2006 Chevrolet Impala

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
FWD. Not a true Impala. Pretty clearly based on the Malibu's platform.

ZV

2006 Chevrolet Impala : Chevy will be the first GM brand to get an all-new replacement for its W-bodied sedan, the Impala

 

[Yzzim]

Looks like an updated Lumina

 

[jspeicher]

0/10

 

[Colt45]

Thats not an impala, this is an impala.

 

[MichaelD]

It's a 2002 Nissan Maxima. Or whatever year the body style before the current one existed. Seriously. Look at the front end, then move your eyes over the beltline towards the rear. Maxima.

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit

Originally posted by: funboy42
They need to bring the reto muscle car look back like Ford did with the new mustang. That car in no way to speaks to me as a mean, fast ride.
And while they are at it drop the computer bs controlling the engine, trans, and brakes. I mean with the technology we have today I am certin they can produce a carb that gets better fuel economy then fuel injection. The ONLY reason that they wont is because it makes it so the average Joe can no longer work on his own car and forces you to either take it to the dealership and get it fixed or pitch it.
Years from now when all the older cars are gone and we are left with these computer controlled high dollar matenance vechiles left the economy is going to topple because poor and lower middle clase that buys the odercars will not be able to afford to fix or replace parts on the because the replacements will cost to much and wont have the funds to get something like this repaired.

Its all going to go to hell in 10-15 years mark my words.

2007 RWD Camaro....

no such thing as a camaro, or firebird in the near future, someone who i know who designs for GM, has said this, that there are NO plans for any Camaro, or Firebird replacement.

MIKE

 

[MichaelD]

Originally posted by: Colt45
Thats not an impala, this is an impala.

*drool* Yes. And it's not "gangsterized" either. No puke orange metalflake paint job with the the 8-inch little hopper tires on it. No pimp daddy button interior nor little doggie shaking it's head on the rear deck. Nice pic.

 

[KarenMarie]

looks like just about every other car on the market in it's class.

 

[funboy6942]

Id take this one over a newer one any day.

 

[BW86]

Ugly.

 

[Twista]

looks plain

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: BW86
Ugly.

 

[redly]

Originally posted by: NFS4
2006 Chevy Impala

Do the taillights still look like Target Logos?

 

[redly]

Originally posted by: funboy42
They need to bring the reto muscle car look back like Ford did with the new mustang. That car in no way to speaks to me as a mean, fast ride.
And while they are at it drop the computer bs controlling the engine, trans, and brakes. I mean with the technology we have today I am certin they can produce a carb that gets better fuel economy then fuel injection. The ONLY reason that they wont is because it makes it so the average Joe can no longer work on his own car and forces you to either take it to the dealership and get it fixed or pitch it.
Years from now when all the older cars are gone and we are left with these computer controlled high dollar matenance vechiles left the economy is going to topple because poor and lower middle clase that buys the odercars will not be able to afford to fix or replace parts on the because the replacements will cost to much and wont have the funds to get something like this repaired.

Its all going to go to hell in 10-15 years mark my words.

I've got computer controlled cars and have never had a problem working on my own stuff. Maybe you should progress out of the 70's

 

[funboy6942]

Originally posted by: redly

Originally posted by: funboy42
They need to bring the reto muscle car look back like Ford did with the new mustang. That car in no way to speaks to me as a mean, fast ride.
And while they are at it drop the computer bs controlling the engine, trans, and brakes. I mean with the technology we have today I am certin they can produce a carb that gets better fuel economy then fuel injection. The ONLY reason that they wont is because it makes it so the average Joe can no longer work on his own car and forces you to either take it to the dealership and get it fixed or pitch it.
Years from now when all the older cars are gone and we are left with these computer controlled high dollar matenance vechiles left the economy is going to topple because poor and lower middle clase that buys the odercars will not be able to afford to fix or replace parts on the because the replacements will cost to much and wont have the funds to get something like this repaired.

Its all going to go to hell in 10-15 years mark my words.

I've got computer controlled cars and have never had a problem working on my own stuff. Maybe you should progress out of the 70's

So does that mean that because you can work on a computer controlled car mean EVERYONE can work on them? I am a mechanic and I can (used to till I got hurt) work on them. But your missing that there is maybe a 10-20% of the population that have the skills to do thier owwn work. Sure they can change one part for another but what happends when the one computer controlled part fails and you dont know which one it is. If you have a computer to talk to your car to tell what part failed the everyone has it but reality is no. If you dont know what part failed what do you change? And again you missed the point that when these cars get passed down in the years to the poor to lower middle class they will be forced to take it to the dealership. Your poor how can you afford to pay at that time $100 an hour. Shoot its $75 right now. Then you have to pay for the part that failed. I am sorry but give me a 70's type car. No computer. If a part fails it fails. You dont have a computer over riding to compansate for the failed part till it fails and then you find you have a problem. And lets talk about the lcd screen dash, radios and what not. Do you think when they fail its going to cost a few bucks? HELL no.

I am saying there shouldnt be a need for all this really. We have the technogly to be able to make a fuel economy carb. Its just the auto makers will loose so much in doing it because the regular Joe will once again be able to work on thier own ride again AND god we cant have that happen again can we?

 

[redly]

dude, I have no mechanical training whatsoever. If anything, the computer makes most repairs easier. Just go rent (free, depending on the store) a diagnostic code reader from an autoparts store and it points you to the possible and likely region or part that is causing the problem

For parts, buy used or ebay and save. It's worked for me for the past couple of years. I'm cheap and drive early 90's junkers. If you take your car to the dealer time after time and continue to pay without researching how to fix it yourself, than fvck you. It's easy and the information is FREE at the library or online.

LCD screens and radios..bah, if you're poor, you shouldn't be buying a high end model that would have a part that is expensive to replace.

AND..WTF is this non computer "technology" that is supposed to make a carb efficient and low maintenance? I'm curious

 

[FrustratedUser]

I actually like the current model better. I drove it cross-country and it drives nice and is roomy but the interior is well.. less than great.

 

[Mallow]

wow, didn't think they could make that car uglier.

 

[Aves]

Originally posted by: Colt45
Thats not an impala, this is an impala.

:thumbsup:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: NFS4
2006 Chevy Impala

Indistinguishable

 

[Goosemaster]

The front looks like an insect from bugs life....you know, that fat lady bug.:thumbsdown:

 

[DivideBYZero]

I fell asleep looking at that car.

 

[Aztech]

That's sick, and not in a good way.

 

[loic2003]

That's got to be one of the most boring designs of a car I have seen in months. Where's the flare, the excitement, the pazazz that makes the thing look even remotely different to any other american car? There's not one unique feature or seemly any attempt and making something stylish for the year 2005. It would have been dull in 1995.

 

[funboy6942]

If you take your car to the dealer time after time and continue to pay without researching how to fix it yourself, than fvck you. It's easy and the information is FREE at the library or online.

Would you please take the time to read what I write before making such a comment??? I especially like the fvck you comment, very mature.
But anyway you seem to miss that NOT everyone is like us. Yes I agree that all that you mentioned is true BUT not all people will do that and because of that it will hurt the economy in the long run.

And as far going back to carb and getting rid of the sensors will make it low maintenance because just think about it. Right now if you buy a car that was made say in the 80's will it cost you more to have work done to it or your 90's?? The 80's would be cheaper because there are much less sensors to fail meaning lower cost to repair and diag. If you drop the sensors, switches, injectors, and most of all that is controlled by a computer when a part fails it fails. Since you have no knowledge on how a computer controlled car operates you need to know that if a sensor fails the computer may not throw a code for it. Instead it will compensate changing other factors to keep the car running as it should. Untill another part fails causing all hell to break loose and may have a code for the one but not the other making it very hard at times to get the car to run correctly again. The computer only throws a code if the failed part is noticed atleast 3-4 times after start up as being failed. If it works some times and some times it doesn't the computer will see that it is working a throw the code away till it notices again that it failed 3-4 times in a row. Ask anyone here that they have see the check engine light come on for a week, dissapear for a month to have it reappear. And almost everytime it is brought to the dealership the light wont come back on and since the computer sees it as working it pitched the code away so we see nothing yet again.

NOW for the part where it is cheaper. Ditch all that shite run a carb. no anti knock sensor, throttle sensor, maf or map sensors all the carp the computer reads and compensates to "make" the car run better. This way when something fails it fails. Its not a stupid sensor failing causing your car to now run like crap but a physical part had to fail instead which you go right to the failed part and change it. There by saving you money in the long run. Why do you think it is so much cheeaper to fix a 60's-80's versus a 90's up. 90's up you not only have computers, sensors, switches, breaking but the some actual parts as well.

If you dont get it now what I ment you are very narrow minded.

OH and that thing you bought at the auto parts store to talk to your computer is great for older cars with antique computers running them. It gives you basic whats wrong but to do the job correctly you need the newest ones that measure everything down to what the sensor out puts are so you can see a slowly failing part. With that thing if the codes not there then thats it and at times just because you have a code it made not be it. It points you in a direction but may not be the real reason and your back to what i said when the computer compensates to make it run right till another one fails. You can change that part but it still runs like crap throwing a code for the same part you changed leaving you no choice but to take it to some one that has an even better computer to talk to yours and look at each individual sensor.
If you think I am talkign out of my ars think again. Been a mechanic since the age of 15 (now 33), not only did I work on cars but also managed several auto shops incuding an Infinitiy dealership.