GM Inside News Forum banner

2012 Impala Rated 30 MPG Highway

24K views 145 replies 68 participants last post by  Neanderthal 
#1 · (Edited)
2012 Impala Rated 30 MPG Highway
Civilians will get 302 HP and 30 MPG highway.
www.GMInsideNews.com
July 17, 2011
By: Nick Saporito


Back in February GMI broke news that the 2012 Chevrolet Impala would get a minor tweak and new 3.6-liter V-6.

After confirmation from GM on the tweaks to Chevrolet's aging sedan, GM published that the 2012 Impala with police package, a perennial favorite of police agencies in the U.S., would be rated at 27 MPG highway.

The announcement led to questions as to whether or not the 2012 Impala, devoid of the "old" push-rod V-6's, would be rated higher in retail trim. As it turns out, it will be.

The 2012 Impala ditches two push-rod V-6's, the 3.5-liter and 3.9-liter, in favor of GM's new 3.6-liter V-6 with 302 horsepower. 2012 also marks the first year in which the Impala sports a modern six-speed automatic transmission.

According to the EPA's website, the government agency will be rating the 2012 Impala at 18 MPG city and 30 MPG highway. The 2011 Impala 3.5-liter and 3.9-liter were rated 19/29 MPG and 17/27 MPG respectively.

According to GM, the 2012 Impala in police guise is good for a 0-60 MPH time of 6.6 seconds. It's not clear if that figure is accurate for the retail car or not.

The revised Impala will be competing with Ford's revised 2013 Taurus, which is estimated to be rated at 31 MPG highway with Ford's 2.0-liter Ecoboost four-cylinder.

Production of the 2012 Impala has already began at GM's Oshawa, Ontario assembly plant.
 
See less See more
1
#4 ·
When will the Chevrolet website start showing 2012 models? www.cars.com has about 50 2012 Impalas at dealerships right now across the country.
 
#9 ·
When did Impala lose its center headrest for the back row?
 
#125 ·
I'm guessing for 2012. I've never seen one without 3 headrests in the back since they started making them again in 2000 (or whenever). I probably wouldn't buy one but that certainly reduces my interest in one considerably. I don't think GM makes a vehicle with a center head restraint anymore (removed on the Cruze, DTS is gone, removed on Impala).

I've always appreciated the Impala for its reasonable fuel economy with a wide back seat (if not the best legroom) with 3 head rests and a huge trunk. It has always gotten good crash test ratings as well, even in todays tougher tests. It isn't the best looking car but it isn't bad looking either.
 
#13 ·
You know, people may not like the Impala, but something about it has seriously grown on me.
 
#15 ·
I don't see a thing wrong with this car. A lot of people still don't have to have a super-duper touchscreen infotainment center in their car to be happy. This car still looks good (though I know that's subjective), now has a great modern power train, is roomy and comfortable, is a good value for the money... what's wrong with it? It may not be a true "flagship", but to anybody but the harshest of critics, I fail to see how a car that still sells pretty well is somehow a negative for GM.
 
#18 ·
I don't like the car without the chrome in the back. It looks strange and Bob Lutz was right to want it all put on the Impala. As far as the inside goes, the new wood looks nicer than the old wood IMO but still. Not enough new outside of the engine/transmission and the things they changed make that LT model look worse. Oh well.
 
#19 ·
I think this represents some firsts for the large sedan class. I believe this would make it the first large sedan in its class where the "volume" models crack the 300 horsepower mark. It'd also be the first to be rated 30 highway from a V-6 under the latest EPA rules. The 2012 300S might hit that mark as well, although the Impala has already hit lots and will offer 30 mpg standard; hurry Chrysler!

There is still an appeal to this car and it remains solidly successful for GM. Despite how much I clamor for a new large sedan, I understand GM and just wish they'd have a new large sedan to go alongside the W-Body. Had this car been given a proper interior and more competitive powertrains, say, for 2010, this car would receive a lot less complaining I think. The new faux wood is an improvement, although still not very good. I thought we were getting more than no chrome piece on the rear end. We were told a NEW REAR END. I expected at least a new bumper and maybe a new light design.
 
#20 ·
GM must be loving the fact that this car despite its age still makes money for them.

Its volume helps keep the factory running nicely, its profits are helping GM at a time when it needs to be making good money, i can imagine tho it has also given them some big headaches about taking it upmarket, potentionally higher profits at a higher price point but less sales due to higher price.
 
#22 ·
I for one look forward to these making their way to the rental lots. 302 HP sounds more fun than the typical 4 banger Malibu, Avenger, or HHR that I usually get.
 
#26 ·
I bought a new 2008 Impala LTZ with the 3.9 litre engine and active fuel management. It was rated at 18 mpg City / 28 mpg Highway. I ws NEVER able to obtain 28 mpg on the expressway during long trips, and I did not use E-85 fuel.

I bought a new 2011 Impala LTZ with the 3.9 litre engine - now without active fuel management. It was rated at 17 mpg City / 27 mpg Highway. I only have 4,500 miles on the engine, but I can not achieve 27 mpg on a highway trip - and I am still not using E-85 fuel.

Does anyone really think the 2012 Impala will achieve 30 mpg on the highway?
 
#28 ·
Are you using E-10 or 100% Gasoline? It makes a difference. Also are your highway speeds 65 MPH and below or higher? Especially with four-speed anything about 65 MPG and you are trading fuel-efficiency for speed quickly.
 
#35 ·
That engine looks tight.
 
#36 ·
We are looking at a full 2012 run plus a hopefully short 2013 run before seeing next-gen Impala, right? Will this car survive into Classic-dom too?
 
#43 ·
If I were in the market for a full size four door, I'd jump right on the Impala. Every June my wife and I take a trip to my hometown of St. George, SC, and we always rent a car to drive down there. The 2010 trip was made in a 2010 3.5 equipped Impala. My average speed was 76.6 and I acheived 33.4 mpg on the trip. The car was comfortable, quiet, drove well and never missed a beat.

This year Enterprise had no Impalas available and my choices were a Camry, Optima, HHR, or Accord. We took the Accord and while it was probably the best driving FWD car, it literally sucked. With its four cylinder it equalled the Impala in fe traveling the same distance at the same speeds. Low-end torque was non-existent but was pretty good once above 4k rpm. The car was very noisy on anything but glass-smooth pavement and my wife never complained so much about getting comfortable.

All in all, I'll take the Impala, boring looks and all. I didn't find the Accord's interior to be any better or upscale looking. Plus, the Accord didn't FEEL anywhere near as solid as the Impala.
 
#51 ·
2.44 on 9C1.
 
#52 ·
The EPA downgrades the actual mpg they get by 30% to match modern driving habits, the original tests were designed in the 70s.

So if they say 30mpg it means they actually got about 43mpg in their tests. Obviously at slower speeds and milder accelerations, with real gas.

Here are two results from drivers of 2010 Impalas with 6 cyl engines, both over 30mpg average.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList2&make=Chevrolet&model=Impala
 
#53 ·
Civilians will get 302 HP and 30 MPG highway.

The 2012 Impala ditches two push-rod V-6's, the 3.5-liter and 3.9-liter, in favor of GM's new 3.6-liter V-6 with 302 horsepower. 2012 also marks the first year in which the Impala sports a modern six-speed automatic transmission.
Please note that the Order Guide was updated last month to state that the retail version of the Impala generates 300 hp @ 6500. Whereas the 9C1 does 302 @ 6800. Both put out 262 lb-ft @ 5300.

I presume the difference being that the 9C1 is allowed to rev higher due to its standard oil cooler and resulting increased crankcase capacity.
 
#55 ·
Does the 3.6L have AFM? It seems AFM seems to really help EPA ratings but not do much for real world mileage. My experience with AFM is that I can only just hit the rated mileage occasionally, while most normal cars I can commonly see the highway rating, and occastionally do much better.

So, If the Impala doesn't have AFM, I expect to see better than 30 regularly, and thats pretty impressive.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top