Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | AF 350Z | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
| Latest | 0 Rplys |
|
Car Comparisons Compare any cars and find out what every body else thinks. Just refrain from making stupid comparos like Viper vs. Geo Metro :) |
View Poll Results: Which car would you rather have? | |||
Chevrolet Impala | 6 | 21.43% | |
Dodge Charger | 17 | 60.71% | |
Ford Five Hundred | 5 | 17.86% | |
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll |
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread |
|
Thread Tools |
10-24-2005, 03:54 PM | #1 | |
AF Regular
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Fall River, Massachusetts
Posts: 72
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
I just wanted to see how people thought the new 2006 Impala stacks up against the Ford Five Hundred and the Dodge Charger. I picked the Charger instead if the 300 because I figured Dodge compares better against Ford and Chevrolet than Chrysler. I think the Buick Lucerne and the Mercury Montego would be better against the 300. The specs on the new Impala should be on the Chevrolet website.
|
|
10-24-2005, 04:07 PM | #2 | |
AF -Advisor
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Queen City
Posts: 3,563
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
Gotta go with the charger man. Just more appealing to the eye.
|
|
10-24-2005, 04:30 PM | #3 | |
AF Regular
Thread starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Fall River, Massachusetts
Posts: 72
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I forgot to put what I would take. Well the first one to go is the Five Hundred just because it is underpowered. I have heard talk about a new 3.5-Liter Duratec V-6 with around 250 Horsepower but as of right a 3.0 with only 203 hp is not enough to move a full-size sedan around. Other than the motor the Ford is a very nice car especially in Limited trim. It comes down to the Impala and Charger. I would pick the Impala not just because I'm a Chevy man but I live in the north and the Impala is FWD. I'm pretty sure the Charger can be equipped with AWD but i really dont care to much for AWD. Also the Impala SS has been estimated to run from 0-60 5.7 which is quicker than the more powerful Charger R/T which takes 6.0 to get sixty.
|
|
10-24-2005, 04:39 PM | #4 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Charlotte, North Carolina
Posts: 366
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
I'd go with the Impala SS in black, the Charger is nice also.
__________________
|
|
10-24-2005, 04:47 PM | #5 | |
AF Enthusiast
|
I honestly cant believe that the Ford 500 and Dodge Charger are cometing cars. Price wise, yes they are, but the customer is very different for each. The Impala SS would be the best of both, the power of the Charger and the practacality of the 500. But Id really have to go with the Charger. The SRT8 just sweetens the deal. But the Charger takes the cake even in the base SE (or is it SXT) form with the 250 HP 3.5L V6.
__________________
Currently: 1998 BMW 328is black/black coupe 5MT Thanks to Nicecar! Got a Facebook? Join the AF group! http://hs.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2213949483&ref=mf |
|
10-24-2005, 05:07 PM | #6 | |
AF Enthusiast
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
charger... that much power should really be driven through the rear wheels.
i'm not sure about the charger having the option for AWD. i know the magnum does, but not so sure about the charger. the impala looks allright... but i'm starting to forgive the charger for not being a 2-door... |
|
10-25-2005, 04:22 AM | #7 | ||
AF Fanatic
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
Quote:
|
||
10-25-2005, 04:19 PM | #8 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 649
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
I just bought a Five Hundred so I'm gonna go with it. The build quality is amazing, and the 6 speed automatic really helpsw movie it when you want to but also saves a lot on gas. It has the smoothest ride out of any of these cars by far.
P.S. The new chargers are slow as balls. And the SRT-8 is overpriced. The chargers rev and make a rucus but don't actually go anywhere.
__________________
|
|
10-25-2005, 05:55 PM | #9 | |
AF Enthusiast
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
while i wouldnt put my money of a 250hp 2 ton car, i dont see how the RT or SRT8 could be slow at all.
besides, i dont see how the fivehundred could be all that quick... barely over 200hp/tq on a 3600lb car? comeon... |
|
10-25-2005, 06:39 PM | #10 | |
AF Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 127
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
i dont call low 14s slow, and the srt8 is even quicker, mid-13s i think
__________________
Move along, there is nothing to see here... |
|
10-25-2005, 09:09 PM | #11 | |
AF Enthusiast
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
The 500 gets better performance than expected due to its good gearing from the 6-speed Auto and CVT.
__________________
Dr. Disque - Current cars: 2008 BMW 135i M-Sport 2011 Mazda2 Touring Past cars: 2007 Mazda 6S 5-door MT 1999 Ford Taurus SE Duratec |
|
10-27-2005, 09:47 AM | #12 | |
AF Enthusiast
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
but better enough so that it matches the charger? it is only 300lbs heavier then the five hundred, which has 210hp/tq less compared to the srt8, and 130hp/180tq less compared to the RT.... untill i see it, i'm not gonna believe that the five hundred can keep up with a charger.
and now that i go and look at it, the impala is the cheapest power... but it still only comes in FWD driving that power... o.0 |
|
10-27-2005, 09:42 PM | #13 | |
AF Regular
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: O'Fallon, Missouri
Posts: 439
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
I have to back him up on the Chargers are slow I saw one at the track a Hemi and his best run was 14.7 in the 1/4. You would also be suprised the Ford fivehundered is faster than the Charger with the 250hp V6. And this is done by gearing and especially with the CVT transmision it keeps the motor is the peak torque of the Rpm's so it may not sound like it moving fast because the motor won't rev up that high but it will go.
__________________
'91 Kawasaki Ninja 600R Newest Toy: V&H, Stage 1 carbs '89 Honda Accord DX A20a1 5spd Daily Driver '68 Ford Galaxie 500 XL 390fe C6 First Car/Project Car See/hear the ride. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rO0C-qxj6qA |
|
10-30-2005, 03:03 PM | #14 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 649
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
Go test drive both and then talk to me, I shopped around and the FiveHundred isn't a speedster and it's definately aimed at a different segment of the market but it's still fun to drive, more so in my opinion than the other cars. The gearing on the FiveHundred is really well thought out and responds well and pulls strong throughout the band. The Charger has power no doubt about it, but when driving it, if you floor it you will hear that big powerful roar of the engine but you're gonna be really disappointed. It's great you guys can quote numbers but it comes down to how the car feels. Also the suspension is amazing on the FiveHundred and holds the road superbly.
__________________
|
|
11-13-2005, 08:57 PM | #15 | ||
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,385
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Impala vs. Charger vs. Five Hundred
I'll take the Impala's cousin, the GXP Grand Prix.
__________________
1993 F-150 Lightning Mods-March UD pullies, Ltngdrvr CAI, Flowmasters, E-fans, and Eibach / Bell-Tech Drop Kit in the garage. http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2149061/1 Quote:
|
||
|
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
|
|