NAIOA.comNAIOA.comNAIOA.com
 Create an Account
 

  
NAIOA Impala Forums :: View topic - 2014 Impala
GarageGarage    1/4 Mile Table1/4 Mile Table    Forum FAQForum FAQ    SearchSearch    UsergroupsUsergroups   MedalsMedals
MemberlistMemberlist   ProfileProfile    Watched TopicsWatched Topics    Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages    Log inLog in 

2014 Impala
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NAIOA Impala Forums Forum Index -> 2014+ General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bobhall98
Cadet
Cadet


Joined: Jan 27, 2010
Posts: 67
Posts per day: 0.02
Location: Houston, PA

2009 Chevrolet Impala


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 10:14 am    Post subject:  2014 Impala Reply with quote

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....dQRgV0Duk=
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pitch Black SS
NAIOA Owner / Founder
NAIOA Administrator
NAIOA Administrator


Joined: Mar 08, 2004
Posts: 12756
Posts per day: 2.58
Location: Tullahoma, TN

2004 Chevrolet Impala
1982 Chevrolet Malibu
2007 Chrysler 300C
1986 Chevrolet Monte Carlo


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 10:48 am    Post subject:   Reply with quote

interesting commercial, why start with a 65? it was the worst looking year in the 60's

plus "aggressive redesign" by adding a 4cyl Rolling Eyes

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
TSS
Member Level
Member Level
Gold Contributor (Amount: 1) Gold Contributor


Joined: Jan 24, 2010
Posts: 1577
Posts per day: 0.56
Location: MI

2010 Lincoln MKS
2014 Chevrolet Impala


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 11:10 am    Post subject:   Reply with quote

Ironically reminds me a lot of my MKS, which just replaced my 09 SS.

They need to bump up/offer as optional the ponies though, whether through an 8, supercharged/Turbod V6, or whatever before they will take performance sedan customers away from Ford and Chrysler. Just my two cents.

_________________
"Trying times are not a good time to quit trying"

2010 Buick Enclave CXL - bone stock;
2010 Lincoln MKS Ecoboost - V6 AWD Twin Turbo; Livernois Motorsports Tuned, 0 to 60 in 3.90 seconds;
2014 Impala Limited LTZ
2009 Impala SS (SOLD)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IffyG
NAIOA Moderator
NAIOA Moderator
Silver Contributor (Amount: 1) Silver Contributor


Joined: May 19, 2007
Posts: 13731
Posts per day: 3.63
Location: Nashville, TN

2002 Chevrolet Monte Carlo
1998 Oldsmobile Intrigue
2009 Chevrolet Malibu


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 11:42 am    Post subject:   Reply with quote

Pitch Black SS wrote:

plus "aggressive redesign" by adding a 4cyl Rolling Eyes


I'd argue the motor doesn't matter much in the statement of an 'aggressive redesign'. The 2014 Impala resembles the 2000-2013 models in that it's called an Impala and has 4 doors. I don't think there is much (if any) carryover of parts and if you plopped this car in front of someone without any badging, I doubt they would think it's an Impala.

Also, I'm not understanding hate on the 4 banger. Since it returns a reported 35 MPG on the highway, I'd say it's a decent option for those that are more concerned about fuel economy than performance, which is probably the vast majority of consumers in the age of 4 dollar a gallon gas.

_________________
helldorado wrote:
GLWTGFY. Big Thumbs Up

Dan wrote:
Protip: If you don't know what you're doing, don't do it.


d
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lingenfelter
Uberd0rk!
Uberd0rk!
Gold Contributor (Amount: 1) Gold Contributor


Joined: Oct 21, 2006
Posts: 9331
Posts per day: 2.34
Location: Ontario, Canada

2003 Chevrolet Impala
1999 Yugo Tempo


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 11:45 am    Post subject:   Reply with quote

IffyG wrote:
Pitch Black SS wrote:

plus "aggressive redesign" by adding a 4cyl Rolling Eyes


I'd argue the motor doesn't matter much in the statement of an 'aggressive redesign'. The 2014 Impala resembles the 2000-2013 models in that it's called an Impala and has 4 doors. I don't think there is much (if any) carryover of parts and if you plopped this car in front of someone without any badging, I doubt they would think it's an Impala.

Also, I'm not understanding hate on the 4 banger. Since it returns a reported 35 MPG on the highway, I'd say it's a decent option for those that are more concerned about fuel economy than performance, which is probably the vast majority of consumers in the age of 4 dollar a gallon gas.


Clearly, they didn't "restyle it" agressively, since it's not even the same car.

And yes, gas is a rip-off. I don't see why anyone would DD a V8 unless they enjoy whizzing money away, in which case, I'll setup a Paypal account and accept donations. Laughing

_________________
uıɐƃɐ ʎɐqǝ ɯoɹɟ pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ƃuıʎnq ɹǝʌǝu ɯɐ ı

GMPP Duals, GMPP Handling Kit, NAIOA FWI V2, Silverstar Hi/Lo/Fogs, Viper 5900 Remote Start/Security.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
jgilius
Uber
Uber
Silver Contributor (Amount: 1) Silver Contributor


Joined: Feb 07, 2009
Posts: 937
Posts per day: 0.3
Location: grand haven, mi USA

1983 Ford Thunderbird
2004 Ford Mustang


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:25 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote

TSS wrote:
Ironically reminds me a lot of my MKS, which just replaced my 09 SS.

They need to bump up/offer as optional the ponies though, whether through an 8, supercharged/Turbod V6, or whatever before they will take performance sedan customers away from Ford and Chrysler. Just my two cents.


todd...... todddddd.... what have you done, todd? Shocked any spare parts left over?? Smile peace, john

_________________


www.afgwm.org
www.pwctoday.com
www.focusfanatics.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
2011LSKING
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Oct 26, 2011
Posts: 43
Posts per day: 0.02


2011 Chevrolet Impala


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:38 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote

^^^^

yea we got on him pretty good over on ***** for drivin that f***......damn blue oval

_________________
IMPALA EMPIRE PRESIDENT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
helldorado
Uberd0rk!
Uberd0rk!


Joined: Jan 22, 2006
Posts: 10873
Posts per day: 2.55
Location: NJ

2001 Chevrolet Monte Carlo
2002 Chevrolet Monte Carlo
2005 Infiniti G35
2008 Subaru Impreza
2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee
2013 Toyota Space Cruiser


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:47 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote

IffyG wrote:
Pitch Black SS wrote:

plus "aggressive redesign" by adding a 4cyl Rolling Eyes

Also, I'm not understanding hate on the 4 banger. Since it returns a reported 35 MPG on the highway, I'd say it's a decent option for those that are more concerned about fuel economy than performance, which is probably the vast majority of consumers in the age of 4 dollar a gallon gas.


Considering the reported 3800+ lb weight, I'll believe a true 35mpg when people actually report seeing it. The 2013 Malibu with the same engine is only rated for 37 mpg highway.

But I'd argue they could've used the existing 2.0L turbo 4cyl engine instead, with proper tuning and gearing, kept it out of boost at highway speeds and maintained high economy for cruising. Why would I opt for an ~185 hp anemic Impala that may get 35 mpg, when I can opt for a 274 hp turbo Sonata that returns 34 mpg on 87 octane fuel?

The whole argument that you must give up performance for efficiency is moot when the competition is doing a better job of providing both. GM's seemingly anathema to effect turbocharged or hybrid drivetrains is really costing them compared to Ford, Hyundai, etc...

_________________
maybe we should chug on over to mamby pamby land
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TSS
Member Level
Member Level
Gold Contributor (Amount: 1) Gold Contributor


Joined: Jan 24, 2010
Posts: 1577
Posts per day: 0.56
Location: MI

2010 Lincoln MKS
2014 Chevrolet Impala


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:52 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote

I also got some killer gas mileage with my V6 Twin Turbo Ecoboost on a trip last week from MI to PA, and back to MI. Considering the car weighs about 700 pounds more than my 09 SS did , is AWD, has more HP (355 versus 303), AND it gets better gas mileage, I am also saying GM needs to do something to stay in the game. Turbos, Supercharging, I don't know - something though.

_________________
"Trying times are not a good time to quit trying"

2010 Buick Enclave CXL - bone stock;
2010 Lincoln MKS Ecoboost - V6 AWD Twin Turbo; Livernois Motorsports Tuned, 0 to 60 in 3.90 seconds;
2014 Impala Limited LTZ
2009 Impala SS (SOLD)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
20SS07
Uberd0rk!
Uberd0rk!
Gold Contributor (Amount: 1) Gold Contributor


Joined: Apr 25, 2007
Posts: 10054
Posts per day: 2.64
Location: Reading, PA

2009 Toyota Tacoma


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:54 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote

2011LSKING wrote:
^^^^

yea we got on him pretty good over on ***** for drivin that f***......damn blue oval


Im sure hes got the last laugh since he has the nicer car lol.

My only issue with the 4cyl is that there are 2 NA 4cyl options very close in displacement. No problem with offering a fuel sipper model but not 2. Too bad they dont yet have FI version of the 3.6 they could have offered very similiar options as the Taurus. 2.0T on the low end to better better fuel economy, NA V6 as the volumr seller, than FI V6 on the high end.

Rkvette probably had a stroke when he saw the 4cyl. If hes still alive. No torques like SS V8,,,,impala. Godzen likes fatties. Only bustin rkvette

_________________
helldorado wrote:
Jesus created the internet and puppies and dandelions and kittens and sunny days and lollipops and impalas and turbochargers and pizza and beer and wings and boobies and blowjobs and pizza and pizza and pizza and beer and snow days and football and cheerleaders and drag radials and nascar and everything else that's awesome.

whitelightnin04MC wrote:
It's hard to find retards of this quality in such masses. It's truly amazing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
2011LSKING
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Oct 26, 2011
Posts: 43
Posts per day: 0.02


2011 Chevrolet Impala


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:30 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote

yea i truly doubt those 4banger options can truly pull that heavy car with efficiency

and as 20ss07 stated......theyre very close in displacement.....so is one really that much better than the other

it should have went like this if they planned on not doing a SS

LS- 4banger

LT- V6

LTZ- TC/SC V6

_________________
IMPALA EMPIRE PRESIDENT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Domo
Forum Regular
Forum Regular


Joined: Oct 14, 2008
Posts: 293
Posts per day: 0.09
Location: Maryland

2001 Chevrolet Impala
2002 Chevrolet TrailBlazer
2005 Chrysler 300C


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:38 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote

I Love the Look! i really love it!

The 3.6 Will be mine... 303 HP!

http://youtu.be/IU-lVGRcdTI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PushrodPower
Uberd0rk!
Uberd0rk!
Platinum Contributor (Amount: 1) Platinum Contributor


Joined: Nov 30, 2008
Posts: 6396
Posts per day: 1.99
Location: I love drawing butts on stuff.

2005 Chevrolet Impala
1996 Saturn S-Series


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 3:25 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote

Isn't the first time a 4 banger used in a Epsilon. Besides it's a family car NOT a sport sedan. My Impala gets mid twenties city and thirties highway, but not fast at at all and I'm completely OK with that as I'm sure many people will be with a 4 cylinder Impala because they only care about fuel savings and not a 14 second car.

_________________

"The skippers been drinking, oh yes he has you can tell."-Bob Ross
04ImpalaSS wrote:
How much miles are on those seats? How much pounds of ass were applied to the seat during every trip? Lol

wedebrook wrote:
This thread is about *this* far from being about me, all oiled up, eating chili mac in a walmart bathroom.

nightryder wrote:
My c**k broke.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
20SS07
Uberd0rk!
Uberd0rk!
Gold Contributor (Amount: 1) Gold Contributor


Joined: Apr 25, 2007
Posts: 10054
Posts per day: 2.64
Location: Reading, PA

2009 Toyota Tacoma


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 4:01 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote

No one cares about 14 second cars. Thats not considered fast outside of an impala forum. Besides, as was stated numerous times a car doesnt have to be barge slow to be fuel efficient.

_________________
helldorado wrote:
Jesus created the internet and puppies and dandelions and kittens and sunny days and lollipops and impalas and turbochargers and pizza and beer and wings and boobies and blowjobs and pizza and pizza and pizza and beer and snow days and football and cheerleaders and drag radials and nascar and everything else that's awesome.

whitelightnin04MC wrote:
It's hard to find retards of this quality in such masses. It's truly amazing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
IffyG
NAIOA Moderator
NAIOA Moderator
Silver Contributor (Amount: 1) Silver Contributor


Joined: May 19, 2007
Posts: 13731
Posts per day: 3.63
Location: Nashville, TN

2002 Chevrolet Monte Carlo
1998 Oldsmobile Intrigue
2009 Chevrolet Malibu


PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 4:42 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote

helldorado wrote:

But I'd argue they could've used the existing 2.0L turbo 4cyl engine instead, with proper tuning and gearing, kept it out of boost at highway speeds and maintained high economy for cruising. Why would I opt for an ~185 hp anemic Impala that may get 35 mpg, when I can opt for a 274 hp turbo Sonata that returns 34 mpg on 87 octane fuel?

The whole argument that you must give up performance for efficiency is moot when the competition is doing a better job of providing both. GM's seemingly anathema to effect turbocharged or hybrid drivetrains is really costing them compared to Ford, Hyundai, etc...


I'll agree with you that you can certainly make better mileage with forced induction, but there are always people out there that won't buy a car with a turbo (because its just one more thing that can break later). I'm not saying it's a valid reason to avoid a forced induction motor, but there are a lot of folks out there that will steer clear of them.

In addition, you are also going to have a huge contingent of the 'buy American' crowd that won't go near an 'import' brand no matter how much of a better car it is. You seen the rabid Impala fanboyism on this site and know it to be true. Laughing

_________________
helldorado wrote:
GLWTGFY. Big Thumbs Up

Dan wrote:
Protip: If you don't know what you're doing, don't do it.


d
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NAIOA Impala Forums Forum Index -> 2014+ General Discussion All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Forums ©
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. Comments and posts are property of the poster. All other content is © 2008 by the NAIOA.


Use of this site constitutes agreement with the NAIOA Terms of Service (TOS)


PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
Server Local Time: September 23, 2017, 2:26:10 am
Page Generation: 0.16 Seconds ( SQL 46:154 in 0.01 Seconds )