(first posted 3/4/2016) 280 pound-feet of torque: that was the highest torque figure ever seen in a GM W-Body until the introduction of the transversely-mounted 5.3 LS4 V8 to the platform in 2005. With 323 pound-feet of torque fighting with the front wheels as well as a transmission ill-equipped to deal with the powerful engine, the V8 W-Bodies – Chevrolet Impala/Monte Carlo SS, Buick LaCrosse Super, Pontiac Grand Prix GXP – were thoroughly flawed vehicles. The worst of the four, however, were the Monte Carlo SS and this, the most popular V8 W-Body, the Impala SS.
49,611 Impala SSs were manufactured between 2006 and 2009, more than all the other V8 W-Bodies combined. However, the 1994-96 Impala SS was produced in much greater numbers over a shorter period of time. Why was the FWD V8 SS a comparatively slow seller?
It wasn’t because of the price. The Impala SS was the cheapest V8 sedan in America, retailing for around $27k, or $3k lower than a Dodge Charger R/T and lineball with much less powerful, V6-engined family sedans. Its exterior styling was subtle, with only a rear spoiler, handsome 18-inch, 5-spoke wheels and badges to distinguish it from lesser Impalas.
clockwise from top left: Impala, Monte Carlo, Grand Prix, LaCrosse
The interior was far and away the most attractive of the W-Bodies: the Monte Carlo SS’s interior revision in 2006 had not been as extensive as the Impala’s, the Pontiac Grand Prix GXP’s cabin was simultaneously bleak and overstyled, and the Buick LaCrosse Super’s cabin was stodgy and dated.
There was plenty of power on tap thanks to the aluminum block LS4 V8. With 303 horses and cylinder deactivation technology (GM’s Active Fuel Management), the Impala SS managed both impressive mileage figures (16/26 mpg) and rapid acceleration (0-60 in 5.7 seconds). With a practical sedan body, a pleasant interior and a low price, the Impala SS sounds like the bargain of the century.
But then you drive it. Full disclosure: I haven’t driven one of these but I very much would like to. Why? Perhaps to see how poorly a powerful V8 and front-wheel-drive work in tandem. See, by 2006, General Motors had forty years of experience making front-wheel-drive, V8-engined cars handle with some degree of refinement and poise. It had started with the Oldsmobile Toronado of 1966. That car had managed to drive in a way that didn’t alienate buyers long used to RWD despite it packing a big-honkin’ 425 (later 455) cubic-inch V8 under its long and shapely hood. Then, there were cars like the Cadillac Seville STS that managed not to embarrass themselves in the company of European competition although could never really be said to be their equal. But by almost all accounts in the automotive media, the Impala SS was a slapdash effort and a lackluster sports sedan.
Torque steer doesn’t necessarily mean a car can’t be fun-to-drive. Yes, rear-wheel-drive allows for better balance and entertaining power oversteer but a powerful FWD car can still entertain. Alas, sonorous engine note and low-end torque aside, the Impala SS was very clearly a big engine mated to a chassis that couldn’t handle the power. It wasn’t just that it couldn’t launch cleanly off the line thanks to its manic torque steer and over-active traction control. It was also that its suspension was too soft and its motions too uncontrolled, body roll too abundant, its steering too numb, its front seats too unsupportive… It seems like Chevrolet just plopped a V8 into the Impala and called it a day.
That’s because that’s basically what they did. Oh, they strengthened the engine cradle some and fiddled a smidge with the suspension, but the Impala SS benefited from none of the performance tweaks bestowed upon its Grand Prix GXP cousin. The Pontiac had wider wheels up front, Bilstein shocks, larger brakes and even a TapShift manual shift mode on its 4T65E automatic transmission. All of these worked together to create a sedan that was still flawed and imperfect but just a little bit fun. GM was capable of making competent FWD V8 sedans. The Impala SS wasn’t one of them.
Attention to detail in the SS was thoroughly lacking. The seats weren’t even upgraded and there weren’t even gear markings next to the shifter (you had to look below the speedometer). But where all the V8 W-Bodies were really let down by their makers was in the transmission. Very, very few changes were made to the 4T65E transmission for the V8 W-Bodies despite the LS4 producing much more torque than in other applications of this automatic. Consequently, transmission failures have been very common and it’s not unusual for the transmission to require rebuilding or replacement after just 60,000 miles.
Front-wheel-drive holds a very real appeal to those in snowy areas, particularly in the Northeast. No matter how much more fun RWD can be, if your daily driver is RWD and is hopeless in the snow, you’re going to want something else. The Dodge Charger R/T was probably written off by many buyers because it was RWD-only. Until it wasn’t. In 2007, all-wheel-drive joined the options list in both V6 and V8-equipped Chargers. Sure, a V8 AWD commanded even more of a premium over the Impala SS but the extra few grand bought you a much more dynamic and yet easier to drive sedan. The already low sales of the Impala SS shrivelled up even more and 2009 was its last year.
In its best year, the SS represented only 7% of total Impala volume. Coupled with the ill-suited transmission, that means these were relatively rare and will likely disappear at a more rapid rate than the venerable and much more reliable 3.5 and 3.9 equipped Impalas.
GM stuffed a powerful V8 into an ageing chassis. When their engineers applied themselves, they managed to make a semi-decent sporty sedan out of the W-Body. Alas, that was not the Impala SS.
Photos courtesy of Brendan Saur.
Related Reading:
Future Curbside Classic: 2008-09 Buick LaCrosse Super
Curbside Comparison: 1988 Dodge Dynasty & 2012 Dodge Charger
Future Classic: 2015 Dodge Challenger V6
Lancia had stuffed a transverse Ferrari 308 engine in their Thema 20 years earlier, and by all accounts was a well sorted unit. Why couldn’t GM, with all it’s resources, best a gloried crummy Fiat?
Fiat has a history of making better sorted cars than GM. It’s only recently they gave up and started making “Body by Fisher Price” cars instead.
Having said that, I like these Impalas (with a V6 anyway) and as the article points out, it was the cheapest V8 sedan available. If you shelled out a bit more for the Pontiac, you got slightly better engineering.
Admittedly, you would have to think they knew or suspected the transmission wasn’t up to it.
3 liters of flat plane cranked high revving V8 vs. 5.3 liters of crossplane crank low revving stump pulling torque.
Also don’t forget the 95-02 Lincoln Continental, which is basically a Taurus with a transverse 32v V8
The 32v V8 abused the AOD-E derivative pretty much already on the Mark VIII, while the Continental only had a worse transmission to start with.
My transmission (4R70W) is fine with just over 100k in a Mark. The ’98 is the transmission of choice when older models are rebuilt. It also has the rare feature of a plug on the torque converter which makes a fluid change just that – a complete change with no old oil left in the case. I am no drag racer in my car, but high speed runs to various northwest cities are why I keep it licensed and full time insured. It has never missed a beat in my care.
I had 115K on my Marauder by the time I sold it, same 4R70W behind a slightly stronger variant of the DOHC 4.6. No troubles at all. And I didn’t think failed transmissions were that common on the Mark VIII either, from my time with one of those (though admittedly mine had less than 75K on it when it was totaled in an accident).
The Lancia Thema 8.32 used a cross-plane crank and smaller valves than the flat-plane Ferrari variants of the engine. The result was 202 hp with a catalytic converter or 212 hp without. The Ferrari version of the engine was close to 250 hp, which was more than the Thema’s FWD Fiat Type Four chassis could handle. The most powerful Saab-badged version of the Fiat Type Four had 210 hp, probably not coincidentally.
A “Hot Mess” indeed. Not even worthy of an article, IMO.
All of todays’ cars look the same.
http://jalopnik.com/5938235/photoshopped-grille-swaps-reveal-how-all-modern-cars-look-the-same/
OMG: First laugh of the day and so true.
One could do the same with the taillights as well.
A reply from that same article:
“This whole thing about today’s cars looking the same is ridiculous. Cars have always looked the same; when you compare them to their contemporaries.
You could Photoshop cars from any era and end up with similar results. In fact, I’d argue there’s more variety today than we’ve ever seen before. Just think about some of the cars available to the average consumer, and the variety present not just in the overall design but in all the individual elements.
And on top of that, the guys who created these images took some of the most influential designs in the industry and presented those as the basis to argue that all cars look the same. How about you try this with cars like the Nissan Juke, Jeep Wrangler, Porsche 911 and others and then tell me that all cars today look the same.”
+1 Drzhivago138
Claiming that “all cars today look alike” is just plain ignorant.
No it is not. There was a lot more differentiation between makes and models back in the day. As a kid, I could identify almost every car simply by the grille and taillights. Today, it’s much more difficult to do that, especially when the badges have been removed.
How much of that is attributable to personal experience, though?
If you can’t tell a new Kia from a new Lexus from a new Cadillac from a new Chrysler, all that tells me is you don’t follow the new car market very closely.
There are some design elements shared by many cars on the market today, like the short deck, fastback-style body of many mid-size sedans, but again really no more than in decades past.
Frankly, I’m tired of this same debate coming up every single time we feature a modern car on this site. Neither said is going to change their opinion. Can we give it a rest?
My dad said “all cars today look alike” in the 60’s, but did love Mustangs and got one.
Nothing looked like the Mustang in April, 1964.
There are a wide variety of models available today, but the models within the same categories are difficult to distinguish, much more so than when I was growing up in the 80’s. A Taurus, Lumina, Accord, and Camry were all distinctive and easily identified with a glance from any angle. Not only that, they also had distinct strengths and weaknesses that mattered to average consumers. That is not the case today, not to that extent.
In the ’80s, the Accord and Camry were compacts. And today’s Fusion and Malibu are just as distinct as the Lumina and Taurus were then. There’s no objective proof when it comes to aesthetics.
A.
B.
I see a Malibu and a Fusion. Yes, there are similarities, but there are similarities in every automotive era.
There are similarities in every era, yes. But these profiles are much more similar than a Taurus and Lumina. Mind you, these are two of the most distinct cars in their class from the front.
It’s why I get a kick out of Chevy’s current Malibu commercial where they take the badges off and nobody knows what it is. I understand it’s staged, but still…
Come on, things were no different in the past.
The similarity in profile is really a 4 door thing, that bodystyle really has historically looked similar car to car brand to brand, that’s the one concession I’ll give to Drzhivago138 in this tired argument.
“…my best friend’s car enthusiasts 18 year old son…thought a previous generation Genesis was a Mercedes from the front…”
Wasn’t that done on purpose? If so, and if people think that, Hyundai must have been successful!
I thought it was kind of funny.
Perhaps when you were growing up you paid a lot more attention to cars and their differences?
I thought cars in the 90s all mostly looked the same, I was born in ’88. Never had any trouble telling cars from the 60s and 70s apart.
Funny but when I ask my best friend’s car enthusiasts 18 year old son to spot a 1990’s Lumina vs a Taurus he has no trouble at all. Ditto a Camry or Accord from that area (even thought spotting one of those is a very rare event these days). Same goes for a 1990’s Lincoln vs a Cadillac or a Chrysler LH car vs a GM W-body etc. Within the past couple of years I’ll show him a current Subaru Legacy and he will say its a new Sonata or a current Chrysler 200 is confused for a Fusion or new Malibu. Foreign cars are even worse especially all the cookie cutter sedans from Germany and Korea. He thought a K900 was a BMW, thought a previous generation Genesis was a Mercedes from the front and often sees a Lexus and thinks it’s something from Acura or Infinity.
A counter point: look at the side views of the 1971 Buick, Olds and Mercury review. Those three look very much alike. The Buick has the ventiports which makes it easier. But the C-pillars all look the same.
Those malaise barges are a great example. The rooflines, upswept back windows, body lines, and overall shape are all very similar just as the Fusion and Malibu are. However I was specifically talking about cars from the 80’s…as we emerged from the malaise era.
Perhaps it was just the era I grew up in that gives me that opinion, because I feel my examples are pretty compelling.
It’s the ones we grew up with, the ones that we spent the most time in, in which we see the most differences. I couldn’t see any difference in any ’70s (or ’60s, or ’80s, etc.) cars until I started my drawing project.
It’s always been an opinion of a few that cars during [current era] “all look the same” compared to cars during [earlier era, usually when said commentor was growing up]. Usually this is doublespeak for “all cars look ugly now,” though not always. What they’re really expressing is nostalgia, which I won’t put down, but it doesn’t have any real objective, measurable proof beceause it’s just a subjective opinion.
Cars from the pre-World War Two days all look alike to me. However my dad knew one from another when we were in a car museum long ago. I can’t say that I know any and all cars when I see them because I don’t. However there are cars that I have liked and have taken an interest in them. In particular I have liked Buicks, and have owned quite a few. Cadillac’s have always been of some interest. Ford Motor company has not built anything that interested me much except the Lincoln LS. While I did like Chrysler’s ram induction engines, I never got very interested in any after the early 60’s.
+2 to Drzhivago138.
I always had a feeling that a FWD V8 would eat transmissions. FWD transmissions tend to be compact and complex, thus not well-equipped to handle the torque.
Conversely, a traditional RWD transmission with a lower-HP 6-cylinder (or even a 4-cylinder) should last darned near forever, given proper engineering.
I think in some cases even a sufficiently-powerful V6 can push the limits of a FWD transaxle. That’s one of the reasons why I opted for a lower-HP 4 cyl. in my Chrysler 200 over the Pentastar V6. In theory, the transmission should hold up longer and I really don’t find myself needing the power just because it’s there. However, the specific transmission my 200 is equipped with (62TE) has been proven as a pretty reliable unit, even in the heavier DGC/T&C minivans which are equipped with the V6.
The Impala/Impala SS should have been a RWD car since it’s a full-size car. It probably would have been cheaper for GM to opt for RWD over FWD. The LH Chryslers should have been also (and could have if they followed through with the tooling).
The Pontiac G8; which was sold in 2008-9; was the V8 RWD equivalent of the SS but didn’t sell in ’08 and production was killed in ’09 along with Pontiac after the bankruptcy. People say they want a hi-powered rear-drive car but not enough to make them popular; except for a few costly examples. But I would like to find a low milage G8; like this:
So true. That sort of claim is all over the internet ! I read it over and over again. And once an automaker offers it up, the cars sit there gathering dust.
With all the “enthusiasts” out there on the internet superhighway, cars of this type should be flying off the lots.
That’s because the internet enthusiasts want to buy it used, and after it has depreciated by 30-40 percent. GM and other auto manufacturers aren’t in the used-car business.
Those cars ARE flying off the lots. The Chrysler LX platform is over 10 years old and yet, its selling better than ever. The reality is, top tier performance models always have and always will make up a smaller proportion of what is sold, mostly for financial reasons.
Where GM went wrong with the GTO and G8 is they were top level V8 only. With no affordable V6 models to drive the volume, it couldn’t survive. This, along with styling being a slam dunk in every version is one of the things the LX gets right.
Umm…no. The G8 was actually offered with a V6, but needless to say that car sold about as well as ice at the South Pole.
The Pontiac G8 was actually the same car as the Chevrolet SS since in Australia, they were known as the singular Holden Monaro. In other parts of the world, they were also Chevrolets with different names: Chevrolet Omega (which was the same car as the Opel Omega) and Chevrolet Lumina (not related since this one was a RWD) to the similar sized but completely different North American FWD W-Bodied Chevrolet Lumina.
Commodore, not Monaro. The Monaro was the basis for the ‘GTO’.
If all the people who say “GM killed Pontiacs just when they had good cars” had actually bought them, there would be no hand wringing.
They say “build it” at Auto Shows, but then go and buy a pickup.
I have the successor to the G8 (ie VE Commodore), the Chevy SS (ie VF Commodore). Bought mine new in the DC area, black on black with a six-speed manual last summer – she’s now got about 18K on the clock. Car is simply amazing. You can pry the keys from my cold fingers.
Full disclosure- I’ve been a BMW guy forever… and here we are, the very first brand-new car I’ve ever bought myself says GM on it.
People say the car is expensive at nearly $50K, but that’s looking at it all wrong. It’s actually a 50%-off M5.
I really like your car! Was looking at the 2016 version and in the color I Like, ‘Slipstream Blue Metallic’ with the front “jaw” in black with silver trim seems to jut out; not like yours, all in black; would be better if it had the front all in the same color. The price is $46,000+ so hasn’t went up any. With 415HP & torque it should get to the store in time! Does the ’15 have that much power? It must be amazing; it’s got more HP & torque then my fuel injected 454! ☺
Thanks, tmt. Yes, there have been some revisions to the 2016 models, notably in the front fascia – not sure of the details, but there are differences.
Also – yes. Just as with the previous VE-platform Pontiac-badged G8 GXP’s – all US-market SS have been shipped with 415bhp/415lpbf LS3 6.2L (376cid) engines.
She’s a beast. Go and get one.
I had the chance in 2008 to buy one of several 2007 Impala SS certified pre-owned cars a local dealer had and was very eager to sell. They were 2007 “factory demos”, all fully loaded with identical specs except for the color, all with about 1000 miles on the clock, dealer was asking about $20K. Seemed like quite a deal at the time.
I had a hunch at the time that the transmissions would be the weak point on these cars. In hindsight, glad I passed on the SS and with new Honda Accord with manual transmission instead.
Well it might have been a mess but it definitely was hot. In this video an SS out runs, not only the Oregon HP, but a news helicopter and the officer is talking to them; saying he was doing “140mph and he is still pulling away from me, must be doing 150mph” all because of expired tags. he probably wished he had pulled over.
I wasn’t particularly comfortable passing a semi in this gen Impala at 70mph; I can’t imagine what it was like trying to pull off some of these maneuvers at 140—upgraded suspension or not.
That was in Oklahoma City and its NE suburbs circa 2004. Watch the arrest at the end of this clip…it was a Dark Cherry B-body Impala……
Well never trust; you tube; I got that information from one of the comments.
Unless the other traffic he was passing on that freeway (including the tractor trailers) was doing 120 mph, that narrator was exaggerating his butt off. There’s no way was he doing more than 30 mph or so faster than the traffic he was passing. The narrator also kept saying the ground units “can’t keep up with him”, but in every shot there was a black and white no more than a couple of seconds behind him, usually just at the edge of the frame. On the two lane portion, there was what looked like a CVPI practically bump drafting him the entire time.
Those announcers are all the same. When i heard sherriff john burnell refer to a non-GT Ford Escort as a “hot rod sports car”, I started watching them all on “mute”.
Mr. Stopford: you are so right when you claim there was little to differentiate the standard Impala from the SS. Minus the spoiler, the featured car could be a twin, right down to the color, for the 14 Impala my brother recently purchased.
As for the transmission: shades of using a transmission built for Chevettes {?} [THM 200] in full size GM cars. Is nothing ever learned at GM ?
BMW used the Chevette THM200 in the 3-series for a while. Buyers really should’ve learned to drive stick before even considering a Chevette *or* an E21/early E30.
I think the Chevette used the THM 180. The 200 was an O.K. transmission until it was installed in large heavy cars. Later improved versions of the 200 were used in the Buick Gran Nationals, and held up fine.
The THM200 was a 50K mile transmission. It’s like they had a timer on them. At 48–52 thousand miles…REBUILD or replace.
My mother popped hers right on schedule, in a ’77 305 two-barrel Nova. NOT a “large, heavy car”. THM200 comes out…THM350 goes in.
Rebuilt properly, the THM200s seem to do well in amateur circle-track racing. Light-weight, low rotating weight, deep first gear. In real-world use, they’re JUNK, JUNK, JUNK.
Oh, yeah. The THM180 was originally…French, I think. Assembled in Strassbourg? If memory serves, they called it the Tri-Matic. But I don’t remember how GM/USA got the thing. I don’t remember any particular problems with the 180; but how troublesome could it be behind a 1.6L in a Chevette?
Didn’t the Buick Gran Nationals get the THM200-4R, not the THM200? And, the GN 200-4R was specially prepared with more clutch plates and heavy-duty “everything” compared to the run-of-the-mill 200-4R?
Yes, the Grand Nationals got the 200-4R, same as in my ’84 Regal T-type. And mine broke. The transmission was making growling noises, so I dropped it off at the dealership since it was still under warranty. They checked it out and called me back, said nothing was wrong. Uh-huh, I asked them to drop the pan. They called me back and said the pan was full of metal. It was fine after they installed a new transmission.
I have never heard that and doing a search the only A/Ts I can find for E21s or E30s are ZF 3HP22s or ZF 4HP22s, which confirms my memory. BMW did use GM Strasbourg, made in France, transmissions around the turn of the century in both 4 and 5 speed variants, but I don’t believe either was a THM200 or decedent thereof.
It says something about how the V8 worked – or didn’t – in this platform that the 9C1Police Package remained V6-only alongside the V8 SS’ entire run.
If I were looking for a domestic midsize with a bit more fun than usual I’d have gone for a Ford Fusion four-cylinder/manual.
I wonder if enough folks at Chevy/GM felt the transmission that held up for the previous Impala SS, the 3.8 supercharged model, was going to be ADEQUATE with the larger/more powerful V8? And I emphasized adequate because that seemed to be the watchword at GM from the 70s on. That is, we will do what is adequate to get the cars to the dealers as adequate numbers of people will buy the resulting car.
A local Chevy dealer had an 05 Impala SS on their website for months. I actually liked the very subtle look of it, but reviews on the internet said it was basically as good as could be when new but quickly started to build up problems.
The V8’s torque would be higher than the supercharged V6, but the transmission issue is really peak torque surges, not the mean torque. When Cadillac put the V16 into production the transmission did not need upgraded because the torque is evened out over 16 power pulses instead of 8. So the supercharged V6 with 280 lb-ft would perhaps be equivalent to a V8 with 350 or so lb-ft.
I love this Impala SS so much because it’s so stupid! I’ve always thought that this body style of Impala aged pretty well and that it is understated with a bit of authority due their current use in the police departments. I just watched a whole line of them being delivered yesterday to our local sheriff’s office… I didn’t even know that they were still being built! It’s similar to the way that people viewed the Crown Vics as the movie hero’s car before they started showing up with 24′ rims and candy wrapper paint jobs.
I had an opportunity to drive a few of the Impala “Limiteds”… the last of the civilian models of this body style. They handled well and managed the power of the direct injection 3.6 liter V6 pretty decently. In fact, I think these models would keep up with the SS between red lights.
I also drove a used Impala SS. It sounded great and pushed your body into the seat. But if you don’t have good tires on it, that V8 will constantly bounce off the rev limiter and the traction control will make the worst noises to prevent wheel spin. Turn off the TCS (though it’s not fully off) and the steering wheel becomes worthless. Though it’ll leave a set of black marks with a beautiful LS soundtrack and the platform is still tight enough to fling a car of this size around (those big sticky tires help); if too much torque gets to the front tires in a tight corner, you will meet a ditch or telephone pole soon… in a cloud of tire smoke. But then again, most of the people that owned the FWD SS didn’t drive it like a stolen IROC-Z.
I guess that’s what makes these cars so interesting to me. Despite the flashy wheels, the Impala SS is like a body builder in a nice suit with great manners… respectful and classy. Then when you want to have fun, he drinks too much, runs into things and falls all over the place.
The old W-body Impala is being old as the Impala Limited. BTW, they have done the same thing for 2016 Malibus and Cruzes. They use the Limited name for the old versions. I’m in Korea and they are just now touting the new Epsilon as a Grandeur or Genesis rival. We shall see if it breaks the curse, no GM-Affiliated “luxury” brand in Korea has done well since the early 90s
What has kept me away from the V8 W-Bodies is that darn fragile transmission. Tis a shame when the transmission is consider a “wear item” to be replaced at a rate similar to a good set of tires.
When the 3.6 VVT 6 speed auto combo came out in the last of the W-Impala’s there were lots of SS owners on forums that posted: “Wow, I drove one. It is so much better sorted out than the 5.3 V8.”
I am convinced that automakers today consider everything a “wear item”
” It seems like Chevrolet just plopped a V8 into the Impala and called it a day”
Wasn’t that the formula for the GTO and Roadrunner? Basically a cheap intermediate with a big engine that was affordable. It was a pretty good idea then and so was this. You must keep in mind that this was still a Chevrolet and built to a certain price point. It was far cheaper than its GM cousins. 0-60 in 5.7 seconds for 27 grand? Not bad.
Got one of these as a rental some years ago and it was hoot to drive. Blistering performance that reminded me of the muscle cars of the late sixties. A bit unrefined maybe, but the Impala package wasn’t bare bones by any means. The marketing for these was weak and GM, as it usually does, panics and pulls the plug on interesting vehicles way too early.
I agree with this, there’s nothing wrong with affordable muscle. If not for the fragile transmission I think I’d really like this car. But that’s a big problem.
The media often forgets that most people have budgets and don’t drive on race tracks.
The transmission was a heavy duty version for the V8. From what I can see googling the transmission there were problems with the base transmission coupled with the base engines.
But it wasn’t a heavy-duty version, which was my point. It was the same transmission with extremely minor tweaks as what was used in supercharged W-Bodies that put out quite a bit less torque.
As I pointed out above, the V8’s mean torque is 8 power strokes while the supercharged V6 is 6. What this means is that the V8 may not stress the transmission any more than the V6.
reference to my comments on torque: LINK
A V8 has twice the mean torque while an even firing V6 is 2.5x. This implies that the V8 stress is 650 lb-ft while the supercharged V6 is 700 lb-ft.
The other weakness of many classic muscle cars was drum brakes and dated suspensions. Go fast at drag strips, but stopping? “That’s for chickens!”
And I love cheap muscle as much as you, CPJ. But I want cheap muscle to actually drive well. Maybe I could have been tempted by a Grand Prix GXP with cash on the hood, self-destructing transmission and cheap interior aside. But why not just pony up a few grand extra for a Charger that drives much, much better, or simply buy the cheaper, more balanced and still decently powerful LTZ 3.9? Buying one of these would just always feel like you compromised or you couldn’t afford something better.
And Phil, you’re right: people don’t drive on race tracks. I wish my own car’s suspension was a little less stiff because 90% of the time I’m driving it, I’m commuting. I don’t need something so stiff. But it’s the little things like its excellent cornering and well-weighted steering that make it otherwise very pleasant to drive. Now, if I had an Impala SS I’m sure I’d love the V8 engine note and the quick acceleration but I would be annoyed by the feel-free steering, the unsupportive seats, the inability to take off smoothly…
Well, the latter point is part of why the auto industry has this recurring fascination with adjustable suspension systems, although those then end up becoming a question mark in terms of reliability and repair cost.
My mag shocks produce a wonderful ride with 255/35 – 19 inch tires. From what I can gather, problems with them are not excessive and they should last upwards of 100,000 miles.
My best car buddy is known to trade for something brand new and interesting every few years. One of these popped up in his garage and I did get a few rides in it. Needless to say, he showed me its impressive ability to hustle down the road. When you think of the rarity of V-8s in non-luxury American sedans between 1995 and 2005, it was definitely a novelty at the time. It seemed sporty for what it was, and had a nice sound.
Due to my limited time in it, I didn’t notice some of its shortcomings. The unmarked shifter gate – wow, that’s weak.
He owned it just a couple of short years, and reported a few minor glitches that I don’t recall. But, that was always his signal to trade, so he avoided any major failures.
My take on the comings and goings of the V-8 FWD Impala: It was a response to the Dodge Charger, but the Charger was such a novelty in so many ways that neither Ford nor GM was really prepared to respond to it – and likely total sales for the segment and CAFE rules were always going to be limitations, so development was slap dash and not thought out.
I don’t think the death of the Impala SS was much related to the Charger or the AWD Charger. It was more a reaction of rationalizing the GM line to the realities of a deep recession, high gas prices, and government pressure for GM to look both responsible and green in exchange for assistance.
In some ways this car really fit the environment of the times in the U.S. before the recession. Everything was just silly. Gas guzzling vehicles were selling like crazy, on credit of course, to people way over extended on their houses, who thought they were rich because the stock market was soaring. When the FWD V-8 Impala hit the road, I literally felt a bit uneasy about it – sort of how long can this go on? As it turns out, not very long.
The G8 didn’t sell for a few reasons: it was a Monaro, based on the Omega platform, and those of us who had an Omega experience never wanted to touch one ever again. I cringe every time I see one and want to send the owner a Get Well Soon Card. It was made in Australia, so combined Omega crappiness with Australian build quality; GM didn’t do anything to promote it and it combined bland styling with an awful name.
Had it been a Bonneville and made in the US with better lineage and build quality, it might have been more successful, but the ’90s impala SS combined performance, looks, a reasonable sticker price, and a highly upgraded interior. The ’90s impala ss was basically made out of the same technology as dirt, dating back to the ’70’s and was unbreakable.
We looked at a Lacrosse to replace my Dad’s ’95 Cutlass Supreme. The Lacrosse was cramped with huge roof pillars in comparison with the same platform Cutlass of many years before. It was the kind of car that if-someone-gave-it-to-me-for-free-I’d-take-it. The Grand Prix had an unexpectedly hideous and cheap interior, especially compared with the ’98-? version. The Impala was- – – a little better than the Lacrosse but not much. He ended up with a 2010 v6 Charger, which is the only car he looked at that was fun to drive. It is the ONLY car he’s ever had that is fun to drive.
I don’t know what the point of the V8 W bodies was. The first Gen W bodies, from ’88-’96 at least looked sporty. These looked like Xanax on wheels and had awful interiors. Even in this time, an ordinary v6 made about 200+ horsepower, and the Pentastar makes close to 300, as do the v6s in Camrys and Accords. That’s way more power than your average driver can handle, so what is really the point of a V8 in these cars? A FWD v8 made some sense back in the Northstar era when a capable v6 might be at 170 horses but not in 2005.
I do not think that a transmission can handle the forces of turning and stopping and also powering the car. 60% + of your braking is done through the front wheels. A RWD transmission has very few duties and can be designed with a much larger case to better cool the transmission compared with a FWD transmission.
The G8 wasn’t a Monaro. The Monaro was a heavily modified V platform, which was shared with the Omega. The G8 was Zeta, which was an all new, very expensive to develop RWD architecture developed specifically by GM Australia.
The Monaro was sold here as the Pontiac GTO.
It was an all-new platform, Savage, and the build quality was no worse than North American GM products. I know: I own a VE Holden Calais, basically a G8 with nicer trim. 200,000kms on the clock and nothing’s fallen off. And bland styling? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but surely you can agree that even if you don’t love the detailing – which I do, and incidentally the G8 was toned down from the sporty Commodores it was based on – you must agree it has fantastic RWD proportions.
+1
That FT65E transmission was a weak spot in Impalas dating back to 2000….An internet search of Impala transmission problems will bring up a multitude of complaints about that transmission…..The transmission in my 2005 Impala failed at 131,000 miles….The clutch material for the lockup torque converter disolved into pieces and circulated throughout the transmission passages, clogging it up where it would only move when the car was cold….Let the car warm up a few minutes and it would not move in any gear……It is probably no wonder that GM eventually went to a new 6 speed design…..I ended up having a rebuilt transmission installed and can only hope that the rebuilder addressed the weak points of the transmission when he rebuilt it.
” But where all the V8 W-Bodies were really let down by their makers was in the transmission. Very, very few changes were made to the 4T65E transmission for the V8 W-Bodies despite the LS4 producing much more torque than in other applications of this automatic. ”
I understand that Ford made the same mistake in offering the same AX4N transmission behind the Yamaha DOHC V8 in the Generation 3 Taurus SHO as was found behind in the Vulcan and Duratec V6 powered Tauruses.
I had the pleasure to drive a brand-new Grand Prix GXP V8 in 2006 on a road trip from Phoenix to Las Vegas and back. Very impressive car, and I had an absolute blast. I would have very seriously considered buying one if it had not looked like a nightmare to work on.
The AX4N was the beefed up version, it was basically created for the 1995 V-8 Continental. The fact that some Vulcan Tauruses (including my 1995) ended up with it was just a bonus.
None of them had the issues the V-8 W bodies did with their failing trans.
Reading this fine article, it hit me. You just described my 1996 Saturn SL2. Power, (if you were willing to nudge the tach just south of 8K, did many times) torque steer, over active traction control, and suspension and cradle bushings only slightly stiffer than stale marshmellows. It too was an automatic, and I modified the shifter gate so I could paddle shift between 4th and 3rd. Made it much more fun to drive, almost like a sportbike. Despite the abuse of spending time bouncing off the rev limiter, it never broke. I did treat it, however, to regular oil changes of Mobil 1.
These are interesting historical curiosities, but at the time I viewed them as Exhibit A as to why GM was in trouble.
The V-8 powered W-bodies were the perfect example of an automaker answering a question that nobody was asking.
The GM W-bodies were not competitive with the class leaders in build quality or overall refinement by the early 2000s. To hype interest in the cars, GM tore a page from its history book and dropped a powerful engine into its garden-variety family sedans. Unfortunately, it wasn’t 1964 anymore.
The problem is that people weren’t avoiding the Impala because it was too slow. The basic Impala was competitive in performance, and customers weren’t buying Accords and Camrys because they wanted stoplight dragsters in plain wrappers. The car lagged in other areas, which the SS really version did nothing to address.
At least GM is now competitive in the family sedan segment with the 2016 Malibu.
Since when is a midsized sedan the “family sedan”? I’d think the Impala would be the “family sedan”.
I use a Chrysler 300 as a “family sedan” and I wouldn’t consider anything smaller.
The Toyota Camry and Honda Accord have been the top-selling sedans since the mid-1990s, and have been considered the standard family sedan since that time.
“At least GM is now competitive in the family sedan segment with the 2016 Malibu” That is what was said of the 1980 X-cars…. yawn…
Ironically the 2016 Malibu’s predecessor was the FWD X-Bodied 1980 Citation which replaced the Nova.
X cars weren’t marketed as “family sedans” but as compact economy cars. Malibu’s predecessor is the actual Malibu, then Celebrity, then Lumina…
And jeez, it’s been 37 years since they came out. Kind of time to move on, maybe?
Well similar idea, and yet there is no denying that the Nova and Citation were the current Malibu’s predecessor. The actual successors to the original RWD Malibu were the Celebrity, the Lumina and YES the Impala (even though it did not actually replaced the Caprice Classic since its replacement came in 2011 courtesy of Holden) but it can be considered a replacement for both the short production run RWD Impala SS and the FWD Lumina). The FWD Malibu and the several iterations of its design changes actually replaced the Corsica/Beretta duo which in essence replaced both the Citation and the Nova before it.
Well, Suzulight, as TomCat said, that was 30+ years ago. But also, GM has been competitive in the family sedan segment since 2008, to be fair. And none of the last three generations of Malibu have had any major reliability or quality issues unique to that nameplate. The 2013 was hardly the turkey some proclaim it to be even though its rear seat is cramped. So I’m not sure why bringing up the Citation is really relevant.
“I want to like the new Camry but I read a bad review of a Toyopet once and, well…”
Speaking of the Chevrolet Impala SS featured item here, the Chevrolet Impala SS actually had a much closer design resemblance with the slightly larger but totally different Holden Caprice based Chevrolet Caprice PPV. The Chevrolet Impala SS was still based from the ancient FWD W-Bodied 1990 Chevrolet Lumina chassis. The Chevrolet Caprice PPV was based on a different RWD chassis which were virtually identical with the shorter Holden Monaro based Chevrolet SS and the last generation Chevrolet Camaro. Ironically as stated on this story line, the 2007 Chevrolet Impala renamed Chevrolet Impala Limited is still in production along with the Holden Caprice based Chevrolet Caprice PPV being imported here from Australia. Both the Impala Limited and the Caprice Classic PPV were not available for the General Public. The only ones available would be the newly bloated design Impala and the slow selling, expensive and smaller SS.
The last great Impala SS was produced in 1996. What came after was half-baked and sales clearly showed it was a shadow of the mid-nineties RWD sedan.
Why Pontiac and Olds had to go away chapter 35…
You want a well sorted out sport sedan? Buy the Pontiac!
What a bunch of crap, sorry. And you see now that GM doesn’t have to worry about Chevys bumping into Pontiacs on ye olde Sloan ladder, the current Impala is a worthy successor to the great Impalas of the 60’s.
I’m still conflicted whether Buick should remain a nameplate in the US.
Agreed. I may have liked Pontiac and Oldsmobile but they really got in the way of Chevrolet. Look at Ford: without Mercury in the way, you can load up a Fusion or Explorer as much as you want. No need to cut corners or features to justify Ford’s position on the brand ladder.
About the only Mercury that really made sense at the end was the Grand Marquis and the Mariner. Of course, the Panthers got phased out anyway and Lincoln ended up making the MKC to fill the luxury CUV niche.
I think a “near luxury” brand like Buick makes sense. If I don’t want to chip in for a Cadillac but I want a fancy ride, a loaded Chevy just isn’t going to cut it. It didn’t, eventually, make sense to have two near luxury brands around but it does to have one.
Same with Ford/Lincoln. A Mercury, in theory, makes sense. In practice, they were just Fords with slightly different trims but you could still get a Ford that was practically just as tricked out. Ford had already debased Mercury too much to make it work.
Oh yes, I have driven these quite a bit, along with the ’94-’96 edition. I wouldn’t call it a ‘Hot Mess’ exactly, what it is is basically a decent large car with too much engine. The transmission is marginal, but will hold together if not driven too hard. Problem is the car is very fast and begs to be driven hard. The handling is best described as entertaining, but it really does not feel too nose-heavy, which is somewhat of a surprise.
Agreed, an answer to a question no one was asking. I still kind of like the car.
I guess my question is what the point is of getting a bigger engine if it then has to be babied to preserve the transmission — you still end up with no better actual performance than with a less-powerful engine.
From what I can see googling the transmission it has a tendency to fail with smaller engines too.
Isn’t this the same transmission infamous for failing prematurely in the early Volvo XC90 (and S80)?
I will never be a fan of this Impala SS, even though I haven’t driven it as well. I think the problem with this car was not only the dynamic shortfalls, but also the styling downfalls. For all the pitfalls of the 94-96 Impala, they at least looked pretty different from their Chevy Caprice cousins to justify the name, the Impala still managed to look aggressive and stylish despite the whale architecture it was based on. The Impala SS, by contrast, looked like a regular Impala for the most part. No one who wants a car like this is going to pay money if it looks like the base model option you would get from a rental kiosk.
I also wonder how bad the driving dynamics must be, because GM was the king of making a V8 FWD car work. My Cadillac Eldorado for example, despite being a big luxury coupe that’s more focused on comfort, still manages to handle relatively well and not experience typical FWD pitfalls, all with minimal or less than severe body roll. So, I wonder how bad GM must’ve screwed up for this car to be regarded as a failure.
Personally, I kind of wish GM to make an AWD only SS version for the current generation of the Impala, but I know that’ll never happen in this lifetime.
There’s a market for stealthy high-performance cars that don’t look much different than the standard versions. Except for the wheels (which are necessary for performance reasons), a Golf R looks pretty much like a regular Golf.
Boring, next to the Charger or 300. But probably more room….
I think the 300 has plenty of room, especially if you are rolling alone or one passenger in the front like 90% of us probably do regularly.
That said, I wouldn’t mind if they gave it a LWB version with a bigger/longer trunk just because I’d like an even bigger car.
Wonder why they didn’t use the 4T80E as they did in the Bonneville GXP with the Northstar V8 engine. Cost? I don’t see much in the way or torque steer in my GXP either…but then Pontiac did a little more than just plop the V8 in the car. Pity, when these first came out I was very interested in them and excited about the mileage they were supposed to be able to achive…much better than my GXP.
Of course the Bonneville GXPs have their own collection of issues.
I think it was cost why change the transmission when you can do very little modifications to the 4t65e and call it a 4t65e-hd. About 99% of the transmission is interchangeable
It’s hard to know what GM were thinking.
They’d been teaming up big V8s with FWD since 1966 – forty years’ experience! – but it reads as though they’d learnt next to nothing in all that time. The last RWD Impala seemed to indicate they had some understanding of what was desirable when it came to large powerful vehicle chassis dynamics – then they go and produce this. From what we read yesterday, this wasn’t the best-handling FWD platform for starters – and they offer it with a torquey V8, and seem to think that makes it competitive with Dodge Chargers and their ilk.
Sometimes they seemed to get it, and other times they just didn’t. No wonder folk were giving up on GM.
GM is focused on cost and specs. If a car meets X specs, then it’s a good as the next one that meets the same specs. Reliability relates to warranty costs, if it doesn’t cost them, then it’s reliable. If you can’t get in without banging your head, then it’s your fault, nothing wrong with the seats and the styling is good, so what’s the problem?
Yes I understand they are in the business of making money, not good cars, but I swear nobody in management ever drove the turkeys they put out. Not that they cared, but they were clueless, they simply didn’t know for the most part.
I wonder if the concept of putting the LS4 into the FWD Impala was, somehow, a precursor to offering the engine in a fleet 9C1 Impala which, oddly, never happened (the 9C1 Impala only ever had a V6). The decision must have been made to, instead, import the RWD Holden Caprice in 2011 for V8 fleet use.
What would be interesting to learn is the rationale, and I can only guess that the torque-steer properties of the V8 Impala would have lead-footed cops uncontrollably careening all over the place might have given GM pause.
Unlike most of the posters commenting how lousy the V8 W-bodies were, I actually drove one. I owned a 2007 Grand Prix GXP for eleven years. It drove well, rode well, and was reasonably quick. Fuel economy wasn’t bad for a V8. The front seats were very comfortable and the interior was much better than the interior in the Impala.
I don’t think the transmission gear ratios were spaced very well, but at least mine didn’t blow up. 🙂
I have one and I can say they are fun to drive around, and is comfortable to drive but the maintained is a nightmare. Transmissions issues and dead lifters are a common problem with this car not to mention anything running off of the belt is a pain to remove or replace due to limited space. Its about as hard to maintain as a 20 year old BMW
I own one of the 2009 impala ss’s and 101000 miles and absolutely love it, eats mustangs for dinner. Had a Monty Carlo in the 80’s when I was a teenager and put a 66 vett 327 in it and that was awesome times but my 09 ss would eat that for dinner. The Monty car had built tranny and posi plus holly 650 dual feed dbl pump. Again this 09 ss is really no joke, with a lil chip helping it can do wonders. Corners like it’s on rails,,,