By on March 15, 2013

Your humble author came to love the W-body Impala relatively late in the game. TTAC was deliberately left off the list for 2014 Impala press drive invites, presumably to make more room for the Jen Friels and AutoBosses of the world. However, if what we’re reading in other sources is in any way legitimate, my advice to buy the old one while you still can appears to have been approximately as prescient as Paul Atreides was in Dune Messiah.

Perhaps the most surprising review comes from a source not normally known for harsh words regarding new cars.

In his incisive Impala investigation, Yahoo’s Neal Pollack does a pretty fair imitation of Bill the Butcher as he cuts the Impy into little pieces:

the V-6 proved barely adequate… it handled sluggish, like a wet sponge… it felt about as intuitive as trying to change channels on an airplane armrest… but it felt like I was sitting on a cheap half-inflated kiddie basketball the whole time… but there was a springy element to the whole car that just felt plain unappealing… it didn’t remotely connect with the present, or with me.

Pollack delivers the killing blow thusly: “Now it’s just clumsy, expensive department-store jewelry, dated and stale, desperately out of step with the times.” Well alright then.

Chevrolet is telling everyone who will listen that this XTS-lite will “make money”, but the money people at Forbes examined the strategy behind marketing the $40,000 new Impala and found it confusing and inadequate.

As soon as we can rent a new Impala, we’ll check it out and give you the unadulterated scoop on Chevrolet’s ambitiously-priced-but-prosaically-engineered Avalon competitor. In the meantime, GM fans looking for some good news on the car can, of course, find it in that one magazine that really likes the Volt:

For 2014, Chevrolet has substantially upped the Impala’s game in its look, features, and premium interior quality… Impala LTZ stickers north of $40,000 will seem reasonable. The popular mid-level Impala LT trim looks like it could be a top-of-the-range LTZ, and the LTZ’s decor is rich enough to be in a Buick LaCrosse. The design is what makes it look more premium… Corvette-inspired… you’ll see something new on second or third examination… Chevrolet got the big family car’s ride-handling balance right… I drove a 2013 Malibu with the new, 195-hp engine, and it’s smooth, quiet, and powerful in that lighter sedan.

There’s something hilarious in this: MT’s Todd Lassa is so overcome with enthusiasm for this vehicular catastrophe that, to loosely paraphrase John Updike in his description of Rabbit Angstrom’s encounter with a chunky twenty-something part-time prostitute, his love spills a little and lands on the hapless, hopeless Malibu as well. Certainly many of us know what it’s like to be blind drunk and rolling around in a hotel bed with some gorgeous hairdresser who is just like your evil, female spiritual twin only a decade younger and before you know it you’re telling her to have your child and fly with you to Austin, Texas for a round of the rallycross championship there, but most of the time these emotions don’t make it into print, and certainly not when they concern what appear to be two of most cynically insipid vehicles ever forcibly ejected out of GM’s channel-stuffing cloaca.

Oh well. Be sure to check back here for Impala and Malibu tests real soon. In an unrelated note, we also expect to be covering at least one event of the Texas Rallycross season.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

155 Comments on “Chevy’s New Impala Can’t Outrun The Critics...”


  • avatar
    Maintainer

    I was late to the W body party as well. Time seems to heal a lot of wounds…
    I’m hoping for more Airplane! references in auto reviews. “Handles like a wet sponge” Ha! It’s like 1980 all over again!

    Good luck in Texas, we’re all counting on you.

  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    I have two major concerns about this new Epsilon-II based Chevy Impala. One, I’m afraid that it might become to Chevy what the MKS has become to Lincoln, a car that on the face of things looks more desirable and is more modern than its semi-predecessor (Town Car), but shirks too many of the previous car’s qualities to actually be relevant to consumers. I think that had the current W-Body Impala used better materials and adopted the 3.6L V6 sooner, it would have been an excellent car. This new one might have gone just a bit too far, especially if the pricing gets out of control. It might find itself unable to compete with Avalon, Azera, Taurus and even Charger. Two, I’m afraid that the new Impala will upstage the Buick LaCrosse. Granted, they are styled completely differently, but the days of same-sausage-different-package are over for GM, and it needs to keep the brand hierarchy in place. The LaCrosse is getting a major facelift sometime this year for MY2014, and if the price goes up much higher than that of the new Impala, LaCrosse will soon find itself competing entirely with the Lexus ES and Acura TL for entry-level FWD luxury, both of which, unfortunately, have more panache than the Buick.

  • avatar
    genuineleather

    Wait: $40k? How does that leave room for the LaCrosse? Or the new SS? Holy product overlap Batman!

    The idea that GM believes people will pay that for an Impala instead of getting an ES or an honest RWD car from Hyundai or Chrysler boggles the mind. This car shares both the XTS’ platform and it’s not-gonna-happen pricing delusion.

    • 0 avatar
      OldandSlow

      I agree – but who pays the full Monroney sticker price on an Impala LTZ?

      A lower trim Impala LT equipped with a 3.6 V6 shows a sticker price of $31K – which is a tad below the starting price of a LaCrosse sister ship propelled with an e-assist set up. The LaCrosse with added leather starts at 33K.

      The bottom rung, an Imapala LS with an overworked 2.5 four cylinder stickers for about $27K.

      • 0 avatar
        genuineleather

        “I agree – but who pays the full Monroney sticker price on an Impala LTZ?”

        True, but no one pays sticker for Buicks either. I would be shocked if many LaCrosses left the lot for over $35k.

    • 0 avatar
      Scott_314

      I disagree with complaints about the price. GM needs Chevrolet to go up in market and price, period.

      1. The fight in the 20-30K range is over for a few years, and the Cruze is a solid option there.

      2. 23K full-size cars are why GM, Ford and Chrysler went down the drain in the first place. It means cars that compare poorly to others that people associate with the same class.

      3. At this point cars stand on their own merits – if a $38K Chev offers significant benefits over a $38K Lexus, people will adapt if a bit slowly.

      The real problem is that class competitive, and it looks competitive in the $30-40K class, is only a start. I don’t see that little bit extra, what makes it ‘special’.

      • 0 avatar
        Conslaw

        I don’t know that the Cruz has the $20-30k range covered. Truecar gives a deal price of the 2013 Hyundai Sonata GLS with popular equipment package at $21,130, undercutting the size-lower Cruz with when similarly equipped. The Sonata and the Cruz weigh almost the same, and have similar fuel economy, but the Sonata has 199 HP and is roomier than the Malibu which weighs at least 10% more.

        The 2014 Impala is porkier still with curb weight of 3,800 to 3,950 lbs. Compare the 2013 Toyota Avalon at 3,461. Chevrolet has shown that it can make good cars. It can make light cars, but it hasn’t shown the ability to make good, light cars. That’s what it will take. The popularly-priced sedan market is intensely competitive in all sub-segments right now. You need to bring your A-game or your market share will wither to nothing.

        • 0 avatar
          OldandSlow

          Transaction prices are definitely on the rise. The $20 – 30K segment doesn’t offer much in full-size.

          Locally, the Avalon XLE retails for $31 – 32K. Throw in tax, title and a generous ration of Toyota dealer fees – you’ll be looking at $34 – 35K.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            “GM needs Chevrolet to go up in market and price, period.”

            What GM “needs” is to be competitive in price, quality and reliability to their competition (especially the best of the competition).

            Right now, the best of the competition is still better and in many cases, less expensive, than the best that Chevrolet has to offer.

            This whole “needs” thing you’re fixated on is pretty backwards.

        • 0 avatar
          Kyree S. Williams

          I’ve not seen many Cruzes go out the door at more than $23K, which is a little over the price that the Malibu LS starts at. GM has been doing a very good job separating Buick’s other vehicles from their Chevrolet brethren and making them worth the premium, but I really am worried about price-overlap with the LaCrosse and Impala. I guess they can play to different customers with each car, but that seems to be what nearly killed them in the first place…

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        The problem is the giant gold badge on the front, and how people will look at you with derision when you pull up at a nice hotel/restaurant.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          I don’t know about the derisive looks, unless you also find a way of buying $2,000 suits at Target and $9,000 watches from Fossil. People will just assume that you were late to the Avis counter if you show up looking like everyone else but driving a car like this. It happens all the time.

  • avatar
    racer-esq.

    The real score is not a W-body Impala. Whatever the issues with the new Impala, the W-body is an archaic car with poor layout and huge overhangs on a too-short wheelbase.

    The real score is a 2012 (pre-redesign) Malibu. It has a 2 inch longer wheelbase than the W-body Impala. An added plus is that any dealer with a 2012 Malibu still on the lot is going to be cutting huge deals.

  • avatar
    Athos Nobile

    So… what’s the real beef with this car? what are its sins?, supposed or real.

    I can’t grasp the grandiloquent vitriol spewed against it. I am not biting MT’s stuff either.

    • 0 avatar
      motormouth

      Athos, no matter what body is dumped on top of it, the W chassis does not belong on the road but in a museum. In a world where most OEMs produce updated products in order to appear forward thinking and attract new customers, this architecture is so far beyond its sell-by date that its stinking up the whole GM range.

      And yet it still keeps getting warmed over and re-sold as a new model, despite those cars having the dynamics of a see-saw. The question is, who’s more the fool, GM for thinking this will pass muster, or customer dumping $40K on 1990s technology? Hard to say, but I’d be looking elsewhere if a three-box saloon of this size was my calling.

      • 0 avatar
        th009

        The new Impala is not on the W platform, it’s on Epsilon II, just like the XTS.

        The prices start at $29,950. Yes, you can option it to $40K, but you can easily do the same with a Taurus, too, even if you stick to the base FWD V6 configuration.

      • 0 avatar
        mikey

        @motormouth…..The new Impala is not on a W chassis. In fact its not on any chassis. Epslon 11 would be the correct name for the platform. The last Impala on a “chassis”was about 1985.

      • 0 avatar
        danio3834

        Even if we were talking about the W body, I’m curious as to what excatly about it is so archaic that it belongs in a museum? I mean, what specificially is so out of date about it? Looking at the chassis and frame, the last of the W-body really resembles nothing of the early cars.

        We hear all the time people chiding certain models for being old but what exactly is so inferior about this one?

        • 0 avatar
          Maxseven

          What’s inferior about this one (and all Chevy products) is that damn Chevy “bow-tie” badge emblazoned on the nose and ass.

        • 0 avatar
          Kevin Kluttz

          It is inferior because it is slapped together by Generally Shitty Motors.

        • 0 avatar
          motormouth

          In comparison to other vehicle architectures, the W is subpar in its fundamental design. One element of this is in the basic materials used, which do not result in a rigid platform, which in turn makes it more difficult to dial out the wallowy ride as the whole car is flexing, not just the suspension. This flex is difficult to prevent and so makes such movement virtually impossible to dial out through suspension engineering, including damping solutions. The other major area where the W (and pretty much every other older platform) does not stand up well to comparison with current models is in terms of safety. Modern chassis architectures are designed to direct impact forces around the passenger cell. Due to its inherent design characteristics, the W couldn’t do this, and so impact forces were transmitted throughout the car, including the passenger area.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            “which do not result in a rigid platform, which in turn makes it more difficult to dial out the wallowy ride as the whole car is flexing, not just the suspension”

            I can attest to this, and ultimately it all depends on how you’re driving it. If you drive it like a bat out of hell, this becomes noticeable. If you drive it as the highway cruiser that it is, you really do not notice this as much.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            While certainly true in the cases of some vehicles, these theories of inferiority don’t necessarily translate to the last of the W-bodies.

            Crash data isn’t markedly worse than comparable vehicles, like a Malibu, and the kinematic performance of the chassis has been steadily improved over the years through improvements in marterials and component design. The chassis componentry of a 1988 W body and 2012 W-body hardly resemble each other.

            I will agree the actual performance dynamics of the traditional mac-strut suspension under spirited manuevers can’t match the performance of a double A-arm setup, but under 99% of the conditions this vehicle will be used, the performance is good. On the skid pad, the 2012 Impala is within a hundredth or two g of the Malibu and the same or better than an Accord of the same year.

            I don’t think the charges of being severely inferior or antiquated based on the fact that the overall platform is old are really warranted, there are certainly cars that perform better, but there are others that perform worse still.

    • 0 avatar
      tonycd

      I agree, Athos. Typically fun article by Baruth, but I think the original review is a hatchet job.

      The 3.6 is supposedly too slow even for normal use (really hard to believe). He subjectively thinks the theme of the dash shapes is dated and not to his personal taste. The reviewer rips on the MyLink interface, which neutral critics have singled out as one of the BEST in the class, up there with Chrysler’s uConnect and worlds better than MyFordFiasco or Cadillac CUE.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        The 3.6 is supposedly too slow even for normal use (really hard to believe).

        Yeah, any reviewer who rips on 300+ hp sedans, coupes, or wagons as too slow should be sentenced to drive a 1982 Celebrity with the 92hp Iron Duke for one week. (I had to do it from age 16 to age 20, granted the car was over a decade old at that point.)

        • 0 avatar
          danio3834

          Yes how quickly we forget the days when there were vehicles that truly had inadequate power. Cars that struggled up hills. Cars that made you think thrice before pulling out in traffic.

          I can’t think of a single modern car with an 16+ second 0-60 mph time anymore. We live in a day and age where 10 seconds to sixty is considered tortoise. In the 80′s that would have won you some drag races.

      • 0 avatar
        Athos Nobile

        tonycd

        The original review is terrible.

        The organic-sugar-and-gluten-free piece by MT is not much better either.

        Parroting the worse parts of both is… inexcusable.

        If I were to consider the car, both reviews and this article would be completely useless.

  • avatar
    Loser

    ” the V-6 proved barely adequate”
    Did they mean the 4 banger? Find it hard to believe the car is this bad.

    • 0 avatar
      Kevin Jaeger

      I find it hard to believe a 3.6 V6 was actually slow. Compared to an Audi V6 twin turbo, maybe, but this isn’t a car with sporting pretensions. A 3.6 V6 sounds perfectly adequate to me.

      • 0 avatar
        th009

        The 2.5L four-cylinder in my rental 2013 Fusion this week was best described as adequate, too. Maybe with a turbo it would have had more game-changing characteristics …

        • 0 avatar
          thornmark

          Are you sure that was a 2013 Fusion? I’ve been told repeatedly on these threads that Fusions are in such demand that there are no 2013 Fusions in rental fleets.

          I mean the trout-mouthed “beautiful” ones – the Asston Martin look-a-likes.

          • 0 avatar
            Kyree S. Williams

            I’ve seen several of them at Enterprise, and yes, the anemic 2.5L was intended primarily for fleet cars. Most consumers will start with the turbocharged 1.6L…

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            “…Most consumers will start with the turbocharged 1.6L.”

            If that turns out to be true over the long time horizon, it will undoubtedly only be due to the fact that Ford intentionally suppressed production of the normally aspirated 2.5 liter versions of the Fusion.

            The irony is that such a move will drag down the Fusion’s reliability, since the 2.5 liter (also used in the Mazda 6, at least the 2009 through 2012 versions) is pretty much bulletproof.

    • 0 avatar
      Russycle

      That threw me too. In Jack’s review of the current Impala, he raved about how nice the V6 was. I can’t believe it went from awesome to sucking so quickly. Or did they stop using the Camaro motor for 2014?

  • avatar
    ehaase

    The Impala should sell about 60,000 per year, just as the Taurus. Most of the other reviews I have read are quite positive.

  • avatar
    HerrKaLeun

    “Impala LTZ stickers north of $40,000 will seem reasonable.” i hope this is a joke, $40k for this chevy, the subprime and rental fleet queen? Really? the same brand selling rebadged Daewoos… the brand that is subprime to Opel in Europe.

    and they say “north of $40K”? how far north and what are they smoking and where can I get some?

    this makes the $40K sticker for the Volt look very reasonable. At least the Volt has a modern platform and a good (or more modern, interesting, whatever you will) powertrain.

    Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but $40K for a car (not truck or SUV) should get you prime luxury, Lexus entrance material…

    Unless congress is working on a law making all non-Chevrolet illegal (you never know!), this won’t sell.

    • 0 avatar
      danio3834

      I agree, in the 40k territory is the 300C Luxury, which has one of the nicest interiors on the market. It just happens to be stuffed in a car that is very pleasing to drive as well.

      • 0 avatar
        Mrb00st

        that’s the big problem with it for me too. As much hate as the Epsilon II Impala is getting, i’m sure it’ll be a nice car – but having driven the new 300, it’s not going to be THAT kind of nice.

    • 0 avatar
      th009

      You can option an Impala, Taurus, 300 or Charger up to $40K. These are all full-size mass-market sedans that start below $30K. The question is whether you want to spend $40K to get a large mass-market sedan with lots of toys or a smaller premium sedan with less equipment. There are buyers for both.

      • 0 avatar
        jpolicke

        For under $40k I can get a 300 with AWD, and a touch screen that doesn’t tower over the dash like the monolith in 2001:A Space Odyssey. Seriously, do they expect people to reach up there to operate it?

        • 0 avatar
          th009

          Yes, you can option car A to cost over $X, and, yes, you can buy a car B under $Y.

          But those are apples and oranges you’re comparing. Use truedelta.com if you want to have an apples-to-apples price comparison of two cars.

      • 0 avatar
        danio3834

        For around 40K, the 300C with the optional interior IS a premium car in the truest sense of the word. Of course “premium” to some people simply means “pay too much”.

  • avatar
    Ubermensch

    It doesn’t sound like the new Impala is any better than the old one at least as far as driving dynamics go. The fleet loaner I had for a week a few years ago was the worst “new” car I have ever driven. The in-laws Versa was more rewarding to drive than that wallowing pig.

  • avatar
    Junebug

    IF, I wanted a nice big car – and stay within a range I could afford, it would be the Dodge Charger. The friends I have on the NC Highway Patrol loved these cars, and they use them much more than the average consumer. When I bought my Camry (2012), the Charger was on my list, I liked the Charger better, but what killed the deal was there wasn’t any 2012′s left, a 2013 optioned like I wanted would have been over my budget. The Camry was cheaper ( and 0 for 60)and better on gas, and I got the options. OK, I know – not exactly apples to apples here.
    Impala? Nah, I’ve detailed a few of them and they’re ok, nothing special and kinda cheap looking inside.

    • 0 avatar
      danio3834

      You bring up an intersting point. While I’m sure the new Impala will be a fine car that will satisfy the leagues of middle aged women who buy them, why in the world would you spend 40k on this ho-hum sedan when there are options like the Charger and 300 (in RWD and AWD at that price range) that are really, really nice cars. The Chrysler 3.6L is much more satisfying than the GM 3.6L, especially when paired with the 8 speed.

    • 0 avatar
      th009

      Having rented lots of Impalas, Camrys and Chargers, I would say all of them are “kinda cheap looking inside.” The Fusion and Malibu are appreciably better in that regard.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Do you consider the Charger a big car? I really don’t. It’s the same size as an Accord.

  • avatar
    Easton

    Another barely-adequate car from GM. Not a bad car but nothing special to compel one to select it over one of its competitors, just like the rest of Chevy’s lackluster, ‘good enough’ line-up. No All-wheel-drive, no high performance model, no unique features. New Impala is destined to be yet another quickly forgotten car.

    • 0 avatar
      OldandSlow

      That brings up an interesting question. Can Chevrolet grow market share with products that are only ‘good enough’ to meet the stamp of approval of a GM in-house focus group?

  • avatar
    danio3834

    I’m sure driving dynamics will be unremarkably middle of the road. Adequate, nothing to write home about. I’m sure the power provided by either powertrain will also be the same, adequate.

    The styling is nice from the front, but that body line on the 1/4 panel, I can’t stand it. It’s like an Avenger, which is mostly an inoffensive design until I look at that same aspect. I just can’t deal with it.

  • avatar
    dude500

    I wonder if the new Impala is really that bad. As Jack had written in an article about the “Wobble”, maybe this is the car that is just too easy to pile on, no matter how good it is. These writers would probably say the same thing about the old Impala, which seems to be good enough for what it was designed for (even Jack states that he only warmed up to it recently). In any case, I’m looking forward to Jack’s review!

  • avatar
    Zackman

    Well, all I can say is that the comparison between my old 2004 3.4L base model w/Sport Appearance upgrade vs. my 2012 LTZ is night and day.

    The 2012 is a completely different animal when it comes to driving dynamics. After all, it has StabiliTrak, Traction Control, the 3.6L rocket sled engine and more goodies my 2004 didn’t have.

    The 2012 is much more solid in cornering, but it isn’t my old MX5! I didn’t buy the car to carve corners, nor expect it to, but to cruise the highway for my commute. That it does very well, so no complaints from here.

    Are there better cars? Perhaps, but I’m not a Camry or an Accord guy, and my old 2004 was just as reliable as our 2002 CR-V. Should have kept it a bit longer, as I see it at work every other week – the guy who bought it prefers it over his 2001 Crown Vic!

    You know, when the new-car bug bites, it’s hard to cure ;)

    W-body? Well, it’s worked for me so far…

  • avatar
    philadlj

    Don’t get me wrong: after the critical grilling and tepid public response to the Bestest Pat-Yourself-on-the-Backiest American Malibu EVAH and its awful hybrid version, The Impala deserves increased scrutiny. With the Cruze and Sonic, previously awful models were greatly improved; but the new Malibu doesn’t feel like enough of an improvement over the old (which was far from perfect but by no means awful. I maintain it’s better-looking than the new one, too.)

    But I’m still not going to put much stock in one yahoo from Yahoo!’s (they’re still around? huh!) brutal assessment, especially when I’m pretty sure he’s still bitter about the “no more working from home” policy. Also, one man’s barely adequate, sluggish, spongey, clumsy, half-inflated, unappealing car is another man’s chariot. Maybe the Impala just isn’t his bag, but in that case, neither would an ES, Avalon, Azera, or Cadenza.

    And let’s not forget: the Impala isn’t meant to be anything more than adequate in terms of performance. Performance is the purview of the new RWD, V8 SS. If Captain Haddock was looking for a car that would “stick a hand down his trousers and have a little rummage” (automotively speaking), he was barking up the wrong tree.

    The jury’s surely still out, but from what I’ve seen, I fall somewhere between Jackson Pollack’s red-faced vitriol and Lassa’s smooth, creamy Mango ImpaLassi. I look forward to you or any of the other TTAC driving both the SS and Impala. Any chance Road&Track will let you have a spin in either?

  • avatar
    gslippy

    “Certainly many of us know what it’s like to be blind drunk and rolling around in a hotel bed with some gorgeous hairdresser who is just like your evil, female spiritual twin…”

    Sure, and this is why I stick with TTAC. Can’t wait for the actual review, Jack.

  • avatar
    Fonzy

    Loaded is 40K? I saw a new Avalon listed for 34K with leather, nav, and the V6. Let’s see a side by side review of the new Impala and Avalon.

    • 0 avatar
      sunridge place

      Toyota will also sell you a loaded Avalon Limited for $42k.

      You will be able to get a 2014 Impala LT with MyLink, leather, a V6, and plenty of other options right around 33k.

    • 0 avatar
      tresmonos

      Does GM pay attention to the market? No. The Taurus can’t support development costs so why the F does GM think that they can sell this hog for the same as a Taurus?

      Anyone that wants any hints to the future, please read as much as you want into my 3rd typed sentence.

      • 0 avatar

        “The Taurus can’t support development costs so why the F does GM think that they can sell this hog for the same as a Taurus?”

        Why do you think GM can’t support development costs for the Impala? It is built on the same platform as the Lacrosse, XTS, Roewe, Holden/Chevy Malibu, Insignia and Regal. Shares Engines and Powertrain with the Malibu, ATS, XTS, Lacrosse, Equinox, Terrain, and the Lambdas. If anything the new Impala should start printing money from day one given how much more it is going to cost than the outgoing model.

        • 0 avatar
          tresmonos

          The volume isn’t there. Development / Launch costs a lot of money and takes up a lot of resources. It depends how dedicated you are to that market.

          I think it’s a dead segment.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Agreed, Tres.

            There’s just too much similarity in interior cabin dimensions and overall driving characteristics between the space that the Impalas, Tauruses and Maximas used to occupy (based on significant differentiation) and the Malibus, Fusions and Altimas, now.

            This is especially true given the pronounced move in consumer preferences for trying to maximize interior size while minimizing fuel consumption.

            The only outlier I can think of regarding this trend is the Chrysler 300, but that may be because it one of the few “large” cars that holds a real, provable distinction in terms of interior space and driving experience when compared to the next sibling down the totem pole (the 200).

            p.s. – With all this W-Body love in the air, can someone let me know if it’s closer to true or not that the W-Body Impala is essentially a last gen Buick Lucerne which is essentially a last gen Cadillac DTS, chassis wise?

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            @DeadWeight… The W-body is the GM10 development program started in the early 80s as a program to replace the G-body cars which had been introduced in the late 70s. GM was going to go full tilt modern with FWD power-trains and fuel efficiency as a goal. The were intended to be bread-and-butter family cars and GM made wildly optimistic predictions (in hindsight) of the sales #s and market dominance. This was a flagship program of the Roger Smith era and endured constant tinkering and ballooning development costs. In fact some think we may never know the true development cost of the program. The coupe version of the new W-bodys debuted first followed by the sedans and they were the big GM story of 1988.

            GM likely did apply what they learned in the program to the K-body (Cadillac Deville and Buick Lucerne) and 2nd gen H-body (Pontiac Bonneville, Buick LeSabre, and Oldsmobile 88.) However the platforms are NOT related in the manner you describe. The W was NOT an “Epsilon (II)” style platform that the General just kept stretching to fit their needs.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Thanks Dan.

            I was under the mistaken impression that they were essentially the same platform for way too long of a time.

    • 0 avatar

      “I saw a new Avalon listed for 34K with leather, nav, and the V6″

      The Impala is just an Avalon alternative for younger people and men. I can see it succeed very well, if only the price was more reasonable. The Camaro is very popular but a lot of people wouldn’t want a coupe. What I have a problem with is the price. It is barely bigger than the Accord. Has a 4 Cyl just like the Accord and is not as fuel efficient but still costs $6000 more. I wonder why the new Impala has to cost so much. Shares platform with Lacrosse, XTS, Roewe 950 and Alpheon. Shares platform in the SWB form with the Malibu, Regal, Insignia and other. Epsilon II has global sales of around 400,000 Units a year. The new Impala also shares engines with almost all Chevys and Buicks plus the ATS. Chevy should position this just above the Malibu for midsize buyers needing more leg room. All of the Malibu’s shortcomings have been fixed in the Impala. You can also load up a Lacrosse all the way to $44K. The Impala should be $3K less than a comparable Lacrosse, which is not too unrealistic. However, this is not going to set the sales charts on fire.

  • avatar
    mikey

    @ Fonzy…The Avalon got an extra share from the “Toyota ugly bin” They must of borrowed some from the old Tundra. The Tundra is a massive improvement,after they stole F150 front end.

    • 0 avatar
      KixStart

      Well, “ugly” is at least partly in the eye of the beholder. I think the Avalon looks good. It has a nice greenhouse and good lines. I don’t think the 2014 Impala is ugly, it has rather a nice overall look for a big car, but it certainly doesn’t leave me panting after it like some other cars would.

      And I’m not thinking I’d go for the Impala over the Avalon, either. For $35K, one can get the Avalon hybrid, pretty nicely equipped, with phenomenal fuel economy for a big car and it’s still got 14 cu ft of trunk space. It’s only a 4-banger but I don’t need bags of straight-line acceleration to be happy and the electric motors do help performance.

  • avatar
    KixStart

    Back in the day, one could order several of the big Chevvies with the “F-41″ suspension, which was said to greatly improve the handling. I wonder if the new Impala will offer that.

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      I’ve heard that the LTZ versions had stiffer suspensions on the old W platform, likely that trend will continue. If I were to pick up a lightly used 3.6 W and I decided the suspension was to soft, I’d be scouring the scrap yards for a cop model.

      “F-41″ you mean back when you could order just about whatever your wallet desired?

      • 0 avatar
        Zackman

        PrincipalDan; The LTZ DOES handle much better than my old 2004 Impala like I said above. I feel the difference in corners. There’s a certain tight “S” curve near my home that I could take at 40 mph in the MX5 we owned – I didn’t DARE push it harder than that due to my slower reflexes, my old Impala could do it around 30. The 2012 can do it at 35 and to me, appears to have little noticeable lean and feels pretty solid.

        Whether all 2012 models handle this way, I don’t know, but I’m sure StabiliTrak has something to do with it.

        All in all, if I had a complaint about the car, is I wish the interior was a bit fancier, especially on the door panels.

  • avatar
    segfault

    $40k for an Impala? Am I correct in assuming that’s before $10,000 or more in rebates? A loaded FWD Taurus is thousands cheaper.

    • 0 avatar
      sunridge place

      Good lord…everyone acts like all Impalas will be over $40k. I’ll bet fully loaded LTZ’s will be about 10% of the build mix.

      The sweet spot will be a 2LT V6. Starting price of $31k…add a few packages for comfort and convenience and it’ll be 34k.

      Sure, load it up with everything and the LTZ will go over $40k.

  • avatar
    ksr

    This review seems like an outlier to me. Most of the reviews of the 2014 Impala have been rather positive. These are the only negative comments that I’ve read to this point about the interior materials.

    His comparisons are ludicrous. Yes, $41K is a lot of money and could get you a 3 Series. Who would cross-shop an Impala and a 3 Series? Go shop for a BMW that can hold the passengers and cargo that this Impala can handle and then talk about price when you’re comparing a 7 Series to this car. And no one is going to cross shop a big, roomy Impala with a four-passenger Volt.

    Looks are subjective of course. I think this car is very handsome.

    This guy is living in the past. Cars, like most everything else, get more expensive. $41K for a car offering these features and size that is really nicely appointed (my opinion, not the reviewers) isn’t unreasonable.

  • avatar
    Summicron

    Jack’s writing is a lot like the Chaconne from Bach’s Partita #2 for solo violin. It just goes on and on but you keep wanting more.

    Almost none of his topics interest me, particularly go-fast stuff, but I’ll reread each article multiple times.

    • 0 avatar
      KixStart

      Today he provided an interesting pair of literary references. I must say, though, I have had the misfortune to read “Dune” and, to paraphrase Mark Twain speaking about Jane Austen, I wouldn’t read Frank Hebert on salary.

      • 0 avatar
        Summicron

        Well, I pretty much revere Frank Herbert and back in the day was bowled over by his musings on the inevitably sadistic and homosexual tendencies of military organizations. I think that was in a little speech from Bashar Miles Teg to one of the Duncan Idaho ghola.

        Been a while but thanks for the impetus to reread.

      • 0 avatar
        N8iveVA

        “I have had the misfortune to read “Dune”

        Ha, you’re a bigger man than me. I read about 3 chapters of Dune before i threw it down never to finish it.

      • 0 avatar
        corntrollio

        The writing style of Dune was quite awful, but the Dune mini-series (with Bill Hurt as Leto Atreides) was quite well done. I’d imagine the writing style prevents a lot of people from finishing it.

        I haven’t read any of the later books just because even Herbert fans think he started going crazy at some point.

  • avatar
    Acd

    For the life of me I can’t understand the love and affection that the W-Body Impala receives. I had the misfortune of renting a 2013 (in Appliance White of couse) to drive across Pennsylvania last fall and would have rather been in just about anything else. High points were acceleration and fuel economy. Low points included handling, seat comfort, design, and everything else about the car.

    It wasn’t awful the way a 1980 Fiat Strada was; it was more like the awful of a 2012 Nissan Sentra where nothing was desgned nearly as well as is could have been and exuded an air that the people responsible for bringing these pigs to market just didn’t care.

    A W-Body Implala may give years and hundreds of thousands of miles of dependable service but it seems like a completely miserable, uninteresting way to spend time in a car.

    As far as the new 2014 goes, good luck getting retail customers to part with $40k+ for an Impala. Anyone at GM who has their bonus tied to the success of this program better plan ahead.

    • 0 avatar
      Ubermensch

      My sentiments exactly. Besides the terrible floaty ride and wandering steering on the highway one of it’s biggest sins is it a big car with not much space inside.

      • 0 avatar
        th009

        That kind of describes Panthers, too …

        • 0 avatar
          krhodes1

          To me the only redeeming feature of the W-body Impala is that it is not as awful as a Panther.

          The new one just seems like a giant steaming pile of meh.

          • 0 avatar
            motormouth

            My W-body Impala experience was a rental as well, from Toronto to Detroit and back. It did the job, but as you say Acd, such was the layout of the cabin that it felt unresolved in very fundamental way. Plus I never have back problems in cars, but this one was excruciating over six hours each way.

  • avatar
    86er

    The pull quote was hilarious, but raised a question for me: does anyone use E-Segment vehicles as “family cars” anymore?

  • avatar
    Acubra

    Sat in it at our local auto show. This barge of a car does not have a back seat you would agree to spend any meaningful time in. I for a second thought that the seatback was not latched properly as it was almost vertical. No headroom to speak of (and I am decidedly average dimensionally).
    The dash creases reflected badly in the windshield. And that sitting-in-the-bottom-of-a-trench feeling that is especially strong in the more recent GM offerings.

  • avatar
    cargogh

    Will it be the Buick Camaro and Corvette, or will the ‘Vette become independent like the Viper?

  • avatar
    stottpie

    we had one at my work, actually both an LT and LTZ.

    i thought it was pretty good actually. it looks very nice in person, albeit the back is a bit boring.

    the interior is… interesting. lots of high quality materials, but there is A LOT going on. i felt like i’d have needed a month with the car to realize all the interior nuances. it drove well enough… and it’s definitely not as floaty or imprecise as the XTS. brakes felt squishy, but that was my only issue really. i only had it for a single day so not the most thorough review possible.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    “…two of most cynically insipid vehicles ever forcibly ejected out of GM’s channel-stuffing cloaca”

    That’s not going to get you back on GM’s press drive list anytime soon.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    “Chevrolet’s ambitiously-priced-but-prosaically-engineered Avalon competitor.”

    This sums it up for me, Chevrolet shouldn’t be trying to compete with the Avalon in light of Buick, which is supposed to be the upscale brand of the two. Chevrolet should concentrate on volume Camcord and Corollic style models, in the case of the latter they seem to be in a better position. But in the former, their primary offering is world-platform Malibu which from what I understand isn’t selling all that well and has a very small backseat compared with a Camcord. So against Maxima/Avalon/ES350 GM offers Impala and Lacrosse, which are lets face it essentially the same car. This all feels like old GM. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

    • 0 avatar
      sunridge place

      We went through this two days ago…you are either arguing for:

      1. Elimination of Buick and thus the whole Buick/GMC sales channel

      or

      2. Chevy not to build anything bigger than a midsize?

      Or are you arguing that Chevy should spend a billion dollars for their own unique ‘fullest’ size vehicle in a segment where they might sell 60,00-70,000 retail?

      You’re claiming ‘old GM’…you are really aruging against a Buick/GMC sales channel which would be a huge mistake.

      Buick/GMC had about 600,000 sales in the US in 2012. Same as Chrysler/Ram. At much lower fleet and much higher ATP’s.

      Or, you are saying that Chevy shouldn’t offer a ‘fullest’ size vehicle because a BG dealer across town is where the fullest sized cars are?

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        More the latter than the former. When I argue “old GM”, its the duplicate models between brands. Sure Ford now does it with Lincoln, but Lincoln is the “upscale” Ford. GM can do it with Chevrolet and Buick, but then what the heck is Cadillac? I see a market for FWD “large” Cadillac and a market for FWD “large” near luxury such as Lacrosse, what I don’t see a market for is both a Chevrolet and Buick “near luxury” cars, especially with the Chevrolet car line now literally being Daewoo plus this new Impala, W-Impala, Camaro and Corvette. You may turn out to be right and I’ll tip my hat if it happens, I just don’t see the need or market for both this *and* Lacrosse.

        The reason this is happening IMO is the dealer network, standalone Chevrolet or Chevrolet-Cadillac dealers won’t get a piece of the “upscale” Impala action without this model. How much does it cost to produce a sister model between brands, I would imagine its not cheap. Maybe its the right move, we’ll see.

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        I’ll wade in here.

        Chevrolet should offer a full-size vehicle as its flag ship offering.

        They have one.

        It’s called the Holden Commodore VF.

        It’s built in Australia. They have lots of capacity and a waning market. You can do funny money accounting to make the math work or build them in Canada next to the VE platform Camaro.

        Despite the wails that the SS will be over $50K, saner heads are pointing to $38K to $41K – and that is a mack daddy loaded the only option you get beyond color is with or without sunroof (and I’m not even sure if the without sunroof is even an option).

        Make two flavors (like the G8 before the GXP). One with a 300-ish HP 3.6L V6 VVT engine tied to a 6-speed auto geared/tuned for mileage.

        Make the second flavor as the SS.

        Get rid of the stupid SS name and call it Impala or Caprice. Call the rip snorting LS3 powered one an Impala SS or a Caprice SS.

        Keep the W-Body production going for fleet customers only in government, law enforcement, and livery (just like Ford did with the Crown Vic).

        Now you have channel differentiation, you’re using existing assets (instead of reinventing the wheel). You can offer a high content, high value, fun to drive, full size, meaty RWD sedan with acceptable performance in foul weather in the $30K range decontented with the V6.

        It stands far enough away from the CTS (and is larger) in price and features. It’s larger and cheaper than an ATS. The LaCrosse and XTS stand alone, instead of blurring the content and price lines like this dumb idea does now with the LaCrosse and the Impala. You can dedicate W-Body fleet sales going while not devaluing the new Caprice. You keep Holden going and maximize the investment in the VF, which is still a damn good platform. It would stomp the Avalon into the ground from a dynamics stand point.

        I had very high hopes for the new Impala, the pricing structure and reviews are showing they screwed it up as bad as they could.

        Chevrolet NEEDS a full size offering, I agree with sunridge place, but they also need to have a different offering, and I think that is what 28-cars-later is saying.

        [INSERT ARGUMENT THAT THE G8 WAS A FLOP HERE]

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          +1 I’ll drink to that.

        • 0 avatar
          sunridge place

          @APaGttH

          They are actually doing some of what you said they should do:

          Keep W-body around as fleet only? Check
          Bring a flagship based on a Holden? Check

          Your argument for the ‘problem’ of having a Buick Lacrosse and a Chevy Impala was made when they introduced the Buick Verano along side a Chevy Cruze.

          Cruze sales went up YOY 2012 vs 2011 while the Verano ramped up to 4000-5000 units a month.

          Your suggested strategy for Chevy leaves a gigantic hole in their lineup from high $20k to high $30k range where most Impala sales will happen..and your Australian solution is RWD.

          Its a 60,000-70,000 annual sale segment which is not worthy of a unique Chevy-only model radically different from the Lacrosse. Lets also wait for NY Autoshow and see what the 2014 Lacrosse brings.

          The XTS is really the outlier in that Impala/Lacrosse/XTS threesome…not the Chevy or Buick.

          Or, you’re another person arguing for the elimination of the Buick/GMC sales channel which would be a massive mistake.

          • 0 avatar
            APaGttH

            My issue is not that the LaCrosse and Impala are sold side-by-side.

            The simple argument of, “they share the same platform,” would mean the Lexus ES should not exist (as one example).

            What I have a problem with is a loaded Impala is north of $40K – same as a loaded LaCrosse. For $40K – I’m going with the LaCrosse. It’s a no brainer.

            The pricing is all wrong.

            A completely loaded Cruze comes in just a tick above a base Verano. That makes sense.

            The pricing of the Impala versus LaCrosse – FAIL.

          • 0 avatar
            sunridge place

            1. Perhaps you should wait to see what the 2014 Lacrosse that is debuting later this month at the NYC Auto Show has to offer…then wait a few more months for its pricing before declaring it a ‘FAIL!!!’

            Or, have you somehow been given advanced access to the 2014 Lacrosse options and pricing before the rest of us?

            2. A Cruze LTZ with a Sunroof and the Enhanced Safety Package is over 26k. A Verano starts at $23470. That’s a tick?

            And, I’ll say this again…there will be very few $40k plus Impala’s built. The sweet spot will be the LT with the V6 starting at $31k with a couple of 1k package groups taking it up to $34k.

            **Edit** Had the Verano pricing wrong…it now starts at $23965…still 2k under a loaded Cruze.

          • 0 avatar
            APaGttH

            @sunridge place

            $2000 difference is $34 a month (roughly) on a 60 month car loan (average new car loan is now 64 months). Yes, $2K difference is a “tick.” $34 won’t even pay a prepaid smartphone bill for a month or give you a tank of gas in a Prius. It is for the average car buyer, of 51 years old, chump change.

          • 0 avatar
            sunridge place

            @APaGttH

            Ok on the pricing gap I guess. You strangely didn’t address my point about the 2014 Lacrosse debuting later this month in NY and how it completely makes your ‘FAIL!!!!!!!!’ on pricing irrelevant.

            The update will probably be refreshed exterior and all-new interior. Gonnna go out on a limb and guess pricing will go up giving you what you are looking for as far as pricing difference between the two.

  • avatar
    phxmotor

    Gotta admit… a “fun to read” review… but seems to be a more and more irrelevant review of merits in favor of an attempt by one who has been snubbed by GM upper mgt and still trying (over and over and over) to return the favor.

    • 0 avatar
      th009

      Indeed. And if you read the CNN link, the only thing they found confusing was the revolving door of Chevrolet ad agencies — nothing to do with the Impala itself.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Suddenly worried for the SS Sedan.

    Malibu – screwed up a car going in the right direction (but at least a quick refresh is on the way)

    2014 Impala – answers a question that NO ONE has asked – would you like to pay loaded AWD Buick LaCrosse 3.6L V6 money for a decontented Chevrolet built on the same platform.

    Apparently GM can build a good small car (ya I know, Consumer Reports ripped the Spark, big deal, they ripped the Yaris, they ripped the iQ, they clearly don’t like A-segment cars – look it up yer’ self) in the Spark (debatable) Sonic and Cruze — but something is going very amiss in the step in the right direction taken back in 2008 when the Epsilon Malibu debut.

    LONG LIVE THE W-BODY!!!

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Reading my mind, brother.

    • 0 avatar
      86er

      “2014 Impala – answers a question that NO ONE has asked…”

      They answered Toyota, which is all GM does in the passenger and crossover segments going on a few decades now.

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        Buick LaCrosse answers the “Avalon” question – or as noted above a VF Commodore with multiple trim levels.

        This travesty does not.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          GM should have let the Holden/Pontiac G8 become the Impala, and they should have retired the Caprice name.

          There’s still a healthy market for that type of vehicle amongst a VERY loyal base of consumers, in both 6 cylinder and 8 cylinder variations, since it is genuinely and appreciably different than the Malibu or any other front drive vehicle GM offers (which the success of the Chrysler 300/300C & Charger proves).

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Agreed, you want GM’s Avalon you have Lacrosse and to a lesser extent XTS to choose from. Impala could have been something really special.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    I’ve had experience with a 03 impala, for what it is it’s definately not worth the amount paid new. The rear leg room is absymal, the car feels stuffy, can’t imagine cheaper plastics.

    I sat in the new 2014 at the local autoshow, the rear seat room is greatly improved but still inadequate,

    While I’m on rear seat room, has GM offered anything in the last 20 years with appropriate rear seat room?

    The car is all over top fo the malibu, It’s better looking then the old version but still completely ugly, like a bad copy of the Camry that wants to be just far enough different that they don’t get sued. I can’t stand the last 10+ years of the car…
    And 40k? No way, There are so many better options at that price that it’s laughable to even be able to option it up that high, even the buick varient shouldn’t hit the 40k except maybe at the very top range if that.

    My opinion, kill it with fire before you do any more damage to a once great name, or what’s left there of.

    The SS should simply replace it and be improved upon.
    Give it a 5.3 standard, optional 3.6 and optional 6.2 and it’s a win

    • 0 avatar
      ehaase

      CAFE is why GM can’t do what you want.

    • 0 avatar
      sunridge place

      ‘And 40k? No way’

      I officially give up trying to explain that the overwhelming majority of new Impala’s will be in the $28k-36k range…not over $40k.

      • 0 avatar
        corntrollio

        Yeah, I’ve always thought columnists purposefully throw in the price of the most fully loaded highest trimline model without context so that people who don’t read assume that’s the price of the base model and write more comments.

        To be fair, Baruth did add a quote about the LTZ stickering up to $40,000 and that the LTZ is top of the line later, but a lot of people don’t read.

        • 0 avatar
          sunridge place

          No kidding…there’s a freaking Kia Optima for $36k.

          http://www.kia.com/us/#/optimalimited

          No one runs around with their hair on fire about how stupid Kia is with that model and its pricing.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        I realize that it doesn’t start at 40k, what I’m saying is, that it is not worth that in any form.

  • avatar
    2012Impala

    How do you know this vehicle is a castrophe when you have not test drove on so far. Also, I will say it again this vehicle compeetes primarily with Ford Taurus not the Avalon.

    • 0 avatar
      Summicron

      Agreed… the Camry competes most directly with the Avalon.

      A lot of Camry people like me who have always been too frugal (and contemptuous of branding BS) to break with Toyota for Lexus are smitten with the Avalon. We’re looking at what will probably be our last new car purchase and thinking…”What the hell, why not?”

      Actually, I’m enough in awe of Toyota management to think that they know this. They won’t get us into a Lexus so they dangle the new Avalon in front of us at just the right time…..

      • 0 avatar
        2012Impala

        Exactly, the Avalon is for retiring baby boomers s who are Camry Loyalists who want something Lexus like but are too smart to pay the premium for one. On the off chance that a baby boomer Toyota owner would cross shop GM when contemplating an Avalon purchacse me thinks they would be looking at the Buick Lacrosse.

        • 0 avatar
          Summicron

          I hate to admit this, but I don’t think most of us Toyotarians are open-minded enough to seriously cross shop any other make with the possible exceptions of Honda & Nissan.

          The conversion experience in the 70′s and 80′s to Japanese cars was just too deep and powerful to allow change now that we’re approaching geezerhood.

          • 0 avatar
            2012Impala

            Agreed, Toyota has a good game plan get folks to buy a Corolla when their young and have no problems;then have em buy 3-4 Camrys or Sienna; and then an Avalon or if there 401k has done well a Lexus. The only defections might be to Subaru for an Outback or maybe an Acura.

            Younger people like me, its a little different. I purchased a 2007 Impala that stickered for 23k for 17k and had 120,000 trouble free miles so I bought 2012 Impala with 30,000 miles for 12.9 an absolute steal. The Camry is a nice car but I can get a v6 Impala cheaper and have had a good experience with Chevys.

          • 0 avatar
            Summicron

            @2012 Impala

            Spot on with your read of the strategy and its effectiveness.
            I’m really glad to hear of your good experiences with Chevys. I’ve always trusted their trucks (Fords too) and I’m glad to see they’ve gotten their cars more reliable.

            I make a concerted effort to research and buy American-made in things like home mechanicals and lawn/garden equipment, but I admit to being brainwashed with cars. Glad your generation is different.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            @2012 Impala

            You did steal that at 12,900… I bought a loaded Grand Prix in 2010 at the auction for 11,450 with fees and it had 53K on the clock. Two year old Impalas at the time were bidding around that figure, and the base 2010s were bidding 13-14.

  • avatar
    86SN2001

    This Neal Pollack clown is a hack.

    Serisouly there is NO WAY a 3800 pound car with over 300HP and a 6-speed is “sluggish”

    I bet he raved about the WELL BELOW 300HP in the porky, over 4,000 pound Taurus.

    They guy is a hack.

    Autoblog GUSHED over the Impala.

    Maybe TTAC should just drive it rather than review it by quoting other negative articles. There’s an idea.

  • avatar
    Offbeat Oddity

    I rode in a W Body Impala a few years ago and was unimpressed. It rode way too softly, had a small backseat for the size, and screamed rental car on the inside and outside. Not surprised the new one is getting lackluster reviews, either.

    • 0 avatar
      sunridge place

      This Impala has nothing to do with the one you drove a few years ago.

      And, its generally getting good initial reviews. Jack found one guy who writes for GQ and Mens Journal who wrote for a Yahoo blog that had some negative things to say. I think Jack is annoyed he didn’t get a trip to San Diego for the press event.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      No offense, but that’s like saying I rode in a Honda Passport a few years ago and I wasn’t impressed – so surely the current Pilot is equally unimpressive.

  • avatar
    chicagoland

    Well, back in the ‘good old days’, one could by a fuly loaded Caprice Classic, or Impala Custom, that could cost more than a base Buick LeSabre, and no one cried about it.

    Caprice and its BOP cousins sold in good #’s, side by side, for years. It even outlived the other B bodies, until 1992 Roadmaster.

    Once the sticker shock wears off, and real world discounts are applied, GM fans will be buying them up. And business fleets are not going to want old models, they want good residuals.

    If Ford can move Taurus and Focus up market, after years of fleet dumping, maybe GM could? Wait and see.

  • avatar
    Compaq Deskpro

    When do we get a police car version?

  • avatar
    nickoo

    There are a lot of cars I would like to buy for 40,000. The impala isn’t one of them. Did GM forget they have competition? I’d put a Charger R/T Max against all takers at this price point.

    • 0 avatar
      Maxseven

      The Charger R/T Max is way too gaudy with it’s exaggerated body panels, bling-chrome wheels and whacko, mismatched steering wheel. Too bad the Challenger doesn’t have the Charger’s interior, and a newly designed, worthy steering wheel – that would be something. I realize the Charger isn’t a saloon, but who cares?

  • avatar
    CelticPete

    I’d prefer the Challenger too – but I dont have a family. 4 doors are just way more convient even when your 2 door has a decent backseat. The Charger/300 blows this away – they look cooler, have a better interior and have RWD.

    That being said I rented an SRX with the 3.6 liter V6. It wasn’t slow at all – actually had good pickup. So I doubt this car is slow. It did strangely sound AWFUL at full throttle. Way worse then any 4 cylinder I have heard.

    Very few cars are slow anymore..The slowest thing I have rented was a base Jetta. It actually feels nimble but they don’t call it 2.slow for nothing. (It uses a rather awful 2.0 liter). I actually found it kinda comically amusing. Its been a long time since I driven a car that I was flooring on a regular basis.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    The problem with the price is thus:

    When people see an Impala they don’t see luxury, or prestige, or a nice interior, or anybody with $40 grand to spend on a car. They see something mediocre with a too-big badge, and remember all the mediocre versions which came before it. And they might recall when they rented one.

    40K is ridiculous, for ANY amount of trim goodies added to this thing.

  • avatar
    RatherhaveaBuick

    Chevy is really disappointing me again.

    The new Impala is ugly and overpriced, and I really don’t understand who they’re trying to market it too. Just grow up and buy a Lacrosse. They should’ve just re-done a G8 and forgo this whole confusing ‘SS’ project. W-bodies are dependable. People who have a current Imp are not at all the same buyers who would get the new one. This car is DOA.

    The new Malibu is chunky and underwhelming in every way. Its too big and fat, yet the inside is small, like so many new cars. The 2008-2012′s are almost desirable by comparison…what a step backward they’ve taken here.

    The Cruze is the only Chevy car I would have to say I kinda like. Its competitive and relatively good looking. It sells too. However if it doesn’t get a facelift soon, people will forget about it like they did the shoddier Cobalt, and then we’re back in 2007 for the bow tie.

  • avatar
    calmaro

    Note: Have only sat in/ seen/ not yet driven one…
    2014 presentation from front is powerful, sharp, appealing. Egg crate grille and Chevy ‘face’ a nostalgic nod to both ’67 and ’71 Impala. It says Chevrolet (even though bow tie is too big), yet is also clean and Saab-esque simple. Previous 2001-2013 model didn’t have such stature.
    On looks alone, retro allure wrapped up in modern package will nudge a lot of loyal buyers to acquire.
    There is that amateurish rear fender crease and ugly angled (cheap?) trunk line to contend with visually.
    Tail lamps may grow on me and I’ll wait to see how they light up at night– for now they seem to pay homage to Hyundai’s dominating design language of flared rectangles.
    Different market for upcoming SS.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States