ergonomics can do in a case like this is pick the position that would appease an "average" driver. But that would most likely leave shorter or taller people out.

    Also, some people prefer knobs that twist, while others prefer knobs that pull out, and others still might prfer a rocker switch. So what would be the best design for a headlight switch? I've had all three. My DeSoto and Intrepid have a knob that you twist. My '82 Cutlass Supreme had a rocker switch. And every other car I've ever owned had a pull-out knob. My preference is the pull-out knob. But the rocker switch was kinda cool, too! And while I don't like the twist knob, I've finally gotten used to it after having a DeSoto for 16 years and an Intrepid for 116,000 miles! But in a case like this, there's really no right or wrong answer. Some people just prefer different things.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    ...my 1989 Cadillac Brougham has a pull switch for the headlights, the '88 Park Ave has a rocker switch, and the Seville has a twist switch.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    I think most have either gone to a "twist" switch on the dash or turn signal stalk. Wife's 500 and my Suburban both have a twist switch.

    The switch for the lights have never been much of an issue for me but the "high beam" has. I prefer the "european" push forward for high beams and pull back "flash the high beams"

    My prevous fords used the push forward method, but my wife's 06 500 is pull back on the turn signal stalk as is my suburban. The difference is the 500 has a very noticable detent to use "flash only" then you pull harder for high beams. In my suburban, it's about impossible to flash the high beams w/o turning them on. Very annoying.
  • aspesisteveaspesisteve Member Posts: 833
    if you believe what Edmunds has to say in most of it's assesments of GM vehicles, they more or less say that GM vehicles are inferior.

    You and I are on oppisite side of the fence as I believe Honda and Toyota are clearly out in front of GM. So lets say Edmunds is the fence.
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    I've often premised that the Corolla is designed for apes!

    I am glad you are on my side with this. I was starting to fear maybe I was going nuts!

    I think the rest of your comments on ergonomics are pretty good.

    I vaguely remember a Plymouth my dad had with guages that just about spread the width of the dash.
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    It was aimed at "active executive" people in a geriatic environment. I bet many people would even consider it, but a thought of being "caught" in a Lincoln dealership scared them off.

    Agree here.

    When Lincoln came out, the commercials and buzz was for younger people. The LS engineers even did pretty cool things like coming here in the Edmunds TH and discussing issues with customers.

    While some Lincoln dealers were cool, I heard a lot of stories of younger people going in and running into sales people who had no idea how to work with them.

    Guess Ford is making back some of its investment using the platform on the Mustang, anyway.

    Volvo is the Future for Ford luxury. Unless Aviator can generate a following, I think Ford will eventually have to shut down the LM line.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,055
    in Maryland it was actually illegal to flash your high-beams at other drivers. The correct action is flash your regular low-beams on and off (or off-and-on at night). Of course, in this age of daytime running lights, that's not so easy anymore.

    Usually when I have the need to flash someone, like if I'm coming up on a left lane camper, I'll just turn my regular low beams on and off a couple times. I've never actually used the "flash to pass" on my Intrepid, but I think it basically works on the same concept as the "lane change" turn signal, which came out in the late 60's I think. Basically, for a quick flash you just pull back on it a bit so that it doesn't latch, and then when you let go your brights go off. Or, if you pull it all the back, it latches and keeps the high beams on until you pull back again to turn them off.

    Oh, and if any of you young'uns don't know what a "lane change" turn signal is, well once upon a time, a turn signal only had two positions. On and off. You turned it on and then it stayed on until it cancelled out or you turned it off. But around 1969, maybe 1970 they made turn signals so that they would activate by just giving them a little pressure. They wouldn't fully "latch" into position, so the moment you took your hand off the stalk, it would turn off.

    Incidentally, around the time the lane change turn signal came out, that's also when they started feeling like they'd break off in your hand. For those of you who complain about how domestic turn signals feel like they'll fall off the moment you touch them, go ahead and try the signal on some old 50's or 60's car. After that, even the best Benz, BMW, or whatever is going to feel like it'll snap off in your hand! :P
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    Andre,

    I agree with what your saying. About only time I "flash" another driver is when I'm towing my boat and getting passed by a semi and I signal for them that it's clear for them to move back in the right lane in front of me, or when I'm letting them merge in front of me.

    With my Suburban you can't turn the lights off while driving down the road. During the day I can turn the head lights on, but at night, no way to turn them off. I wish GM would give me the option to turn the lights off. But oh well.

    Other than that I don't flash the high beams at on coming traffic, even if they are coming at me with their's on.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    ...when the high beams used a switch on the floor? My 1968 Buick had this. My Seville has the push forward for high beams and pull back flash feature as does my girlfriend's LaCrosse.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Yeah I remember that, that was back in the day when you had to catch your own dinosaur and squeeze them to get your gas. :P

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,055
    in '76, the LeMans still had the switch on the floor, but if you got a Grand LeMans, it had the switch on the turn signal. The sales brochure calls it "European style" or something like that.

    Anyway, they were too cheap to make two different types of carpet to account for moving the switch, so where the hole would be on the floor, they just put this round rubber thingie to fill the hole!

    I think it was 1977 that GM made the signal-mounted high beam switch standard, at least in their downsized big cars. Some of the other models probably dealt with the floor switch though, at least until they were redesigned. Not sure about Ford/Chrysler, though. My '79 New Yorker has it on the turn signal stalk.

    As for squeezing the dinosaurs, better watch out for some of the males...it gives them the wrong idea and gets them excited. Kinda like when my Granddad used to tell stories of getting "bull's milk" Gotta love farm humor, I guess. :P
  • 6mt_jordan6mt_jordan Member Posts: 8
    "My mom owns a G6 GTP coupe an loves it. She wishes she would of gotten the 6 speed manual now. I agree you have a nice car, but I personally like the G6's better styling and ergonomics. I'm not sure how you can call a G6 plasticky when that's what a Accord is too ?

    I've driven both myself and how you came up with a different feeling in the accord.

    Neways best of luck with the accord.

    Rocky"

    How I came up with a different feeling in the Accord was the little things. The armrest was nicer, the steering wheel has a perforated leather wrap (the G6 leather steering wheel was an option, and it wasn't as nice). The Accord also has dual zone auto climate control which is important to me. I liked the tactile feel of things better in the Accord as well. Sure both use plastic, but the Accord's felt better to me (switchgear etc).
  • 6mt_jordan6mt_jordan Member Posts: 8
    The reason I didn't list the Subaru Legacy or Outback is because AWD is a disadvantage for me because it would hurt fuel economy. Furthermore, in order to get a fast one, you HAVE to get the turbo, and I HATE forced induction! I hate it with a passion. Ergonomics and interior quality are good on that car though. But the forced induction kills it for me.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    The G6 is a disaster. Easily the trashiest vehicle in the lineup. I would even put the Cobalt above the G6 for interior materials, build and layout. It is utterly ridiculous to find that I have to pay 27 grand just to get a V6 with a stick, or just settle for a 4-speed slushbox. I hate pushrod motors in cars, and the 3.9 or whatever piece that I drove was nowhere near as refined to the J30 inthe Accord.

    Comparisons with the Accord are limited two the fact that both have a steering wheel and 4 tires. Beyond that it is night and day IMO. But Rocky can make all the assesments he wants, doesn't mean they are universally correct. ;)
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Our driver's ed car was a '78 or so Volare (this was in 1993) and it had that little silver button on the floor. Took me a few minutes to find the thing.
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    I see - what it's the reason for such a hatred? Just curious. I drive one (WRX), and can see some one "not really liking it", but "hating with passion" :confuse: ? Is that some kind of "no turbo/super" religion thing/cult I should be aware of (so I don't cross them and avoid bodily injury) ;)

    I presume you live in Canada (use metric units) - how AWD can be disadvantage there? Isn't a little dip in fuel economy worth added control? :confuse:

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    I don't know about that, we checked out the G6 hard top convertible a few weeks ago. That car was nice. Interior was nice, everything about it was sharp.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    I was looking at the option list on the 07 Suburban/tahoe. On the 00-06 models an external trans cooler was part of the tow package. On the 07, you can get the tow package which includes the hitch and wiring but no trans cooler. The trans cooler is an additional option that only comes with the a 4x4 & 4.10 axle option. That is completely stupid. Not a good idea to be towing 7000lbs w/o an external trans cooler.

    The trans cooler should be part of the trailer package and at the very least should be an option for the 3.73 rear end too.

    I'll bet it will be nearly impossible to find a Tahoe/Suburban on the lot with 4.10s and a trans cooler. You can always add an external cooler, but I'm guessing a few uninformed owners will have a transmission with a short life because the thought they were safe with the tow package.
  • killerbunnykillerbunny Member Posts: 141
    I've often premised that the Corolla is designed for apes! Now it's pretty much a given that whatever car I get in, the seat is going back all the way. I've been in a few cars with power seats where I could adjust it so far back I could barely reach the pedals, but that's mainly older stuff, like my grandma's old '85 LeSabre, or my '76 LeMans.

    Isn't it pathetic to compare a Corolla to a LeSabre(Lucerne, in terms of size)?

    The uncomfortable seating assciated with a tiny car shouldn't be a suprise, right? I personally don't see a Corolla being more uncomfortable than a Cavalier or an Avalon being more uncomfortable than a Lucerne.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,525
    My fintail has the button on the floor. But on Euro model cars, they had flash to pass on the signal stalk, as they were pretty ahead of us even then.
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    Isn't it pathetic to compare a Corolla to a LeSabre(Lucerne, in terms of size)?

    Read Andre's comments again.

    He is not comparing the Corolla to old Buicks. Rather, he is saying the Corolla's seating position should not be as poor as it is, given that the Corolla is a compact car.

    The problem with the Corolla has to do with Toy's decision to design it with a higher sitting position, IMO.

    Along with the Corolla, I have driven a Mazda3, Chevrolet Cobalt, Hyundai (whatever the little Hyundai is), and Dodge Neon. Of all these similarly sized cars, the Corolla alone has the peculiar ergonomics that have the steering wheel and console controls out of comfortable reach when the seat is properly situated to reach the pedals.

    The buff mags and on line sources such as Edmunds also mention the odd sitting position in the Corolla.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,055
    isn't because it's a compact car. It's because of the way it's designed. There are actually plenty of compact cars that I fit just fine in. For example, the Dodge Dart! :P

    Okay, on a more serious, and up-to-date note, here are some compacts that fit me just fine up front...

    Acura RSX
    2006+ Honda Civic (The '01-05 style was a bit tight for me though)
    Chevy Cobalt
    Mazda3
    Dodge Neon
    Hyundai Elantra (and whatever its Kia equivalent is)

    In fact, I'm very impressed with the Neon and the new Civic, because they're the only compacts where I can fit comfortably up front, but then without moving the seat, can still fit comfortably in the back. There are many mid- and even full-sized cars where I can't even do that! For example, I can't even fit in the back seat of an Impala, unless I sit sideways. And even something as mammoth as a Crown Vic or Grand Marquis isn't so hot, because my knees still go into the seatback, and there's not much footroom under the seat.

    As for my comment about the '76 LeMans and '85 LeSabre, what I was saying there, if you read the whole thing, was that it's a given that I'm going to have to put the seat back as far as it will go in ANY car that I drive. Then I was just naming those two as some of the few cars where, with a power seat, I could adjust the seat so far back I could barely reach the pedals. But those two were exceptions to the rule, regardless of size class.

    Now, as for comparing the Lucerne to the Avalon, IMO they're both very comfy cars, so judging from my limited seat time in them, I couldn't pick a clear winner. As for a Cavalier versus a Corolla, well, here I'd probably have to pick the Corolla. I actually didn't find the older 1982-94 Cavs to be bad cars, but in the 1995 redesign, it seems like they lost legroom somehow, and the seats lost some comfort.

    And in any other seating position, I find the Corolla to be pretty good for a small car. I can't stand driving my uncle's Corolla, but as a front seat passenger I think it's pretty comfy. And the back seat is pretty comfy, too. A little tight on legroom with the front seat all the way back, but my uncle is only around 5'10", if that. Actually, it seems like he's shrinking. Unless I'm still growing! :surprise:
  • joestatixjoestatix Member Posts: 11
    This i think is the best looking truck car suv crossover yet http://www.allpar.com/cars/concepts/dodge/rampage.html
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    You might want to rethink that, Its a rather strange looking piece of metal. It looks like to much inbreeding in the automotive industry.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • 6mt_jordan6mt_jordan Member Posts: 8
    Oh, one reason I despise forced induction is I just CANNOT get used to the lag. Turbo lag is the most annoying thing to me. I can notice even a fraction of a second in lag and it bothers me unbelievably. I had to drive around in volkswagon golf GTI as a rental for a week when I was looking for a car (they were out of small cars so I got it for the same price rental), and even the minimal turbo lag drove me up the wall. Superchargers are better, but I hate that exponential power change. I like a very linear power curve. Also, in the long run, over 10 years or so, forced induction is also more unreliable. The turbos and superchargers are an extra maintenance item. Plus they feel weird in the high RPM while driving. Not as smooth. I don't like it at all!

    Yes I live in Canada. AWD to me is NOT worth the added control. FWD works just fine with snow tires. AWD is overrated. It adds weight (hurting handling). And it's a pretty significant dip in fuel economy. For a midsize car AWD eats up roughly ~2L/100km. I drive 400km a week, so that adds up to an extra $8 on fill up per week. To me, AWD is NOT worth $420 extra in gas per year at the current prices. I can buy a good set of snow tires for that much money in just 1 year, and they'll last me 3-4 years. Besides, the traction grip in FWD with snow tires is BETTER than AWD with all-seasons. And then I'm not carrying around that extra weight all summer long.
  • toyowner1toyowner1 Member Posts: 8
    If Honda puts a diesel in the Ridgeline, I think that will be my next auto.
  • toyowner1toyowner1 Member Posts: 8
    DETROIT - Honda Motor Co. Ltd. CEO Takeo Fukui says the auto maker is hard at work on creating a diesel engine that could be sold in all 50 U.S. states. Honda is selling its Civic with a 2.2L 4-cyl. turbodiesel in Europe right now to much success, but Fukui says due to strict emission standards in California and four New England states the engine cannot be sold in those states.
    "Right now, we could bring it to 40 states in the U.S., but that's not what we want to do at Honda," Fukui tells a small group of reporters in an interview here at the North American International Auto Show.

    "So our goal is as soon as possible to develop a diesel engine that will meet the California strict standards," he says.

    "When we are able to do that, we believe it would be welcomed in the American market."

    Fukui says diesels will be mostly utilized for Honda's U.S. light trucks.

    As such, the auto maker will likely not use its Integrated Motor Assist hybrid-electric technology for a vehicle such as the Ridgeline compact pickup.

    "We're making the hybrid engines for small cars right now, like the Civic, so we're thinking about different methods for the light trucks," he says of a possible IMA light truck application.

    He says diesels, or gasoline engines that get better fuel efficiency through the use of technologies such as variable cylinder management, are more appropriate for light trucks.
  • clp01clp01 Member Posts: 7
    Let me know what else is out there. I was just looking for quality, refinement, smooth transmission, easy ride, good resale value, easy resell down the road. For the money, it is fine. I do not want to deal with repair shops all the time. My Fords (besides peeling paint on both) were failures in every sense. One has to look no further than the stocks of these companies to see who is getting it right. I researched it and this was the best to meet my needs. If I paid a little more up front, I will make up for it on the back end (I also got a rebate on top of below invoice since the 07s came out). My insurance on my new 06 Camry is Lower than my 1995 Mustang- with collision!
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Ya now, if GM would just quit trying to make a continually worse minivan, their ratings would go way up.
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    Well, even with AWD I would still buy snow tires - that's not either/or situation to me. I think you say AWD is overrated because you really never drove a good one, like Audi or Subaru on a bad surface. I live in Florida and I can say I "don't need" AWD there at all, but during huge rains my only constraint is visibility (as aquapplanning is unknown to me) - and that really rocks. Similarly with corners - hit gas while cornering and the difference is huge. But again, your money, your choice.

    I hear you on the lag and "explosive" acceleration. The former gets on my nerves occasionally, even after 3 years, but I take it as an opportunity to learn driving (as not getting caught with chocking engine). The latter one is something I actually enjoy, but I can see why somebody may not like it at all.

    Maintenance and reliability of turbos comes more from years of wrong practice (like Chrysler or VW dealers putting mineral oil at 10K intervals) than the real thing. By now I would say that the failure rate of those items is about the same as other components of the vehicle (i.e. I would not be surprised if VW's turbos were dying more often than Subaru's). The only real extra liability would be use of more expensive thin synthetic oil ($25 US per 5 quarts at local Wal Mart - big deal) and even more religious adherence to the schedule. With the oil - the rest of the world switched to synthetics ten years ago for all their engines, even the small 1.2 liters (they got longer intervals as an exchange). I think it's time for this continent to follow suit.

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    Are these crude commercial postings (see 1099) acceptable?

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,055
    I kinda like parts of it, although they do need to do something about the odd window line. That Armada/Rambler-esque reverse-kick in the rear door that separates the big window from the little one throws it off.

    And those taillights look like a tasteless blend of Toyota and Wagon Queen Family Truckster
  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    Nice compared to what? Another GM car. Not hard to improve on that.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Nice compared to most other cars I have looked at over the last several months. Than includes foreign brands both europe and asia.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • elroy5elroy5 Member Posts: 3,735
    My Accord went in the shop Monday. Some idiot girl rear-ended my wife (probably talking on her cell phone). Enterprise had a 2006 Impala. Some of the cheapest looking plasics I've ever seen. I can't believe as long a GM has been making cars, and they can't do better than this POS. You have to reach around the shift lever to turn the A/C knob. Bad design. The doors rattle when you close them already (only 15,000 miles). Cheap crap everywhere you look.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Shenanigans!!!! My girlfriend has a 2001 Impala and it exhibits none of the characteristics you describe at 58K miles! Heck I could've made up the same story.

    "Gee, my girlfriend's Impala was rear-ended by some woman talking on her cell phone and got a 2006 Honda Accord from Enterprise. The Honda only had 500 miles on it and the driver's door fell off when she tried to close it!"
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Shenanigans!!!!

    Well, that settles it! Everybody grab a broom, it's Shenanigans! [he says in his best Officer Barbrady voice]

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,055
    I haven't driven an '06 Impala, only sat in a few. I actually don't mind the interior; it seemed pretty well-appointed to me, and while yeah there was a lot of plastic, that's just the way cars are these days. I think it's a definite improvement over the '00-05 Impala.

    My biggest beef with the new Imp is that I can't fit in the back seat. And if it were me driving the car, with the seat all the way back, I doubt if very many others would be able to, either.

    I can't remember the last car I had with doors that rattled when you closed them. Unless the windows were rolled down part way. In that case, I think they all rattle, just some worse than others.

    Now if I spent any length of time driving the '06 Impala, then maybe I'd notice its little quirks, idiosyncracies, and other things that would either annoy me or I'd just have to get used to.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    ...everybody I know who has a 2006 Impala loves them. Good God, the doors on my 1988 Buick Park Avenue don't even rattle and that car is daily subject to the artillery ranges Philly calls streets.
  • jlawrence01jlawrence01 Member Posts: 1,757
    Seems to me that if BACKSEAT leg room is an issue, you would buy a Chrysler produce as they have by far, the most legroom across the board.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 26,055
    for the most part, that's one reason why I've tended to prefer Chrysler products. And yeah, while it's not very often that I ride in the back seat of my own car, I also don't like feeling the knees of the backseat passengers poking me in the back. And on many cars, I've noticed that when I put the seat to where I'm comfortable, it would make it really cramped back there for just about anyone, and not just another person my size.

    I think the thing that bugs me most about the Impala though, is that its backseat isn't just tight for a full-sized car...it's tight for ANY sized car!

    Now if I REALLY liked everything else about the car, I guess I could deal with the backseat issue. But the Impala, while a decent car, just doesn't stir me up that much. At this point if I were to get a new car, it would probably be either a Charger or an Altima...both cars that I like the style and performance of, but could still seat four adults my size in comfort.
This discussion has been closed.

Your Privacy

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.