Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
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
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
un-usable RWD cars that I can't get past it. Chrysler was forced to offer AWD on it's 1-year old 300 - most people in the Northeast agree with me - RWD cars with all-weather tires still SUCK in the snow. I guess some people are Ok with swapping tires every Novemeber - I'm not. Can't be bothered. I am TOTALLY in agreement with GM keeping the Impala SS as FWD. I happen to like the styling in the new Impala and even though I like the Charger more, I'm still leaning towards the SS at this time.
Up here in Canada many people swap tires on their FWD cars in the winter......they buy 4 rims and put snow tires on all 4........I don't do that but tire manufactures reccomend that winter driving FWD cars with snow tires on all 4 improves traction and handling quite a bit......
Now for that bit about snow tires...I'm out of the house from 7:00 AM until 7:30 PM each night, except Wednesday when I go and see my kids....then I'm out until 11:30 PM. Saturday I pick up my kids and Sunday I return them. The LAST thing I want to start screwing around with is making time (and money) for snow tires, especially since a FWD or AWD car mekes them unnecessary. Jeez...My FATHER and GRANDFATHER used to put snow tires on their cars! Up until this week (because of the Dodge Charger Forum) I honestly could not even tell you that tire companies still manufactured snow tires!
So my message is..Impala SS may have just enough styling and certainly more interior ergonomics than Charge or the Lexus E330. It's only competion in my mind is the new 2006 Pontiac Grand Prix GXP. We'll just have to wait and see what happens between now and when I actually start shopping.
The Charger Daytona/RT has bolstered bucket seats with special high performance wheels & suspension, and appearance package, including special flat black painted hood and the word HEMI in large letters across the front hood. All these features would make this model above the 2006 Impala SS model. Even though the Charger is 2 or 3 hundred pounds heavier, 390 foot pounds of torque will leave this new SS in the dust.....reports are mid 5 seconds to 0-60 for this Charger........and 6.0 seconds 0-60 for the Police Charger.....Its time Chevy made something for the competition!
Sport Sedan Comparison Test
Chevrolet Impala SS
Dodge Charger
Chrysler 300C
Subaru Legacy
Nissan Maxima
Pontiac Grand Prix GXP
Acura TSX
Lexus IS300
The Dodge Charger, the inside dimensions are very similar to the Impala........shoulder, head and hip room are similar, rear leg room in the charger is more, but it does have a smaller trunk......3 engines available in the Charger 250 hp......340 hp......350 hp........and soon after production the .......425 hp option...(HEMI is taking the world by storm) .today performance is where it is at! and being #2 doesn't matter!......Chrysler claims that there DOD (similar technology that the 2006 Impala will have) will increase fuel economy up to 20% while the Impala's 3.9 V6, & 5.3 V8 SS will only get up to 12% better fuel economy..thats a huge difference today at $2.25 a gallon for gas.
Reports here in Ontario Canada near the plant where they are going to build the 2006 Dodge Charger soon, they already have firm orders for 25,000 cars, & a great number of the orders are for the HEMI
The Dodge Charger SRT/8 will be coming soon after with the 425 hp HEMI......I wonder what the city/highway fuel numbers will be for that!
http://www.policedriving.com/Magnum.htm and
http://www.dcxmediaservices.com/videoptrs/wms/dctv/Mar04/Houghton_Ride_Drive_300k.wvx
I'm still about a year away from actually buying anything...Currently The Impala SS is my front runner, Grand Prix GXP is a close second. If Dodge Charger ends up offering an AWD in 2007 (they will I'm sure) then a big test drive-off will be in order. And of course if gasoline really goes over $3.00 a gallon in the interim then an AWD Toyota Highlander Hybrid becomes Playmate Of The Month instead. :shades:
poles
1 The 5.7L engine sold in passenger cars to the average consumer come with the Multi Displacement System (MDS) (similar to Displacement On Demand).
2 That same engine is rated at 345hp and according to the owner's manual, uses 89 octane (not 91) unleaded fuel.
3 The 6.1L hemi in Chrysler and Dodge's SRT8 is rated at 425hp and doesn't use any electronic displacement control and as a result will produce SUV-like fuel economy numbers.
I remain a staunch 'Chevy small block' supporter and feel that with a few design tweaks and performance updates, that 5.3L V-8 will produce torque and hp numbers that will soon rival the Hemi's and produce better fuel economy.
On a completely different not I'd also like to suggest that Chevy keeps 'Impala'
moniker on this front wheel drive (W body) and in 4 to 5 years, design and produce a rwd / awd larger model which should be called 'Caprice'.
I believe that Chevrolet will survive the political battering it has taken in the GM hierarchy and show that it truly is the back-bone of this corporation.
v / r
MikeDeas
If GM were making the video then I can guarantee you - the Chrysler would look like a walrus and the Impala would climb up that hill like...well... an Impala!
We can sit here and post all day about what we'd like and what don't like....sometimes the manufacturers actually liste, and it is good to let some steam off.
But the bottom line is...choose your top 3 or 4 models, do your research, and test drive each. In the end, what they've produced at that point in time is what we've got to work with.
It seems to have about everything else you might want in this type pf car. The photo on the Chevy site shows a portable music player plugged into an AUX input and it has optional XM radio and even remote start as far as gadgets.
Built-in GPS navigation isn't only for luxury cars anymore. It is available on many non-luxury vehicles nowadays. Even a Dodge Caravan minivan has an optional nav system that's totally integrated into the stereo. The GPS navigation screen in the stereo of Dodge Caravans is very small compared to others so it doesn't have much data or map area on screen (simply text with street names, distance to next turn, plus arrows pointing the direction of the next turn etc. integrated into the existing radio station display screen), but it's stealthy so thieves casually scanning vehicle interiors for things to steal won't even notice that it isn't the base stock radio. This also eliminated the need to redesign the dash to accomodate a separate nav system display screen. Even the antenna is hidden so there is no external clue that there is a nav system installed. On the Impala, the GPS antenna could be integrated with XM or OnStar antennas.
You said:
It is my understanding that the new 3.9L engine will have VVT, but will be OHV and not OHC.
If so, this is a big disappointment. I am not interested in old OHV engines. I want a modern engine like the 3.6L VVT in the LaCrosse.
I am actually glad GM is not going to OHC across the board. OHV engines just aren't Grandad's engines (slugs) anymore; I suspect new materials (like lighter pushrods) and attention to valve springs have made them much more competitive to their OHC siblings. Originally OHC was a much better concept due to materials limitations and the need for high RPM (to extract more horsepower from smaller, less torquey engines), but that meant a whole generation of us have had to deal with timing belt changes, timing belt breakage with resulting bent valves (it happened to me with a Fiat 128), sheared oil with resulting cam shaft wear, sheared oil wit resulting viscoscity failure...
On the other hand, GM is finally giving their venerable OHV engines some real power to match the torque they've had, and now they have somehow given them variable valve timing, a neat trick. The 3.5 in the Malibu provides some serious power compared to the earlier 3.4 in the Malibu; yet GM retains some of the best gas mileage figures in their respective classes. I have to applaud that. And I don't begrudge GM saving a few bucks, and a few pounds, on their engines.
The Elantra 4 cylinder was a bit smoother, but all things considered, I like the GM OHV V-6's just fine.
The 06 Impala should be a huge improvement over the somewhat disjointed looking 05. It should compete well with the Ford/Mercury 500, Hyundai Azera and Toyota Avalon. Each of these cars is mightily improved from the predecessor car. I'd throw the Maxima into that mix, but it's a bit too plug ugly to say anything nice about.
Now if they get the interior right for 2006, the Impala will be on my short list of cars for next year. I love the exterior - just wish they had retained the classic Impala taillights, I thought that was a neat nod to the past in the current generation.
Unfortunately, the Five Hundred from Ford also looks pretty good, and the pricing seems a lot better than the Impala - Chevy's delays in freshening the Impala have opened the door to some competition in a segment - large passenger cars - that has been moribund for years.
The 500 could have been a much better car, I hope the Fusion is a better car.
The 2005 Impala is closer to 26 with the LS package, and the regular edition is not appealing to me - GM is still using the older, weaker 3.4 engine in the base model, not the upgraded 3.5 (from the Malibu) or the much upgraded, variable valve timing 3.5 promised for the 2006. Also, the base model Impala I drove in 2003 wallowed on the freeway; the LS model with its upgraded suspension was fine. So right now, the Five Hundred is a better buy, to me, than the base model 2005 Impala.
That will very likely shift when the base model Impala is discontinued for 2006 (they start as LS) and when all Impalas get a much upgraded suspension (the LS, LT, and LTZ all have the same suspension, though not the same tires and wheels). Also, the 2006 Impala will not only get the 3.5 from the Malibu, the 3.5 will be improved with variable valve timing.
To my mind, what was a clear nod to Chevy for the upgraded 2006 Impala (which I thought would be out by now) has been clouded by the Five Hundred. (I am not counting the Camry and Accord because both the Five Hundred and the Impala are a notch up in size; and the Avalon is too expensive.) In Chevy's favor, the Impala has had over five years to get the bugs out, and is now benefiting from a facelift, some suspension work, and great engine upgrades (yes, the 3.9 should blow the Five Hundred away). I'd like to see a five speed or 6 speed automatic, but reports are that the 4 speed in the Impala is very sturdy; and initial reports are that the 6 speed in the Five Hundred "hunts", and the CVT reliability is a big question mark. But, the Five Hundred is certainly appealing if I can get one with side air bags for under 20k; supposedly the body (designed by Volvo) is very strong, a big plus for crashes, while Chevy, as of 2005, only offers a driver side side curtain bag (nothing for the front or rear seat passengers).
I'll definitely drive both, and probably buy one of them in late 2006 as a 2007 model....but that's a moving target depending on pricing and incentives. While the midprice for vehicles in America is mid-20's, I still get nosebleeds from anything north of 17k.
I have posted some of this here before – or perhaps on the GXP forum – anyway, sorry for any duplication . .
Well – number 1, the engine is the same, but the drivetrain is ALMOST the same. 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 current vehicle and have had it on my past 2 as well. 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. YMMV.
Number 2: The Bilstein dampers are a significant (and expensive) upgrade to the ride / handling balancing act. Having driven 3 GXPs now, I am (almost) as impressed with the ride / handling improvement as with the acceleration and feel of the V8 over the S/C V6.
Number 3: The brakes on the GXP are significantly upgraded (larger & cross drilled) vs the SS.
Number 4: No HUD available of the Impala.
The interior of the Impala does not appeal to me as much as the Grand Prix – but that is clearly an aesthetic issue - and if you prefer the styling (inside and out, also considering things different GXP wheels, etc.) on the Impala, your “taste” is at least as valid as mine . .
And in absolute acceleration, the SS ought to perform exactly the same as a GXP.
- Ray
Driving out-of-state in search of “the deal” on “my GXP” . . .
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11322&page=5&pp=20
It appears to be a toss up between those who would prefer RWD instead of FWD. I've driven both kinds, but feel FWD is a little more forgiving in the snow. I guess it's all a matter of what you get used to. I'm sure there are people with RWD cars who learn to drive well in wintery conditions.
http://eogld.ecomm.gm.com/NASApp/domestic/proddesc.jsp?year=2006&butID=1®ionID=1&divisi- onID=3&vehicleID=2193&type=0
In case those reading my posts wonder why I know all this it is because my wife works for Chevrolet, so my responses are not guess work but latest facts and info I could get.
Can't wait to see one.
Impala LS - $24,685
Impala LT - $26,200
Impala LTZ - $29,840
Impala SS - $32,855
I would probably go for an LTZ. That said, with DOD, mileage for the SS is estimated at 17/27 which isn't bad at all for 303hp.