http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f...latform-77264/

Discuss..... To me it seems too far out in the future to be calling it anything near concrete, but at least it would make for a "volume" vehicle to offset the development of Alpha.

This very eerily reminds me of just a couple of years ago discussing volume variants to keep the then upcoming Zeta going with lots of cool RWD variants - so far it's G8 and Camaro and that's all - at least here. They just keep dangling the possibility of RWD mainstream cars in front of us only to snap it away.

 

Holden wont like alpha with no V8 option. In fact Holden wont like alpha without having their fingers deep in the pie.

oh, and as SharpShooter_SS points out, this is so far out it's probably going to change anyway....

 

I dunno, this doesn't make much sense to me. As far as I understand it, Alpha would seem to be far too small to build a proper (full-size) Impala on. And if you're going to develop a "long wheelbase" version of Alpha as is speculated, why wouldn't you just save the money and use what you already have - Zeta?

At the same time, Charlie and Guy have been telling us the RWD Impala is deader than a doornail - unless it is just the Zeta Impala that is dead and not some other derivitive?

 

If you can fit a v8 in a Fiero, as well as a Miata, a V8 will fit in the Alpha. Plus, if GM puts the development into the current 3.6 DI (weren't they going to make a 4.0, 350+ hp version of this engine in the future?), you may not even miss the V8. I just hope GM puts a manual in the US versions of the cars. At least make it an option.

While I don't like the impala having to wait for 4 years before being redesigned, if GM were to re-do the interior, to bring the car up to speed with the competitors, it should fare the next 4 years much better.

 

Ah no, a RWD Impala is dead, done, gone, no chance. Ain't gonna happen.

 

As has been mentioned before, it's one thing to shoe-horn a V8 into a car in your garage. It's quite a different thing for an automaker to do it in the factory and still satisfy all the other related requirements such as packaging, crash-testing, reliability, durabilty, etc.

 

1. Not a question of fitting. It's a question of being engineered for it. Powerful engines mean more weight through more durable drivetrains.

2. As you correctly point out, the future of powerful engines is the V6. Sure, there will still be V8s in the future. However, they will be realitively rare, and in chassis tough enough to handle them. A

3. Again, as you correctly point out, no, we won't miss the V8 any more than the LT1 F-body driver will miss the V8 in a new 3.6 Camaro with the CTS's 3.91 axle ratio. I'd imagine a Camaro slightly smaller and lighter than a current Malibu would be just as much a hoot to drive with a 350 horse V6 as the 422 horse Camaro SS would be.

 

So, what are the chances of a new large RWD sedan under a different name?

 

We already have it, it's the Pontiac G8.

This auto restructing is going to focus on one thing and on one thing only. More fuel efficient cars. A large, rear wheel drive sedan in large volumes won't exist anymore, it doesn't now.

 

I totally agree, but how do you convince the public and the enthusiasts of this, that is the problem.

 

I agree, much of what has been said about both the upcoming Impala and Alpha don't seem to fit the scenario being bandied about over at GMI, nor the mould of what Alpha is supposed to be about. An "extended" Alpha seems to a wasted, redundant effort if it's not much lighter than the Zeta/VE platform.

That said, I was under the belief that Impala was heading to EPII rightly or wrongly as a cheaper means to get the car here since FWD infrastructure already exists and RWD infrastructure would need to be put in place and given the cash-starved reality that is GM nowadays.... I'd love to see a RWD Impala, but I'm sadly not expecting to.

Maybe what we're in store for is a reinvention of what defines a full size car in the future. As it stands now it's pretty doubtful that todays full size cars will be able to shoulder both safety concerns and CAFE requirements and still sell in worthwhile numbers to make it worthwhile. It's not like this hasn't happened in the past - a late seventies full size car was arguably smaller than an early 70s mid size car and so on. Heck a G8 - in some circles a full size car, is arguably smaller than a W-body mid sizer so who knows. Moving forward in to the CAFE reality full size (and everything else we think we know and drive) might be in line for a redefinition again.

 

There's just two problems - less torque in the 3.6, and I am told the 3.6 in the Camaro sounds like crap. I am very happy to see the new Camaro with a V6 that can't really be described as "base" anymore, but for a lot of people, it still won't replace having a V8 (even if that 8 had similar power output).

 

I didn't necessarily mean GM putting the V8 in there. Someone will do it. I do like the thought of a small-ish rwd lightweight (sub 3400 lbs) car, with a powerful V6, and a 6 speed manual. That would be a fun little car, and you would still be able to put your groceries in the trunk, or take the family on that trip across country.

 

If I'm not mistaken, 2010 LaCrosse is on EPII. I saw one of these at the car show a few weeks ago. This car is significantly bigger than Malibu. I was taken aback by the size of this car; appears perhaps even a bit larger than the current Impala.

 

I wonder if this will turn out to be one of the last of the cars that grows in size just because. As CAFE mileage requirements creep upward I can't see manufacturers being able to make these bigger, heavier cars compliant without infusing them with even more expensive light weight components. We're probably pretty close now to the point where the pendulum has to swing the other way and cars will need to get small again or not meet mileage guidelines.

I'm kinda looking forward to seeing the new Buick for myself because, for me it doesn't look bigger than a Malibu in pictures that is - bulky yes, but not bigger so I'm curious to see if it's an illusion.