2008 Impala LTZ

[Michael_S]

Originally Posted by caddycruiser

Especially compared to the classic 3.8L of old, it doesn't really match it for mileage, though the 3.5L tends to do quite well in comparison.

The 3.9 in the Impala is also mated to a shorter final drive ratio of 3.29, versus the 2.86 that the 3.5 uses and the 3.05 that the 3.8 used to have. So most of the time, if a 2005 Impala LT with the 3.8 was traveling at a certain speed at 1500 RPMs, a 2006 Impala LTZ with the 3.9 would be traveling at the same speed at 1618 RPMs. And of course, it's also bigger, so it's using an additional 2-3% of fuel per RPM to fill its larger cylinders.

That adds up fast.

[tony209]

Congratulation to you and happy new car!

What is appeared outside may be happened inside too. What is good or bad is what it is under the hood.
Anyway, I hope you will enjoy your new car.
Good luck,
Tony

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by tony209

What is appeared outside may be happened inside too. What is good or bad is what it is under the hood.

lol wut?

[73ChevelleSS]

I have a 2008 Impala LT with the 3.5 liter E 85 engine.I get close to 30 MPG on road trips.I have driven many Impala's with the 3.9 and do not feel that big of a difference IMO.We have had several cars and this one is my Favorite and my wife loves it.

[member12]

Originally Posted by Michael_S

The 3.9 in the Impala is also mated to a shorter final drive ratio of 3.29, versus the 2.86 that the 3.5 uses and the 3.05 that the 3.8 used to have. So most of the time, if a 2005 Impala LT with the 3.8 was traveling at a certain speed at 1500 RPMs, a 2006 Impala LTZ with the 3.9 would be traveling at the same speed at 1618 RPMs. And of course, it's also bigger, so it's using an additional 2-3% of fuel per RPM to fill its larger cylinders.

That adds up fast.

Sounds like a problem a six speed would fix.....then again, what's the point of the 3.9 now that they have the 255 horsepower 3.0L engine?

I think this particular chassis is still well ahead of it's "sell by" date, but that doesn't mean that the Impala should be ignored. New engines/transmissions, new interior, new sheetmetal....need them yesterday.

Or they could just streamline production with the Malibu and build a wider, longer version of those cars.

[Shotgun]

Originally Posted by member12

I think this particular chassis is still well ahead of it's "sell by" date, but that doesn't mean that the Impala should be ignored. New engines/transmissions, new interior, new sheetmetal....need them yesterday.

Isn't it the same chassis that was introduced in '88 when the Monte Carlo went to Lumina and the Regal, Cutlass Surpreme and Grand Prix went FWD? I thought I'd heard that before, but not sure. The "W" body, I believe. Man, it's an ancient piece, for sure! That said, I think more can be done with that chassis if true effort was made to keep the cars fresh-looking and updated as you said.

[member12]

Originally Posted by Shotgun

Isn't it the same chassis that was introduced in '88 when the Monte Carlo went to Lumina and the Regal, Cutlass Surpreme and Grand Prix went FWD? I thought I'd heard that before, but not sure. The "W" body, I believe. Man, it's an ancient piece, for sure! That said, I think more can be done with that chassis if true effort was made to keep the cars fresh-looking and updated as you said.

Yes, the W body is pretty old. The LaCrosse and Impala still use this chassis. I think that the current Impala is the best example of this chassis as well. I'd hope that it could be stretched a couple of inches (or that GM could somehow find a few more inches of interior room). It doesn't have to be the size of the new LaCrosse or Taurus, but it needs to be larger than the Malibu and Fusion.

The Impala isn't a bad handling car. The ride could improve...but I'm sure a few changes here and there would solve the clunky suspension of the current car.

I'd like to see updated styling...a tad more agressive without borrowing the Malibu's front end...more refined, more reliable powertrains (engine and transmission), and better interior quality. I'd rather see more of the Accord front end in the new Impala to be honest. The conservative styling of the Impala has done very well in attracting buyers, and I don't recommend straying to far from that. It needs to be kept modern without looking to stogy or feminine.

The current interior is really pretty good, but I think the radio unit and instrument panel could be updated and the quality of the leather seats could use a bump as well.

Otherwise, the Impala is not a bad car at all. The Taurus is better....but mostly because it doesn't have the issues that I outlined above.

More evolutionary updates are needed to keep this car competitive. I hear they still might go RWD....no problem with that....but it needs to retain it's value pricing and good quality.

Above all, they need to eliminate all quality problems and essentially design the updated Impala to be a tank on wheels. It doesn't have to have the cutting edge styling of the Maxima or the fancy trim pieces that the Avalon and Genesis have....but it has to be the most reliable car every built. GM needs that kind of product.

[Ed753]

While I understand you expect the very best for your hard earned dollars......

You sound a tiny bit, picky. To your point, you have a few issues, but you've taken a few delivery prep issues, combined them with some things that are working/functioning as designed and displayed when you ordered the car (but you don't like) and a few other issues, combined it into ONE BIG LIST to make it sound like you own a POS.

You didn't buy a $60,000 BMW, Lexus or M-B, you bought a $25,000 Impala.

I'd bet, if you buy an Asian car, you'd nit-pick it to a list longer than this one.

One question, you ordered a 2008 in October 2008, and took delivery in November 2008? Is it a '09 or a '08?

[steverino]

Originally Posted by Candle1

We have had our 2008 LTZ now for over a year 17000 miles on it. It really rides great and handles really good. I have had two problems since I got it one was the remote start it will not start the care if your more than 50 feet away from the car. and the other is the gas mileage it will get 27 -28 if I drive on cruise at around 60 to 64 it will kick into 3 cyl. mode and does great. But if I get on the interstate and I am doing 65-70-72 it will never kick into 3cyl. mode. and the mileage is around 18. At first the Dealer told me I had to put at least 7-10000 miles on before it would get any better. It hasn't no I am told that it is not suppose to go into 3 cyl. mode once you get over 65. Does anyone know if this is true or am I getting a snow job from the dealer??? Except for the mileage and the remote start everything has worked perfect. We really like it.

I think it's a snow job. I have an '07 SS and I've cruised at 65-75 and on a flat surface runs in 4 cyl. mode. On one 35 mile stretch on the interstate the DIC Instant MPG read out at 28 mpg. No issues at all with any of my Impala's 2005 LS, 2007 SS, and 10 month old 2008 LT (replaced the '05). Also, I think the issue with the rear seat room may have something to do with the flip & fold seats, which I think are real handy and a slick idea, but they tend rob you of some foot space

[1999 White C5 Coupe]

Originally Posted by caddycruiser

The 3.9L gas mileage has always been iffy, even with the cylinder deactivation, and lots of owners remark on that. Especially compared to the classic 3.8L of old, it doesn't really match it for mileage, though the 3.5L tends to do quite well in comparison.

I'd say the numbers you're getting are normal, especially given that it seems to be operating fine and you've gotten it well settled with 17k now. Just a characteristic of the car and powertrain.

The fuel mileage on my 2008 Impala LTZ (3.9 with active fuel management) has consistently achieved fuel mileage below the posted estimates (18 mpg city & 28 mpg highway) using 87 octane unleaded fuel (not E85 Ethanol).

Now that the car has 10,000 miles on it - the mileage is still lower than advertised, despite our attempts to achieve the best mileage possible.

For 2009, Chevrolet/GM dropped the active fuel management feature for the 3.9 Litre engine Impala.

[AirCleaner]

The lack of dealer prep is apparent, and the lack of glove box lock, coat hangers , rear seat heat ducts etc reeks of de-contenting.

[Wolfman01]

That's a bummer that your car was apparently rushed out at the end of a production day or week. I bought my '08 Impala 2LT last spring, and have nothing but good to say for the car. I have had zero warranty issues or fit and finish issues. I now have 22k on the odometer. My Impala is the single nicest car I have ever owned, and I still love hopping into it to drive someplace.

As for the lack of an indicator on the shifter itself, I've never missed it. It is displayed in the DIC at all times anyway. My Nissan truck has the marks both on the dash as well as the shifter. I have yet to look down at that shifter when changing my selection, when I have the indicator available in the cluster. IMO, it's just more natural on the dash. If the car had been a column shift, that's where the indicator would have been located anyway.

AFM is great. I love it, and I've taken the time to learn how to make it work to my maximum advantage for saving fuel. If you look at my sig, you will see the highest mileage I have been able to extract out of the car according to the DIC. The number was obtained by keeping to 55 mph, where the AFM can really make a huge impact. Like with any new vehicle, give the engine time to break in a little bit, and learn where the car's sweet spots are so you can bring the numbers up. If you are using the remote start feature alot, that will put a major hurt on your mileage numbers, so use it sparingly.

[ebz06]

Originally Posted by 1999 White C5 Coupe

I have been a loyal, long-time Chevrolet / GM customer for 38 years. If GM continues to build cars with the marginal quality I have experienced with my 2008 Impala LTZ, they will continue to drive customers to Toyota or Honda.

I can certainly understand your frustration and believe you to be "right on".

Talk about marginal quality . . . sometimes it's the little things that build to big irritations. The example I generally use when discussing what drives GM customers to Japanese products concerns the AC/Heater Blower Resistor. You know, that little piece that fails and eventually causes your fan to operate at only one or two (usually the highest) speeds. Most of the GM/model/repair forums address it somewhere. Very prevalent. Since 1983, SEVEN of 10 GM cars I've had, have all had this problem. From a Cavalier to an Intrigue to a Grand Prix GTP. A minor part causing a major headache. Yet GM has done nothing over the years to re-engineer and remedy the situation? What's up with that?

It's certainly not enough to make me switch . . . but c'mon--25+ years ! ? That's how you develop a "reputation".