Going, going, gone - the venerable Impala, only for fleets as of late

[trinacriabob]

I've already reviewed the last-gen (2014 or 2015) Chevy Malibu.  The reason I got the car is because I returned the new, heavily pillared and raked Chevy Impala to the rental car agency because I couldn't see out the back and over the headrests.  I wrote a fairly good review about that Chevy Malibu.  Some of you agreed and some of you disagreed.  While this review is about an Impala, I had another of those last-gen Malibus in the recent past.  The base 2.5 was indeed coarse when hammered and, not only that, the gas mileage on 2 tanks wasn't what I got the first time I had one as a rental.  However, the biggest demerit was the start-stop feature at a light.  It was far from seamless.  The engine came back to life with a shudder most of the time.

Over Thanksgiving, I had a full-size car reserved from E.A.N.  You could select from the line at this airport.  I saw not one, but two, last-gen classic Chevy Impalas to choose from!  I forgot how I selected the one I did.  It could have been license plates congruent with the state of rental or the fact that it had those plump cloth bucket seats.

This was the last W-body that carried on for fleets and that was finished out at GM in Oshawa, Ontario, Canada - where my current and last car were assembled!  After the car I had rented prior to that, I feel that this Impala might be getting one helluva "halo effect."  It had the ubiquitous 3.6 high feature V6 mated to the now very familiar 6 speed automatic transmission.  God, this car made so much sense.  Everything about it was easy.  The instrument panel cluster and pods were simple and intuitive.  The blue lighting was refreshing.  The rig felt solid, both in its build quality in the cabin and via its weight.  The switches and toggles were familiar, being that they were mostly unchanged.  And, last but not least, one can be an average sized individual and appreciate those wide and not overly contoured bucket seats finished in cloth.  These were the same ones found 9 and 10 years ago in both the Chevrolet Impala and the Monte Carlo as it was being phased out.  And I commented on them favorably back then.

The drivability of the 2016 fleet Impala was quite good.  This 300 hp V6 was very capable of handling this sedan weighing somewhere between 3,500 and 4,000 pounds.  It worked well off the line, to pass, and all the way around.  The transmission shifted smoothly and hinted at the shift points.  Lately, I've decided I prefer a geared transmission to a CVT but  I just don't need all the various speeds.  From an auto show, I learned that this engine is, or has been, on Ward's Top Ten Engines list.  For being that powerful, highway trips returned high 20s in terms of mpgs.  Mixed driving came back in the low 20s.  Traffic clogged streets and expressways in South Florida can do that.  Moving to and from Fort Lauderdale and Miami during rush hour was absurd and an incident off on the shoulder or in the HOV lanes was the order of the day.  The quietness of the cabin and the suppleness of the suspension weren't what they are in my old school LaCrosse, but they were close enough and good enough.  There were two things I didn't like about the car.  First, it felt cheap to have a car with a nice, commodious interior with alloys on the exterior and be holding onto a urethane wheel.  Second, the Impala has always been among the W-bodies with the least amount of steering assist at low speeds.  They all have that issue, including my LaCrosse.  However, when maneuvering to get into and out of parking spaces, the hydraulic power steering unit on this car felt cumbersome.  Still, for all that was good about this car, the negatives were negligible.  And one could always figure out how to get a leather wrapped wheel onto what I believe was an LT model.

I remember the good old days of the 3.5 high value V6 engine and the 4-speed automatic transmission.  And I remember how easily that combination could have an Impala or Monte Carlo deliver 33 mpg on a highway trip.  I was perfectly o.k. with 211 horses and 4 gears still allows you to feel the shift points, despite their being almost seamless.  With 6 or 8 gears, I lose interest in the shift points.  I prefer to feel every step shift. After all, it's not a CVT.

The other thing is that the full size Chevy they put on police fleets is a tad better looking than this vehicle.  The rear end is nicer with smaller taillamps, the roof line flows better, and the front end is far and away more appealing.  I did not bother to check out the dashboards and interiors of these since it's probably not a good idea to be peering into police cars.

At any rate, this Impala was only offered to fleets.  I believe that a year or two prior to that, solo customers could get it on this car fresh from the factory.  Since it's no longer being produced and the individual buyer option is no longer workable, I didn't bother to look into the logistics.  However, I will recant on what I said in another review.  If I had been in the market for a car a year or two ago, this would have been my "go to" car.  For about $26,000 to $28,000 MSRP, one gets a stalwart of a W-body, plenty of room, plenty of history for mechanics and owners, a Ward's Top Ten engine, many other tried and true GM components, and a lot of common sense in a car. 

The Verano would have come next, but a Cruze-based Verano is not going to happen.  Going, going, gone for the long-lived Impala body style dating back to 2005.  For those looking for and needing an heirloom GM car through about 2014, this would have been a good way to go, but then hindsight is 20:20.

 

Car exterior (side)

 

 

Car exterior (it has always looked bigger than the Grand Prix and the LaCrosse)

 

 

Car exterior (the diamond hatch in the grille seemingly says high feature 3.6 V6 and 6 speed trans. - I preferred the earlier grille with horizontal slats)

 

:

 

Engine bay (300 ponies reside in here)

 

 

Car exterior (rear view - it was an LT)

 

 

Roomy trunk

 

 

An unchanged and highly functional front cabin (no push button start - everything is "old school" and it felt solid to the touch)

 

 

I sort of like the dual hump look on the cowl of the dashboard

 

 

Good rear seat, not that it was needed (this is where you can tell this vehicle is a little longer than the Grand Prix and the LaCrosse of W-body vintage) and the fabric is far from high rent, but it felt durable

 

 

Super easy to work with - simple, all you need, nice graphics, blue back lighting, and some D.I.C. buttons at the right ... I miss dashboards that are this sensible. 

Bleh to the urethane steering wheel.  It was an LT, so it should have been leather wrapped.  That would have felt much better.  The difference is light years.

 

 

Lastly, these bucket seats felt great ... to me, the proportions are ideal and it's doubtful we'll see car seats this plump and this wide in cars at lower price points

 

Edited March 7, 2017 by trinacriabob

[Frisky Dingo]

Ugh. You'd have to pay ME to own one of these.

[G. David Felt]

@trinacriabob Nice write up, glad you enjoyed the auto. I would never own it as the tight interior room and style just does nothing for me. 

With that said. If this auto had to live on, what would you change?

[regfootball]

this gen of Impalas sold bigly around these parts.  When GM put the 3.6 in them, it was a nice improvement.

I am glad a large GM car is available like this for a good price to buyers who like them.

I like their styling and the simple clean interior.

I do know a couple people who have had recent Impalas and i would say just look for info on their reliability.  In the case of the few I knew, it is possible their maintenance or lack of may have been a factor.  

[ccap41]

On 3/22/2017 at 2:18 PM, Frisky Dingo said:

Ugh. You'd have to pay ME to own one of these.

You and me both. 

[ocnblu]

My dad currently has one of these 3.6L Impalas.  He is a steadfast Chevy man.  Before this he had an older one with the 3.5L... the a/c ate itself, and with the prospect of a $1500 bill to fix it, he traded it on his current Impy, dark gray over ebony, with the crosshatch grille and body color trunk molding.  I had to tell him his 3.6L has 300 hp, not sure if he believed it.  These cars are true workhorses though.

[Drew Dowdell]

I've been a long time fan of the W-bodies, but by the time these came around GM had done something to the seating position that makes them feel off to me.  I could never get the seat into a comfortable position... I always felt I was sitting way too high. 

[Robert Hall]

Had quite a few of these as rentals across the US over the years.   Always liked them.  

[trinacriabob]

@dfelt - I'd change it to look more like the variant that only police departments get.  I don't even know its name.  Would it be a Caprice or just the fleet police unit?  The grilles on those are sportier and more defined, along with the tail lamps.  I'd also "dechunk" it a little bit, with that rear pillar being way too thick and ungainly. The rake of the rear windows is fine.  I'm not liking the trend to fastback anything and everything to the point that there's almost no trunk lid.  I like how the cowl of the dash feels wide and the top of it is not overpowering relative to where you sit, though I don't think that spread out bucket seats like that would be in demand today.  They'd need to be more cupped.  I still prefer the flatter look.

@ocnblu - yes, it's weird to see the jump to 300 hp in the 3.6 from 211 hp in the 3.5.  I'm guessing that, independent of other major components, 3.5s have held up fairly well.  GM service advisors seem to say these engines have gone the long haul.

[Drew Dowdell]

@trinacriabob - yeah, the 3500 and 3900 both hold up very well.  I continue to be impressed with their smoothness.  It's a shame that the Horsepower per Liter crowd killed them in the marketplace.  The 3500 may only make 219 hp which is just higher than the 196hp in the new 2.5 in the base Impala, but it also makes 35 lb-ft more torque and at a lower RPM.   I know I'd rather have the smoothness of the 3500 over the rather rough sounding (even as far as 4-cylinder go) 2.5 liter.

[loki]

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

@trinacriabob - yeah, the 3500 and 3900 both hold up very well.  I continue to be impressed with their smoothness.  It's a shame that the Horsepower per Liter crowd killed them in the marketplace.  The 3500 may only make 219 hp which is just higher than the 196hp in the new 2.5 in the base Impala, but it also makes 35 lb-ft more torque and at a lower RPM.   I know I'd rather have the smoothness of the 3500 over the rather rough sounding (even as far as 4-cylinder go) 2.5 liter.

and we'll never see it (3.5 or 3.9) with a 6-speed(+) and updated like the 4.3 has been. with a straight ratio for hp the 3.5 would make ~231hp, and ~258 for the 3.9. those look like great 2.0L Turbo replacement ranges for those that don't want a turbo in midsize and large sedans to midsize crossovers and ... small trucks.

Always liked Dwightlooi's technical ideas and explanations.

[Drew Dowdell]

15 minutes ago, loki said:

and we'll never see it (3.5 or 3.9) with a 6-speed(+) and updated like the 4.3 has been. with a straight ratio for hp the 3.5 would make ~231hp, and ~258 for the 3.9. those look like great 2.0L Turbo replacement ranges for those that don't want a turbo in midsize and large sedans to midsize crossovers and ... small trucks.

Always liked Dwightlooi's technical ideas and explanations.

Sadly, the 4.3 is actually small enough to fit under the hood of the new Impala. They just won't do it.

[loki]

11 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Sadly, the 4.3 is actually small enough to fit under the hood of the new Impala. They just won't do it.

i think i remember you saying this. dang HP wars....or more specifically hp/L...

[G. David Felt]

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

@trinacriabob - yeah, the 3500 and 3900 both hold up very well.  I continue to be impressed with their smoothness.  It's a shame that the Horsepower per Liter crowd killed them in the marketplace.  The 3500 may only make 219 hp which is just higher than the 196hp in the new 2.5 in the base Impala, but it also makes 35 lb-ft more torque and at a lower RPM.   I know I'd rather have the smoothness of the 3500 over the rather rough sounding (even as far as 4-cylinder go) 2.5 liter.

Makes one wonder just how fast we will change over from an ICE to an EV culture once people have test drove an EV. Since Torque is 100% from Zero, the smoothness that you experience is just amazing. Anyone that has driven a Tesla, Bolt, Leaf knows this and realizes, HP is a piece of the puzzle that moves an auto. Torque is the more important piece and allows one to have a truly satisfying experience of silky smooth motion.

I agree with you that I would take the smoothness of the older V6 over the 4 banger.

[Drew Dowdell]

12 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Makes one wonder just how fast we will change over from an ICE to an EV culture once people have test drove an EV. Since Torque is 100% from Zero, the smoothness that you experience is just amazing. Anyone that has driven a Tesla, Bolt, Leaf knows this and realizes, HP is a piece of the puzzle that moves an auto. Torque is the more important piece and allows one to have a truly satisfying experience of silky smooth motion.

I agree with you that I would take the smoothness of the older V6 over the 4 banger.

Horsepower is the measurement of torque over time.  A Tesla has max torque at zero RPM, but it also has ZERO horsepower at that point.  Horsepower is a marketing gimmick and largely irrelevant to the every day driver.  It's only relevant to race car drivers.