Please GM, keep the next Impala simple.

[tollytime]

I know everybody wants to see a RWD Chevy four door with a monster V8 and that's ok with me. Just make sure it's called something other than Impala.
I currently own a lackluster 2007 base Impala and I think it's the best car in the world. I'm in my 40's with a couple of kids that don't need car seats anymore. I don't need a minivan shaped like a car either. (see all new ugly barge called Taurus)
I want the same good old fuel economy. Please, let's not make an all new car like the Buick LaCrosse and get the same fuel economy as a 6 year old Trailblazer.
Keep it front wheel drive. My kids need to get to school in the winter. I really need that FWD to get around the Dodge Chargers stuck in the snow.
I want the same old reliable 3500 V6 with good old OHV technology. Who want's to change timing belts? I want torque, not rpm's.
Keep that big trunk that seems to swallow everything. You put the gas tank in the trunk of that Pontiac I had, don't do it ever again.
The current Impala has no blind spots, let's keep it that way.
The fat square bumpers limit styling, but they can take a lot of punishment.
The interior and dash is spread out. I'm not flying a plane, so don't give me a cockpit.
I guess it would be nice to change it just a little bit. I'll try to keep it as simple as I can.
Hmmm. You could add an inch here or there, just don't barge it up. The styling lines could be a little more noticeable, just make sure you keep the body parts simple and flexible. I guess that's it.

[Suziebob]

I like the way you think. There needs to be a simple base Impala, but to be competitive in segment it does need gadgets and gizmos that are well integrated and intuitive. But hey, if they're well integrated, you may surprisingly find yourself using them. Oh, and AWD would be welcome as well.

[MyImpalaSS]

Originally Posted by tollytime

I know everybody wants to see a RWD Chevy four door with a monster V8 and that's ok with me. Just make sure it's called something other than Impala.
I currently own a lackluster 2007 base Impala and I think it's the best car in the world. I'm in my 40's with a couple of kids that don't need car seats anymore. I don't need a minivan shaped like a car either. (see all new ugly barge called Taurus)
I want the same good old fuel economy. Please, let's not make an all new car like the Buick LaCrosse and get the same fuel economy as a 6 year old Trailblazer.
Keep it front wheel drive. My kids need to get to school in the winter. I really need that FWD to get around the Dodge Chargers stuck in the snow.
I want the same old reliable 3500 V6 with good old OHV technology. Who want's to change timing belts? I want torque, not rpm's.
Keep that big trunk that seems to swallow everything. You put the gas tank in the trunk of that Pontiac I had, don't do it ever again.
The current Impala has no blind spots, let's keep it that way.
The fat square bumpers limit styling, but they can take a lot of punishment.
The interior and dash is spread out. I'm not flying a plane, so don't give me a cockpit.
I guess it would be nice to change it just a little bit. I'll try to keep it as simple as I can.
Hmmm. You could add an inch here or there, just don't barge it up. The styling lines could be a little more noticeable, just make sure you keep the body parts simple and flexible. I guess that's it.

Right on!!

I love my SS and wouldn't change much about it. Plus it gets much better gas mileage than you would expect, even though that doesn't concern me.

I think that the next-gen Impala will look a little bit sportier/sexier and like you said, with more noticeable lines.

I personally think that the base models should be the Caprice with the LTZ and SS models as Impala.

[mjd1001]

I'll say I am hoping Chevrolet keeps a large (larger than the Malibu), FWD car. Call it the Impala or anything else, but make sure it is available.

I'm would not have anything against a full sized RWD or AWD car also. For people who want that option, it's fine, Just don't do so at the expense of an Impala type vehicle.

[jAustin]

Originally Posted by tollytime

I want the same old reliable 3500 V6 with good old OHV technology. Who want's to change timing belts? I want torque, not rpm's.

AMEN to that! That's why I love my 3100. Easy to work on. No need for timing belt replacement. Peak power low in the rpm's. I don't drive my car at 6900 rpm's! Like they say, HP is what you brag about but torque is what you really feel.

[Smellhound]

I'm in agreement with most of you also. FWD is fine, I'd actually prefer it. Gm need to make a Big, affordable, FWD car, like the new Taurus. I actually wouldn't even be upset if the next Impala is still FWD and a bit bigger than the current one.

[solman98]

We purchase a lot of Impala's in my company. We currently also have a 07 model. My only complaint is the side mirrors. THey just suck IMO with the shape of them.

Why can't they make a new DOHC V6 with timing chains like my Ecotec and the 3.0 in the wifes Mazda's Duratec?

[Dr. Show-Me]

Rwd was common, almost universal, until women became a large part of the (outside the house) workforce. Women are in many cases practical, and would want a car that can get them back and forth to work, shopping, etc.
Fwd and awd aid in driving in less than ideal driving conditions, such as we have in Missouri. Rwd handles probably 90% of driving conditions, fwd probably 99%, and awd the last percent.
I believe the fwd push has come from meeting womens' desires for cars that can handle the most driving conditions they are likely to find in their normal driving environments.
Awd has traditionally been for off-raod use, but nowadays it is almost never used that way. It does provide more a sense of security. The driving dynamics of rwd are superior to the others, but it also does the worst in severe adverse weather.
Using my wife as an example, she hates and is afraid of driving in snow and ice. She doesn't like to drive at night. She won't drive my Cobra when it is raining, and doesn't like driving it the rest of the time, finding it "scary and heavy." She wants something comfortable and safe. For her, a fwd or awd sedan is the right choice.
The current Impala would be a good choice for women, and an awd version would be better still. Guys will still want the power and driving dynamics of the rwd version, like an Impala SS.
GM needs to bring out a modern Impala, and it probably should be the EpiII fwd/awd model, stretched and widened to fit 5-6 adults, and ideally wide enough to fit 3 child seats in the rear.
I'd like GM to bring out a rwd version simply called "SS," a single model with a smallblock LS engine in it, kinda like an updated 94-96 Impala SS.

[Smellhound]

Originally Posted by Dr. Show-Me

Rwd was common, almost universal, until women became a large part of the (outside the house) workforce. Women are in many cases practical, and would want a car that can get them back and forth to work, shopping, etc.
Fwd and awd aid in driving in less than ideal driving conditions, such as we have in Missouri. Rwd handles probably 90% of driving conditions, fwd probably 99%, and awd the last percent.
I believe the fwd push has come from meeting womens' desires for cars that can handle the most driving conditions they are likely to find in their normal driving environments.
Awd has traditionally been for off-raod use, but nowadays it is almost never used that way. It does provide more a sense of security. The driving dynamics of rwd are superior to the others, but it also does the worst in severe adverse weather.
Using my wife as an example, she hates and is afraid of driving in snow and ice. She doesn't like to drive at night. She won't drive my Cobra when it is raining, and doesn't like driving it the rest of the time, finding it "scary and heavy." She wants something comfortable and safe. For her, a fwd or awd sedan is the right choice.
The current Impala would be a good choice for women, and an awd version would be better still. Guys will still want the power and driving dynamics of the rwd version, like an Impala SS.
GM needs to bring out a modern Impala, and it probably should be the EpiII fwd/awd model, stretched and widened to fit 5-6 adults, and ideally wide enough to fit 3 child seats in the rear.
I'd like GM to bring out a rwd version simply called "SS," a single model with a smallblock LS engine in it, kinda like an updated 94-96 Impala SS.

I'm seriously asking, can someone explain to me just how the driving dynamics of RWD are superior? I can see in high speed driving/racing, if your car is getting traction down it allows the weight to shift onto the drive wheels...but for everyday, even 'moderatly' aggressive driving, I just don't get it. I HEAR peoople say RWD is better or type it all the time...but I really, reall don't undertand how it is better in 95% of our everday driving conditions.

What I DO know about FWD is when I am exiting a curve or turn, as long as I don't spin the front tire (flooring a 5.3 V8 Impala, for exampe), the FWD vehicles seem to have better dynamics to me because it 'pulls' you through the turn.

[JT87]

The FWD push comes from added simplicity, weight, and practicality, as well as the 'inability to get into trouble while going to fast' as evidenced by FWD's understeer/push tendencies. It's easier to package, easier to put together and theoretically cheaper.

Originally Posted by Smellhound

I'm seriously asking, can someone explain to me just how the driving dynamics of RWD are superior? I can see in high speed driving/racing, if your car is getting traction down it allows the weight to shift onto the drive wheels...but for everyday, even 'moderatly' aggressive driving, I just don't get it. I HEAR peoople say RWD is better or type it all the time...but I really, reall don't undertand how it is better in 95% of our everday driving conditions.

What I DO know about FWD is when I am exiting a curve or turn, as long as I don't spin the front tire (flooring a 5.3 V8 Impala, for exampe), the FWD vehicles seem to have better dynamics to me because it 'pulls' you through the turn.

Depends on how 'seriously' your are asking. I could throw you an essay about moments and load transfer and various geometries, etc., and bore you to heck. Drive a FWD that is engineered for performance (i.e. my Cobalt SS) somewhat spiritedly and you'll quickly notice the limits of FWD. The entire rear of the car is passive. The various directions of forces and moment axes that the front wheels have to cope with is quite ridiculous! You simply shouldn't make one half of your car do so much work, while the other half does virtually nothing. In a FWD car, there is more weight shift away from the front axle while accelerating and turning than there is in a RWD car. RWD car's stay better balanced. Again, I could go on and on and write you a textbook!

[mjd1001]

Originally Posted by JT87

The FWD push comes from added simplicity, weight, and practicality, as well as the 'inability to get into trouble while going to fast' as evidenced by FWD's understeer/push tendencies. It's easier to package, easier to put together and theoretically cheaper.



Depends on how 'seriously' your are asking. I could throw you an essay about moments and load transfer and various geometries, etc., and bore you to heck. Drive a FWD that is engineered for performance (i.e. my Cobalt SS) somewhat spiritedly and you'll quickly notice the limits of FWD. The entire rear of the car is passive. The various directions of forces and moment axes that the front wheels have to cope with is quite ridiculous! You simply shouldn't make one half of your car do so much work, while the other half does virtually nothing. In a FWD car, there is more weight shift away from the front axle while accelerating and turning than there is in a RWD car. RWD car's stay better balanced. Again, I could go on and on and write you a textbook!

I understand what you are saying, but I kinda agree with the previous post. In a mid or full sized car, especially a Sedan, well over 90% of drivers will never come close to pushing their car hard enough to expose those limites of FWD. IN fact, with how hard most of those drivers push their cars, it may actually perform BETTER in FWD form than RWD form.

[caddycruiser]

Originally Posted by solman98

We purchase a lot of Impala's in my company. We currently also have a 07 model. My only complaint is the side mirrors. THey just suck IMO with the shape of them.

Why can't they make a new DOHC V6 with timing chains like my Ecotec and the 3.0 in the wifes Mazda's Duratec?

Huh? They do. It's called the 2.8L, 3.0L, the 3.6L, etc. Chains and overhead cam central.

[calgaryhhr]

Originally Posted by Dr. Show-Me

Awd has traditionally been for off-raod use, but nowadays it is almost never used that way. It does provide more a sense of security. The driving dynamics of rwd are superior to the others, but it also does the worst in severe adverse weather.

I think the benefits of a well engineered all wheel drive system are becoming much more apparent lately. With lighter materials and smaller packaging it is becoming the drive system of choice for all driving situations (even spirited and racing applications.)

I would take AWD over any front or rear wheel drive option.

[eurohazard]

GM's V6 engines (aside from the Honda sourced SOHC V6 used in the Vue) are all chain right?

The absolute BEST request IMHO, is that Chevy keeps the sightlines clear. F "style" for the large sedan segment. I really, really like the Chargers and 300s....but I would have to spend a lot of time contemplating if the crappy visibility is worth having RWD.

[nailhead425]

Originally Posted by mjd1001

I understand what you are saying, but I kinda agree with the previous post. In a mid or full sized car, especially a Sedan, well over 90% of drivers will never come close to pushing their car hard enough to expose those limites of FWD. IN fact, with how hard most of those drivers push their cars, it may actually perform BETTER in FWD form than RWD form.

FWD vs RWD in snow:
Acceleration: FWD.
This is often exaggerated especially when comparing low-torque FWD vehicles to high-torque RWD vehicles. Such as a Corolla to a 3/4 ton pickup. high-torque front drivers will spin the tires with the rest.
Deceleration: RWD.
Engine braking on the rear helps prevent premature lock-up in slippery conditions. Try it in snow, it works great.
Cornering: RWD.
FWD will understeer when pushed and in snow or on wet pavement that point is very early. With RWD a simple goose of the throttle will bring about some trailing oversteer and bring the rear around. While on dry pavement in FWD letting off will reverse the action and cause the front to get more bite, in a situation with a low coefficient of friction, this is typically too little, too late.

In todays automotive market FWD has a packaging advantage, that is all.