Impala Forums banner

LTZ axed for 2017, replaced with Premier

6K views 35 replies 13 participants last post by  Radiochris 
#1 ·
Just an FYI, doesn't look like the equipment changed much if at all.
 
#2 ·
You can also order the V6 in any trim you want in 2017.
 
#3 ·
$1,095 up charge for the V6 in the LS and LT is a joke. All car manufacturers upcharge for the engine but let's get real. The cost between the two engines is probably less than $100 if not the same. I work for a manufacturer so I see engineering and costs in my position all the time. People would be horrified how badly people get ripped off. For Example, we manufacturer a part for 88 cents and sell it for $28 - $45 depending who we are selling to. They in turn sometimes add another 30% if it's resold. We sell it in two models. We up charge the higher end model by as much as $15 more but the cost is 4 cents more to produce it. These are material and labor costs. Even if you add in 50% for overhead, (rent, utilities, insurance, etc...) it's still a ripoff. And we manufacture in the USA. Just imagine how companies like Apple who make their shit in China rip people off.
 
#4 ·
We're talking about 50% more engine here though, larger block, larger displacement, larger crank, 2 more pistons & cylinders, larger valvetrain, stronger engine mounts, further EPA testing for multiple engines, additional crash tests required for different engines in cars, upgraded transmission to hold the extra power, cost to create a new ECM/TCM tune for engine/trani combo it's certainly different than the ATS or camaro V6.

By the time you factor all of this in, the margins are massively lower.

I don't know what you manufacture but those sound like cheap or small parts. I work in a CNC shop and sure material cost can range quite drastically very easily but a lot of people do not see or think about overhead costs. CNC machines can cost millions depending on spec and size unless you buy old used ones, you have engineering costs, labor costs, insurance costs, employees mistakes, tooling, consumables, accounting, setup time, maintenance, materials and anything else I may be forgetting to mention. By the time you add in all your operational costs, bills and material cost you now need to add in your own profit margin. Your total overall cost to make a part in North America is quite high.

For a part to cost .88 could be made of brass which is extremely cheap, fairly small in size and not calculating the above mentioned. The overhead costs are why people are moving manufacturing to countries like China where you can cut that overhead in half and seriously increase margins even after the logistic costs of overseas shipping.

There are some jobs we take on for our larger customers we potentially lose money or cut even on but do it because other jobs we do for them bring in great money. We often take these hits to maintain our relationships with our partners and balance out the loss with the margins from higher value jobs.

This list is the best way to figure out the cost to do a job. Consider all the factors that must be calculated to see the true cost of a job:

Labor costed to the job based on the actual employee hourly rate

Labor overhead (fringe benefits, vacation, other employer paid benefits and taxes) applied to the job based on direct labor hours

Manufacturing overhead applied (by work center) based on the cost of running machines in that work center

Selling/marketing, engineering, General, and Administrative overhead (all the other costs of doing business) applied proportionally to each job, either based on direct labor hour or another appropriate allocation method

Material and outside service costs such as heat treating, plating, anodizing, etc. applied to the job based on actual cost (rather than standard or average) to correctly analyze the effect of the rising cost of material or the actual cost of the service performed.

Sorry for the long post but I see how parts prices get calculated and there's no way they're getting a 97% profit margin. For those who don't know how to calculate profit margin (Sale price $30 - Cost 0.88 = 29.12 then divide profit by sale price 29.12 ÷ 30.00 = 0.9706 then to turn into percentage times by 100 which equal 97.06%) GM gets 6.76% profit margin https://ycharts.com/companies/GM/profit_margin

If GM's Profit margin is 6.76% that means that's the percentage of that $1095 for the engine they take home after all costs have added in. Which is not too much money at all honestly, correct me if i'm wrong but that's around $75 bucks. Ever wonder why Manufacturers are going to mexico or china? Look at the profit margins, they're sad and keep going lower decade after decade.
 
#5 ·
^^Agreed! Everyone throws around the "ripoff" term way too easily. So many associated costs and expenses that they don't think about. In my opinion, a $1,095 upcharge for the V6 is a steal! :)

And by the way, if you know the cost of something up front and you accept the cost, you cannot get "ripped off". To rip someone off is to charge them more than originally stated or charge them fees that they are unaware of. :) Just sayin...

Sent from my HP SlateBook 10 x2 PC using Tapatalk
 
#6 ·
Exactly, I think the price for engine upgrade is a pretty damn good price. People always look for a reason to says parts are a rip off but people have no idea what they're talking about. I hear it all the time when i calculate a job for a client they typically understand after I briefly explain, I have no right to release specific financials but I know enough to say a 97% profit margin in manufacturing especially in the USA or Canada is near impossible unless you're selling bottled air for $1.10.... 0.10-0.15 for the bottle and $1.00 for the air, your cost being the bottle lol.

If it wasn't the weekend I'd goto work the next day, screenshot the cost of JUST the metal is already up there. I know for a fact as a baseline, Aluminum 6061-T6511 in the dimensions of 1/4"(H) x 1/4"(W) x 12" (L) costs $2.90 not including shipping. What that will make me is about 5 2" threaded bolts with the rest scrapped WITHOUT overhead cost added in. Yes I typically wouldn't use aluminum for bolts but just saying that's all I could make with that or maybe other really small thin parts.

For something bigger like a 5"(W) X 5"(H) X 12" is roughly $175-200 weighing at approx. 30 LBS of aluminum. That's with NO machining just the metal.
 
#7 ·
I also think the price to upgrade to a V6 is pretty reasonable.
 
#11 ·
Don't forget a V-6 engine was standard on all 7th and 8th generation Impala models (although several different ones). Beginning with the 2012 Impala models (and then the 2014 & up Impala Limited)- the LFX V-6 was standard.

I think the upgrade charge is excessive - although I realize the cost is also included in the base price of 9th generation models where the V-6 is standard (such as my 2014 Impala 2LTZ).
 
#8 ·
If you boil it down everything for sale on the planet is a rip off, it's called capitalism. I'm an engineer with a masters in business and lean manufacturing that work in operations, so I'm aware of all the gory details. Get used to it or find a tall cliff, remember you can't take it with you...

Good news is the 4 cylinder isn't available in Premier trim. When we were shopping we saw an LTZ we liked enough for me to pull the trigger but then realized it had the 4 cylinder...no vehicle that stickers for $38K should have that kind of power to weight ratio.
 
#9 ·
I don't think college degrees or where you work has anything to do with it. Either it seems like a decent deal to you or it doesn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IceMan2
#12 ·
Any price for a 7th or 8th generation Impala would be excessive to me, I don't care for them.
 
#14 ·
The more units they sell with the smaller engine, the better their Corporate Average Fuel Economy is. They simply have to offer and push the more economical engines. I'd be surprised to see ANY 6 cylinder engines a few years from now, barring the government getting its head out of its collective asses.
 
#15 ·
when i got my car the salesdude said everyone buys 4's . i think it was malibus at the time he said you cannot even get in 6 anymore. the 6 impalas werent selling very well which means whoever buys them there didnt care about power. plus gas back then was around 3.50 i think.

i have no proof of this but my gut just tells me that a 4 banger hauling around 4000 lbs works harder and wont last as long as a 6 cyl . i'm sure someone has the engineering to prove me wrong or right
 
  • Like
Reactions: Radiochris
#16 ·
The Buick LaCrosse is totally redesigned for 2017 and according to Buick's comparison chart the "3.6L V6 ENGINE WITH START/STOP TECHNOLOGY" is standard across all trim levels.

It will use an 8-speed auto trans and is rated 21 city/31 highway for the FWD and 20/29 for AWD.

So maybe in 2018 the Impala will move to the new platform and the 4-banger will be dropped?
 
#18 ·
I'm not so sure I like the idea of an 8-speed trans... In my opinion, there is already too much shifting going on with the 6-speed. I'd imagine that the 8-speed would be constantly shifting in city driving.

Anyone on here actually driven a car with an 8-speed trans yet? Any feedback (I've not driven one)?

I'm also not sure i like the idea of the start/stop technology. It just seems that these "schemes" they use to get better mileage out of a V6/V8 (DOD, auto-start/stop) end up causing issues down the road.

Sent from my HP SlateBook 10 x2 PC using Tapatalk
 
#19 ·
I'm not so sure I like the idea of an 8-speed trans... In my opinion, there is already too much shifting going on with the 6-speed. I'd imagine that the 8-speed would be constantly shifting in city driving.
That's my take, too. I've wondered about the Chrysler 9-speeds as well.

We have the 6-speed in our Cruze, and it shifts too often, IMO.
...
I've watched these things go from 3-speeds using vacuum modulators for control, to being 6- and 8-speeds with computer control - computer control that doesn't seem to have much more predictability than 50-yo turbo-350's and C-4's.

That said, I know that, in the late 80's, Motorola semiconductor (more recently known as Freescale and now part of NXP), developed a 16-bit processor with digital signal processing (DSP) enhancements, for use in transmissions at Chrysler, as I recall (p/n: MC68HC16Z1xxx). This chip, by itself, doesn't solve the shifting problem, but the control algorithm that required it may.

That is, having not driven a Chrysler 9-speed, I can only speculate that perhaps they have a control algorithm that better manages the gear changes.

I'd like to think that GM would/could come up with a comparable system (for 6- and 8-speeds) that doesn't seem to be constantly hunting another gear. But what I've seen so far has me a little disappointed. (Altho GM still ranks at the top, IMO, for their legacy in computer controlled engines and drive trains.)

As as result of how the transmission behaves (in our Cruze), when I'm driving it, I try adapting my driving style a bit to avoid the frequent shifting. But, even then, I notice it doesn't seem to coast well when I let off the gas.

Doug

.
 
#22 ·
We had a 2013 Malibu ECO with the auto stop/start and we loved it. Worked perfectly for the 3 years we had it before it was totaled. I see a lot of complaints about the non ECO auto stop/start Malibus that came after that in 2014 and 2015 though (they didn't have the small generator/electric motor under the hood nor the larger lithium battery in the trunk). I would be fine with another system like our 2013 Malibu ECO had.
 
#24 ·
But isn't the car constantly shifting under 45mph? I mean really, how many gears do we need? I actually preferred the "feel" of the older 4-speed transmissions over the 6-speed in my 2012 Impala - it just seems like it's constantly shifting unless I'm cruising at one constant speed or on the highway. Personally, I'd trade a few MPGs for less shifting any day.

I'll have to download and look at a tune for one of these 8-speed trans to see the shift speeds, but based on what I've seen on the 6 speed trans, it must be even worse with 2 additional gears.

Sent from my HP SlateBook 10 x2 PC using Tapatalk
 
#25 ·
I took a look at the 2016 Cadillac ATS shift speeds... At low pedal positions (<12%), you'll be in 5th gear by *23mph*, 6th gear by *28mph*, 7th gear by *37mph* and 8th gear by *47mph* - now that is a lot of shifting! :) The 2012 Impala stock trans gets to 6th gear @ 47mph for comparison (which I already consider too much shifting).

Until you are at pedal positions over 31%, the amount of shifting going on is just crazy...

Here is the stock 8-speed upshift table for those that are curious...


Sent from my HP SlateBook 10 x2 PC using Tapatalk
 
#26 ·
I'm sure it's busy but I notice it less than the 6 speed in our Impala and when you want power it's always in the power band. The Cadillac also has different driving modes. Sport does a great job managing RPM and shifting more more spirited driving situations letting you get involved with the manual paddles whenever you want. The manual shift button on the gear selector in the Impala is lame. What's the downshift schedule look like?
 
#27 ·
Here is the upshift/downshift tables as well as the TCC apply/release table. Interesting that the TCC locks up at speeds as low as 10mph in 2nd gear!

I guess if the shifts are so smooth that you don't really notice them then it's not a big deal. Like you said, you notice the shits less than in the Impala. I've never liked the way the shifts are in my 2012. I'm still trying to get the shifts to my liking (just started adjusting things again - it's addictive!). I will say that I've managed to almost totally eliminate all Knock by not locking the TCC up so much. I don't lock it at all in gears 1-4 now and keep it unlocked at certain times in 5th and 6th as well (or else it caused the engine to lug, which caused KR). It's still locked the vast majority of the time in 5th and 6th, just not at some very low pedal/speed combinations (again, to avoid "engine lugging" situations.

By the way, if you'd like, I can send you a copy of the HPTuners software and any tune you want to look at. While I certainly don't most posting pictures of tables, there are *so* many tables and it's all very, very interesting (at least to me!). You obviously won't be able to change anything (you'd need to purchase the HPTuner hardware and a license for your car), but you can at least look!




Sent from my HP SlateBook 10 x2 PC using Tapatalk
 
#31 ·
Like you said, you notice the shits less than in the Impala.
:yikes:

I have to honestly say I have never shit in our Impala.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jtrosky
#28 ·
I've been trying to avoid getting interested in HP Tuners since my Cobalt SS days. I have a background in industrial control systems so I know I'd be addicted in no time. The wife drives the Impala for here business and the CT6 is a lease so I feel like screwing with powertrain calibrations is probably more trouble than it's worth for me but thanks. I know I'd be interesting and fun.
 
#29 ·
Yes, I definitely wouldn't want to tune a lease. If they find out, I imagine it could really cause you some grief! You're a smart man not to even look - would be way too tempting! :)

By, the way, it looks like the speed limiter is set to 135mph on the Cadillac (via fuel cut). Just an FYI...

Sent from my HP SlateBook 10 x2 PC using Tapatalk
 
#30 ·
The 8 speed auto in the camaro is pretty solid transmission. I think people hate change but in all honesty, you hardly notice the shifts unless you're having spirited driving. With Cafe standards hammer dropping on automakers you have the choice of an 8 speed or a smaller less powerful engine to reduce those numbers. Take your pick.
 
#33 ·
Just wanted to add to the discussion regarding the 2017 LTZ to Premier change that I've noticed no Impalas placed in Chevy advertising, not newspapers, TV, nor GM mailers. I do believe they're going to kill the Impala soon for lack of domestic sales in favor of the Buick LaCrosse. Anyone who shops for the Impala is most likely looking at the LaCrosse as well. GM is responding to sales of all sizes of SUVs and wanting to manufacture what the public, generally, is buying. It will be interesting to see if Chevy produces a 2018. The Premier name, IMHO, doesn't have the cache of the LTZ moniker!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top