Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
"GM designers and engineers continue to finesse details on the future Camaro and companion models, including a proposed rear-drive replacement for the Chevy Impala sedan, said to be inspired by the classic 1965-'67 Impala series."
I can't wait for it to come out, if it does. If GM really does it how it is supposed to be done - CORRECTLY - they will have a hit that could possibly be bigger than the '94-'96 Impala SS.
They must fix the semi-boring style (inside and out), and they should really try and make the Imp handle like a BMW 3. If GM fires the bean-counters and pulls out all the stops, I (and hopefully hundreds of thousands) will buy one.
Go here for the rest of the article: More Details on 2010 Chevrolet Camaro
While stability control tames a lot of the issues with RWD, RWD weighs more and eats into passenger and trunk space.
If Chevy "really" wants to pull out all the stops, they could go to AWD, which also adds weight but also eats into gas mileage; but since the Impala is a mass market car with pricing constraints, FWD makes more sense to me.
That having been said, I think the Impala needs a lot of suspension tuning and better stock tires. Their is no reason for a modern Impala to handle like granddad's Crown Victoria.
Chevy has (or used to have) some good suspension engineers, and used to offer "sport" suspension as a nominal cost upgrade - stiffer shocks and springs, bushings, better calibration. I would be happy if they would reintroduce such suspension upgrades as an option along with other options like ABS, and included better tires; or if Chevy just tuned up the suspension across all trim lines to be closer to SS levels, but without the ultra-low profile, low sidewally tires on the SS.
Even the '07 Camry has been retuned for better handling.
Keep in mind GM does have a great RWD car in their Cadillac line, where customers are willing to pay the extra charges and give up some "family car" efficienty; and that the ultraperformance GTO, another great RWD, is being dropped due to lack of sales.
So I don't think RWD is the magic bullet to selling more Impalas (don't they sell enough already? it is the modern Taurus).
A sidebar on the two most popular current American RWD cars, the LX series from Chrysler and the Mustang: The LX cars aren't selling well, except the 300, which sells mainly due to its exceptional styling. On the 300, the typical customer is more interested in 18" wheels than in the ability to handle well or deal with snow well. In fact, except for the high performance models, the LX cars don't handle any better than most FWD cars (although the LX's have less understeer, not necessarily a good thing for poor drivers).
RWD was no-brainer for Chrysler because it could draw on some very well-proven, although long in the tooth, Mercedes RWD technology; because Chrysler had access to a good, well-proven stability control system to keep its drivers (mostly) out of trouble on reduced traction (rain and snow) roads; and because RWD lends itself well (north south packaging) to the HEMI V-8.
RWD is a no-brainer for Ford in the Mustang (which sells well mostly due to styling and pricing, not due to RWD) because Ford has been recyling old RWD techonology since teh Mustang came out in '64, and on basically the same (until 2005) chassis.
It's obviously possible to build economical, great handling FWD cars - the Mazda3 is a good example (I'd say VW too, but they have dropped the ball on the non-GTi's.)
It's also possible to build poor-handling, borderline dangerous RWD vehicles - the Crown Victoria and a whole slew of trucks and SUV's prove that.
I'll stick with FWD, except in real enthusiast cars, and even there RWD doesn't triumph (mid-engine and AWD are probably the winners).
I hope more tweaks will coming in 2007.
Ive had both problems in my 06 impala. the dealership added extra insulation under the dash and it seems to have done the trick. I have also had problems with the heated seats. Mine is on the drivers side. It corrects itself after the car is restarted. If someone finds out what is causing it let us know.
How do you like your 05 GXP. I drove a 2006 GXP rental and I really liked it. Considering it and Impala SS for a car later this year. What kind of mileage do you get? It has the DoD 5.3, yes?
Thanks,
bubbaman999
I just wish the Impala had the HUD.
I was dissapointed to see I could not build an SS w/ heated leather and heated mirrors. Really a nice feature for icy Pittsburgh. Possibly an option for later years?
An LTZ w/ the silver dash treatment works too, but just doesn't have the excitement factor of a V8. (I've never been a fake-wood fan. Make it a texture, metallic, or piano black. . . )
To my understanding, if Impala SS have leather seats, they are heated. It is not an option. The same with power seats, including the passenger seat.
I would suggest to go to Chevrolet.com, search for Impala SS at local dealers, and click on "View Window Sticker".
I mentioned that I have the same problem with the heated seats. It happened again tonite. The temperature outside was -6 C. I turned on the driver side heated seat and it turned off by itself after a few minutes of driving. I tried turning it on again but it wouldn't stay on more than a few seconds. After I turned the car off and retarted it, the driver side heated seat returned to working normally. Please find out for us readers what the problem is and how your dealer corrected the problem. Your reply will be greatly appreciated.
It is a hoot to drive. I enjoy it a lot.
Where did you rent a GXP?
The differences between the GXP and the SS that I am aware of include:
Number 1, the GXP drivetrain is ALMOST the same as the SS. For me, the SS lacks one critically important drivetrain feature. TAP Shift. This manumatic function is seen by some as a ‘gimmick’. I have this feature on my past 3 sedans. I find that (given I cannot and would not want to drive a car with a traditional manual trans. in 90+% of my driving) the additional control offered by this feature significantly enhances my driving enjoyment.
Number 2: The Bilstein dampers are a significant (and expensive) upgrade to the ride / handling balancing act. I find that the ride \ handling compromise is particularly well done, given FWD and the extreme front weight bias – and Number 2.5.
Number 2.5: The GXP’s wheel \ tire package represents a significant upgrade over the SS. These are quite aggressive. Particularly the 255 / 45 front Potenzas.
Number 3: The brakes on the GXP are significantly upgraded (larger & cross drilled) vs the SS.
Number 4: I prefer the bolstering \ lateral support of the seats in my GXP – they provide better comfort for me.
Number 5: The HUD available in the GXP is very well executed. I appreciate it, and I rarely have to look to the instrument panel in typical driving.
Does the SS have Stabilitrac Sport?
I happen prefer the styling of the (forged, lightweight) wheels on the GXP. But whether or not that difference matters to anyone else is purely subjective.
Like all of the other (interior and exterior) styling differences.
To each his \ her own . .
- Ray
Greatly preferring the GXP’s styling vs the SS as well . . .
My gas mileage is “fine”.
Details:
First – highway MPG: I have achieved over 22 MPG for a full tank only twice in over 8,000 miles. Both were close to ‘ideal’ “real-world” conditions. (Sounds like an oxymoron, but what I mean is: In the “real-world”, I am NOT constrained by the EPA test limits on rate of acceleration when I merge or pass or leave a traffic light. In the real world, roads have at least some traffic and I am constrained largely (on Interstates) by local speed enforcement rather than EPA test max speed (still 60 MPH!!) and I am free to drive with my A/C on. ‘Ideal’ conditions mean relatively light traffic, cool enough ambient temps to be comfortable without the A/C compressor running, cool enough that the air is relatively dense, and mostly running on roads with little significant elevation change. And only me in the car, and a weekend case.
My overall fuel mileage now stands at 19.1. But if I remove the 2 ‘best’ tanks from the spreadsheet, the average drops closer to 18.5.
Second, I am satisfied with the overall fuel mileage, given the available performance & how often I utilize it. (Many smiles per gallon, thank you.)
My “around town” MPG reflects the fact that I really enjoy the V8’s acceleration. And I use it whenever I (safely) can. And I use all of it. WOT. Often. Thus I do not achieve the EPA estimate there. No big surprise.
[ The acceleration is really the one dynamic performance aspect where I feel like I can legally and safely utilize 100% of the available HP & TQ on public roads. Perhaps not for long at any given time, as more than 10 or 15 seconds of WOT will have this car moving faster than any open road speed limit in the US. But compared to lateral acceleration & braking, it is a thrill that I can regularly enjoy, asking it to deliver all the power that it has to give. This is something that I can enjoy - every time I drive it! ]
Although I have seen (and quoted here) that GM states DoD can function at up to 80 MPH under absolutely ideal conditions, my feeling is that in the real world, the slightest headwind, acceleration to pass, or uphill incline, etc. will result in DoD = off.
And the point in the fuel mileage vs MPH curve where above a certain MPH, under certain specific conditions, DoD will not engage - likely results in a sharp drop in MPG. In fact, it will result in a discontinuity (??) in the curve. Meaning a straight drop, where DoD disengages, then a continuation of the downward sloping curve – at a lower MPG level as speed continues to rise.
For example. One might expect a somewhat linear drop in MPG as speed rises across the range of typical US highway travel. (Yes, I know, not really linear and not over all speed ranges, etc)
But for purposes of illustration here - If I assume that at an absolutely steady speed of 60 MPH, my GXP can achieve 30 MPG, then at 65 it might be capable of 28 and at 70 it might be 26 and at 75 it might be 24 and at 80 it might be 22 and at 85 MPH, 20 MPG.
If DoD is operable up to 70, but will not engage starting at say 73.14159 MPH for instance, the numbers might then look like this:
MPH\MPG
60 – 30 (DoD on)
65 – 28 (DoD on)
70 – 26 (DoD on)
75 – 20 (No DoD - instead of 24)
80 – 18 (No DoD - instead of 22)
I am making these numbers up, but I believe they are in the range of possibility \ reality for my GXP.
This would mean that exceeding the DoD engagement threshold would cost something like an additional 20 or more percent (24 with DoD vs. 20 at 75 MPH without DoD and 22 vs. 18 at 80, etc.) beyond the expected decrease as speed rises beyond whatever that critical speed actually is. My driving suggests that the speed where DoD does not engage in ** my ** typical driving is between 70 and 75.
But that’s just me speculating.
YMMV.
- Ray
Still enjoying the drive – and not obsessing about MPG . . (?)
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I usually have the volume somewhere around the middle, where it's not noticeable, especially when you're moving (road noise, wind noise, and dash blower fan all mask it).
But I hear you -- shouldn't be there, not for the price they charged for the Bose upgrade. Otherwise, it's a pretty sweet system, with awesome clarity.
To the owner who didn't want to trial the fix on their car; yes, I can understand your position. Don't mess with my car until you know what you're doing. At the same time, I appreciate those of you who contacted me and allowed this fix to be trialed. I know the people on this forum will not tell me a problem is fixed until it is.
As for those who are concerned if it will cause a problem later on if not fixed, my opinion is that it will not cause any further problems. In time, it may go away on its own as the vehicle ages and parts shift due to their own aging.
And by the way, thanks to all those who have purchased Impalas. There are many people here in Oshawa who would like to thank you.
Thanks for the reply.
Thanks,
Bubbaman
"If your vehicle has the 3800 Supercharged V6 engine
(VIN Code 4) or the 5.3L V8 engine (VIN Code C), use
premium unleaded gasoline with a posted octane
rating of 91 or higher. You may also use regular
unleaded gasoline rated at 87 octane or higher, but
your vehicle’s acceleration may be slightly reduced, and
you may notice a slight audible knocking noise,
commonly referred to as spark knock. If the octane is
less than 87, you may notice a heavy knocking
noise when you drive. If this occurs, use a gasoline
rated at 87 octane or higher as soon as possible.
Otherwise, you might damage your engine. If you are
using gasoline rated at 87 octane or higher and you hear
heavy knocking, your engine needs service."
As there have been many posts elsewhere on Edmunds about the use of Regular or Mid-Grade vs. Premium in many cars designed for Premium, I will only add that given the GXP is a high performance car (low 14-s in the Quarter Mile qualifies in my book) and that I bought it specifically expecting to enjoy that acceleration performance whenever I want to or need to – I run Premium. And since I cannot reliably predict when I will want or need all the HP & TQ available, I run it all the time.
There are lots of alternatives to the GXP with motors that are designed run on Regular. (Are there any with V8s making over 300 HP / TQ and such a sweet sound?) At 20 cents per gallon premium for Premium (I crack myself up) and an average fill of 15 gallons or so (for me) the additional $3.00 – out of over $40.00 / refill total these days – is worth it to me.
- Ray
Receiving at least an additional 3 bucks of enjoyment while burning through each tank . .
Second, there was some talk a while ago about the top speed of the Impalas. I haven't taking my SS past 90, but I did just notice that the car comes with W rated tires, which are rated up to around 149 mph....
Since CAR AND DRIVER stated that the GXP had a top speed of 142, I'm again guessing that the SS will also be in the 140's.... Although I think the Speedometer only goes up to 140....
I also run 93 octane in my SS, it's worth the extra $3.00 per fill up and I've noticed a 1 to 3 mpg increase over the 87 I used for the first 3 weeks.
Just some random thoughts!
John
W = rated to 168 mph.
- Ray
Not ready to attempt that speed anywhere near where I live . . .
The overpriced Bose Amplifier/Speaker system may not be the culprit of this problem. It is likely the cheap head unit (Made in China?) that spoils your experience.
GM just announced that they will move their Electronics
Purchasing Department to China to save money (they want to be the next Walmart). So cross your fingures.
jt
Just took delivery and now have 400 miles.
In addition, the 3800 engine is legendary for HWY mileage (30 MPG on large vehicles) since it has benefited greatly from decades of continuous improvement.It may take GM some more years to do the same thing on the 3.9 V6.
jt
Mileage has been getting better as the engine gets broken in. All of my driving is mixed city/highway, with average speed per tank of around 55kmh.
I am definitely a heavy-footed driver, particularly with the great acceleration of the 3.9 in the LTZ. It's so much fun to put it to the floor and take off. It will be interesting to see what the mileage is like when I do a cruise-controlled trip down the 401. So far any trips on the 401 have been fun dashes into Toronto with lots of to-the-floor acceleration.
There's no doubt that a 6-speed automatic and DOD (DOD is rumored to be installed as standard equipment on the '07's) would significantly improve mileage. Imagine how much better the 3800 Buick would be with those same improvements! Don't get me wrong. My Impala is a decent car and I knew going into the deal that it wouldn't get the mileage that my Buick does. My point is that with all the performance and mileage that some GM cars develop, you'd think the 3.9 would be more efficient, just on the motor alone.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
You're also right in saying that it is difficult to test top speed. There's nowhere around my area where I can (or desire to) safely go over 140 mph....
John
Also, when you change gears, what on the Dash tells you what gear you are in. I saw this on a last gen Lexus GS and it looked cool. It looked like a grear follower with a light on what gear you are in, not just a few lights that show up when you change.
Thanks.
[quote="zjim"]Were the HuskyLiners for the '06 Impala a custom "drop-in", or did you have to trim them to fit? I hate to pay that kind of money for a "universal fit" floor mat. No offense, I know you said that they were a perfect fit, but I'm very fussy about this type of accessory. Do they have the "step plate" texture to them? I'm most concerned about covering the drivers side raised portion where your left foot rests while driving. Also, do they protect the raised floor just in front of the seat?[/quote]
No offense taken. They're a custom "drop-in" specifically for the '06 Impala and GXP (twins, at least in the floor areas), and they do have the "step plate" texture. They do cover where your left foot rests while driving. However, they do NOT cover the raised floor just in front of the seat, nor the raised floor right next to the door/entry. So, you still run the risk of stainage at those spots. But, it's still an excellent compromise that *mostly* does the job.
http://www.alldata.com/tsb/General-Motors/1141113600000_1141891200000_06-08-50-0- 02A/index.html