Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
BTW...how does your 5.3 DOD do for you on the highway? Most report 24 MPG on a good day.
I don't do a lot of highway driving, but the few times I've been on one my instant mpg reading is around 24 mpg cruising at about 70mph.
How do you do for MPG just in general? I was going to purchase one of these SS Impalas, but just recently begged off it because of this.
Now I'm looking at the 3LT 3.9 or an Altima 3.5 at 250 HP and gets 29 MPG.
Perhaps the real difference is that the 3.9L takes lower grade gas and still performs well -- doesn't need premium. So it will save you a few bucks each time at fill-up, and overall, the 3.9L models cost less than the SS in purchase price. But you give up that nice growl and probably a second or so of 0-60 acceleraton.
Now, remember, this isn't apples-to-apples since the 3.9L lacks DOD this year. Next year, it may be a different story.
Now, while I've been somewhat disappointed with the 3.9L's gas mileage, I'd rather have that as a known quantity than buy the first year of a new DOD system. Earlier DOD's had lots of problems as I understand it. It's still far too soon to see how the SS' DOD will fare after 50,000, 100,000, 150,000 miles, etc.
With that said, I hope GM is able to produce a durable DOD as it should help keep them competitive, at least on mpg while providing good horsepower when needed.
Now one would think Chevy would have a great combination mating a 242-hp 3.9L with DOD and a 5-6 speed transmission. That should push highway mpg's well over 30.
The 5.3L doesn't require high octane (91+) but it is recommended for maximum power. I have ran mine on both premium and regular and have noticed no difference in engine run quality. I have yet to performance test but my "seat of my pants" opinion is that the higher octane does increase power enough to warrant the average $3.00 extra per tank.
As for mileage between the 3.9L and 5.3L, you will see the biggest difference in stop and go driving where there is more idling. Highway EPA is one mpg different in favor of the 5.3L but that's under ideal conditions which nobody is likely to duplicate. In order to achieve the EPA numbers, I'm thinking flat terrain at 65 mph may get you close to the advertised numbers.
We happen to have all three engines in our family. I own the SS with the 5.3L, my sister owns a 3LT with the 3.9L, and her son owns a 1LT with the 3.5L. My sister and I have tracked our mileage from day 1 and she's averaging about .5 mpg higher in mixed driving; 18.5 vs. 18 mpg.
Oviously mileage will take a hit with remote starting, especially if it's allowed to idle for any length of time but it's a personal choice. Sure is nice to get into an air conditioned car after walking across a hot parking lot.
As for the drained batteries, there is obviously a gremlin hidden in some or all Impalas that has been difficult to find. My guess is some programming anomaly that those who've had the problem are stumbling upon. The majority of our Impalas have OnStar and I would recommend reporting the problem through the OnStar network to help ensure it's getting attention at the manufacturer's level.
While there have been some minor disappointments with my Impala SS, I have to say that overall I really enjoy it. Sure, it's styling is a bit bland, it doesn't manage the advertised EPA numbers, and in my case, there are two minor squeaks. In the short period I have owned it (4 mos), I remembered that my mileage with my previous '02 Monte Carlo SS never achieved it's advertised mileage either. Both are due to my heavy foot during interstate travel. I achieved 25 mpg and occasionally 26 mpg with that car and it was rated at 29 mpg. Three or four mpg from my Impala SS' rated mileage is exactly what I'm getting...24 mpg. But, I have 50% more power in this car. Not a bad tradeoff in my opinion. So, my advice would be to acknowledge the issues your car may have but try to maintain a positive outlook. If you decide that your car's a lemon based on an isolated problem, you may as well get rid of it now because you'll never notice the great things about it...only it's next problem.
You may be surprised by how often DOD engages. My daily commute is on a state highway with several side streets feeding into it. As a result, depending on the time of day, I can drive at a steady 60 mph or stop and go. But, as long as I'm not rabbit starting every time the traffic begins to flow, DOD kicks in as soon as I achieve the "current" cruising speed. Also, since I can select to watch when DOD engages through my instrument cluster (IC), I have learned how to drive in a way that maximizes its use. As a result, my mileage average has steadily increased. Unfortunately, I can't be sure how much of that is due normal break-in vs. my new driving habits.
As for your concerns over uneven wear, that's a non-issue. It's not the same four cylinders being cut off. Rather, it's a cyclic system where, if I understand it corrcetly, each cylinder skips every other combustion stroke. There is no carbon buildup or other issues because no fuel is injected during the "off" stroke.
I think this is a modern adaptation of technology that was originally introduced in some Cadillacs about 10 years ago. Back then, it was a fail safe way to "limp" your way to a service center if you happened to lose your coolant system due to accident or failure. The engine would manage to run without coolant by skipping every other firing stroke and cycling cooler outside air through the engine for cooling.
While lighter weight materials and improved gearing will also increase efficiency, the R&D for a transmission with more gears is a much larger expense than reprogramming the existing computer that manages engine operation. I'm not totally convinced that the five and six speed transmissions are as cost effective as many assume. I agree it's where the industry is headed but more gears adds more complexity and likely more weight. I don't fault GM for not rushing to get five and six speed transmissions in their cars. I drove a six speed 500 while I was shopping and it felt and sounded like a manually shifted transmission only without my input. I also drove a Ford with a Constant Velocity Transmission (CVT) which doesn't actually shift gears but constantly changes the ratio to keep the engine at peak efficiency or performance (depending on the situation). The GM transmissions seem to be simulating the CVT technology by allowing the torque converter to continually adjust during moderate acceleration. My guess is they were able to adapt tried and true technology and skip the more expensive first generation of the NEXT technological step.
Everyone has such angst over new model lines yet they insist on the newest technology. I love new technology as well. Strangely, the amount of technology packed into the Impala was a major deciding factor in my choice over the Dodge Charger. That said, I have learned not to always insist on cutting edge technology since there is a huge price/reliability premium to be paid.
But...that's just my humble opinion.
My choice is sonata better looks and quality.
Have you heard of other people having this problem? I haven't seen any other posts about the issues I'm having.
The Impala is a good looking car. Constantly getting comments about it.
Either one may satisfy your needs and wants...if a bland sedan is what you want. The differences are minor, really. The Hyundai has a longer warranty.
:lemon:
Just added a 2006 Sport Red LTZ to my stable.
So far since my other car is race prepped Aerio, the Impala is a dream.
250 miles in the first week and so far milage is about 25+ on highway and 15 around town.
Will this improve a bit once the engine loosens up?
Other than that just a perfect 3 kids 2 adults car. All the features are spot on, sunroof is a bit noisey when open at highway speed but that is my only nit pick for now.
I love the way the Impala looks and wanted to be Pro American in these times of trouble for GM. Mostly the car will sit wait for my mom who is 70+ to take it on short trips. The 3.9 has tons of power and despite being thirsty I am not ashamed. Hell even the new Civic Si only get 19mpg in NORMAL driving. Can't wait for the EPA to revise the ratings to expose the Japanese abuse of the system. Never seen a Japanese 4 get ANY WHERE near the sticker unless you let it run at 40mph on cruise
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I really want to buy an Impala.
My critera have been the following:
Leg room for a tall driver, power, and economy in that order. I'm 6' 4". I wanted high twenties for MPG on the highway...but good power response and room enough to straighten my legs.
My first attraction was the Impala SS. But when the EPA number started to look like a "bait and switch" routine I becamse suspecious of everything about the impala. Used SSs are on the market for 23k right now....and I think because of this.
But the only real catched seemed to be the EPA numbers since the car was still a very good value otherwise. So I turned to the 3.9 in the LTZ and LT3 packages. But now it looks like the same story on the EPA numbers. The promise of DOD (AFM) for the 3.9 next year looks only to be a proimse of a few MPG and new technology that might not be ready for prime time.
A friend suggested the Nissan Altima 3.5SE. Even more leg room, terrific power, and EPA numbers that are very real. 30 MPG on the highway. Premium fuel recommended but not demanded. The 3.9 has excellent power too, but it isn't as smooth. Also the dash does touch my knee at one point on the Impala. Altima is less expensive as a midsize.
I'll still keep the Impala LT3 in the comparisons, but it isn't comparing well with these reports. I like the space in the rest of the Impala (it is a full size) and the ability to add leather, bose, etc without adding a sun roof such as in the Altima. I'm too tall for a sun roof in either car.
So basically the 3.9 is only mariginally better than the 5.3? Maybe city driving (when you have to idle more) even better.
My daily commute would be more in between driving...30 MPH with stop signs and few lights. Then more weekend cruises on the highway on most weekends.
I've driven several times in the SS. My tests gave me 23-24 all on the DIC for highway even at 75 MPH. I hear the same from owners...new and old engines.
In town, however, I was finding it around 19 MPG. So the SS might be OK in thees conditions. Does that make sense?
Anyhow, what I'm hearing you say is the SS isn't that bad when compared to the 3.9....except maybe if you sit at idle more often. The 5.3 idles as a V8.
You sure do have heartburn for DOD. All I can say is don't buy it if you don't like it. I'm very happy with my car and the DOD. Some points I'll make in this discussion:
1st) I have not seen any itemized charge for DOD. As I stated in an earlier post, I'm fairly certain it's just a programming change for the engine computer, no physical hardware. At most, the added cost would be for fine tuning the engine programming which I imagine gets a lot of attention, DOD or not.
2nd) DOD engages more often then you're thinking. I drive my car daily and whenever I reach a cruising speed, be it 20 mph all the way to 70 mph, as I ease up the throttle, DOD engages. In good traffic, I accelerate for 10-15 seconds and then cruise for the next 5-10 minutes. So, DOD is engaged for the majority of my commute (assuming traffic is actually moving).
3rd) There is a cost benefit whenever any technology reduces fuel consumption (not necessarily cost-effective). I disagree with your assumption that DOD actually adds cost to the vehicle; at least to dollar amount you contend. If fuel use is reduced, overal consumption drops, demand drops, (hopefully) prices then drop.
For strictly mileage, the 3.9L is probably the better choice even though the EPA only rates it at 27 mpg highway(compared to the 5.3L at 28 mpg highway). If economy is your #1 concern, obviously the 3.5L is the best choice.
In my case, economy is very important but I have always loved the sound of a V-8 engine. I managed to get my first one when I bought a '94 Mercury Cougar (it also had rear-wheel drive, which I prefer). Unfortunately, I was involved in an accident and the car was totaled out by the insurance. In 2002, there was no V-8 or RWD vehicles out there (in my price range) but I found the 02 Monte Carlo SS which, although it only had V-6 and FWD, was great in all other aspects. The amount of technology Chevy packed into that car, along with it's great fuel mileage, made it an easy decision. Now, Chevy is putting extremely powerful V-8s in the same car. Fuel economy takes a small hit but the driving pleasure is much improved. So, I'm paying a small premium (average 1-2 mpg both in highway and city driving) to drive a car that makes me grin every time I pull away from a stop. I consider that a bargain.
If you test drive the SS and love the sound of the engine, it may be the right choice for you. If that isn't important (as was the case with my sister), the 3.9L still offers excellent performance and a little better economy.
I've mentioned before in this forum that we currently have three '06 Impalas in our family; my SS/5.3L, sister's 3LT/3.9L, and nephew's 1LT/3.5L. We're going on four months and all of us have no serious complaints.
As for the Altima, Nissan's suck. Horrible reliability and their service is awful. My mothers friends Altima has 7 recalls and she said the service is so bad she is badmouthing Nissan to everyone she knows.
If you're going to go Japanese go with Mazda. Good, sporty cars.
"If you test drive the SS and love the sound of the engine, it may be the right choice for you. If that isn't important (as was the case with my sister), the 3.9L still offers excellent performance and a little better economy."
Thanks, quietpro.
Engine sound ranks low on priorities. They are, again, leg room, power and economy. The Impala SS meets the first two squarely. It sounds like you gain only a little MPG with the 3.9 and but gain more power with the 5.3 so the trade off isn't a fair comparison.
Also, it was my hope the 5.3 would retain some value because it wouldn't be sold into fleets. There are plenty of LT3s in the rental market.
Good point on resale. I like to think you're correct; that would bode well for me. Personally, I'd rather have a top of the line Chevy than a stripped version of some upper level brand.
There have been some folks who mention the limited rear seat room but that only becomes a big issue with tall folks in the front seat. In my case, you don't want to sit behind me but my friends (average 5'10" height) have no issues, front or back.
From GM:
“The key to DOD’s efficiency and virtually imperceptible operation is a set of special two-stage hydraulic valve lifters, which allows the lifters of deactivated cylinders to operate without actuating the valves. These lifters, used only on the cylinders which are deactivated, have inner and outer bodies which normally operate as a single unit. When the engine controller determines cylinder deactivation conditions are optimal, it activates solenoids in the engine lifter valley which direct high-pressure oil to the switching lifters. This oil pressure activates a release pin inside the lifter which allows the outer body of the lifter to move independently of the inner body. With the pin is released, the outer lifter body moves in conjunction with camshaft actuation, but the inner body does not move, thus holding the pushrod in place. This prevents the pushrod from actuating the valve, thereby halting the combustion process. “
- Ray
12,500+ miles on my 5.3L V8 (GP GXP) & no issues with DoD . .
Given:
The consumer & the federal government (CAFE) are demanding higher fuel mileage and customers also increasingly desire better acceleration \ performance. With additional convenience items (power seats, etc) that add weight to vehicles.
These goals are largely in conflict.
In order to facilitate development & sale of such W Body variants as the SS and GP GXP with good acceleration (low 14s in the Quarter Mile at 100-ish = ‘good’ in my book) and also, still meeting the CAFÉ requirements means developing technology that allows the highest possible EPA fuel mileage numbers. Or at least this is highly desirable.
12% increase in steady state MPG (say 30 vs 26 or 27) at (EPA test speeds = still max. 60 mph!) cruise likely allows a higher posted EPA highway & average MPG number and (with GXPs now accounting for a rather high proportion of GP sales and likely SS also a significant portion of Impala sales) allows improved CAFÉ numbers.
So – I was able to purchase (at a relative bargain price, IMHO) a good accelerating, V8 equipped sedan capable of at least ‘decent’ fuel mileage.
- Ray
Happy with my DoD equipped 5.3L V8 in most every way . .
Has anone heard the news about GM switching to 3 valve heads with its OHV engines? Its based on an old article in wikepedia. I can't find the article now, though.
Still, its a good thing GM is advancing engine technology.
“Displacement on Demand (DoD) System Description
To provide maximum fuel economy under light load driving conditions, the engine control module (ECM) will command the displacement on demand (DoD) system to deactivate engine cylinders 1 and 7 on the left bank, and cylinders 4 and 6 on the right bank, switching to a V4 mode. The engine will operate on 8 cylinders, or V8 mode, during engine starting, engine idling, and medium to heavy throttle applications.”
- Ray
Confused . .