Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Chevrolet Impala 2007 Chevrolet Impala Owner Experiences
170 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 4:53 PM
You are in the Chevrolet Impala Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: teresabutler89 (Dec 23, 2007 4:08 pm) Well, even though you have serious issues with me and are taking this personally, it is evident that my assertions are correct since you didn't refute any of them. Being able to push the two pedals and turn the wheel effectively enough to keep the car within the lines isn't necessarily an indication that you fully understand the features of your car. I've only pointed out these things because you obviously have not taken the time to read through the manual. Usually, it's us "males" who are accused of skipping the directions and then messing things up.  I've just had to (painfully) get you to admit you haven't read the directions. To get a true measurement of your car's economy, take it out for a ride on a flat stretch of interstate at a time when you can drive at a steady speed for 10 miles or so. Once you're up to speed, reset the computer and check the reading after you've driven the 10 miles. Exit the interstate, and reenter in the opposite direction. Again, once you're up to speed, reset the computer and check the mileage at the point where you started the experiment. If the two numbers are about the same, the conditions in both directions were likely very similar and that would be a fair representation of the vehicle's mileage (assuming the wheels and tires are the factory originals). If the two numbers vary, it's likely that one direction was slightly up hill/into the wind/etc and vice versa. In that case, add them together and divide by two for an average (but it will be slightly less accurate). I'm suggesting resetting the computer AFTER you reach your cruising speed because in such a short trip, the acceleration would skew your actual mileage. Also, use the cruise control (resume on the return trip) so that speed is the same and there isn't any unusual acceleration thrown into the mix. Choose a speed between 55-70 mph to get a fair reading. If, after doing this, your mileage is still in the 20-21 mpg range, I would say you definitely have a problem and can tell the service rep exactly how you achieved this terrible mileage under controlled (to the best of your ability) circumstances. In the past, when you went in complaining about the vehicle armed with nothing but a number on the DIC, it's no wonder they didn't take you seriously (just as I didn't). But, if you go in with some stronger evidence, they are much more likely to listen. Believe it or not, I've only tried to help you in all of this. You have just taken my observations and suggestions as personal attacks rather than reading them for what they are. If you take the same attitude with your service department, it's no wonder they so quickly discount what you have to say. Good luck! RESPECTFULLY, Ron |
|
|
Replying to: teresabutler89 (Dec 23, 2007 4:08 pm) There must be something wrong with yours or you may be driving a lot of hills or some other terrain which is causing unusual gasoline consumption. The DOD system in my car seems to work very well.
|
|
|
Replying to: priggly (Jan 02, 2008 12:00 am) 
|
|
|
> I've owned it for about 10 months and have 17,000 miles on it to include 2,500 for a trip to Florida and back to Ohio. Since this is my first winter, I find that this car is evil in the snow and ice conditions with sensible driving in it. The back of this thing feels like a rear wheel drive car on BALDEENEES. It wallows. The tire pressure is always between 32/33psi and they have plenty of tread. Feels like a race car with the rear stabilizer disconnected. I'm just looking for input to see if anyone else have experienced this problem. Otherwise, I love the car for it's power, size, comfort and the sounds it makes. Most of you who write this forum talk about the gas milage. On my trip to Florida which was all freeway with hills and mountains, I averaged 25 mph. Daily driving it's a solid 18 to 21 which is the same as I got with my 2000 Bonneville SSEi. Anyway, what say ye about the handling? Thanks
|
|
|
Replying to: zedo6 (Jan 24, 2008 1:14 pm) Naturally, I test drove it during a warm spell with dry roads, so I didn't learn about this car's downside until lately. I was hoping it was a problem related specifically to something on my car, but hearing you have a similar problem with a different model, I'm wondering if this is a shortcoming for all Impalas. If I would have known this earlier, I don't think I would have bought an Impala. I'm seriously thinking of trying a different brand of tires, but am cringing at the cost. Anybody else have this problem?
|
|
|
Replying to: kenwrench (Jan 25, 2008 2:59 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: zedo6 (Jan 25, 2008 7:29 am) The Federal Government has mandated that all vehicles have a stability control system as standard equipment by 2012, and starting in 2009 must be in 55% of all new vehicles. GM isn't adding Stabilitrak because of a flaw in the Impala's handling, they are doing it to remain competitive with other manufacturers and to start meeting Federal requirements. When Car and Driver tested an Impala SS, they made specific comments about the suspension and they way it goes about doing it's job. They said in June 2006: "Part of the reason the Impala SS feels so uncomfortable with the V-8’s power is that it doesn’t benefit from all the chassis tweaks bestowed on the Grand Prix GXP. Opt for the Chevy, and you don’t get the Pontiac’s wider front wheels and sticky Bridgestone tires, Bilstein shocks, and larger brakes. Although the SS’s chassis gets its own special anti-roll bars, bushings, and shock and spring rates, the suspension simply monkeys around too much. Any sporting input is foiled by a mess of undamped and uncontrolled body motions. Dive, squat, and roll control could be described as nautical. Hit the firm, easily modulated brake pedal hard, and the SS’s nose dives toward the pavement. A stop from 70 mph used up only 172 feet, a couple of feet better than the larger-braked GXP could muster."
|
|
|
Replying to: ryster (Jan 25, 2008 10:56 am) in the snow. I don't believe that GM put Stabilitrac on the SS due to competition or gov mandate. It's is my opinion that the handling goes off due to the transfer of engine torque. It wobbles and when you introduce snow, it amplifies the problem. In my opinion, Stabilitrac was added to help cure the problems that I write.
|
|
|
Replying to: zedo6 (Jan 28, 2008 8:10 am) If the handling of the car was truly that dangerous in the snow, Chevrolet would either be voluntarily recalling all Impalas to address the "problem" or they would be required by the Government to recall and fix any "problem". GM has added it purely to meet Federal Government requirements, GM even states such on their own website: "The government will require electronic stability control on all new cars and trucks by 2012. GM will have StabiliTrak standard on nearly all vehicles sold to retail customers by the end of 2010." While I agree that tautness of the suspension on the Impala degrades quickly, I would not consider it a problem. The Impala is what it is, a family sedan more intended for long distance cruising than canyon carving. It sounds like you may be trying to get more out of it than it is ultimately intended for. Your plan to enhance the suspension may be the answer you to your concern. It could be a simple strut tower brace, and some better tires, would solve your issues.
|
|
|
Replying to: ryster (Jan 28, 2008 9:00 am) |
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Chevrolet Impala 2007 Chevrolet Impala Owner Experiences
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Chevrolet Impala
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
