mmarshall

Good points, LexBob.

BTW, the 2Gen LaCrosse, at its launch, had (and still has) a superb chassis, but its interior materials and general hardware was a distinct step below the 5Gen ES it was being marketed against. Against the new 6Gen ES (which, IMO, is a step down from the 5Gen, and particularly the superb 4gen ES), it's now more of a direct comparison.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

please take your inflammatory rhetoric elsewhere. what models a given car is comparable to is subjective, there are no absolutes here.

mmarshall

Slightly off-topic, maybe, but, since we're on the subject of the regular FWD Impala, here's some advance-info on the upcoming Australian/Holden-sourced RWD Impala SS with the 6.2L V8. As I stressed earlier, this is a completely different car from the bread-and-butter FWD version, and, IMO, promises to be a good competitor for the Chrysler 300 and Charger Hemis.

(Mike, I'll wait for a review/test-drive, but my preliminary guess is that, if you liked the Pontiac G8 GT as much as you say you did, you are going to love this one.

I liked the G8 GT myself (at least its exterior and drivetrain), and did a full review of it, but the coal-mine-black interior and rather flimsy hardware inside did not impress me much.

http://www.egmcartech.com/2013/02/16...r-since-1996/#

Toys4RJill

Anybody can compare any vehicle they want. I just think the OP totally missed the boat thinking that a Chevrolet Impala competes with a Toyota Avalon. But hey, I have seen stranger comparisons in the past.

As for Buick, well it is cute that GM compares it to the Lexus ES, I certainly would not believe that Buick is a luxury car, I don't think it even qualifies as a near luxury. I would call a Buick a decent upscale General Motors products that does pass as a premium product.

They fit right in the segment that the Avalon currently serves. Now if the Lacrosse could start offering a standard V6 that would be nice.

Back to the Impala, I am a bit shocked that the V6 does not clear 30MPG on highway.

mmarshall

I agree....and I stated, in the review, more than once, that I felt that the Impala should also have the V6 standard (the same 3.6L, BTW, that is also used in the Lacrosse). It is, IMO, an excellent powerplant. The Impala is not only too large and heavy for a typical four, but a four also does not fit the car's position as a Chevy FWD flagship.

For those who want better mileage than the V6, a hybrid-version, with the same powertrain as the LaCrosse Hybrid, might be kept as an option.

Once again, sample one and you might see why. It not only has a good amount of torque (though at a fairly high 5200 RPM) but is also dragging, by today's standards, a pretty-good sized car around. Given its response/refinement and driving characteristics, the gas-mileage isn't that bad at all. And I also think that, like the VW/Audi 2.0T Turbo-four, the official torque figure of the 3.6L may actually be a little underrated.

Toys4RJill

I am not so sure that the Lacrosse qualifies as a true hybrid, compared to an Avalon hybrid, the EPA numbers of the Lacrosse are poor.

The real issue with the Lacrosse is the issue of weight, at over 500lbs heavier than the Avalon, one wonders what GM was thinking.

GM really should think twice about offering AWD drive in the Impala, I hope they never do. The Lacrosse weights in at 4274lbs, that is a head scratching 100+ more than Toyota Tacoma 4WD DOUBLE CAB pick up truck.

The Imapala likely weighs just under a Lacrosse.

mmarshall

If you are refering to a series-vs-parallel hybrid, that's probably true. GM hybrids have never been as sophisticated or versatile as those done by Toyota/Lexus.

Avalons don't come in AWD though, saving some weight.

With the four-clyinder, I agree. But the 3.6L is a superb V6 for everyday driving...it, IMO, could handle the extra-load with ease. That's why Buick, for example, limits the LaCrosse AWD to its 3.6L models....the four simply couldn't handle it.

Pickup trucks in general, though, when they are empty, don't have much weight in back of the rear seat....and the Tacoma, unlike the Tundra, is not considered a large truck at that. That's why, years ago, pick-ups were the first vehicles to get standard (rear) ABS...to keep the light rear-ends from sliding all over the place when the rear wheels locked up.

For a FWD LaCrosse, yes, probably true.........though Impalas come with a variety of trim-levels and engines, all of which, of course, affect weight. And, of course, they lack the extra AWD weight of Lacrosses so-equipped.

Toys4RJill

And the Lacrosse mild hybrid is nowhere near as efficent as the Avalon hybrid, its not even close.

As for AWD in Avalon, that is not the issue as to why it does not weigh as much as a Lacrosse, the Lacrosse FWD still weighs 500lb more than an Avalon.

Generally this added weight is from the queit tuning that has been added. The differece between the Lacrosse and the Avalon is that the Avalon is designed to be quiet from start, it simpy does not make the noise whereas the Lacrosse masks the noise.

The Avalon approach is superior and the benefits are a lighter car and low noise *** well as superior fuel effiency.

You should rememember to keep in mind that the Avalon is a queiter car than the Lacrosse.

mmarshall

I've driven both. To my ears, doesn't seem to be much difference in noise-level between the two. Where the Avalon outdoes the LaCrosse, IMO, is mostly in the quality of its interior hardware. The LaCrosse has a lot of flash and glitz inside, but it is mostly cheap plastic under that surface-flash.

Toys4RJill

Well, from everything I have read, the new ES350 is quieter than the Lacrosse, this is what MT reported. I have a hard time believing thata Buick Lacrosse is as quiet as the new Avalon.

With the Avalon, some are saying that is on par with Bentley and Audi A8 for being quiet, this what a few reviews have mentioned at Edmunds.

The 2013 Avalon was recored at 59.8 dBA, ES is around 66 and the Buick was in at tick higher than the ES.

LexBob2

The new C&D has a compare of sedans which includes the new Avalon among others. The quietest car in the test at 70 mph cruise was the KIA Cadenza followed by Azera then tied were Avalon, Impala, Chrysler 300 and Charger. After the Cadenza the differences between the rest was small.

mmarshall

Can't comment much on the Cadenza, but I plan to test-drive it before too long. If it is, in fact, the quietest of the group, that would be saying something, considering that Kia products, though far better-built today than in the 1990s, are not usually known for refinement or noise-isolation. Of course, the Cadenza has a hefty price-tag, especially for a Kia, so maybe some of that money went into refinement.

The Cadenza, BTW, avoids the mistake that the Impala marketers made.....there are no four-cylinder versions. All Cadenzas have a 3.3L V6, whose HP/torque ratings appear to be very close to the Impala's. Kia blew it big-time, though, on the Cadenza's exterior paint colors (like Hyundai did with the Equus), but that's a different topic that I'll save for another thread.

http://www.kia.com/us/#/cadenza/build?page=step1

LexBob2

Yeah, I thought it was interesting that the two quietest cars in the comparo were the Cadenza followed by the Azera.

However, they finished at the bottom in the overall test results. The Avalon and Impala finished 1 and 2.

ArmyofOne

While I do not expect the world from GM...wtf is up with that frickin engine? When will it die? the 305 HP 3.6L is the SAME 3600 Vortec V6 of yore that they stuck in everything with a GM nameplate. Largely unimproved and gets about the same gas mileage as it did in 1997.

Just kill it already GM At least its frickin reliable...

Outrage

GM's High Feature (DOHC) V6 has been in production in some capacity since 2004. This is roughly as long as the Toyota GR (DOHC) V6 has been around. Prior to that, GM used a Northstar (DOHC) V6 in their upper end platforms. In 1997, most other GM V6 passenger car models used a form of the 3800 (OHV) V6 Series II.