Thinking of buying 2000 or 2001 Impala....

[sliko]

The local GM dealer, which I worked for as a collision tech for ten years before I started railroading, has a 2000 and a 2001 Impala. both are in excellent condition with 60000 miles. I am just wondering if these cars are reliable enough to go for another 40000, I am not sure about them as the majority of vehicles sold in my area are suv's or trucks. I would buy a truck but this is for my wife. Currently she drives a 1997 s10 blazer that is giving us nothing but trouble. Any info would be appreciated.

[MCO_Death]

I would say it depends upon the type of the Impala, Regular vs. LS. Regular Impala's have the 3.4L which i've heard have far more problems. The LS's (and police models) have the 3.8 L, which is one of, if not the most reliable engines GM has. I myself have a 2000 with the 3.8 and clocked 150k mark recently, car still runs/drives strong as it did when new. Just make sure any warrenty/recall issues with the Impala has been taken care of (Common Issues with steering colum, intake, brake rotors and slipping transmission, all are free work if still under warrenty)

Hope that helps.

[sliko]

we bought the 2001 impala ls with all the bells and whistles, onstar, leather, heated-power seats, sunroof, 3.8 liter, spoiler. seems to be a good car and has all the warranty updates. picked it up for around $11,500. thw wife is happy with it.

[victimizati0n]

the 3.4 and 3.8 chevy engines are the best out there.

If the people who had it before you get it drove it easy, yes it will last.

It all depends on how it was driven.

We had a 92' sundance, my dad drove the car easy, and we had no problems with it (it has 125,000 miles on it) after we sold it, the guy who bought it from us was pissed, because he blew the tranny (which was replaces 2 times before)

We know he beat the hell out of the car, because when he followed us to the title place, he was like flooring the car, and like crap like that.