Impala...

From C&G:

here is what I was told about the Impala: ( And I have heard this from two sources - it was just confirmed ) They are calling the concept the 64 - as it has the tail panel and lights from that year - but the body is mostly 63/64 impala - with the hint of styling from the 67 in the nose. Both of the people that I have spoken to about the car litterally came unglued when describing it. It will blow us away in styling and function. We did not go into specifics on the powertrains, but it should carry what will be going into the Camaro.

Can you all imagine what it will be like? Can you see a 'Catalina or Lemans' for Pontiac out of it...or even maybe a Buick Roadmaster return? Nothing was specific other than the generalization of the exterior. I cannot wait to see that car and the Camaro in the driveway. This will be off the wall - but a wagon version of the Impala with those body cues would be awesome for the wife - give it AWD and 400 horses for fun...wow - the future sure looks bright for us car nuts...Challengers to beat up on with our Camaros, Chrysler 300's to beat with an Impala, and everyone with yet another chance to laugh at Ford...well, for everything!

Party on Wayne....

From C&G:
...but a wagon version of the Impala with those body cues would be awesome for the wife...
Am I the only one that has been wondering why GM hasn't built a full size wagon since the Caprice/Roadmaster in 96? Are they afraid that they'd take sales away from the many SUV/Crossovers? I think the 2000-2005 and 2006+ impalas would've looked great as wagons!

Am I the only one that has been wondering why GM hasn't built a full size wagon since the Caprice/Roadmaster in 96? Are they afraid that they'd take sales away from the many SUV/Crossovers? I think the 2000-2005 and 2006+ impalas would've looked great as wagons!

You answered your own question...

Trucks and SUVS have been outselling everything for the last decade, and an SUV is nothing but a stationwagon that is easier to to get into/out of.
So anyone after a stationwagon must choose between a minivan, an SUV, or a crossover these days, but in all seriousness they are not really so different.

SIDENOTE - my 86 Bronco II and 91 Explorer both have "WAGON" in the bodytype field on the registrations in North Carolina. (I dunno about the new Explorer... haven't payed it any attention.) So I guess the state still views them as wagons.:confused:

You answered your own question...

Trucks and SUVS have been outselling everything for the last decade, and an SUV is nothing but a stationwagon that is easier to to get into/out of.
So anyone after a stationwagon must choose between a minivan, an SUV, or a crossover these days, but in all seriousness they are not really so different.

SIDENOTE - my 86 Bronco II and 91 Explorer both have "WAGON" in the bodytype field on the registrations in North Carolina. (I dunno about the new Explorer... haven't payed it any attention.) So I guess the state still views them as wagons.:confused:
The GMC Jimmy we own is still a "wagon" which has made me chuckle for years.

Onto the task at hand. Charlie brings up good points/threads. You should probably to on C&G to see what he's talking about. ;)

SIDENOTE - my 86 Bronco II and 91 Explorer both have "WAGON" in the bodytype field on the registrations in North Carolina. (I dunno about the new Explorer... haven't payed it any attention.) So I guess the state still views them as wagons.:confused:

Yup, my '91 Jimmy is registered as a wagon here in Michigan.

This is really great news about the Impala...can't wait to see it! It's just too bad we need to wait another 2-3 years.

imo of course...

But if GM can pull of a Impala that brings back images of the 60 impy you're going to see a lot of 300's on the used car lot.

It sounds like good times are in store for the Impala finally, can't wait to see what this car is going to look like.

Sounds interesting, I hope they don't over retro it. I'd like to see a modern interpretation of the styling like the Camaro Concept. And please give it a modern interior.
There is nothing I'd like to see more than Impala SS's return to greatness. Sure the current SS is a nice car, but it still has something missing, mainly RWD.

I cant type...i'm foaming at the mouth.:eek:

That is if it is called Impala....

With a shape and features like that, what else can they call it?

That is if it is called Impala....

I'm thinking more and more that it will.

The GMC Jimmy we own is still a "wagon" which has made me chuckle for years.

Onto the task at hand. Charlie brings up good points/threads. You should probably to on C&G to see what he's talking about. ;)

We'd love to but the site is down. Again. :(

That is if it is called Impala....
Chevelle sounds good, doesn't it?

Chevelle is the wrong name for it.

......and for what it's worth? The car is breathtaking

Chevelle is the wrong name for it.

......and for what it's worth? The car is breathtaking

Impala sounds like the correct name for a car like that.:)

Bel Air?

The biggest thing is...what happens to the FWD Impala if it is still being made? Impala and Impala Classic?

The biggest thing is...what happens to the FWD Impala if it is still being made? Impala and Impala Classic?

Isnt the new Malibu supposed to be everything to everybody ?

Man , I cant wait to see Chevrolet a couple years from now :)

I thought the Impala was like the 8th best selling nameplate? Is this a good move to switch all those buyers over to the Malibu while the Impala gets all the flashy, I-like-my-RWD people?
Not that I'm against heritage inspired cars rather than these Honda jellybeans we have now. :cool:

Bel Air?

The biggest thing is...what happens to the FWD Impala if it is still being made? Impala and Impala Classic?

if we think of the "Impala" as just a name, would it be possible to have "Impala" on both a FWD and RWD platforms? The VIN will obviously identify the architecture, but have models that will separate out the FWD from RWD. Maybe have some similarity in the way they look on both architecture. The LT, LTZ can remain on the FWD with V6, and come up with model names for the RWD platform. If the 2 cars are similar in looks, then you won't need a V6 in the RWD platform, nor a V8 in the FWD lineup.

Chevelle is the wrong name for it.

......and for what it's worth? The car is breathtaking
Car tease!

About the only other thing that might fit is Belair.... oh wait.... nevermind. :)


As for what will happen to current Impala customers, consider what could happen to cost of manufacture and volume if (using an out of thin air number) you could round up 100% of Malibu buyers and say 60% of current Impala buyers and put them into a single great looking FWD model?

Chevrolet would be making alot of money, and potentially challenge Toyota for best selling car. :think:

(As for the a new RWD Chevy sedan, if it pulled 2/5 of it's sales from current Impala buyers, and the rest from other barnds, Chevy would increase in overall size by conquest sales.

Though the numbers are out of my neather reagion's, Im guessing this is the gameplan.

Am I the only one that has been wondering why GM hasn't built a full size wagon since the Caprice/Roadmaster in 96? Are they afraid that they'd take sales away from the many SUV/Crossovers? I think the 2000-2005 and 2006+ impalas would've looked great as wagons!

I have no facts to fall back on, but I always understood that one of the killers of the station wagon (and to some extent large cars in general) was the CAFE standards that auto makers had to meet. Since SUVs (and mini-vans) were classified as "trucks" their (poor) mileage did not count against the overall passenger car average. The "family truckster" station wagons that were a mainstay for families for years were mileage killers for the industry and had to be phased out to keep the averages up.

Now that the engine and fuel management technology has improved to allow for reliable DOD (or whatever each company calls it) larger cars can be produced with enough power to be useful and get more reasonable mileage.

As for the possibility of a new "breathtaking" Impala, I hope GM stick with inspirational design that really falls into the "gotta have it" catagory before the bean-counters get in the way!

Allen

I have no facts to fall back on, but I always understood that one of the killers of the station wagon (and to some extent large cars in general) was the CAFE standards that auto makers had to meet. Since SUVs (and mini-vans) were classified as "trucks" their (poor) mileage did not count against the overall passenger car average. The "family truckster" station wagons that were a mainstay for families for years were mileage killers for the industry and had to be phased out to keep the averages up.

Now that the engine and fuel management technology has improved to allow for reliable DOD (or whatever each company calls it) larger cars can be produced with enough power to be useful and get more reasonable mileage.

As for the possibility of a new "breathtaking" Impala, I hope GM stick with inspirational design that really falls into the "gotta have it" catagory before the bean-counters get in the way!

Allen

Many wagons, like the Dodge Magnum for example, are classified as trucks.

About the only other thing that might fit is Belair.... oh wait.... nevermind. :)


As for what will happen to current Impala customers, consider what could happen to cost of manufacture and volume if (using an out of thin air number) you could round up 100% of Malibu buyers and say 60% of current Impala buyers and put them into a single great looking FWD model?

Chevrolet would be making alot of money, and potentially challenge Toyota for best selling car. :think:

(As for the a new RWD Chevy sedan, if it pulled 2/5 of it's sales from current Impala buyers, and the rest from other barnds, Chevy would increase in overall size by conquest sales.

Though the numbers are out of my neather reagion's, Im guessing this is the gameplan.
Any guesses as to the current FWD Impala SSs yearly volume? That could likely be all (or most) movedover to the RWD models. Also what is the Charger's volume vs the last Intrepid?

Many wagons, like the Dodge Magnum for example, are classified as trucks.

Hmmm.... didn't know they had classed the new ones as trucks. Wonder how they sold that based on the shared platform on their passenger cars??

I was referring to the old "classic" station wagons like the ones the old Caprice and Crown Vics.

As I said, I have no factual reference for this. I had heard this years ago and it seemed plausable....

Allen

Hmmm.... didn't know they had classed the new ones as trucks. Wonder how they sold that based on the shared platform on their passenger cars??

I was referring to the old "classic" station wagons like the ones the old Caprice and Crown Vics.

As I said, I have no factual reference for this. I had heard this years ago and it seemed plausable....

Allen

I think it's the way they calculate cargo carrying ability.

I think it's the way they calculate cargo carrying ability.
I thought it was the fold down rear seats.

Bottom line is a new Impala with RWD/AWD, classic lines instead of import following and some V8 power......

Gives me a chubby! :D

Allen

Chevelle is the wrong name for it.

......and for what it's worth? The car is breathtaking

Wow, should I wait for the new Camaro or wait for the new Impala SS. I am very passionate about both name plates. I know I could talk my wife into a Impala SS for her daily driver and the Camaro for my new toy.

Things are becoming very exciting. When will we first see the new Impala, NAIAS 2007?

I have no facts to fall back on, but I always understood that one of the killers of the station wagon (and to some extent large cars in general) was the CAFE standards that auto makers had to meet. Since SUVs (and mini-vans) were classified as "trucks" their (poor) mileage did not count against the overall passenger car average. The "family truckster" station wagons that were a mainstay for families for years were mileage killers for the industry and had to be phased out to keep the averages up.

Now that the engine and fuel management technology has improved to allow for reliable DOD (or whatever each company calls it) larger cars can be produced with enough power to be useful and get more reasonable mileage.

As for the possibility of a new "breathtaking" Impala, I hope GM stick with inspirational design that really falls into the "gotta have it" catagory before the bean-counters get in the way!

Allen

As far as GM's B-Bodies they were eliminated because GM execs wanted the Alrington plant retooled to produce the full-size SUVs. The other plant couldn't keep up with demand, and then they added the Caddy's Esclades. With all of these cash cows, the B-Bodies didn't stand a chance. As much as I hated the demise of the B-Bodies and handing over the RWD market to the competition, it was probably a good move for GM at the time $$ wise. Now with high gas prices it may start hurting.
Everytime I think of the demise of the B-Bodies, I can't get overt the fact that its been 10 years and GM is still not back in the RWD bussiness. Why couldn't they have moved B-Body production to a smaller plant to hold over until the next gen. of RWD car was ready.

As a result with no B-Bodies on the market, the Ford Crown Vic has been virtually unchanged for almost 10 years now. With no direct competition changes come very slowly to a car, which hurt the already very limited full-size RWD market. Now with the DCX on the scene with popular RWD cars things are looking up.

Wow, should I wait for the new Camaro or wait for the new Impala SS. I am very passionate about both name plates. I know I could talk my wife into a Impala SS for her daily driver and the Camaro for my new toy.

Things are becoming very exciting. When will we first see the new Impala, NAIAS 2007?

I can see an Impala SS parked next to my Camaro Z/28.

As far as GM's B-Bodies they were eliminated because GM execs wanted the Alrington plant retooled to produce the full-size SUVs. The other plant couldn't keep up with demand, and then they added the Caddy's Esclades. With all of these cash cows, the B-Bodies didn't stand a chance. As much as I hated the demise of the B-Bodies and handing over the RWD market to the competition, it was probably a good move for GM at the time $$ wise. Now with high gas prices it may start hurting.
Everytime I think of the demise of the B-Bodies, I can't get overt the fact that its been 10 years and GM is still not back in the RWD bussiness. Why couldn't they have moved B-Body production to a smaller plant to hold over until the next gen. of RWD car was ready.

As a result with no B-Bodies on the market, the Ford Crown Vic has been virtually unchanged for almost 10 years now. With no direct competition changes come very slowly to a car, which hurt the already very limited full-size RWD market. Now with the DCX on the scene with popular RWD cars things are looking up.

How about a couple of bits of trivia on the B-bodies demise?

For 1998, the B-bodies would have had LS1 engines. General Motors already spent the money & did the development work and the certifications needed for the LS1 engines to make production in Caprices, Impala SSs, Cadillac DeVilles, and probally the Buick Roadmaster as well. (I say probally, because GM had people at Holden in the mid to late 90s looking at the Holden Statesman as a large Buick replacement.

The GM B-bodies, though pulled from the Arlington plant (almost at the last minute) very nearly had it's tooling moved to a plant in Mexico, and would have continued. If I remember, the tooling was crated up and ready for shipment. The cars still made money, and though Roadmaster, Deville, and Caprice sales dipped the final year or 2, Impala SS's sales increased each year right up to the end.

I don't know exactly what killed the move. Most likely a combination of the idea of moving a vehicle to Mexico which probally wouldn't sit well with the UAW, the idea that cars that big wouldn't be around very much longer (big car sales actually were declining as a whole), and at the time, GM was run by people who didn't have a background in the automobile business.

GM should have kept producing the B bodies at Arlington, TX and converted one of the plants producing its forgettable FWD cars to SUV production 10 years ago.

My parents love their 96 Roadmaster, and I love driving it. It eats up highway miles very well. It is a shame they didn't carry on. Oddly enough my Dad had expressed real interest in the new Lucerne. I need to show him a picture of the Statesman. He would probably be on that car like white on rice. Him and my mon like large rwd sedans. She still pines over her 1983 Delta 88.

How about a couple of bits of trivia on the B-bodies demise?

For 1998, the B-bodies would have had LS1 engines. General Motors already spent the money & did the development work and the certifications needed for the LS1 engines to make production in Caprices, Impala SSs, Cadillac DeVilles, and probally the Buick Roadmaster as well. (I say probally, because GM had people at Holden in the mid to late 90s looking at the Holden Statesman as a large Buick replacement.

The GM B-bodies, though pulled from the Arlington plant (almost at the last minute) very nearly had it's tooling moved to a plant in Mexico, and would have continued. If I remember, the tooling was crated up and ready for shipment. The cars still made money, and though Roadmaster, Deville, and Caprice sales dipped the final year or 2, Impala SS's sales increased each year right up to the end.

I don't know exactly what killed the move. Most likely a combination of the idea of moving a vehicle to Mexico which probally wouldn't sit well with the UAW, the idea that cars that big wouldn't be around very much longer (big car sales actually were declining as a whole), and at the time, GM was run by people who didn't have a background in the automobile business.

*The B-Body Cadillac was the Brougham, not DeVille. DeVille was FWD and had been by a number of years.


Wasn't there also a outside company that was wanting to buy the tooling and continue producing the Caprice for fleet purposes?

I knew the LS1 was ready to go, and I think it was going to be rated at 290-295 hp in the B-Bodies, that would have been sweet in the Impala SS, and not to mention the Caprice 9C1.

Another little factoid: B-Body production was suppose to end in the summer of 1996, but was extended all the way out until mid December of 1996.
Mainly Caprice 9C1s were produced, but I also believe a lot of Impala SS were produced given the bloated production number for 1996 compared to 1994 and 1995.