2006 - 303 HP V8 Returns Impala/Monte Carlo SS.

Read in the Chicago Tribune auto section today Chevy will revise the Impala & Monte Carlo line up for 2006.

Engines offered will be the base 3.5 litre 210 HP V6 which replaces the

180 HP 3400 A 3.9 litre, 240 HP V6 will replace the 200 HP 3800 V6.

The SS versions of both cars will have a 303 HP 5.3litre V8 that is currently offered in the 2005 Chevy Trailblazer.

Both 2006 Impala & Monte will remain FWD.

Impala exterior revisions will eliminate the Cherrio's looking taillights when lit up. The picture of the Monte in todays paper looked the same as 05 except it had new headlight capsules grille & hood.

LT, LTZ and SS classifications will be offered.

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

1991 Pontiac Bonneville LE 3800 V6 ( C ), Black/Slate Grey _~_~_~297,626 miles_~_~_

~_~_~_~_U.S.A._~_~_~_~_~_

~~~The Former Fleet ~~~

89 Cavalier Z 24 convertible 78 Holiday 88 coupe 68 LeSabre convertible 73 Impala sedan
Reply to
Harry Face
Loading thread data ...

I thought the next Impala was to be RWD.

Reply to
James C. Reeves

The pics I have seen basically looks like they resurrected the 99 Lumina and slapped Impala/Monte badges on them.

Reply to
Brad Clarke

It will be on the next re-design.

This is just a re-skinning.

Reply to
Brad Clarke

Ouch ! Now that's just mean !

Reply to
Full_Name

One step at a time...

Reply to
Paradox

Take a look at this and say it's not Lumina-esque :)

formatting link

Reply to
Brad Clarke

I can see it a little bit.

Reply to
James C. Reeves

And to think that GM is losing market share with exciting vibrant cars like this......

Thankfully they are not constrained by the round headlight shape that they fought so vehemently to get rid of. The New Mustang would have just sucked with the old round headlights......

PS for those who didn't notice this is a bit tongue in cheek.

Reply to
Full_Name

I was excited as all get out when I read an online news item about this today (Can't recall where). I was ready to try to pre-order a V-8 Monte! IMHO it sucks that you can only get the V-8 by buying the crap SS package as well. I like to drive sleepers. That's a totally different story, though.

The catch is (and there always seems to be a catch lately with GM) is that these engines will have the wonderful cylinder deactivation feature to improve mpg.

GAH!!!!

Didn't they learn anything from those 4-6-8 Caddies in the late 70's or early 80's?? That was a serious debacle, IIRC!

As a result, I'm not touching one of these with a 10 foot pole. I'll go with something with a gen III 3800. That puppy has proven itself as one of GM's best motors ever from what I've seen.

Comments?

Rick

Reply to
Rutger6559

Rick

Chrysler 300 Hemi's have that cylinder shut down. I haven't heard of any problems with their system. I think with it being controlled more by computer & electronics it probably works better than what Caddy had used in the 80s.. We may see more engines going that route in the future.

A Goodyear manager had one of those Caddy V 8,6,4 for many years and never had trouble with his.

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

1991 Pontiac Bonneville LE 3800 V6 ( C ), Black/Slate Grey _~_~_~297,626 miles_~_~_

~_~_~_~_U.S.A._~_~_~_~_~_

~~~The Former Fleet ~~~

89 Cavalier Z 24 convertible 78 Holiday 88 coupe 68 LeSabre convertible 73 Impala sedan
Reply to
Harry Face

Good point, and I'm glad you mentioned it as my post came off like I thought GM was the only culprit, which is not true.

Don't get me wrong - if they've got this thing down now then I guess I'm all for it. It's just that with all the Caddy problems I remember, I'm not willing to risk my $$$ for 10 years or so to see how it pans out. Much like I won't buy a hybrid because we've yet to see how long the ultra-expensive batteries last. (Another subject, I know.)

Hmmm...... Perhaps he was lucky or more was made out of it than it was? I still think the fact that Caddy dropped them relatively quickly says a lot.

Thanks for the info, though, HF!

BTW, you lookin forward to the Chicago Auto Show? I know I am.

Rick

Reply to
Rutger6559

Totally different, what they will be doing with the modern engines as compared to what they did with the old Cadillac engines. I doubt that most people will even be able to tell when the engine switches between modes.

Ian

Reply to
shiden_kai

How is it totally different? Sounds very much similar. Of course it's all in the details, and that's why I'm asking.

Reply to
SgtSilicon

Thanks, Ian, that's encouraging to hear. But like the Sgt asked, do you have any info/links to explain exactly how it's different? Not that I don't believe you, of course. Just like the Sgt I'm merely curious.

Reply to
Rutger6559

I'm not sure how it's different either, but Honda is using a version in its new Accord V6 hybrid. At full throttle it out performs the standard Accord V6. Under reasonable, non-lead-footing, conditions it is supposed to get the same gas mileage as the 4 cylinder standard Civic.

Honda and GM are doing a lot of engineering project sharing. IIRC, a modified version of the Honda V6 in used in the Vue.

Reply to
Kent Finnell

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 17:21:14 -0600, someone posing as Harry Face chisled in the wall:

So sad.

I drove one the other day, while looking for a car. (Ended up buying a V6 VUE.) It just wasn't the same. I really miss RWD.

One of my managers has a '96 SS. Now there's a nice car!

Reply to
Perfect Reign

I believe that the "displacement-on-demand" technology has improved quite a bit since.

Reply to
James C. Reeves

Sarge, you are right....I spoke a bit too soon. I don't have all the details, but it will use cylinder de-activation at the lifters, not at the rocker arms like the Cadillac's used. So the concept is going to be similiar, but I suspect that the execution will be much better because of the better computer technology.

Here....I did a little searching and came up with this article. Answers all your questions and mine.

formatting link
Ian

Reply to
shiden_kai

My bad....see my response to Sarge.

Ian

Reply to
shiden_kai

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.