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 17 of 24: 1; ...; 14; 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; ...; 24; Prev; Next; Last

#161 of 233 by regfootball Mar 13, 2003 (7:44 pm)
he meant to say 'band-aid'.
#162 of 233 HP by garnes Mar 14, 2003 (7:33 am)
The new Accord is 240 HP and what - 212 lb-ft of torque vs a very low end 280 lb-ft for a SC 3.8 and 225 for a non SC engine. That 240 is only available at quite high rpms too - 6250. Even more telling, the peak torque of 212 is available at a very high 5000 rpms. Peak numbers are only a fraction of the picture. Please also consider that the BMW 330's (3 liter 6 cylinder) produce "only" 225 HP and 214 lb-ft of torque. Gee, what's the matter with those performance minded BMW engineers? - can't keep up with Honda? Well, that 225 comes in at 5900 and the torque of 214 is available at a much much lower 3500 rpms. Don't get me wrong, the Honda is an awesome engine, but you just can't look at peak numbers. Even with the rpm's known, you still don't know if the peak torque occurs at a spike in the curve or if the torque curve is very flat. The total power curve and the gearing strategy matter a lot. Unfortunately, most of the public just looks at peak numbers - same for magazines. Also, cars are sent to the magazines for "first drive" hype and the car performs incredibly (of course) only to perform less incredibly in later "comparison" tests 6 months later with other cars. Worse, 0 to 60 is all the focus and the "street start" (C&D tests a 5 to 60 street start that eliminates the gains from a trick launch - it is more indicative of real driving experience/performance) is much lower for some cars. Example: the WRX tested well under 6 seconds in C&D to 0 to 60, but the 5 to 60 number was 7.4. Hmmmm. I just don't see any intelligence in this constant "bash" mentality sometimes displayed on some boards. If you don't own an Impala or care to own one in the future, why deposit your refuse here? Do you also hang around the grocery store and ridicule those that buy foods you don't like (for whatever "reason")? This "old technology" stuff is goofy. I have both a DOHC (4 cam), 32 valve V8 car and the Impala with the 3.8. I love them both and don't find the 3.8 lacking in any respect. I find it to deliver plenty of power with lots of low end torque, incredible fuel economy, and a great value as part of a nicely equipped, very roomy, safe, full sized comfortable car.
#163 of 233 by atbear Mar 14, 2003 (8:54 am)
The Series II 3.8 S/C engine produces more like 315TQ... it's very underrated. 240HP is about right for it though.... The Series III 3.8 S/C engine produces even more torque, and this time the HP is underrated as well. Just like most GM cars and trucks.
#164 of 233 atbear by garnes Mar 14, 2003 (9:34 am)
Yeah, they do that and I think it's stupid. Some that come to mind are the outgoing 5.7 L Camaro and Firebirds. I've seen chassis dyno's that clearly indicate the engine is producing power closer to the corvette (a huge amount of power is making it to the wheels). But they underrate the power so as not to "compete" with the vette. Also, I've always found it weird that the 3.8's in some Pontiacs make 230 torque and the Chevy is 225. Yeah right. The set up is the same as far as I can tell. I wouldn't be surprised that the Chevy is simply listed 5 less than the Pontiac just to keep some sort of artificial line between the divisions. GM is infamous for this and they think they are helping their divisions. It's stupid.
#165 of 233 Opps! by kirbstoy Mar 14, 2003 (10:51 am)
OK. OK. Sorry for the negativity on the new Impala SS. I really like the new Impala and, in fact, am seriously considering a new LS when my current vehicle lease is up. My disappointment really comes from it being available only in black...but, as mentioned in a previous listing, Pontiac (and Buick) offer the same driveline with other colors, so I guess that's ok. I guess my biggest disapointment is that its not a rear-drive Vortec V-8 which Chevy has done recently to demonstrate it could be done. The new Stage III engine (the supercharger hassle comment was out of line)would have been better also, but, well maybe we should be happy they're going to have a SS. Happy motoring!
#166 of 233 by 02lssport Mar 14, 2003 (6:58 pm)
regfootball - "he meant to say 'band-aid'. " Do you want me to name all of the cars (foreign and domestic) that come with forced induction from the factory? Its funny that I don't hear anyone complaining that Saabs, VW's, or Volvo's come with turbo's. Plus Mitsu and Mazda are coming out with turbo cars. Superchargers can be more reliable and drive better without that turbo lag. Band-aid? NOT. You are just a domestic hater.
#167 of 233 by magnetophone Mar 14, 2003 (7:23 pm)
Well, I'd rather have a Saab, Volvo or VW any day over a Chevy
#168 of 233 by regfootball Mar 14, 2003 (10:17 pm)
cars are global. there are no domestic cars and no foreign cars. get past the homerism buddy.
#169 of 233 by atbear Mar 15, 2003 (12:09 am)
Saab is made by GM.... anyways.. y'all are without hope or reason...
#170 of 233 by johnclineii Mar 15, 2003 (2:40 am)
If SAAB is made by GM, then Volvo is made by Ford. And it is a very short hop to Intrepid is made by Mercedes. As was said in the parent group for quite some time: IMPALA On with the show...(SHO?)