Introduction
Twenty years ago, the Impala was one of the best-selling nameplates in the United States, bar none. And while the Impalas of yesteryear were mega-ton behemoths on the highways, today's version is merely a shadow of its former self. Our 2000 model, an LS edition, consistently ranked in the bottom third of our evaluations and left many of our editors wondering what went wrong with the successful nameplate that has been absent from the Chevrolet lineup since 1996.

Background and Our Test Vehicle
When Ed Cole (then chief engineer for Chevrolet) sent the first Impala off the assembly line in 1958, Chevrolet's latest creation was dubbed "a prestige car within the reach of the average American citizen." As an uplevel trim package on full-size coupes and wagons, the Impala quickly won loyalty and favoritism as one of America's most loved full-sized cars. In 1961, the Impala received the coveted Super Sport (SS) option and the legendary 409 engine – the stuff songs are written about.

In the 1970s, the Impala took on a whole new image with a 223-inch length and an overall package that helped it to outsell every other car in the country. But with the OPEC crisis in the late '70s, and the resulting high gas prices in the '80s, the Impala became a shorter, taller and narrower fuel sipper until 1986, when it was dropped from the Chevrolet line up.

To the delight of enthusiasts, a Caprice-based Impala SS returned in 1994 with a Corvette-derived LT-1 V8 and a monochromatic color scheme that made the car a bad-to-the-bone, rear-wheel-drive family sport sedan. Today, the '90s Impala SS's have taken on a "collectable" quality, sought out for their compliant ride, tire-smoking power and aggressive good looks.

Our new 2000 test vehicle was a far cry from the original Cole dreamed up 42 years ago, or even the sorely missed '94-'96 version. Gone is the traditional rear wheel drive and throaty V8, replaced by a 3.8-liter V6 and front-drive componentry. As for looks, well, most of our editors wouldn't be caught dead with a new Impala in their driveway. Our consensus: Chevrolet should have kept with the former Impala SS program. But in typical GM fashion, once a vehicle is perfected, the platform sees an untimely death. Thus, we get this warmed-over Lumina.

Exterior Design
Ugly. That was the term most often used to describe the 2000 Impala. The new "squashed greenhouse" look isn't befitting of the Impala lineage, which imparts a breadbox appearance. According to Chevrolet Chief Exterior Designer, John Cafaro, "The Impala nameplate has so much positive equity behind it that we wanted to build on its foundation. We knew that to bring back the Impala name, it had to have the right look, the right stance and the right performance."

Obviously, someone didn't get the memo.

The front of the Impala features a low and wide fascia, which looks more like a frowning Sumo wrestler than an aggressive stance. The Impala still shares bulging bodylines with its predecessor, but includes a high decklid that gives more of a dramatic wedge shape than the rounded "sleeper" look Impala enthusiasts are used to. Looking at the Impala from the rear, you'd think the design team had penned the hideous tail lamps right after a bad acid trip, bringing a new meaning to the term ugly. In the fit and finish department, the Impala came in dead last, with editors noting extensive paint orange peel, misfitting panels and trunk gaps that were off 1/8-inch from one side to the other.

Interior Features, Controls, Materials and Design
Ergonomically, the Impala is pleasing to drive with a good driving position, but fails miserably in the aesthetics department with mismatched material colors, gaping air vents and exposed screw heads.

Driver and passenger receive Lay-Z-Boy-like recliners up front, which seriously lack lumbar and lateral support. All drivers' controls are decently placed and within an arm's reach. We really disliked the placement of the fog lamp switch, which is buried behind the steering wheel.

Climate controls are intuitive and easy to use, with dual-slider temperature controls, decent-sized rotary knobs for fan speed and vent direction. Oversized buttons make the selection of fresh/recirculated air, AC and rear defrost are a piece of cake. We were disappointed with the decision of Chevrolet's engineers to continue with the all-in-one turn signal/wiper/washer/cruise control stalk, which will probably begin to lose some functionality (we've seen a few of these units become sloppy and eventually lose electrical terminal contact from continual use) after two years of operation. Two large cup holders are located in the center console.

Back seat occupants receive a comfortable bench with decent seating for two, but three can be quite cramped. Head- and legroom is nonexistent, which left us wondering, "Is this really supposed to be a full-sized car?" Pull down the rear armrest and voila! Two cup holders are available to hold large cups of soda.

Interior materials lack quality textures and instead sport rubbery vinyls; glossy plastics and a leftover-parts-bin feel that best resembles Playskool parts. Perhaps it's time Chevrolet took lessons from Ford's Visteon group on how interiors are done.

The Impala LS comes with a host of cool features, including anti-lock brakes, traction control, dual front and driver-side air bags, child seat anchors, dual heated outside mirrors and a tire-inflation monitor as standard equipment.

Engine and Transmission
Of all the vehicles in this test, the stalwart 3800 V6 was the only pushrod engine in the group – and one of the punchiest. The powertrain pulls strongly and smartly with excellent low-end grunt – enough to propel the Impala from a dead stop to 60 mph in a decent 8.2 seconds. Backed by an electronically controlled four-speed automatic transmission, the Impala exhibited crisp, precise shifting with no hesitation when downshifting. Upshifts were nearly imperceptible under normal driving conditions. Nail the throttle and the transmission responds smartly through the gears.

Suspension, Ride and Handling
The Impalas of the '60s were known for their "jet smooth" ride and the 2000 Impala continues with the tradition of large-car heft and loose-wandering feel. If you miss the big-boat feel of a 1972 Thunderbird or Caprice, the new Impala was designed just for you. On the highway, the Impala soaks up nearly every rut and bump in the road, making long trips comfortable, but teeters off the edge of compliance with vague steering (our tester had over one inch of play in the steering rack) and an obviously soft spring and shock combination that left us remembering the days our parents drove pillow barges.

While the four-wheel, MacPherson strut suspension shines on the highway, canyon driving brings out the handling weakness of the Impala. "Wallowy," "tons of body roll" and "weak" were the comments most often used to describe the Impala's handling characteristics. With the new Impala having 25mm additional suspension travel over the Buick La Sabre (which shares the same-platform) and our LS tester featuring the upgraded touring package suspension, we would have expected it to handle better than the stripped Ford Taurus. Unfortunately, that wasn' the case as the Impala came in dead last in our handling exercises.

Conclusion
Chevrolet had a great thing going with the Impala SS in the mid 1990s. It was a large family sedan that would comfortably haul five large adults with tire-smoking performance and a sport suspension that could take on anything a sports coupe could ... and outrun it. At its $25,415 price point, the Impala is still cheaper than the Maxima, Intrepid, Intrigue and Passat we tested, but there's over $3,500 difference between our Impala and the less expensive Taurus in this test. While Chevrolet touts the 2000 Impala's heritage, this latest generation is such a long throw away from Ed Cole's original vision, perhaps Chevrolet should have held off, waiting for a vehicle worthy of the Impala nameplate.

Editors' Comments
I want to like this car. I really do, but it won't let me. Styling? Ugly. Performance? Mediocre. Interior design and quality? Poor. I almost wish Chevrolet hadn't called this car the Impala, because it's a disrespect to all of the cool Impalas before it. – Brent Romans.

The Impala appears at first glance to be a decent value as the mid-priced car in this test. But spend some time driving it, and slowly the realization dawns that several of the cars in this test are cheaper, more attractive, just as commodious and more enjoyable to drive. – Christian Wardlaw

Stereo Evaluation - 2000 Chevrolet Impala