Impala

>>16450207
2000-2014

File: 1483804996166.jpg (41KB, 374x454px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 374x454px

>>16450265
W H E W

'64 impala

>>16450207
None of them.

>>16450299
Then what is?

>>16450310
Is what?

>>16450207
A RWD one

>>16450207

I've always wanted to drive an Impala SS of that generation. I bet it torque steers with the grace of a swan.

>>16450366
>muh RWD
The RWD Impalas are all slower, worse handling, and arguably less reliable than the FWD models.
This only thing they have over FWD models is comfort.

04-05 SS

>>16450371
they're mediocre

the SS sedan is a much nicer car.

>>16450207
I rented an 08 that was brand new while on vacation in Florida. It drove like a 16' Bayliner. What a total piece of shit. Do yourself a favor & just don't.

>>16450921
As an owner of the 2015 Impala I am going to tell you, having driven the pictured generation a few times as a rental that the only one you should even consider out of that generation is the 2013 with the LFX engine. My biggest complaint, OP, mirrors this guy's. The suspension tuning is unacceptable forgivable. If buying in that year range and size class find a Saturn Aura knowing the suspension and interior was actually done right in that model and keep in mind the GM high feature engine ( the XR trim I believe) had a known but pretty infrequent problem with oil consumption

>>16450207
buy a panther instead. w bodies are shit.

>>16450207
1959
Alternatively, >>16450283

>>16450283
>>16451103
Let me just ruin those dreams for you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_r5UJrxcck

>>16451171
Before I clicked that youtube link I thought to myself that it'd be that exact video. Plenty of people drive unsafe cars, safety ratings seem to be the last concern on /o/

>>16450207

The 200-2005 models are pretty comfy. I don't know about their reliability issues across the board though, I know I bought one new in 2004 and it is still running solid. It is finally starting to show its age though after 260,000 miles and I don't think it will last much longer, but I did drive the fucker every single day and racked up 100% of those 260k miles myself (probably 90% of them highway) and it has treated me pretty well. It is starting to shift kind of hard now and the acceleration started showing some issues last month and the engine is making a god awful whine when the acceleration started acting up.

All in all, I can't complain because I got 13 years of daily driving use out of it, got 30 mpg on average, and other than 4 brake jobs and an oil change every 7,500 miles, I literally did nothing in terms of maintenance or repairs.

Guess that means it has a good transmission given that I never once changed the fluid out, flushed it or anything of the sort.

My dad had one from the 2000s. SS tho. After putting new headers and programming some shit it would bury the needle past 140mph

>>16451282
2000-2005 models were known for headgasket and intake manifold gasket problems, along with the occasional failing transmission, but only when you beat on them. Otherwise, pretty bulletproof.

>>16453697
2004-2005 SS models had a supercharged 3.8L V6. 2006-2009 SS models had a 5.3L LS4 V8.
Take your pick as to which it was.

>>16455845
One my dad had was a v6 so yeah. I could only imagine the v8 one.

>>16457144
>I could only imagine the v8 one.
They were famous for blowing the transmission to smithereens

>big 5.3L 300 HP LS V8
>let's attach the FWD V6 transmission to it!

>>16457164
Tru.
>GM