Chevy Impala 2004 Redesign - READ ONLY

233 messages, Last post on Sep 10, 2003 at 7:13 PM

You are in the Future Vehicles - Archived Discussions Forum. Your Host is kirstie_h

This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Future Vehicles Host for Directions! discussion.

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Impala, Sedan

Outline

Messages Page 13 of 24: 1; ...; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16; ...; 24; Prev; Next; Last

#113 of 233 by atbear Feb 27, 2003 (6:28 pm)
You are correct on all points, vcjumper.
#114 of 233 by 02lssport Feb 28, 2003 (5:03 am)
Just to show how reviewers can have such different views and numbers... From New Car Test Drive... "Since you can get the big 200-horsepower 3.8-liter V6 as an option in the lower-priced base model, the Impala becomes the least expensive GM car powered by this gutsy pushrod engine. Chevy claims it will accelerate to 60 mph in 7.7 seconds, which is quick for this class." "When the Impala was introduced as a new model in 2000, Chevrolet was aiming for a car to carry the heritage behind that famous name. The result is a capable, quick, and fun car that drives nothing like Impalas of old. And that's good news. You can bet there was debate whether to dredge up the image of old ill-handling Impalas by resurrecting the name, but for younger generations who never knew the older versions of the car, "Impala" will mean something entirely different. The Impala delivers excellent value among mid-size sedans, with decent handling, immediately recognizable design cues, and a long-list of amenities."
#115 of 233 vcjumper and others like you by 02lssport Feb 28, 2003 (5:34 am)
Go learn something: http://www.latimes.com/classified/automotive/highway1/la-hy-gmmot- ors4dec04.story GM will continue to use OHV engines and continue to improve the design to keep up with OHC engines. These OHV engines from GM will continue to produce more HP (as in the Corvette V8 compared to the likes of the Mustang V8 or BMW v8) and continue to be less expensive to produce, lighter, and more fuel efficient. Why don't you head over to the Vette forum and inform them that the engine design in their #1 rated sports car is old outdated technology and that they are part of a small minority. Huh?
#116 of 233 02lssport by vcjumper Feb 28, 2003 (7:17 am)
The 3800 motor is a far cry from the Z06 motor. I've driven 3800, 3100 and 3400 equipped cars on cold winter mornings and I do most of my driving from 55-85mph. I cannot afford a z06. For these reasons I prefer OHC. If GM has decided OHV is better than OHC, why have they been replacing many OHV motors with OHC ones (2200 ecotec, 4200/3500/2800 vortec, 260hp 3.6L global v6 3.6l)
#117 of 233 by regfootball Feb 28, 2003 (7:47 am)
"He said the very few problems he's ever seen have happened because people paid no attention to coolant level" That's complete and utter bullcrap. Why are the manifolds popping off in the first place. Checking your coolant level every other day is not gonna prevent the damn thing from breaking. "Is flooring an automatic car and driving in a straight line the complete measure of car's performance? What about the twisties!" Well in that instance, the Impala fails even more miserably. "Isn't it kind of obsolete since the only "redesign" is sticking the 97-03 GTP motor in the 04 Impala?" The topic is not obsolete, the car is. Exactly the point....why is it even worthy of news that it takes them 4 years to put a supercharger in the car when it was available before the car was even released? HOW CLUELESS CAN GM BE? ITS EMBARASSING FOR THEM TO MAKE A PRESS RELEASE ON IT. Besides, in the article, Ford says their cost to build those engines is the same, because of the other efficiencies they realize from commiting to the OHC design across the board instead of having a buttload of engines all with different designs. vcjumper....I think what it is is that the world arm of GM is producing sophisticated powertrains but GM as a company is still reluctant to go global with their engine development programs. The North American arm stubbornly refuses and would prefer to develop a large number of their own engines, who knows why. It can only cost GM millions of extra dollars to have world GM and North American GM going their own separate ways like they do. I am very interested in the new world GM v6's DOHC, but now I already see they won't offer the 3.2 in the Malibu, instead a pushrod motor. That kills that one for me. LOL if GM is so against OHC why do the trailblazer and new pickups have OHC.....why were they forced into putting them in all the small cars? Face it...GM was caught with their pants down. The public does care. GM had better get some OHC motors in their midsize offerings soon. Go to the Intrigue boards and you will see there are more who prefered the shortstar than those who were like formersuver who appears to never take his vehicle out of town on the interstate or out of the city streets and urban environment. In the article Ford claims they build the engines for the same cost because of all the efficiencies related to having common and modern designs.
#118 of 233 by 02lssport Feb 28, 2003 (8:56 am)
OHV and OHC engines both have their pros and cons and both have their rightful place right now. Perhaps at some point the OHV design will be obsolete but we have not reached that point yet. All I care about is durability, reliability, power, and efficiency. I don't care if the original design of the engine is over 20 years old and why should I or anyone else. There have been many advancements in the OHV design and there will be more to come. GM's OHV beats many of its competitors in those categories above. The 3800 has better gas milage and power then a good number of its competitors and the v8 OHV puts out more power then just about ever other engine so what the hell are you taklking about. That is all that matters in the end. To say the Impala is obsolete is pure nonsence. As far as power, performance, comfort, looks, cornering it is in the middle of the pack. There are a few cars in its class that are slightly better and there are a few cars that are below it. Most people would agree with that.
#119 of 233 great timing! by alpha01 Feb 28, 2003 (9:18 am)
From today's USA Today test drive (James Healy) on the 2004 Grand Prix (which got a very favorable review, and its darn good looking, if you must go mid-size GM, here is my choice.) "All GP models use GM's hoary 3.8-liter V-6, lineal descendant of the shake-and-shudder six-banger that made its debut in early '60s Buicks. GM's refined it beyond reason over the years, and now it's quite a good power factory. " ~alpha
#120 of 233 alpha01 by vcjumper Feb 28, 2003 (9:54 am)
I sat in the 04 GP at the auto show. The disappointment for me was rear headroom. Was pretty cramped back there for a large midsize (well for a small midsize too!) and I need to stick adult passengers in the rear quarters pretty often.
#121 of 233 by atbear Feb 28, 2003 (3:03 pm)
"Why are the manifolds popping off in the first place." No ones manifold has ever popped off! Why did you just make that up?? "What about the twisties!" Well in that instance, the Impala fails even more miserably." Well Impala's about in the middle of the pack. It has good road feel, but far too much body roll. It's not really supposed to be a twisty taker though... "if GM is so against OHC why do the trailblazer and new pickups have OHC" That's the craziest thing I've ever heard! HAHA... good one. try V8's and I4's I5's and I6's... This topic is pretty much dead......
#122 of 233 by regfootball Feb 28, 2003 (6:18 pm)
Trailblazer uses an inline 6 that is DOHC. The engine has been getting raves. The upcoming Colorado which replaces the s-10 due soon will have 4 and 5 cylinder variants of this DOHC as the only available motors. That was to which I was referring to. GM is designing a whole range of motors around DOHC architecture and modular (basically copying Fords ten year old idea) in size and cylinders for their Trailblazer and Colorado lines. Not for full size, but for the midsize trucks. Apparently if the argument for OHV is so strong then why is GM itself being contradictory. Previous poster is right, both have a place. Its just such a huge market flaw for GM to put all its eggs in one basket reagrding powertrains for sedans. It excludes OHC powerplants from availablity in the segments it would benefit from them the most. The Impala is one of them. As far as the manifold thing there is enough postings on edmunds here and I know from personal experience that it is indeed a problem for recent model years of cars with 3800 engines and plastic manifolds......seems to be occuring with quite high frequency.