guionM

No. Espilon has totally different hardpoints than Zeta.

I think you might want to take a read of my Commodore VF thread.

I'd bet on it.

TOO Z MAXX

It looks a little bulky to me.

smooth3d

I don't know I how feel about this new Impala. Yes it looks nice, but to be honest anything looks better then the current car. What do guys think about the new Impala's powertrain line up vs the 2013 Taurus powertrains? E-assist 2.4 182hp vs Ecoboost 2.0 247hp, 2.5 195hp vs 3.5 288hp and 3.6 303hp vs Ecoboost 3.5 365hp. If the two are similar in size class the Taurus seems to outclass the new Impala at every trim level and that's not adding in awd that the Taurus could be had with?

I think GM could have did a little better, but this is a nice car never the less!

96_Camaro_B4C

Good question, but I don't think anyone is marketing the 303 hp 3.6L as an alternative to the SHO. So, basically you can get a little slower car to get well over 30 mpg hwy, or pony up to the 3.6L and still probably get 30 mpg highway while going 0-60 in the high 5 / low 6 second range. I've seen tests of the LaCrosse with eAssist do 0-60 in 8.2 seconds. Same platform and powertrain as the Impala. Not a fast car, but more than adequate for daily driving duty, especially given the awesome fuel economy numbers.

Won't run with an SHO, but that's not the intended market. Maybe they will offer a sportier version later (or maybe not).

It does seem weird at first to think of a big Impala with a 4 cylinder engine under the hood. But remember, prior to the 2012 intro of the 3.6L / six speed, the Impala offered 3.5L and 3.9L V6s with around ~200hp/225 lbft and 230 hp/240 lb-ft and a 4 speed automatic. The vaunted 3.8L had 200 hp and 225 lb-ft, also with 4 gears. The new 2.5L puts out nearly 200 hp, and 200 lb-ft, and it has six gears (and a few extra pounds).

Based on pics, I think the Impala has the clear advantage over the Taurus in terms of the interiors, and I think I give it the edge on exterior styling too.

For me the question mark would be the Charger. The Impala definitely has a nicer looking interior to me (except for the steering wheel), but the Charger has the exterior look, the stance, and the RWD chassis backing it up... I LOVED the 2011 Charger V6 I had for a rental a while ago (older 5 speed auto), and I recently rented a 2012 300 V6 / 8 speed auto that was freaking badass. Pretty cool to have such choices in the big sedan market!

jg95z28

"Hey look kids! Its the new Honda Impala!"



The interior is nice, the rear quarter design modern, but the Honda-esque grill has got to go.

Silverado C-10

I thought this car was supposed to "wow" me. I'm not "wowed."

...and I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed the honda grill thing...

jg95z28

At least we still have the good looking 2013 Chevy Malibu. Let's hope that GM doesn't screw it up by changing the grill for 2014; and let's hope to God the new RWD Chevy sedan gets a better nose.

96_Camaro_B4C

I see a bit of Honda, mainly in the 3 horizontal elements within the grille (noticed it first on the Traverse), but it isn't overdone like some of the newer Hondas (Crosstour, new CR-V, etc.).

This front end is easily better than the one on the 2013 Malibu, IMO. Not that the Malibu's is bad (I saw and sat in my first one two weeks ago, possibly the first one purchased in Arizona...), but I like the new Impala front end better.

jg95z28

I'm sorry but I have to strongly disagree...


The 2013 Malibu is far better looking.

Silverado C-10

Don't get me wrong, it's actually a nice looking car, but there has been so much hype about how awesome this car is going to be... I'm not seeing it.

GM went bold with the camaro and entire cadillac line and it payed off big. They did a better job with the malibu restyle. They took a somewhat bland car and made it look a little bad ***. This car looks kinda bland. I think the 'bu front end would have made this car stand out a lot more. The malibu and cruze are the new bread and butter cars, this is the car GM could have really taken a chance on and they didn't.

Like I said in another thread about the lincoln, nobody's going to take a second glance and say, hey what's that cool car? I can't tell you how many camrys/accords/etc I see in a day because they all blur together, but I can tell you about how many camaros/mustangs/challengers/chargers/300s I see....

jg95z28

Ok, I have to admit, the actual photos of the silver LTZ in NY are far better than the stylized GM "studio" photos.

This one actually reminds me of the 8th generation (2000-2005) version for some reason...
2014 Chevrolet Impala: New York 2012 Photo Gallery - Autoblog

That said, I still think the Malibu is better looking.

96_Camaro_B4C

Actually, looking again, the Impala front end is even less Honda-like than the Traverse, as the smaller grille on the Impala only has 2 horizontal chrome elements (Traverse has 3, like the Hondas).

Malibu front end looks alright, but I'm not sure I'm sold on the taillights, and I don't care for how prominent the grille is. I'm also not crazy about the way the grille is above the headlights (albeit only slightly).

I do like the Malibu's stance, and those wheels look better. I don't like that the wheelbase shrunk. I actually think the current Malibu is more elegant looking (than the 2013 Malibu, and maybe more than the Impala as well), save for the weird taillights on the current car.



EDIT: The Impala does come across as more massive (which it is), but not just in length. It has that thick midsection / squashed greenhouse look, sort of like the LaCrosse (on which it is based), and it carries forward into the front end of the car. It is styled to look the part of a big family sedan (a la Taurus, Chrysler 300, LaCrosse, etc.). The hood looks kinda tall on the Impala.

I really need to see it in person, I think, especially side-by-side with the Malibu.

99SilverSS

Ugh. I actually liked the GM press release photos better. The head on shot of the Impala nose screams Toyota Camry to me.
This car shows a lot of its Epsilon brethren from Caddy and Buick.

I think Chevy could have done a lot better with the taillights. Too Jetta looking.

It just feels like the Impala and Malibu were styled by two different companies. I wasn't a big fan of the Malibu type corporate nose but there was no mistaking the identity of the brand. This Impala and Traverse look a bit too generic like a Honda or Toyota emblem would fit right in. Nothing says Chevrolet to me....

96_Camaro_B4C

Yes, I had the same problem with the Buick Enclave pics. The rendered ones from GM were HORRIBLE (especially the wheels on the Enclave). Then I saw the Enclave pics taken of an actual vehicle and felt much relief. I was actually prepared to rank it last behind the Traverse and Acadia after the refresh, but now I'm not sure (I'm still not certain of the Enclave grille). I don't know why they release crappy rendered shots like that. Take some pics of the real cars for crying out loud. Inside and out.

However, the silver-ish Impala pics from the show do highlight the Camaro-like elements in the front end and just how THICK that front end is. I'm starting to question my initial assessment (LOL). I really wish the wheelbase on the LWB epsilons could be more like 115-116 inches. The old Malibu looked great on the 112" wheelbase. Now the full-sizers are on that same length but with longer overhangs and the thick waist / squashed greenhouse. They basically require 19s or 20s to look right (18s might be alright; Charger/300 and Taurus have the same issue). I guess that's just the times we live in. I wonder what the overall rolling diameter is on the new Impala wheels to tightly fill those big wheel wells? The current Impala looks just right on 17s or 18s, to me. (Similarly, the Camaro went from 25.4" to 28" tires when it went from 4th to 5th gen. I love how my 17" ZR1s look appropriately sized on my B4C. They'd look goofy as hell against the 5th gen body!)

Again, I need to see it in person.

Also, while I'm not 100% sold on the downturn from the rear quarter panel to the rear door (or the chrome trim in the scallop that only covers part of the rear door length), the rear end / taillight area looks GREAT to me.

HuJass

It does look bulky & thick.
The back end looks like a Hyundai.
I don't like that "swoosh" the starts in front of the rear wheel opening and curves into the upper character line.

Something else seems strange to me about the car. Can't put my finger on it.

The new Malibu is better looking. It's taught where the new Impala looks...well, thick & bulky.