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 18 of 24: 1; ...; 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21; ...; 24; Prev; Next; Last

#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?)
#171 of 233 by magnetophone Mar 15, 2003 (4:23 pm)
I know Saab's a GM product. I still like Saab regardless of that.
#172 of 233 Band-aids by vcjumper Mar 15, 2003 (6:07 pm)
Don't forget Kompressor equiped MB's. Why don't they just make them as powerful without them? Just aweful . I mean look how happy Audi S4 buyers/enthusiasts where when the new S4 was announced with a NA V8 rather than a TT v6.
#173 of 233 by regfootball Mar 16, 2003 (12:17 am)
yeah the kompressor Benzs are a way to sell a 'starter' 4 cylinder Benz that won't fall on its arse from a dead stop. Then they can advertise a Cclass 'starting at 29,900!' even though they just want to get you in the showroom to see the v6 model at 8 grand more. I'm not so much opposed to turbos and superchargers in four cylinders as the fours usually have very small displacement. A saab turbo 4 is 2 litres. I wouldn't expect 265hp out of a 4 cyl non turbo. But in the v6 game, I think the basic design of the motor (valvetrain) and size (displacement) should be enough to get serious horsepower without really needing a supercharger or turbo. Shoould be able to get 240hp or so without one.
#174 of 233 by johnclineii Mar 16, 2003 (3:59 am)
People like you are one reason that superchargers are made. It is torque, especially low in the power band, that matters in making a car accelerate quickly. All that horsepower does is keep it moving. Torquey engines often have relatively unimpressive horsepower ratings. But, the public looks for horsepower ratings. I doubt 5 out of 100 could even tell you what torque is. Thus the supercharged engine on the Impala. The better question is why do they STILL keep the Series III for Pontiac and not let Chevy use it? I see little reason to even consider an Impala when the new GTP is out with the newly improved engine. ESPECIALLY since it, unlike the Chevy, comes in colours other than black and even with cloth seats, should one so desire.
#175 of 233 GTP vs Impala by vcjumper Mar 16, 2003 (7:38 am)
Back seat room and comfort.. When I checked it out at the auto show, the GTP struck me as pretty cramped back there for a 3500lb W-Body.