A RWD Impala will need to sell volume, hell, any WD Impala needs to sell volume.

If it would get a V8, it better be low production versions, IE, SS model. If it comes with a V8 just a hair above standard base cost cutting stripper model, then it would lose lots for them in CAFE.

I don't think any of GM's V8s will help with CAFE, but in limited edition models they may work better for sales for the company.

A V6 Impala covering 65-75% of total slaes is fine with me as long as it damn near hits it.

^Opposition to this may come from large number of voices saying things like, "It's RWD, now get me my LS3!!"

Until we get LS1-like performance (which is sedate by a decades worth of innovation) and better economy, currently we have more power but same economy, the V8 will be a subthought for this vehicle.

 

Why not just make a nice AWD Epsilon 2 for an Impala. Why does it have to be bigger? Wouldn't simply being better surfice?

 

I pondered this same point in the other Impala thread. I don't think it can remain on the W platform - it would be the only model and built in a plant that's supposed to be turning out Zeta cars - having been converted to a flex line. Epsilon 2 is the only FWD option - well, I suppose that's the only option if Impala is to continue - although the up-sized Malibu on the same platform performs the same job too.

I was kinda hoping for a WM sized car - since that was what Impalas always were - the biggest Chevy. The car would still be smaller that the old B-bodies but be more space efficient and modern. WM dimensions and layout would separate the car from the Malibu, its dimensions would also separate it from the G8 - trim and luxury (or lack thereof) would separate it from any Buick or Caddy models.

Maybe GM really has no real need for an Impala so it should go away - if the Malibu covers the FWD territory and the G8 and potential Buick and Caddy models cover the RWD territory an Impala becomes redundant doesn't it?

The weight comparison of the VE car and the W body kinda makes the CAFE argument moot if we're also talking only a 1mpg difference in fuel efficiency between the two drive configurations to boot. This would certainly suggest that there's more afoot here than meeting CAFE requirements. Good to see that political infighting is as alive and well in the "new" GM as it was in the "old" GM.

 

Next to the corvette you cant kill a name with that much recognition. I'm thinking it will be wider/longer than malibu on epsilon 2. Hopefully they can bring it in at 3650lbs and a base 3.2L and a 3.6L with direct injection. I think CAFE has killed the V-8 impala. RWD or FWD.

But who says it has to change at all? Look at the panther. Who says they cant split oshawa or build it elsewhere like Orion/KC.

 

You seem to forget the the Impala disappeared for years before the name was resurrected by GM. Back then, there are many that criticized what the new Impala was compared to the old Impala.

Maybe the best thing for GM to do is place the Impala name on hiatus until it makes business sense to offer a suitable replacement. Just as they did with the Camaro.

 

All is not lost... it's just that things are on hold atm (according to this article: http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums...howtopic=22202).

If Impala will be built on the same platform as the future DTS/STS replacement, then it surely will be RWD, YES? It seems likely as GM are consolidating its model/platform strategy in similar vein to BMW re: the 5/7 series.

 

That website is garbage.

I'm just sayin' but....Impala stays FWD and we'll see what happens to Oshawa in the mean time.

 

I'd think a larger version of EpII would be the only feasible chassis for the Impala if it is to stay FWD on the next go around.

 

That must be why you offered to buy that "garbage" website for "$5000" at least 2 times in the last 6 months. But nevermind that no one goes to, or posts, at your site.

I wonder...will you ever grow up?

 

That along with my CTS vs. Malibu 3.6L compassion pretty much shows that it isn't about MPG

 

Some people like bigger cars. I drove a new Malibu Saturday, and it may be marginally larger then my 1998 Regal. My Dad loves his 1996 Roadmaster, and would gladly buy a car in that class. I would too.

 

Josh, how about you keep the mud slinging to a minimum. Some of us stood by you during the debacle, keep that in mind.

 

The Pontiac G8 V6 weighs 3885lbs.
Length 196.1
Width 74.8
Height 57.7
Head Room Front 38.7
Head Room Rear 38.0
Shoulder Room Front 59.1
Shoulder Room Rear 59.1
Hip Room Front 56.7
Hip Room Rear 58.0
Leg Room Front 42.2
Leg Room Rear 39.4
17/25 MPG

Impala V6
Length 200.4
Width 72.9
Height 58.7
Head Room Front 39.4
Head Room Rear 37.8
Shoulder Room Front 58.7
Shoulder Room Rear 58.6
Hip Room Front 56.4
Hip Room Rear 57.2
Leg Room Front 42.3
Leg Room Rear 37.6
18/28 MPG

The G8 V6 is smaller, weighs more, and gets worse mileage. How did this happen?

 

That has nothing to do with the G8 and all to do with the 3.5L OHV vs. 3.6L DOHC V6. Just look at the Aura differences. 3.5L/A4 > 3.6L/A6 in MPG

 

But yet the 3.5L OHV/6spd combo in the Vue actually gets slightly less MPG then the 3.6L DOHC/6spd combo.

Perhaps more gearing differences then engine differences?