Impala or Malibu ???

We have a 2001 and like it. I would buy it again if I had to, but would order a base model with the 3.8L instead of the 3.4L. The LS comes with ABS standard and the base comes with the 3.4L standard, if you can order a base model with the 3.8 you will have the better combination.

I think that 2002 was the last model year for Impalas without ABS (I believe it's standard now). I bought a 2002 without ABS but I had to search hard to find it. The 3.8L and LS interior make the base model much more desireable.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% There are two classes of pedestrians in these days of reckless motor traffic - the quick and the dead. ~ Lord Dewar 1933 ~

Climbing into a hot car is like buckling on a pistol. It is the great equalizer. ~ Henry G. Felsen 1964 ~

I have a 01 impala 3.8L base model and I haven't been that happy with it. The problems I have had with the car are: Leaking coolant--had the intake manifold gasket replaced by dealership (warranty) Engine cradle creaking--replaced the aluminum subframe (warranty) Steering makes a clunk sound when turning--lubed the Intermediate Steering Shaft (warranty) Steering makes a clunk sound only when turning left--not yet taken to the dealership. When driving over 100km/hr and applying the brakes the car starts to shake--I imagine the rotors are warped. All these problems and I have only driven it 17K miles. The impala isn't the only car in the GM line-up with steering issues. I have read some Buick LeSabre owners complaining of clunks when turning and that isn't a W-Body.

The positives: large, affordable, fuel efficient, safe and comfortable.

The malibu is much worse than the impala. I drove the malibu for 1 week while my car was being worked on and it quite tight inside and the engine sounds way more rough than the impalas'. Plus the 3.1L engine is less reliable and gutless on the highway.

Vince

The base Impala with the 3400 is available without ABS. You can also get a Buick Regal LS 3800, WITHOUT ABS, its optional, Bonneville offered ABS as an option for 1 year- I think in 2002 or 2003,

Regal is the only GM car ( That I'm aware of ) with a 3800 standard, where you can NOT get ABS on if you don't want it.

A base Impala with the optional 3800 engine is almost identical to the LS. You get the same sport tuned suspension, ABS, Electronic Traction Control, tire inflation monitor, 16 " custom cast aluminum wheels and touring tires.

The only other differences between the Base and LS are some standard features on the LS , but there optional on the base.

On the base model there are no fog lights in the front bumper, no spoiler, although one is Optional on base in 2004. You can get a 2 different cloth bench seats styles or a bucket seat interior in the base.

A Leather bench is optional in the Base.

Buckets are standard in the LS, though you can get a leather bench seat, no cloth bench seat is offered on the LS..

Good Luck

========= Harryface =========

1991 Pontiac Bonneville LE 3800 V6 ( C ), Black/Slate Grey _~_~_~_~277, 300 miles_~_~_ ~_~_

Hey even the trucks have that steering clunk. Funny, my mother's 99 Malibu has a 4.3L with plenty-o-balls.

~KJ~

I thought the 3.1 was the largest V6 offered in the 99 model Malibu.

| > The positives: large, affordable, fuel efficient, safe and comfortable. | >

| > The malibu is much worse than the impala. I drove the malibu for 1 week | > while my car was being worked on and it quite tight inside and the engine | > sounds way more rough than the impalas'. Plus the 3.1L engine is less | > reliable and gutless on the highway. | >

| > Vince | >

| > > I am considering the purchase of a 2003 Impala. Any info on these | > > makes/models would be greatly appreciated. | > >

| > > Thanks | > > John | > >

| > >

| >

| >

| |

Same here. Has Chevy even made a 4.3L? I'm guessing KJ meant 3.4L but was still mistaken since I bet it's a 3.1.

Of course, I'm no genius by any means!

Rick

The 3.4 is the optional engine on the 2004 model (the newly redesigned version). I don't think the information on the 4.3 in the Malibu is correct.

I think he means 3.4L in the Malibu. The 4.3L is in the S-10's, Astro;s, etc. Our Impala had the steering clunk, I bought the grease tube for $5 from gmpartsdirect and squirted it in. The 3.4L has plenty of power, the only reason I recommend the 3.8 over it is they 3.4L (at least in the 2001 model) still has the intake manifold gasket problem.

"KJ" wrote

Your mother is lying to you. It's not possible for her to have a 99 Malibu with a 4.3 liter engine. It's not even possible for her to have a 3.4 liter engine in her Malibu. Her choices are 2.4....or 3.1...from the factory.

Ian

I used to own a 2003 Malibu, the largest (and only) V6 was the 3.1 (170 horses with 190 ft. lb torque). Power was reasonable and adequate, but hardly exceptional. It seemed to begin to run out of steam though at highway speeds...not very good "top end" power. Who ever told you that any 99 Malibu had a 4.3 V6 is pulling your leg.

Wrong answer. The 3.5L is the optional engine for 2004.

The only 4.3 I am aware of is the Vortec V6 that is in the trucks.

I just bought a 2003 Impala with only 33K Km and it was put ont the road in april 03 (in Canada) with the 3400 and it's a charm.

STF "John" a écrit dans le message de news:ClV0c.11582$ snipped-for-privacy@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...

Well why didn't you correct me before when I said it had a 4.3 in the other news groups?

~KJ~

Your moms 99 Malibu might have a 2.4L or a 3.1L but not a 4.3. At least not from the factory (grin). I agree the 3.1 in a Malibu is peppy.

Regards, Al.

"KJ" wrote

Unfortunately, correcting your posts would be a full time job, and I already have one of those! I just catch the blatant ones.

Nuff said?

Ian

What's 100cc's between friends. :-)

Do you want a real car??? Then go buy a 2003 Crown Vic or Grand Marquis. Full frame, cheap to buy cheap to insure and is bigger faster and has lots more options. Oh did I metion they have a real V-8 motor??????

Jake