I'll take it a step further...

I'll bet the Impala outsells the ENTIRE PLATFORM the car is based on.

 

That is quite a statement considering how popular 300 and Magnum are at the moment... but.......... you are probably right!!!

 

I'll bet $20 that Impala SS outsells the debilitating polio virus

 

That's not hard to imagine. Daimler-Chrysler has shifted away from fleet sales with the shift from the unwanted LH sedans to the strong selling LX-platform cars, GM's outdated FWD products will fill the rental lots. I'm sure the Impala will generate huge fleet sales while Chrysler racks up retail sales with the Charger - with minimal incentives.

Of course, I could be wrong. Even rental car customers might demand something better than an endless stream of Grand Prixs, Impalas, LaCrosses and even Monte Carlos.

 

I had a 1999 Grand Prix GT with traction control and only all season tire and that thing was amazing in the snow. The only way you could get stuck is by bottoming out, which I did once (20" Noreaster). Since the Impala/monte are basically on the same platform I'm sure they are just as good. TC makes these cars tanks in the snow. Basically the only thing you would need the AWD on one is for acceleration in the 3.9L & V8 models.

 

I've driven plenty of FWD cars in the snow, but I never was impressed. I also think that traction control systems (without stability control) are utterly worthless. Until I jumped ship and became a SUV owner, I made do with a big, fullsized RWD "winter rat." Believe me, a heavy traditional car with cheap snow tires on the rear handles better in the snow than a FWD sedan with a useless (non-stability control) traction control system.

Did you ever noticed that the State Troopers in the snowbelt states still drive Crown Vics. Snow doesn't keep those guys off the roads.

The acceleration in the 3.9L and "detuned" V8 won't be fierce enough to require the assistance of AWD.

 

How is stability control going to help a stopped car? or one going slow up a slippery hill? I've driven FWD with and without TC and it makes a huge difference (with an automatic). I'm not saying RWD suck in the snow like the automakers brainwashed everyone in the 80's to believe. Just that the W-bodies with TC are so good that there is no need for AWD in winter as long as you have TC & maybe SC.


My 3800 GP could chrip those tires pretty damn good, AWD would be very usefully with the added 100HP/100tq. Remember LS4>LT1

 

There is no way a RWD car with snow tires is going to take on snow better than a FWD with the same tires (or even a lesser tire). I've owned both and find this to be a rediculous statement. My FWD GTP could go through what a RWD could only dream of...

I seem to recall a few snowstorms while living in upstate NY when plenty of troopers were stranded on the Thruway in their Crown Vics...

 

Um, there is a huge market for RWD cars for the general public. The three most populated states are RWD climate.... Cali, Texas and Florida. I drove my Z06 thru the winter in Chicago..... (with the stock tires)They plow and salt the crap out of the roads. I never had a problem in the winter. Just stay off the happy pedal.


There were seven days last winter in Chicago that a signifacant amount of snow fall. I was driving once during last winter when the plows had not come thru yet. So, I was troubbled once last year. fair trade if you ask me. Id take that over suffering with a FWD car the rest of the year.

BTW- Most RWD cars tend to be performance tuned. FWD cars that are performance cars are horrible in the winter. My wifes old SRT-4 was more of a handfull then the vette. Try steering with your spinnig tires! Yea, thats safe

 

Actually NY state is #3. I'm glad you said that. I counted days last winter were they would have bee trouble for my SS and found there to only be 7 really bad days. That was a performance car. With something like a CTS with 50/50 weight distro and 235 vs. 275 rear tires I would have drove all 7 of those days and thought nothing of it.

Tires are usually #1 factor in poor weather driving.

 

I've never had a real problem with getting stuck and my pre-SUV vehicles have never had traction control. Spinning out under heavy braking on slippery curve is more of a worry (not that that's ever happened to me either). That's why I think that the foul weather advantages of FWD and old-school traction control systems aren't worth very much. Now stability control is another story.....




This does raise the question of just how many neutral drops the 2006 Impala SS will take before something "warranty related" happens.

 

Stability control is great, but is only good when moving. To get going that is were traction control comes in. It work a lot better with automatics than manuals, but trust me it works and is very usefully on a 2wd car.

No more than any other V8 automaic car I would imagine.

 

FWD transaxles tend to be weaker. There is a space constraint in a FWD package. You wont find a dana 60 or 8.8 sized rear end gear in a FWD car.

 

guion,

It isn't often I disagree with you, but I definitely cannot agree with most of the above statement.

1) Maybe where you live FWD is unimportant to 99% of the people where you live, but not here. There's several MILLION people in the Northeast and NY that swear by FWD or AWD vehicles. Indeed, you can drive a RWD in snow...I drove an F body through 4 winters, never got stuck once. So? It does NOT mean I prefer it by any stretch! I have 4 snows on my GP, and its a tank. We had a very bad snow/ice storm today in which we all left work 3 hours early (never happens where I work ). This car is far superior than my old Camaro was with its lightning-fast 135hp and studded snows!

2) I have dealer literature stating GXPs are running 0-60 in under 6 flat. GTP times are about 6.4...this thing is faster than a GTP, for sure.

3) Why do you assume the new Impala is heavier? The 5.3 is well known to be lighter, and this is NOT a new chassis...so why do we assume a weight increase? I think 3,600 lbs is a very fair assessment. I do admit you probably have info I am unaware of, but it doesn't add up to me. Also, why do we assume Charger will be lighter than a 300C? Same chassis...same powertrain...same basic equipment. I doubt there is THAT much more sound deadening in a 300 to make it way significantly more. I just read a 300 SRT-8 article pegging it at 4,190.


I agree with Pacer...on my daily driver, FWD is the preferred choice. Its amazing how many Firebird sales I lost because people felt they needed a second car for the winter (which is somewhat true unless you want to deal with studded snows). I'm also amazed by the amount of buyers turned off by the GTO being RWD too!!!! Same theory as the 'Bird...they need 2 cars.

I have said this a million times. Sure, you CAN drive RWD in the snow. People did it for years. But people also drove 4 bbl V8s with bias ply tires for years, too. Doesn't mean people prefer it.

I don't care how much traction control and stability programming you throw at a RWD car...its a Band Aid for a system that does NOT work as well in inclement weather, period. While I'm ignoring the rest of redzed's comments as usual, one thing I will agree with is his take on traction control in a FWD car. Its completely worthless...when I have somewhere to go and it tries to kick in, I turn the damn thing off. It hinders progress more than it helps.

 

2 more things...

1) Z28x hit the nail on the head with the stability control assessment. What I meant when I said that's a band aid for an inferior set up is in terms of getting moving. FWD simply gets you going better than RWD in slippery conditions. Whether it was the Camaro or the GP or any other car I've ever owned that has been driven in snow, once I'm going I'm fine. Its getting going on an icy hill which is where the value of FWD really comes into play.
2) guion, PA does not have the snow MA does Hell, my girlfriend lives 2 hours north of me in VT and I can't believe how much more snow she gets than me!!! Everyone in VT has snows. And BTW, you never see ANY RWD cars out where she is...you see a ton of F bodies, Mustangs etc. in the summer when I'm up there, but this time of year you're lucky to see any. Again, that's my point.

Sure, they CAN drive them...but why?