as the first post said, we're talking about a car that would be released in one-two years, and whose product cycle would be over aropund 2015, 5 years before the CAFE standards take effect. That just seems like a load of BS.

Further, as the first post declared, the facts show the difference is also BS.

The real problem is the weight of Zeta. That seems to be why GM is scrambling against it, imo, that and the eleghant in the room: sales volume/profit. They want to keep selling GMT 900s/1000s of the future....and customers keep demanding them, so they have to sacrifice somewhere they don't have real demand right now. The concept of Zeta is in demand, nice luxurious sedans/coupes with great handling at an affordable price...but GM product planners think they can fill that void with other platforms apparently.

 

^ That's a good point.

Domestic customers buy a lot of trucks/SUVs, so if they were going to sell something that has very little import conquest sale appeal, they might just be hurting their own bottom line.

 

In my opinion the new Malibu will canabilize any sales a front wheel drive impala would be after.
Where as a rwd impala will bring in buyers who were shopping for 300c's and chargers as well as loyal GM customers who have been waiting for a large rwd sedan. Actual sales to people. Not inflated fleet numbers the current impala gets to claim.

 

This is actually what I was thinking more or less. This may just be a way to cancel products and attempt to save face if they aren't happy with the whole Zeta architecture.

 

I can't begin to understand why they're bothering with a new Impala if it's FWD, and V6?

What is it going to be, ten, twelve inches longer than a Malibu?

You're telling me there are tens of thousands of people who want a front drive, V6 five passenger sedan but who find a 112 inch wheelbase completely unnaceptable? And would run, not walk to a car with a 116 inch wheelbase?

 

Seriously the Malibu is only 8 inches shorter than the Impala. How many more sales can they get by making a Malibu XL and calling it Impala?

Thats a pretty weak reason.

 

I'm guessing its only part of the reason. In other words, it sounds good, even if there are other reasons why they'd rather leave it FWD. (i.e. Cheaper to develop, higher projected sales and profitability, etc.)

 

A note about the mpg's and weights listed on the 1st page, a V-6 malibu weighs about 3550 not 3415. Thats part of the 26 mpg. The caddy does very well for its heft. The current Impala SS weighs 3800 and gets 24 highway, the zeta impala would weigh about the same as the G8, 3995. I'd expect 24 mpg highway.

I'll also repeat what was said above, CAFE levels start raising in 3 YEARS, not 12 years.

The Impala has a alot of brand recognition. My co-workers who drive and swear by asian cars admit that Impalas are good cars, weither they are or arent. GM doesnt need the bad press that the "New for 2009 Impala gets 24 mpg". It would tarnish the whole Chevy car line. Let pontiac have the muscle car and mpg headlines for now. People translate pontiac with muscle more than value anyways. I dont think the G8 will sell well anyways, the economy and gas prices will ruin a good car. If GM needs to stretch epsilion than so be it, we own one, its a good car. Let the economy and fuel situation work its way out.

Right now for GM its all about survival. Some good cars have come out, some awards have been won. But the bleeding has not stopped. They aren't turning a profit and the stock price was about $22 a share today. Thats right on par with Macy's. Another bad PR hit will come in the next few months as toyota passes them in world wide sales. People are writing them off for dead. Maybe not here on CamaroZ28.com but its definiately out there. I couldn't get two of my co-workers to a GM lot last year. They both bought VW jettas cause "VW's are cool, GM's are unreliable and have BAD interiors."

These zeta sedans aren't going to save GM, cars right for the market will. Malibu's, Astra's and Volts are way more important to GM's public perception then the zeta. People no longer judge your car company by its top of the line, the credibility is established with corrollas, civics, camry's and accords. People shop upwards from there. Check were those cars are on the top seller list. Those are all in the top five or are there quite frequently.

 

2007
Camry 473,108 (up 5%)
Avalon 72,945 (down 18.2%)

 

The G8 V6 is rated at 17/25 so it is 1 mpg hwy behind the Malibu and CTS, but remember the G8 uses a 5 speed auto while the other 2 have 6 speeds.

The V6 economy champ is the 3.5L OHV V6, but that is going away. So the next Impala is going to need something more economical than the 3.6L if it is going to keep up with CAFE and the current Impala.

Why couldn't the next Impala get a 250HP DI 2.8L V6 and 6 speed auto as standard? That would do better than the G8 and Malibu, or maybe even a DI version of the 2.4L (~200HP?). Solstice already uses a 2.4L setup for RWD so the Kappas and base Zeta could share that powertrain setup.

Avalon is also more of a Buick type vehicle, not a value car like a Chevy.

 

All else being equal, a RWD car will weigh more than a FWD car. Some of the reasons:
- The rear suspension and subframe must be strong enough to withstand the acceleration loads, whereas with FWD the rear end is just along for the ride and can be fairly light. The strength required of the front suspension is mostly the same either way.
- RWD requires a separate and heavy differential, whereas with FWD it is usually part of the transaxle case.
- RWD requires a means to get the power to the back, which means the addition of a driveshaft and u-joints

This added weight is part of the reason RWD cars tend to be less efficient than FWD, but there's more. A RWD car must turn the power 90º at the differential. This perpendicular transfer of power is usually accomplished by hypoid gears which are not very efficient. FWD, on the other hand, does not have to turn the power 90º and therefore uses helical gears which are more efficient. The driveshaft and u-joints are power-robbers. And then there's also the added rotational mass of the drivetrain components in a RWD car.

 

4 speed, 5 speed, 6 speed, its all the same in top gear on the highway. Ask toyota why their six speed doesnt beat GM's four speed. Same goes for the ford fusion vs the impala. the 2007 ratings were 28 vs 31

It basically ends up being the same final drive ratio give or take 1 or 2%. It really comes down to torque at a given rpm, more rpm = more torque = less mpg.

GM typically doesn't let short geared cars out the door. 3.9L cars being the exception. Our Aura spins 2000 rpm at 74mph, my maxima spins 2850 at 74. A 2.8L would be unhappy in a 3900lb car, the G8 will have 2.92's, a 3.2L might be an answer, it would make about 240ftLBs. DI is worth something in low end torque but still a just slight boost at 2000 rpm. Maybe longer intake runners are in order, the intake is varible anyways, why not some tpi length runners to really enhance cruising rpm torque.

In reality its canceled anyways. Atleast until GM has more money and more CAFE compliant vehicles. I'm starting to think about the 2006 business week article I read. In 2006 toyota had 26 models and spent 16 Billion on R and D. GM had 80 models that year and spent 8 Billion on R and D. Less badge engineering is good, especially on the same continent. The Opel/Saturn, Holden/Pontiac reationships seem to be a good idea. Othersides of the world hide badge engineering well and pontiac, saturn, chevy and buick shouldn't all be selling the same thing. Maybe with the high candian dollar they are looking to offer oshawa the next round of buyouts. Leaner and meaner ya know?

 

I wonder how a "live axle" Impala would refactor in the equation..

 

You're all forgetting that they would be putting in 6.0+L V8s in a good portion, and those aren't going to help the first wave of CAFE.

 

I don't think it would turn it into an Evil Gas Pig...it's just the point that it wouldn't help any.

And when the vehicle is already selling well as a FWD...just improve it. Don't regress by even 1mpg, just to turn it RWD - and potentially a flop. Family Cars aren't necessarily thought of as RWD. Sports cars (sedan, coupe, whatever), speed, and trucks are equated with RWD in my area. So - that may detract a lot of buyers rather than keep the old ones, and gain more.