2012 Chevy Impala

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

wolf_06

Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
597
Location
Atlantic, Canada
I was thinking getting rid of my hyundai and get something bigger.
What do you guys think of the impala with the 3.6L??

Is this engine better than the 3.5L?

One of my friend just sold his 2003 impala with 493 000 km on it, former taxi car, ran on conventional oil all its life. Impressive car.
 
3.6 is more powerful and likely more fuel efficient than the 3.5. The 3.6 is a DOHC design, while the 3.5 is a pushrod OHV design. The 6-speed that comes with the 3.6 is likely a better transmission than the 4-speed behind the 3.5.

Impalas aren't bad cars, they're just dated. At least parts are cheap, and mechanics have been working on W-bodies since the early 1990's.
 
Originally Posted By: sciphi
3.6 is more powerful and likely more fuel efficient than the 3.5. The 3.6 is a DOHC design, while the 3.5 is a pushrod OHV design. The 6-speed that comes with the 3.6 is likely a better transmission than the 4-speed behind the 3.5.

Impalas aren't bad cars, they're just dated. At least parts are cheap, and mechanics have been working on W-bodies since the early 1990's.


Ha! I could have swore there was a 6 speed impala .. but the few I drove were all 3.5 / 4 speeds.
 
Over all its a good car...but just like sciphi said they are dated. And it wont have good resale value down the road. And if you care about fit and finish its not that good.
 
The 3.6 is 305 hp and a very nice engine. It moves pretty good. Why not a Malibu with the same engine? Much nicer. The 2012 Impala is overall a decent car that you will get lots of years out of.
You have have to put it in perspective. You are coming out of an Accent, while not a bad car even the Impala is better than that.
 
I got my wife an '08 Impala a couple years ago, and she thinks it is "the best car ever".

It's big and the interior is fantastically comfortable. The suspension is a bit floaty. It is not what I would call top-tier quality, but whatever. Exterior styling is bland.

The trunk is huge. The ride is nice. It's been dead reliable. Mileage is decent. Parts are cheap.

The worst aspect: It barely fits in my garage.
 
The 3.5L in the Impala gets awesome MPG. Low to mid 30's all highway and mid 20's around town. More than enough power for the vehicle. I would not want the 3.6L due to the issues those DI engines have had.

My Sister had one and I really liked it. Roomy, comfy, nice ride, etc... I used it on a couple trips from NH to VA and it was the most comfortable long drive I have ever had. I also disagree with those saying they are bland or not well made( fit and finish ). I think they are attractive and the F&F was as good as other vehicles in it's class.
 
Last edited:
GM's DI implementations have been pretty darned trouble-free for the most part. The worst knock against them is some of them such as the 2.4 SIDI engine need 5k mile oil changes to combat fuel dilution. The 3.6 V6 in question has shown to be a pretty good engine. The early ones (2005-2006) had timing chain issues, but IIRC those were ironed out.
 
Timing Chain problems are problems are they not? Also, DI engines in general are very hard on oil which means you need to be very diligent with your OCI's. Just not something I would want if possible to avoid. The 3.5L is an excellent motor and pairs very well with that platform Impala. To me of the two I would take the 3.5L.
 
Last edited:
I can give a bit of feedback as I own a 2010 Impala and rented a 2013 for a week about a month ago when mine was in the shop.

To start, I would look at other brands makes too. If you are stuck on Chevy's, the new Malibu's are nice and almost the same size, but are put together much better.

My 2010 has about 70K miles on it, this is the most maintenance intense car I have ever owned. I am a car guy and take care of my stuff, maintenance is always done on time. Runs great and is a really smooth car but lots of little things going wrong. I'm on my third set of front brake rotors (keep warping,Impalas are known for this) the transmission cooler lines are leaking, rear main seal leaking, power steering pump starting to make noise ( yes the fluid level is correct) ,had bad park interlock wiring I had to redo as it wouldn't shift into park or release the key from the column, passenger tie rod or ball joint starting to make clunking noise.... Never had a newer model car with so many issues. But, I do love the way it drives, very smooth/solid drivetrain and pretty good on gas, we get 24MPG overall. The interior is junk, all plastic and feels like it's from the early 2000's.

The 2013 I rented with the 3.6 felt put together much better overall,only had 6K miles on it though and from what I recall mine felt like that when it was new too. It was just as smooth as my Impala however, you have to rev the [censored] out of that motor to get any power from it, feels like it has no torque down low. Rev it up into the 4-6K RPM rev range and it moves, but it's annoying to have to romp on it anytime you want to get anywhere. Gas mileage was about the same, ride was the same,same junky interior, brakes felt a little better so i'm hoping they finally fixed them in 2013.

Hope that helps some. I'd go test drive them to see which you like more. Better yet, go drive a new Ford Fusion or Taurus. I just purchased a new Ford as IMO they are leaps above Chev in quality, tech and performance now. The new Chevy's look nice too but with all the issues I have had with the Impala just couldn't buy another.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Timing Chain problems are problems are they not? Also, DI engines in general are very hard on oil which means you need to be very diligent with your OCI's. Just not something I would want if possible to avoid. The 3.5L is an excellent motor and pairs very well with that platform Impala. To me of the two I would take the 3.5L.


The timing chain issues were ironed out long ago with that engine in the Cadillac CTS. The current corporate 3.6 V6 doesn't have timing chain issues, at least as far as I know.

I agree that DI engines do need diligent oil changes. GM is no better and no worse than other makes for their DI engines needing on-time oil changes.
 
Originally Posted By: sciphi
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Timing Chain problems are problems are they not? Also, DI engines in general are very hard on oil which means you need to be very diligent with your OCI's. Just not something I would want if possible to avoid. The 3.5L is an excellent motor and pairs very well with that platform Impala. To me of the two I would take the 3.5L.


The timing chain issues were ironed out long ago with that engine in the Cadillac CTS. The current corporate 3.6 V6 doesn't have timing chain issues, at least as far as I know.

I agree that DI engines do need diligent oil changes. GM is no better and no worse than other makes for their DI engines needing on-time oil changes.


I wouldn't want any DI engine if I had other options is my point.
 
Originally Posted By: Huie83

It was just as smooth as my Impala however, you have to rev the [censored] out of that motor to get any power from, feels like it has no torque down low.


I'm surprised to hear that. I thought it would have good low end torque with that 6-speed transmission.
21.gif
 
The low end torque from the 3.6 is actually pretty decent. It's no 3800 but it's not supposed to be either. Doesn't stop people from comparing them though.
21.gif
 
Having had 3 seperate 3800s I have to say I enjoy the 3.6. Plenty of power and plenty of torque even when compared to a stock superchareged 3800.
It is, IMHO, just a better power plant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
A personal auto ownership history story to share
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Boomer
69GTX
Thoughts on buying 2017 Toyota Camry LE with 33K miles
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
gregk24
OVERKILL
Bad accident - walked away
2 3
Replies
56
Views
3K
Rust_Belt_Pete
A
Father/Son Project: 2006 Toyota Tacoma w/1GR-FE...Known Issues?
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
D60
Elkins45
2011 Impala semi-phantom drain
Replies
4
Views
282
carlprop
Back
Top Bottom