Sounds.... coarse? What does that mean? Subjective.
Quick? Too easily? Again, opinion. What is the 1/4 mile time? Zero
to 60? If their whole business is to RATE things, then they should be
actually measuring whenever possible. And quickness is possible to
Opinion again. Granted, handling might be harder to measure but
actually can be if ya try much at all.
That is completely meaningless to me. Maybe what absorbs or
unsettles me is not what is what happens with this car, or maybe it
is. Who knows.
Very easily measured. I find CRs "rating" method to be worse than
More opinion. Some opinion is okay but it's best explained.
Wow! An actual FACT.
Fact if the "good" is the actual crash test rating. Opinion if "good"
is CR's wording.
Factual. It has a V6 engine, and is CR's top rated sedan.
Didn't take long to get into bullshit land again though did it?
How roomy? How quiet/noisy? Both of these traits are measurable.
Measure it. Publish it. Do it for all the cars you rate.
Telescoping fact.... ideal position opinion. But at least it's an
opinion which is explained.
As I expect almost every modern tranny does.
No facts here at all. Just hype.
A wee bit more facts.
As said before.... why not actually MEASURE the quickness? Perhaps
real numbers do not allow you to paint things in such a favorable
light as compared to others as using subjective touchy feely words do.
It's funny that both cars get the same "very good" rating symbol for
acceleration, the Honda also gets the phrase "very quick" to describe
it's quickness with no downside, the Chevy gets a descriptive phrase
of merely "is quick" with a downside mentioned immediately with it. I
say it's funny because, they Chevy is for sure quicker than the Honda
even with the V6, and with all doubt removed for the V8 version. Yet
the CRs wording of this trait most definitely favors the Honda.
Strange that, since it is the opposite of the TRUTH. Makes me
question the either the integrity/objectiveness of CR, the competency
of their ratings or both.
Numbers, please. Very measurable once again substituting subjective
Another rare fact.
Mix bag of fact and subjectiveness.
This is a good example why I think CR is unworthy of much of the
respect they get.
Well, you aren't wrong with your assessment. Except, of course, that I dont
give them much respect in the first place.
If a person wants to know what a car drives like, then get in it and drive
If you dont like the drive, seating, body integrity, etc, then look for
else until you do find one that you like.
Dont buy Honda, or GM, or any other damn thing until you try it.
If it falls apart on you after you buy it, then learn from the experience.
a free country.
Absolutely no offense taken, Sgt.
I can't even make up my mind what car I want to buy, so have decided to wait
I will most likely take over a lease on a Volvo as a company car, and this
will be my
first of these to become intimate with. It has an automatic tranny, which I
have chosen had it been a personal car. But, it will make it easier for my
wife to drive,
especially in a country that is strange to her, and where winter ice and
Volvo aint Volvo anymore, but at least I dont have to assume the
responsibility for it.
With me in the drivers seat there is 1" of space between the front seat
and the rear seat. Not enough space to carry little children, unless
they are in a kids seat.
The VW Beetles had much more space.
I'd drive a couple cars before making a decision. I'm not real sold on
the previous generation Impalas, I've head that the new ones are much
better, but they only came out for the '05 model year. Based on
driving an '04 as a company car for the last year, I'd probably go with
supply means lower prices.
I rented a '05 Impala for two weeks and wasn't impressed with it's so so
handling and old tech auto transmission.
Slightly smaller than the Impala, but similar in size to the Accord and
a much more up to date design than the Impala is the Chrysler Sebring
Here there are quite a few '05 Sebrings now coming off lease with 10K to
20K miles, selling at about 60% of new list price.
As would be my expectation Roy. I've never owned one, so I don't have any
first hand experience with the Impala, but my buddy is about to have one
ordered as a company car. He's pretty abusive (under certain definitions of
the word) of a car, so it will be interesting to see how it holds up under
The fleet service company, I once owned, serviced NY State Police Impalas.
Many of them had over 200K on the clock and were still running fine. Other
police departments use them as well, but nothing holds up as well as the
Ford Interceptor ;)
(NB:I had the '05 3.4L Impalla for a 2 weeks rental. These comments may
only be applicable to that model of Impalla)
There is a huge difference between 4 th and 3 rd gears and the
transmission didn't seem to adjust it's shifting to my driving style as
modern automatics (since the early 90s) do. I was highway driving in
hilly country, on both 50mph and 70 mph max. roads.
I assume in an attempt to get max fuel mileage it stays in 4 th as long
as possible and required a big push on the accelerator to get the
downshift to 3 rd and resulting much higher revs. and uncomfortable to
drive. On cruise in hilly country at higher speeds (60 mph+) this huge
down shift results in one hell of an engine racket. Without a tach,
which all our Chryslers have had for years, I couldn't quantify the rev
difference between 4 th and 3 rd, but the engine noise difference told
My oldie '95 Concord and my wife's '01 Sebring are very pleasant to
drive by comparison. Both just slip down into 3 rd when needed; hardly
noticeable. They don't even require much additional push on the
accelerator, but will down shift to maintain the speed one is driving
when not on cruise. Also on cruise the Chryslers downshift
automatically when downhill speed goes about 5mph above the cruise
setting, this Impalla didn't do so, probably not having this function
that has been common on most cars since the early 90s.
Also The Impalla cornering and tracking took me back to cars of the 70s,
whereas all FWD Chryslers we've owned since '79 have had excellent
cornering and better tracking than the Impalla.
I will admit that the Chrysler Reliant of the early 80s (I rented a
few) had very poor cornering. I read that it was setup to be similar to
what NA car owners were used to. >:)
Re handling and cornering I owned several UK and European cars in my
younger years, because I couldn't stand the sloppy handling and huge
size of the typical NA cars at that time. They spoiled me on handling.
Chrysler was first of the big 3 to produce crisp handling cars in NA,
with the '79 Horizon 3 dr hatchback.
On the other hand the Impalla is OK for relatively level roads. IMO it
would be a fine car in flatter country and the highway mileage was very
good, obviously the result of such a high top gear. It has a huge trunk,
the front seats were fine; we had no rear seat passengers to comment on
The Impala also has very nice conservative styling, even better in '06.
The Impalla makes a fine airport taxi, which appears to be where many of
them sell here.
For an inner city taxi service the Toyota Corolla is becoming very
As for "my being overwhelmed by GM auto transmissions", I'm overwhelmed
that this ''05 Impalla had an auto transmission and handling so inferior
to that of my 11 yr older '95 Concord.
<Snip a good commentary and opinion>
Thanks for following up. It's good to hear someone actually articulate the
reasons they don't like something, complete with comparisons to what they
prefer. What a difference between that approach and the more common
<Product Name> bashing.
Underwhelmed! Underwhelmed. Though I was curious to know your reasons, I
could never suggest anyone be overwhelmed by a GM tranny.
You've got to be kidding about the Sebring. I have owned Chrysler
products only but the Sebring/Stratus are only sold on the deal and
mostly to rental fleets. The Impala is not my favorite as I dislike low
seats in sedans. I have not been in an Accord for a few years.
owned car. Of course they could be leased; few will tell you that.
With the 300 replacing the LH Chryslers, the Sebring is now the
preferred mid sized Chrysler here. The 300 sells poorly here, but the
LH sold very well.
Canadian buyers prefer one size less than USA buyers for cars and in
Vancouver the average car size is less than in the CDN prairies and
The reason the cheapest accord is 17 grand is because it is a honda and
it has a honda badge. If you want my opinion i would buy the impala
because all i buy is gm. Is the honda a 2003. If it is still jump on
the impala. The SS are nice too.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.