Last post on Mar 10, 2013 at 12:24 PM
You are in the Chevrolet Impala
What is this discussion about?
Chevrolet Impala, Sedan
#849 of 3634 Re: Premium Engine [evandro]
Nov 28, 2005 (10:48 am)
I don't think the 3.6 DOHC will make an appearance in the Impala; the 3.5 and 3.8 engines have been a staple of this line since inception, and this year they actually did a major overhaul of both engines by converting to variable intake valve timing and boosting the 3.8 to 3.9.
It isn't clear whether the 3.5 and 3.9 are actually even newer than that; I have heard, but been unable to confirm, that the 3.5 and 3.9 in 2006 are actually totally different from the 3.5 and 3.8 in prior years, and that both new engines derive from the recent re-engineering of the V-6 in the Malibu.
So, in either scenario, Chevy has already invested a lot in upgrading the base and one-level up engines in the Impala; certainly the performance is a lot better than in the 2001 Impala, for example. The new 3.5 is about as powerful as the old 3.8, and the 3.9 is about as powerful as the old supercharged version of the 3.8.
Plus, there is the 5.3 "short block" V-8 option.
I don't think, therefore, that the 3.6 DOHC will make it out of the Buick family into the Impala.
#850 of 3634 Re: Premium Engine [micweb]
Nov 28, 2005 (11:49 am)
boosting the 3.8 to 3.9
Just to clarify, the 3.9 is not based AT ALL on the 3.8. One is a 60 degree V6, the other a 90 degree V6.
#851 of 3634 Re: Premium Engine [hammen2]
Nov 28, 2005 (12:11 pm)
Do you have any additional details on the 3.5/3.9?
#852 of 3634 Re: Premium Engine [micweb]
Nov 28, 2005 (1:05 pm)
I test drove a black Impala SS back in late August and loved its off-the-line acceleration, but was a bit concerned by some noticeable torque-steer. I'm seriously considering buying one next spring, but read that the DOD system also has some problems. So I'd to know if anyone has bought an '06 SS, and if so, whether you've had any problems with your car, especially the DOD system? Thanks in advance.
#853 of 3634 Re: Premium Engine [jpstax1]
Nov 28, 2005 (2:19 pm)
Where did you read the DOD has problems? I haven't heard about any problems on the Chrysler system, so I figured maybe they (the collective automobile world) has worked out the problems this time around. Honda even has one on its minivan.
I tend to bite the bullet and buy an extended warranty if there is a lot of new technology in any cars I buy. The factory extended warranties are transferable to your future buyer.
I think whatever "bugs" are in the SS will be minor relative to the enthusiast desire for this car in the aftermarket. But, that's just my educated guess.
#854 of 3634 Re: Premium Engine [micweb]
Nov 28, 2005 (3:19 pm)
Both the current 3.5 and 3.9 are derived from the old 3.4, OHV 60° V6, with Aluminum heads.
The 3.5 DOHC was an all-Aluminum 90° V6 and the 3.8 OHV is an all-Iron 90° V6.
It sure is nice that the new engines got variable intake and valves, but multi-valve and cam phasing are the best thing after sliced bread.
Don't get me wrong, I have a 3.8 Bonneville and a 3.5 Intrigue and I love the off-the-line punch of the former and the passing power of the latter, but I found both virtues in the 3.6 La Crosse.
Has anybody driven a 3.6 La Crosse and the 3.9 Impala yet? Perhaps I should...
#855 of 3634 Re: Premium Engine [evandro]
Nov 28, 2005 (4:17 pm)
Has anyone driven the Lacrosse and Impala...........
When we were shopping for a new car a couple of months ago, we drove the Lacrosse CSX. We looked at several cars, and it was coming down to a choice between the CSX and the Nissan Maxima. The only CSX's that the dealers had in stock were all dark colors, and we wanted a light color. Plus, the seat and interior in the CSX just didn't quite fit me right...subtle little things that would have probably been an aggrevation over time. Thats when the dealer pointed us towards a Light blueish gray Impala LTZ. The interior immediately felt better...the seats fit my old body better, and we both liked the appearance, etc. Taking it for a modest test drive, I could not tell much difference between the power and handling of the two cars. I could break the rubber loose at a traffic light in both the CSX and the LTZ...and neither had the horrific torque steer of the SS. Doing a fairly severe steering wheel whip at about 40MPH...to simulate swerving to miss a dog, etc., produced a controllable body lean and both cars recovered quickly and handled my little "test" well. I did notice, however, that the salesman double checked his seat belt, even though I warned him that I was going to test the suspension.
Bottom line...both the CSX and LTZ appear to be excellent cars, and the differences are minor. Personal preference and a couple of thousand less for the LTZ were the deciding factors on our choosing the LTZ.
#856 of 3634 Re: Premium Engine [evandro]
Nov 28, 2005 (11:53 pm)
FYI, Wikipedia has more info on the Impala's 3.5 and 3.9 engines, at: GM High Value engine
I believe the 3.5 is the LZE engine (note the E85 fuel capability), and the 3.9 is the LZ9.
I test drove the 3.6 LaCrosse CXS, the 3.8 Series III CXL, the Impala 3.5 and the 3.9 -- each at least twice. Ended up buying the 3.9 Impala 3LT (same as the LTZ for engine, suspension, tires, and rims).
The 3.6 LaCrosse CXS is an impressive car. Lots of acceleration and the upscale touring suspension is sweet. Tighter in all the right places, yet very smooth where it needs to be.
The two lower LaCrosse models are completely different cars in driveability and feel. For instance, the CXL's 3800 Series III engine paired with the sloppier suspension was noticeably slower and had too much wallow and float. I floored it and the front end jumped all over the place -- almost lost control on a country road, so it was quite unsettling. That didn't happen with the CXS. The CXL also nose-dived in moderate to heavy turns, where the CXS was more stable.
Really liked the CXS inside and out, but thought it was substantially overpriced for the smaller size of the car. At $30,000 MSRP, I felt one can get into a better class of automobile for the money (so did the Consumer Reports review). It's still a beautiful car, though.
Comparing the 3.6 CXS and the Impala 3.9 directly: The CXS was a bit quieter from the inside (Luxury-focused Buick worked a bit more on the sound deadening, to be expected over the value-based Chevy). Driveability-wise, both were very stable cars to drive. I could jerk both around and experienced very little body lean. Both had great power and acceleration, a testament to the new VVT designs over the old standard pushrods. Nicely tuned suspensions on both, and I like their stability -- no unnecessary surprises under heavy accleration or turning. I'd give the nod on the smoother ride to the Buick.
Given the smaller size/weight of the LaCrosse, I'd say the 3.6 VVT is to the LaCrosse what the 3.9 VVT is to the Impala. In the end, I wanted a larger passenger compartment to fit my family more comfortably and have room for loading it up on long trips (Impala has a noticeably larger trunk). It just would have been too tight with the LaCrosse, especially in the back seat, and I saved a chunk of change by going with the Impala.
I liked the overall looks and interior comfort of the Buick, including the standard leather seats, power lumbar pump, climate control, etc., many of which were missing from the Impala's equipment list. However, being an avid iPod user, the Impala's new line-in jack and Bose system was very compelling.
#857 of 3634 Re: Premium Engine [ivanadrivealot]
Nov 29, 2005 (11:57 am)
Ha, I didn't know that I could find such information on GM engines in Wikipedia!
I drove the La Crosse and was underwhelmed by its tight rear seat, especially when compared with the Regal. But the quality of the interior materials were a fine surprise.
Thank you for sharing your experience in such a detailed way.
#858 of 3634 Re: Premium Engine [evandro]
Nov 30, 2005 (10:15 am)
Envandro wrote: "I drove the La Crosse and was underwhelmed by its tight rear seat, especially when compared with the Regal. But the quality of the interior materials were a fine surprise."
Sadly, the Impala suffers from the same tight rear seat. If your plan is to carry adults back there regularly and you (as the driver) are more than about 5'6" (and thus have your driver's seat pushed back accordingly), consider other cars (such as the Hyundai Sonata) with a more roomy rear seat. However, I don't carry adults in back regularly, so this shortcoming did not deter me from buying my Impala LTZ, which after 3500 miles is still performing to my high satisfaction.