Impala vs. Accord?

Foreign car buyer have themselves convinced that only the brand THEY buy will last a long time. They do not understand that many of us own domestics that have 200K or more on the clock. ;)

mike hunt

So.... you're a pot stirrer, huh? Hey - if you do go ahead and get that V8 SS, make sure to post some performance observations.

As for the TC switch - I often turn mine off in the winter in order to actually get the car to go. TC tries to drive the car too much for the driver and will leave you half out into an intersection with no power left going to the wheels as the engine is choked out. Some of us actually know how to drive and don't need this technology to handle winter roads.

transmission"

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 bashing.

Underwhelmed! Underwhelmed. Though I was curious to know your reasons, I could never suggest anyone be overwhelmed by a GM tranny.

I bet he would say that counts. He was just asking though. The guy has a point.

I've had coupons for free oil changes and would not even take it to the dealer for that.

Actually, now that I think of it, neither of my Bonneville's (two 1996's) cut engine power very much when the wheels are spinning. They activate the ABS. My sisters Grand Am, on the other hand, is exactly like you describe. You give it too much gas, and its as if the car stalls. I hate that feeling, and I totally agree that good driving skills should exceed the technology level of your car. Even in the winter, my TC rarely, if ever, kicks in. There's not much need for TC, unless you have a constant heavy foot.

: "Excelent."

I said here, that isn't where you are.

That's true. A big difference is the imports test new models on their home market, so we don't see all the initial problems.

A big problem we have is if a big 3 manufacturer doesn't change bad designs, ie GM frequently trying to push problems under the carpet because they are losing too much money to back their products adequately.

This thread has zig zagged all over the place, but I will add my two cents.

I bought a used 2001 Impala back in Sept 2002. The car had less than

19K miles, and was priced almost 7 grand below it's original sticker MSRP. I think the total out the door purchase price was around 15K in cluding tax and fees, etc. I compared the car to used Taurus and some Accord Camrys of the same year.

This was my very first GM car.

I have had the car 4 years this Sept, and now just turned over 60K miles.

I am surprised at how poor the reputation is for these cars. I have had an issue with the ISS, and EGR gaket leaks, but otherwise an excellent, reliable car. My out of pocket expense has been lower with this car than any car I have ever owned (several Crown Vics and various Chrysler products).

I would recommend the Impala, and will probably replace this car with another GM product.

My two cents, Bill

Go look at a 2006 V6 Impala the current price is around the same as a summarily equipped 4 cy Corolla, 18K

mike

Well, when I bought my Impala, it was before the employee pricing and all of the big incentives. The point of my post was that a used Impala seems to be a good value, and I have had good service so far out of mine.

Not to change the subject, but a few years ago a financial anaylist on a nationwide talk radio show had a therory that the lowest cost of car ownership per mile was to buy a one year old Intrepid, or Taurus, keep it three years, and trade for another Intrepid, or Taurus. His theroy was that these cars depreciated deeply the first year, had two years of warranty remaining, and required little in cost for the third year of ownership. You were always in a car that was less than four years old, and had lower costs out of pocket. In comparison (again, his therory) to a Camry, or Accord, you could not recoup the high purchase costs, even with higher resale value. His recommendation for Accords and Camrys was to own for 100K miles plus to meet the same cost per mile of a used Intrepid, or Taurus every three years.

In may area, Camrys with over 100K miles still bring 8, or 9 thousand dollars in good shape. I would rather have a new Taurus every three years, myself.

Good Thread here. Take care,

Bill Mike Hunter wrote:

Used Impalas can be a good value because the first year depreciation is huge on them, thanks mostly to the vast number which do short term rental fleet duty.

If you have the 3.4l, watch out for intake manifold gasket leaks. It is not a question of if, but rather of when it will happen.

Get an oil analysis of your used oil at least once per year to catch it before major engine damage happens. Well worth the $20 to do.

is one of many reputable companies which can do this for you.

John

Better than the 3.4 for sure, but "Honda like" .... I doubt that :).

There have also been issues with the plastic manifold equipped 3.8l developing leaks and/or melting near the EGR valve. Keep an eye on it.

John

You must have been spending a lot to maintain your cars. >:)

I agree, but a new Taurus is now out of the question, unless you are happy with the very base model Taurus Ford has been selling for the last few years.

Vast numbers? How many is that? ;)

mike hunt

Glad you did not say Toyota. Toyota has more recalls, this year, for engine proplems than any other manufature ;)

mike

Not a problem on todays engines.

mike