Used 2009 Impala, boring but solid?

Stew · 08-11-2010, 12:56 PM

Any thoughts on a 2009 Impala LT with the 3.9 liter V6? Local dealer has one with 36k miles for 13900. Anybody have any idea what kind of fuel mileage it would get? Also is the 3.9 a solid motor? Being an 09 it should have the remainder of the 5 year 100k mile warranty, correct?

FenwickHockey65 · 08-11-2010, 01:11 PM

Solid all around car.

HeatherR · 08-11-2010, 01:15 PM

Very solid car. The MPG will be a pleasant surprise too.

We used one to drive back and forth a couple times when we were moving to Texas from up north, so a lot of miles and were shocked how good the MPGs were in real world driving.

Stew · 08-11-2010, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeatherR

Very solid car. The MPG will be a pleasant surprise too.

We used one to drive back and forth a couple times when we were moving to Texas from up north, so a lot of miles and were shocked how good the MPGs were in real world driving.

Was this with the base 3.5 or the optional 3.9? One thing I like about this one is that is has the bigger motor. I drove a new Malibu V6 a few years ago with the 3.9 and remember being relatively surprised at how spunky it was.

Stew · 08-11-2010, 02:46 PM

Oh, is this Impala still on the W Body platform?

Muscle Master · 08-11-2010, 03:12 PM

The impala is a very solid daily driver.. My sister has one and even I like to drive it

For 230 horses its a very peppy sedan

REEFBLUE93 · 08-11-2010, 03:31 PM

I just had to add my .02 here. I had a buddy drive me to pick up an electric fan from my mechanic a while back. We took what I thought was his mom's 2000 or 2001 monte carlo ss. I think it had the 3.8L V6 in it. The car had well over 100K miles on it and showed signs of wear and tear. On the way back he tells me that it's his little brother's car. His brother is well known for destroying anything mechanical. This car still had plenty of pep and drove and rode nice as well. I considered that to be a serious testament as to what these cars/engines can withstand.

Stew · 08-11-2010, 03:44 PM

Ah, i know the older 3.8 is totally bulletproof, 3.9 is a different motor altogether though. I believe this car would serve me real well though. Also looking at picking up a ranger for my better half since we run beagles in the hills chasing wabbits on the weekends haha.

Here is a link to the Ranger

http://www.brucewaltersford.net/used...ZR45EX4PA81613

actual internet special price is 12300

and the Impala

http://www.brucewaltersford.net/used...WC57M191176914

actual internet special price is 13900

REEFBLUE93 · 08-11-2010, 03:53 PM

Oh man, I used to own a 2003 Ranger. It had the 4.0 and that little truck was fun, and speaking of bullet proof....

fielderLS3 · 08-11-2010, 04:15 PM

I've got a 3.4L with 122,000 miles that still runs like new and doesn't use any oil between changes. From what I understand, the 3.9L is basically a bored out 3.4, so it should be an equally solid engine in the long run.

Fuel economy will be pretty good for a large car as well, particularly if you drive it conservatively. I think 3.9L Impalas have AFM.

One thing I noticed about a 3.5L Impala I drove on a 200 mile round trip was that it feels much more powerful than it actually is. I think there is some electronic throttle trickery used to make it feel that way...as in if you press the gas pedal down 10%, the throttle opens a lot more than 10%, and once you are beyond about half pedal, the engine is already almost wide open, so the only thing that really changes from then on is the RPM the transmission shifts at.

Ultimately, the Impala is a boring car on a heavily aged platform, but if you need a roomy full size car, it is cheap to buy and operate, reliable, and will get the job done.

Stew · 08-11-2010, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by REEFBLUE93

Oh man, I used to own a 2003 Ranger. It had the 4.0 and that little truck was fun, and speaking of bullet proof....

We have a 98 Ranger with 198k miles right now, not origional engine (has around 140k miles and NOT the trucks fault) just had to replace the transmission at 196k, not bad because it HAS been abused and just takes it, I am a believer Definatly one of the great things about a vehicle being built for a very long time is you eng up with the most bulletproof vehicles.

Quote:

fielderLS3 I've got a 3.4L with 122,000 miles that still runs like new and doesn't use any oil between changes. From what I understand, the 3.9L is basically a bored out 3.4, so it should be an equally solid engine in the long run.

Fuel economy will be pretty good for a large car as well, particularly if you drive it conservatively. I think 3.9L Impalas have AFM.

One thing I noticed about a 3.5L Impala I drove on a 200 mile round trip was that it feels much more powerful than it actually is. I think there is some electronic throttle trickery used to make it feel that way...as in if you press the gas pedal down 10%, the throttle opens a lot more than 10%, and once you are beyond about half pedal, the engine is already almost wide open, so the only thing that really changes from then on is the RPM the transmission shifts at.

Ultimately, the Impala is a boring car on a heavily aged platform, but if you need a roomy full size car, it is cheap to buy and operate, reliable, and will get the job done.

Same here, and for now i definatly need a good daily driver more than anything. Same as the Ranger, all the bugs have been worked out. I have no doubt it should be 1000 times better and more reliable than the 2000 GTP I had and the 2000 Regal my Parents have (engine is the only thing not to go bad there). The best part about both of those were the bulletproof 3.8s and of course the GTPs power

FenwickHockey65 · 08-11-2010, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stew

Oh, is this Impala still on the W Body platform?

Yes, and if the article I read today is correct, it'll be on the ancient W-body platform until 2014.

GM. Commodore. Slap Impala badges on it and call it a day.

Toasty · 08-11-2010, 05:57 PM

the 3.5 and 3.9 seem reliable enough, but if memory serves, have roots back to 2.8 and 3.1's, which weren't the best around, but it totally depends on how many miles you keep the car for.

truth411 · 08-11-2010, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

Yes, and if the article I read today is correct, it'll be on the ancient W-body platform until 2014.

GM. Commodore. Slap Impala badges on it and call it a day.

Seriously, what the heck is Gm doing with the impala??? They are ruining a classic and beloved nameplate. Why won't they just bring over the holden commodore as the impala??

Oh well if the 2012 dodge charger comes with a V8 and 8 spd transmission as rumors suggest, then I am sold.

08-11-2010, 12:56 PM	#1
Stew Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4 Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Eastern, Ky Posts: 3,789	Used 2009 Impala, boring but solid? Any thoughts on a 2009 Impala LT with the 3.9 liter V6? Local dealer has one with 36k miles for 13900. Anybody have any idea what kind of fuel mileage it would get? Also is the 3.9 a solid motor? Being an 09 it should have the remainder of the 5 year 100k mile warranty, correct?

08-11-2010, 01:11 PM	#2
FenwickHockey65 General Motors Aficionado Drives: 2023 GMC Canyon, 2023 Expedition Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Florida Posts: 37,375 View My Garage	Solid all around car. __________________ 2023 GMC Canyon Elevation 2023 Ford Expedition SSV (State-Issued)

08-11-2010, 04:15 PM	#10
fielderLS3 Drives: 2016 Mazda6, 2011 Mustang 5.0 Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Portage, Wisconsin Posts: 4,049	I've got a 3.4L with 122,000 miles that still runs like new and doesn't use any oil between changes. From what I understand, the 3.9L is basically a bored out 3.4, so it should be an equally solid engine in the long run. Fuel economy will be pretty good for a large car as well, particularly if you drive it conservatively. I think 3.9L Impalas have AFM. One thing I noticed about a 3.5L Impala I drove on a 200 mile round trip was that it feels much more powerful than it actually is. I think there is some electronic throttle trickery used to make it feel that way...as in if you press the gas pedal down 10%, the throttle opens a lot more than 10%, and once you are beyond about half pedal, the engine is already almost wide open, so the only thing that really changes from then on is the RPM the transmission shifts at. Ultimately, the Impala is a boring car on a heavily aged platform, but if you need a roomy full size car, it is cheap to buy and operate, reliable, and will get the job done. __________________ 2022 1SS 1LE (Arrived 4/29/22) "The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive." . 2022 1SS 1LE (Coming Soon)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
September 2009 Camaro production & sales figures. Tops Mustang for 4th straight month	Tran	5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions	53	11-04-2009 08:44 PM
Impala Staying FWD, Super Epsilon II Model for 2013	FenwickHockey65	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	12	10-06-2009 12:21 PM
New 2008 Pontiac Solstice and G6 GT and New 2009 Impala SS and Covette Convert 4 Sale	drchevy1	Autos For Sale / Wanted	0	06-04-2009 03:09 PM
Camaro Update: Zeta gets a tweak for Camaro and Impala	Casull	5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions	3	03-27-2007 12:23 PM

08-11-2010, 01:15 PM	#3
HeatherR Drives: 2009 CTS, 2008 Solstice GXP Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Keller, TX Posts: 769 View My Garage	Very solid car. The MPG will be a pleasant surprise too. We used one to drive back and forth a couple times when we were moving to Texas from up north, so a lot of miles and were shocked how good the MPGs were in real world driving.

08-11-2010, 02:46 PM	#5
Stew Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4 Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Eastern, Ky Posts: 3,789	Oh, is this Impala still on the W Body platform?

08-11-2010, 03:31 PM	#7
REEFBLUE93 Account Suspended Drives: 1993 Rustang Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 941	I just had to add my .02 here. I had a buddy drive me to pick up an electric fan from my mechanic a while back. We took what I thought was his mom's 2000 or 2001 monte carlo ss. I think it had the 3.8L V6 in it. The car had well over 100K miles on it and showed signs of wear and tear. On the way back he tells me that it's his little brother's car. His brother is well known for destroying anything mechanical. This car still had plenty of pep and drove and rode nice as well. I considered that to be a serious testament as to what these cars/engines can withstand.

08-11-2010, 03:44 PM	#8
Stew Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4 Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Eastern, Ky Posts: 3,789	Ah, i know the older 3.8 is totally bulletproof, 3.9 is a different motor altogether though. I believe this car would serve me real well though. Also looking at picking up a ranger for my better half since we run beagles in the hills chasing wabbits on the weekends haha. Here is a link to the Ranger http://www.brucewaltersford.net/used...ZR45EX4PA81613 actual internet special price is 12300 and the Impala http://www.brucewaltersford.net/used...WC57M191176914 actual internet special price is 13900

08-11-2010, 03:53 PM	#9
REEFBLUE93 Account Suspended Drives: 1993 Rustang Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 941	Oh man, I used to own a 2003 Ranger. It had the 4.0 and that little truck was fun, and speaking of bullet proof....

08-11-2010, 05:57 PM	#13
Toasty Custom User Title :D Drives: 2011 Summit White 2LT/RS Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Bolingbrook, IL Posts: 2,342	the 3.5 and 3.9 seem reliable enough, but if memory serves, have roots back to 2.8 and 3.1's, which weren't the best around, but it totally depends on how many miles you keep the car for.