I bet you didn’t know there’s a torque steer conspiracy afoot. Several mainstream manufacturers have decided to boost their front wheel-drive models’ fuel efficiency by throwing their drivers at solid objects each and every time they dare to accelerate with authority. Thankfully, not all carmakers have joined the secret scheme; many wrong wheel-drivers maintain manageable directional stability under maximum thrust. Of course, these vehicles aren’t powered by a 5.3-liter can of whoop ass, like Chevrolet's latest Impala SS. If ever there was a front wheel-drive car that discourages hoonery, this is it.
Even before you fire it up, the Impala SS wards off G-force jockeys with its milquetoast styling. I’m not saying that the SS’ lines are restrained, but if this car were a politician it'd be too conservative for the Neocons. The usual hot car performance cues– aggressive front air dam, rear wing, bling wheels and twin pipes– are subtle to the point of existential angst. Only the 18” hoops sing a siren song to adrenalin seekers (courtesy of The Ramones): “Ba-ba-bamp-ba ba-ba-ba-bamp-ba, I wanna be sedated.”
Inside, if it’s good enough for Avis, it’s good enough for you. Although the SS’ cabin is large and accommodating, the mock luxurious surfaces are as unyielding as a Kim Jong Il. Even the one place where the car’s designers showed their soft side– the door inserts– are blue light special. Parts bin? More like rubbish bin. The flash casting on the shift knob is bad enough. The fact that it lacks gear change information on its flimsy façade is worse. For a company that’s been promising world class interiors for the better part of a decade, the SS’ interior quality is nothing short of inexcusable.
And then there's the bean-counted icing on the rental car cake: the $31k Impala SS uses the same bulky steering column, bus-sized steering wheel and counterintuitive dash-mounted gear indicator as its column-shifted counterpart. But hey, the panel gaps are tight and uniform and the MP3-compatible, XM-ready eight-speaker BOSE audio has mad flava. If you like a traditional American big car vibe, the Impala SS is a nice place to visit– provided you keep your eyes closed and your hands to yourself.
The Super Sport allure (such as it is) rests solely upon the Impala's Corvette-based pushrod V8. This small block mill generates so much horsepower (303hp @ 5600rpm) and torque (323 ft.-lbs. @ 4400rpm) that it launches the 3711 pound Impala like a ball of flaming garbage in a catapult. Zero to sixty arrives in a shocking 5.6 seconds. The Impala SS has more than enough grunt to put a smile on your face– just like the one found on a septuagenarian moments after his last Viagra.
For a motor this beefy, you could even say the Impala's four-speed slushbox holsters one too many gears in its arsenal. Its quick-witted mannerisms also make part throttle acceleration more impressive than its cylinder deactivated fuel economy figures (19/27). Make no mistake: this is a well-executed powertrain. Well, aside from the fact that it’s off the mark by exactly 90 degrees.
Now I know I said the front wheel-drive SS is a torque steer demon. Clued-in readers will know that’s not strictly true. The Bowtie Boys have programmed the SS’ traction control system to counter the inevitable loss of grip at the prow by braking the left and right wheel sequentially, sending torque back and forth. The result is just as annoying as genuine torque steer, only slightly more bearable. If you want REAL torque steer, simply disengage the traction control and hang on.
The SS’ ride is wonderfully compliant and utterly non-sporting. Throw this floaty drifty heavyweight into a corner and the chassis tilts precipitously, violently hurling its unsupported driver towards one door or the other. Luckily, twin piston front brake calipers slow the bruiser’s rapid pace with ease and grace. The Impala SS is fine and dandy in a straight line, at 3/5ths. Push any harder and there’s no question whatsoever it’s gonna hurt. With its raucous intake tenor, accelerative restraint requires Pavlovian conditioning– which the SS’ handling provides at no extra charge.
In short, this dog won’t hunt. Someone in GM's marketing department should have had a word with the company’s engineers. Even a shade tree hot rodder knows an Impala SS requires strong styling, an upscale interior and a world class chassis. Rumor has it the next generation Impala will have a proper rear-wheel drive layout. Let’s hope so.
144 Comments on “Chevrolet Impala SS Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Good job, Mehta. I wonder how many people were clamoring for a front-drive soft-mobile with bland styling and an ancient drivetrain?
GM and Ford are really beginning to irritate me. As you point out, they’ve been promising upgraded interiors for 10 years….only on occasion do I see evidence of that happening.
Sajeev,
Having driven one of these on a recent weekend (and not bought, BTW), I can say that the admittedly uninspired interior is not as bad as you say and a definite improvement for Chevy (yeah, lots of qualifiers there).
It is fun to drive however and since the saleasman was not along I did note your concerns about handling at the edge. I never felt threatened however. Having had a couple of earlier-gen Luminas and Impalas for company cars, I found the handling pretty predictable and not scary. For those brought up and sold on FWD sedans this car is OK.
Yet, FWD is why I wouldn’t and didn’t buy one.
I thought this was the truth about cars? Is there anything you guys like about American iron? This is a decent car. At real world transaction prices, they will sell. My weekend sojourn with one in Canada was uneventful, passed quickly (as in 160 kph), and lightened my gas card about as much as the Accord I was forced into last month. I admit, the domestic auto industry has paid my way since I was 7, so I will always look for the best side of them, just as I do with my 20 years married wife. But, I am not stupid, know how to get around PIR in 1:30, and give no one a pass for sentiment. Just once, look at a car without your preconceived notions, please. They say optimists live longer, too.
olddavid
In Sajeev’s defense, this review is easily the most positive thing I’ve read about this car on TTAC. The whole idea of a FWD 300+ hp car is universally derided, and for good reason. Besides, the whole thing screams “quick fix” from the styling to the interior.
I would applaud this if it were a DIY effort from some Impala fanatic (do they exist for this particular iteration of the car?). But this is a corporate effort, so the bar is raised and the car still seems to hit its forehead on it.
This site is infested with driving enthusiasts, just like me. The problem is that most of these cars will be sold to people who have no idea what Sajeev is talking about. And so long as it doesn’t break, they’ll tell you they’re quite happy with the thing.
I disagree on the number of ratios. The gap between first and second is HUGE. The car needs another ratio in there. Yes, it pulls strongly even at 2,500 rpm in second, but it’d be even stronger at 4,000+.
I also slightly disagree on the amount of torque steer. It’s there, but not abundant. There’s only one car I’ve driven in the last few years with so much torque steer that the car’s handling was ruined: the Sentra SE-R Spec V.
Finally, GM makes a much better fast front-driver for enthusiasts: the Grand Prix GXP is far more fun to drive than the Impala SS. Unlike the Chevy, it’s one of those cars that actually feels better the harder you push it. Sure, it’s far from perfect, but it’s a lot of fun. Could be a bargain as a nearly new car.
My site’s page for the Grand Prix:
http://www.truedelta.com/models/Prix.php
I think this is further evidence that GM needs to put Magnaride standard in everything with an MSRP over $30K and optional on everything else.
Mr. Mehta;
You are too critical of the Impala’s “milquetoast” styling.
“The usual hot car performance cues– aggressive front air dam, rear wing, bling wheels and twin pipes– are subtle to the point of existential angst.”
OK automotive aesthetics are subjective, but I think Chevy should get a medal for this design – many other performance models are encrusted with copious amounts of “Aero AIDS” – useless and ugly rear spoiler, chin spoilers that won’t clear a gum wrapper, and giant wheels optimized for fashion not function. This stuff if the vinyl roof of the 90’s and early millenium.
I would like to propose an annual award from TTAC: “the performance model least be-spoiled by stupid plastic junk” or “the annual award for restraint in mounting giant stupid wheels”. I am disappointed GM had to attach *any* junk to this car, but better less than more.
Finally remember there is a market niche for this type of car. It is called a “sleeper” or “Q Ship” and is designed to surprise other drivers.
“it launches the 3711 pound Impala like a ball of flaming garbage in a catapult.”
That cheered me up out of my post-holiday blues. The very idea of this car is sad and embarrassing.
I’m only 30 so I won’t claim to have witnessed all the ups and downs in the auto industry but I have to comment on this whole FWD vs. RWD thing. I remember in the late 80s or early 90s when Honda put out a commercial making fun of RWD. They showed a dog sled being pushed by dogs versus one being pulled by them. Their argument was that in terms of wet/icy traction it is more efficient to pull rather than push. That clever analogy combined with Honda’s reputation for long-lasting and efficient engines made me subscribe to the FWD camp.
I owned a ‘95 Civic Si and I loved everything about it. After that I started a family and needed a larger version of the Si but Honda didn’t bring the 5-door to America so I bought a ‘03 Matrix XRS. I figured that I was getting exactly what I wanted, an efficient and sporty hatchback that can hold a small family. Unfortunately I found out that the ~180HP didn’t route well through the front wheels. Accelerating from a dead stop felt like an arm wrestling match sometimes and I learned to stop accelerating at all in turns. It’s not to say that I don’t like the car, I just realized that I found the limitations of FWD.
First, I live in California and wet/icy traction problems occur about 8 or 9 days out of the year for me.
Second, FWD is great for vehicles with less than 150 HP. Those vehicles are efficient and handle well.
We are in the middle of a second horsepower war which is cool for car enthusiasts (not so much for environmentalists). Right now if you want the big HP you need to forget about FWD. However, if you want efficiency then get a light-weight vehicle with FWD. Choose the right tool for the job.
It’s kind of sad because I know that GM and Ford were shocked by the FWD success of the Japanese cars in the late 80’s and they decided to change everything to FWD. However they never made a good small FWD car and they took their mediocre medium and large cars and ruined them with FWD.
The big question that needs to be asked is “who really wants to buy this?” My extended family is pretty evenly split between the Europhiles and the the muscle car crowd, and I can’t think of anyone who would really be interested.
1. You’ve already stated there will be a rear-drive Impala soon.
2. You are priced dangerously close to the class leaders in the segment.
3. You have added nothing appreciable except some straight-line speed (esp. lacking in visual cues). Overly-subtle visual changes are usually the territory of the Germans, but even they make their hi-po models more obvious compared to this SS.
The fuel economy is commendable, as it is with the Vette. I’m very impressed with that element, which might be the only real saving grace from a marketability perspective (ie, V8 power on demand, with V6 economy).
I want to buy it because I need a fast car that will fit three kids in the back with a transaction cost of under $26K. The Impala SS fits that need. I also prefer front wheel drive because, like I said, I have 3 kids in the back and snow days are pretty freakin scary in my neck of the woods.
I’m intrigued by the new AWD Fusion, for about the same cash, but it ain’t no 300HP V8.
jazbo123: The interior is a LOT better than the last Impala, but that’s certainly not good enough for me. At this price point, its still one of the worst interiors (Chrysler 300 too) in its class, and there is simply no excuse for that.
olddavid: I’d be in a Crown Victoria Sport (17″ wheels, monochrome) well before the Impala SS. That’s actually an American car to be proud of, even though its slooooow. Unlike the Impala, the Crown Vic is better than the rumors about it.
How’s that for objectivity?
Michael Karesh: I’ll have to drive that Sentra. I just can’t imagine a high revving four-pot messing up handling as well as the LS1-series motor turned sideways.
And yes, I heard the GXP was better at managing the power. For another road test, I guess.
Ed S.: Magnaride wouldn’t fix the torque steer problem, but the handling would be a lot more controlled.
thx_zetec: Ok, I’ll admit it makes a nice Q-ship from the understatement route. But I’d still like an American car with American car styling cues, not the bland curves and generic lighting pods. You should be able to have your cake and eat it too.
mdanda: It goes fast in a straight line, not fast in the corners. Depending on the roads you travel, that’s an important distinction.
I’ve driven the car, and much like the powerful torque steer laden V8 Caddies of the last decade, it is a bit of a handful under acceleration.
This can be viewed as a huge negative, but I prefer to look at it as an interesting quirk. The car may look bland, but the LS4 V8 gives it tons of character that no other (non Chrysler) car in its class can match. Add to this tons of room, good economy, and dealers willing to deal on them, and you have an interesting alternative to the vanilla sedans that dominate the segment. Being able to smell your own burnouts is just an added bonus. ;-)
As a hotrodder, it bears mentioning that the tuning on these cars is extremely conservative, in deference to the transaxle. The motor is basically a 6 liter Corvette motor with a smaller bore and a slightly shortened crankshaft due to space limitations. It even uses the same cylinder head castings as the Vette.
Given how well these new-age GM V8s respond to modifications, it will be interesting to see a 500+ HP tuner version with ported heads and a lumpy cam. Now that would be some FWD “hoonery,” as you put it.
I wonder just how strong that 4T65 transaxle really is.
I have not driven an Impala SS but have driven the GP GXP. I liked it but was unhappy the interior (except for the front seats which were very comfortable and reasonably supportive in my opinion). It is amazing that the Impala (which is built in the same plant) fails on the handling front given an extra year of development time versus the GXP. Looking at both units from a base MSRP standpoint, there is not that much difference.
I am also surprised that both of these vehicles have so much torque steer given the knowledge GM has on eliminating it on FWD vehicles with V8’s it garnered from the Cadillac Sevilles from the 90’s. I understand that the small block V8 has more torque than a 90’s era Northstar but really!
I disagree with you Sajeev on the exterior styling of the SS. I like the fact that it has a certain amount of stealthiness (is that a word?) about it. The world has its share of “look at me, ticket me” sedans such as the Charger, M5, TL, etc. Like the late, unlamented Marauder, the SS has enough visual cues to set it apart but not enough to attract unwanted attention.
Maybe GM will do us all a favour the next time around and offer the next-gen Impala and GP with all-wheel drive.
Happy New Year!
I cannot imagine why anyone would buy this car instead of a loaded 300C. Get yourself a set of four good snow tires for the winter. All of the hype about the superiority of front wheel drive in the snow doesn’t make sense. You still have to be able to stop and turn corners, and powering the front wheels does little for that problem.
Don’t you wonder how those people in their Volvos got around Sweden for all those years?
I read that Chevy decided to call the more powerful Equinox a “sport”, rather than “SS”. Maybe if Chevy had called this a “sport” and saved the SS moniker for actual sports sedans, they woudn’t have built expectations they couldn’t meet.
I guess this is the time to say ‘wait 2 years and the 09 Impala will be class leading,’ but I think I’ll pass. Judge GM by its products, not its promises.
Sajeev’s review is honest and well written. As usual.
It may not be obvious at first glance, but this car illustrates what is really wrong at GM:
-Whether or not this version is better than the last is not the point. The objective should be to be superior to the competition, which itself is also improving with every iteration. GM aspires for improvement, instead of victory, and falls short of the mark; in the marketplace, it is superiority that counts.
-The General’s one-size-fits-all solution to all of its ills invariably leads back to the same cure-all — a pushrod V-8. While it’s fun to have a 300 hp sedan every once in a while, you don’t need to be an enthusiast to know that ponies and FWD don’t go together, and that 300 hp is going to burn a lot of fuel that may be too costly for your typical would-be Impala driver to afford.
It leads back to the inevitable questions — why do the more modestly powered versions of these GM vehicles end up being so miserable, and why is more attention not paid to those cars? Those who shop for the likes of Accords and Camrys have come to expect that ALL versions of the car have their virtues, and that even the slower one offers acceptable performance — with GM, anything that lacks a V-8 is almost assured of being subpar. It’s high time that Wagoner et. al. focused on building a car that is worth $25,000, rather than just $25 per day.
Like the late, unlamented Marauder, the SS has enough visual cues to set it apart but not enough to attract unwanted attention.
CSJ: Yeah, kinda. But the Grand Marquis was a better looking (more American) canvas to start with. The Impala isn’t a bad looking car in respect to Camrys, its just not appealing as a Chevrolet.
CSJohnston,
Every FWD V8 Caddy I ever drove, both the Northstar and it’s torquier 4.9L pushrod predecessor, torque steered plenty…enough to change lanes on their own when the throttle was matted on the highway. I suspect the new LS4 Impala’s output is being artificially held back to limit this, but I found the torque steer to be about the same.
It’s funny how TS makes the Acura TL and Altima feel cheap and econocarlike to me, but when accompanied by a muscular V8 rumble, it is an interesting contrast that is far less objectionable.
But I agree with the others…..I’ll wait for the RWD version.
jthorner:
There are two BIG BIG advantages for FWD in the snow:
a: A lot more weight over just the drive wheel helps traction. On old RWD cars, there was the trick of putting a couple hundred pounds of sand in the back when driving in snowy conditions.
b: A FWD actually does handle better in snow and ice, becaues the drive wheels pull you through a turn, and the turning wheels have more weight over them for better traction.
It’s amazing what a FWD Saturn Hamstermobile with snow chains will do in a blizzard. Crossed Echo Summit (Highway 50 in the sierras) just before it was closed for avalanche control. Easy-peasy-no-problemo.
nweaver: question for you. Some people say that RWD with modern day winter tires and sandbags is better than FWD because its easier to control understeer in the snow. Thoughts?
“… Volvos … Swedes…”
My RWD Volvos were actually very good in the snow with all-seasons. With real snow tires at all 4 corners, they were awesome. My current FWD Toyotas are also very good in snow with all-seasons. They do behave differently but they’re still good.
It seems to me that the keys to success on snow are less which end has the drive wheels and more due to reasonably light weight, limited power(*), limited-slip differentials, good balance and good ground clearance. Both vehicles shared these qualities.
(*) it’s easier to modulate takeoffs to match the traction limits of icy conditions if you only have 114hp (Volvo) or 120hp (Toyota) on tap!
Talk about an answer to a question no one asked.
What GM could bring in is the car that the Monaro was based on; the australian Commodore
I usually like to champion the underdog fwds on here, but this is ridiculous. fwd only makes sense in a compact, and even then it takes a lot of good engineering to do it right. these things are not sleepers. everybody knows they have hp, but everybody also knows that these cars are a total joke. the styling is only slightly better than the previous fugly model and it’s still pretty awful stuff. not to mention the terrible handling. if anything this review is too soft on this ill-conceived crapmobile.
GM and Ford are really beginning to irritate me. As you point out, they’ve been promising upgraded interiors for 10 years….only on occasion do I see evidence of that happening.
Beginning to see a pattern? GM, mainly with loud-mouth Lutz doing the talking, is trying hard to hype up the interior of every new car it has coming out. What’s the problem? Most of the interiors are still a step or two behind Toyota and Honda, and a lot of them share obvious parts like radio units.
SherbornSean is right – this should be badged something other than a SuperSport. LTZ, Sport, Z7, whatever. Just not SS.
As a former 1996 Impala SS owner (just recently parted with) and a current TBSS owner, it’s just plain wrong to drop in a V8 in this platform and call it an SS. I’m even iffy on my TBSS, but 13.5 second quarter mile times tend to sway me.
The SS badging on the Impala disappoints everyone involved, and dilutes the SS badge, for what little it means any longer.
At least the Cobalt SS is a fine track car for its class, when prepped correctly. And I don’t think it should be an SS, either.
Why didn’t GM use the torque steer reducing tricks from the GXP on this car? What, so Pontiac can make it exclusive? Stupid. It’s no miracle cure, but for once they didn’t share crap across brands for the same platform? Idiots.
Sajeev: No one does a better job of extracting torque steer from a four cylinder than Nissan. Track down a Spec V, and don’t touch the gas in a turn unless your hands are VERY firmly on the wheel.
As for the 300C someone else mentioned, the Impala doesn’t hold up well, but the GP GXP is actually much more fun to drive than the Chrysler. The softer suspension settings in the Impala make torque steer worse, as the nose rises up more in hard acceleration, further distorting the halfshaft angles.
Another former “real” Impala SS owner (1995) here.
This current “Impala” (can’t even bear to type it out the full name!) actually will outrun my old SS (6.6 to 60/14.9 ¼ was the fastest I ever did with it. However there is no way that it can compare with it in handling, room, or comfort. The RWD 90s Impalas never knew what “torque steer” meant either!
Y’all are exactly right–FWD does not belong on this size a car, nor does it work with anything capable of more than 200 HP. If Nissan can’t conquer torque steer with their otherwise fine Altima SE-R, then it’s probably a hopeless task.
The current body’s Toyota-lite generic styling earns it 0 points. Neither does the too-cramped driving position. The instrumentation is a pale Honda-wannabe style, and the wheels look like they came off an AMT model kit.
However, I will stand up and defend big pushrod engines. GM has proved that they can work and work very well. Can someone possibly explain the advantage of the overly bulky Ford DOHC V8s? No real advantage over the LS1, let alone the LS2.
If GM would’ve called this thing a Super Lumina, I doubt anyone would complain, or care.
Another former “real” Impala SS owner (1995) here.
This current “Impala” (can’t even bear to type it out the full name!) actually will outrun my old SS (6.6 to 60/14.9 ¼ was the fastest I ever did with it. However there is no way that it can compare with it in handling, room, or comfort. The RWD 90s Impalas never knew what “torque steer” meant either!
As another “real” Impala SS owner (a 96) I will point out that a fast corner on a bumpy road would let you go tail out faster than you could believe. I never got into trouble, but the solid rear axle wasn’t world-class and is the main reason I sold it (with very little depreciation after 40k and 4 years).
If nothing else, the 94-96 Impalas showed that GM could actually build cars that don’t depreciate like lead shot thrown into a well.
seems to me that a little torque steer is a good trade off for lots more space – and if u don’t need space, why buy a sedan this big? and better snow and wet performance.
Our 1996 Impalas didn’t really depreciate much (mine only had 44K miles on it when I sold it, too, recently) but I don’t see how GM could apply that “knowledge” across the board. Because quite frankly, it was sort of luck, if you ask me. They were limited appeal models, the last of what we thought was a dying breed (well, considering it and the Maurader died, I think I’m right). Then DCX made the 300/Charger with a Hemi, and revived the genre, so to speak. Leave it to GM to bring a knife to a gunfight.
Honestly, the 94-96 Impala SS did have all the limitations of a rear drive live axle beast (and then some). Which is why it wasn’t my daily driver, thereby increasing the resale value (and decreasing my chances to be disappointed with it). I drove my Honda every day – the SS was mostly for fun.
As much as it pains me to say it, GM doesn’t NEED another Impala SS. That does little for their bottom line. They NEED the base Impala to compete well in the mainstream market. They need Camry/Accord type sales without whoring this car out with Bleeding Red Tag prices.
It merely pisses me off that they’ll badge this car this way for the sake of selling a few more, I suppose. I look at it like this – if BMW applies the M badge to EVERY 3 series made, or Mercedes applies the AMG badge to even the lowest 230, they might increase sales slightly and/or briefly. But long term that erodes value across the entire brand, and specifically to that badge. Rant over.
They need Camry/Accord type sales without whoring this car out with Bleeding Red Tag prices.
Isn’t the current sales drive better known as a Toe Tag Sale?
also, i wanna buy a cruiser that had really comfortable rear seats suitable for adults. I wish y’all would sit in them for a bit, and let us know what it feels like. I hear the rear seats on this one and the GP are uncomfortable.
All-in-all, not a bad package, but certainly not for everyone. Certainly not for those scared off by a little non-unexpected torque steer. And definitely not for those who like to flick about quickly around beckoning s-curves.
It is a good package for those wanting a daily highway cruiser with lots and lots of storage room- not just a big trunk, but with well-thought out storage in the fold down seats.
It’s a good package for those wanting to haul humans, and do so in winter weather without having to resort to doing by extra effort what FWD can do without trying.
From a practicality standpoint, the GPX scares me away in that no spare tire is provided by Pontiac, and the ability to do a four corner tire rotation is gone. Not to mention the GPX’s back seat is scrunched down, compared to the Impala, in an effort to get coupe lines out of a sedan.
What bugs me about the Impala is the crazy pricing extremes. Does it really make sense for one model to range from $20,000 to $34,000 (70% MSRP uplift over base price)? I say nay nay. I think that’s trying to make too much out of trim levels and 2 cylinders.
Not to mention, at Impala SS pricing you’re also courting the G35 and such.
also, i wanna buy a cruiser that had really comfortable rear seats suitable for adults. I wish y’all would sit in them for a bit, and let us know what it feels like. I hear the rear seats on this one and the GP are uncomfortable.
The seats are pretty comfy front and back. The leather was more like rubber, though. I had no other complaints, unlike my time with a Chrysler 300.
The rear seat bottoms also fold forward for carrying extra cargo. Not sure if its needed, but its a neat idea.
In order to be a “real” Impala shouldn’t it have 2 doors, not 4? In other words, don’t you mean 94-96 Caprice? (SS)
ronin,
I think a single car can effectively sell with massive price differences between. There was roughly 100% increase for the VW R32 over the base Golf (based on what they actually sold for, not just sticker). And to think people said the R32 was not distinctive enough from it’s base cousin. Same with the W8 Passat (as a market “tester” for the Phaeton), which ultimately died an early death and soon saw a lot of used demand.
The WRX and moreso the Mitsu Evo both pull it off pretty well, too (obviously with a lot more differentiation from base). Of course, it’s been said on this site many times that some manufacturers have the same build quality and ethic from top to bottom, while others–namely domestic–feel that market stratification should be more pronounced and based heavily on size. In other words, no matter how much you dress up a Cobalt, I could never see a version commanding $25k+
Sajeev:
Well, on ski trips, I’ve been the passanger in a LS400 which did a 90 degree skidout into a snowbank on a suprisingly clean road, while the Hamstermobile has plowed through some incredible crap, with just chains on (but no traction control or ABS).
If you have dedicated snow tires, it might be different, but for generic 4-season tires, I’d MUCH rather have FWD, it really is pretty easy to control at the speeds you should actually be going.
You screw up and give the FWD too much gas, and the wheels just spin. You screw up on the RWD, and it can slide around on you so easily.
Likewise, watching that SL500 get stuck in the snow just behind where we pulled out with the Hamstermobile over the christmas holiday was just a sad statement of what good an overpowered RWD beast can be in the snow….
Also, IMO, fold down seats are USEFUL. Cars which don’t have them should be pointed out: I think its one of the huge weaknesses of both the RX-8 and MazdaSpeed6.
Oh, you mean the seatcushons fold forward? Clever. Not as clever as the fit’s seats (the cargo area alone was enough for my sister to buy one), but seems a good idea to me.
Every FWD V8 Caddy I ever drove, both the Northstar and it’s torquier 4.9L pushrod predecessor, torque steered plenty…enough to change lanes on their own when the throttle was matted on the highway. I suspect the new LS4 Impala’s output is being artificially held back to limit this, but I found the torque steer to be about the same.
Hi Doc,
I don’t know. I never remember either the Seville or the Deville I spent time with having the same level of TS that the GXP I drove had. This is all based on an admittedly hazy memory but I don’t remember it being as pronounced or as violent.
Then again, once I learned to expect it, the TS in the Pontiac was no big deal. All it meant is I can get a bit of a workout while driving!
nweaver: if I ever live up north (I hope I never do, no offense ) I will have to try out a RWD car with a set of Blizzaks and compare it to a FWD car. Everyone raves about those Blizzaks in snow.
Yeah, the cushions fold forward and there’s a hole in there to keep stuff. Makes a good place for tools,gloves, etc or to hold extra shopping bags. I had more important business to discuss in the review (this is a Super Sport, not a rental car) but that’s what the comments section is for.
Sajeev:
I’ve been driving in the snow since I was a lad.
FWD is 1000x better than RWD. FWD is nearly as good as 4×4 on flat surfaces – I suppose the steeper grades would bring out the all wheel drive advantage.
FWD: You hit the throttle and steer where you want to go.
RWD: wheels spin, tail wags, flailing arms counter-steering.
You can love rwd – I do. Still doesn’t mean it’s not for crap in the snow.
As for the Chevy, if they put the V8 in any model, I might just have bought an LS. In fact, gimme the bench seat, soft suspension and 4 on the tree. Charge me $23K and I’m a happy Chevy owner.
In fact, spreading the V8 around might be wise considering next year’s Malibu will have a DOHC V6 and be about as big as the current Impala, not to mention that the V8 rates higher mileage than the 3.9L.
But if you must spend $30G, you might as well go Charger RT.
dhathewa: Wrote:
It seems to me that the keys to success on snow are less which end has the drive wheels and more due to reasonably light weight, limited power(*), limited-slip differentials, good balance and good ground clearance. Both vehicles shared these qualities.
As someone who drives in snow very often (most recently yesterday in a 2003 Impala) and who has logged lots of miles in the snow in both FWD and RWD vehicles, I strongly disagree with several of your points.
First FWD is better than RWD mainly because the car goes where you point it, period. You don’t have to go up hills sideways, constantly steering into the skids as the rear end fishtails in RWD vehicles. When the front tires spin, they spin where you want to go. When rear tires spin, they cause the rear end to slide sideways, which is very, very bad on public roads. Traction control has helped RWD cars become more manageable in the snow, but when you need to turn off the traction control to make good progress (in slush, wet snow or to get up a hill); FWD is far, far superior to RWD. Unless forced to by circumstances, I will never drive a RWD car in snowy conditions again.
Second, the best FWD snow car I ever drove was an 87 Bonneville, with about 70% of its weight over the front wheels. I never got stuck, and on many occasions drove around many different cars and trucks stuck on steep hills in the snow. The worst FWD car I remember was an 89 Sable wagon. The Sable handled great in the dry, but wandered and tracked poorly in the snow due to it’s more even weight distribution. I’d bet the Impala SS with winter tires or even plain old all season tires would be very good in the snow due to the extra V-8 weight in the front. With FWD cars, weight, and more importantly more weight in front makes for a far better winter car. Other people I’ve talked to have agreed with me that the GM B and C bodies were arguably the best winter 2WD cars ever made.
Why are we debating the relevance of the drivetrain layout as it pertains to about 1/3 of the US population for 3-5 months of the year? I guess you could argue that auto safety needs to cater to the lowest common denominator to achieve universal acceptance. Then again, it might be the perfect analogy for Detroit’s myopia.
“Are marketplace conditions favorable for this car, Mr. Wagner?”
*looks out window*
“I believe so. It’s still snowing.”
ash78:
Nevertheless, a rwd car is a snowstorm is way more dangerous than a fwd car. I will never buy a rwd car ever again – i mean NEVER – it breaks my heart too – i love rwd beemers. But one sideways trip up a snowy on ramp, and I’m a beleiver. At least GM got this right – the fwd part i mean – and now they are changing that! Damn. Why would you not have the best of both worlds – FWD for traction and cabin space, AND a cool V8? Beats me. Its like having your cake and eating it too!
“Why are we debating … drivetrain… ?” – ash78
Because if you live in that third of the country, winter capability is an essential part of vehicle capability, unless you are willing to store the vehicle for a few months and drive something else. I don’t have that kind of money.
“FWD is better than RWD… Going up hill…” – airglow
Going up hill brings out the worst in both.
In FWD, the incline transfers the CG a little bit towards the rear, reducing your traction advantage, albeit slightly. If you give it too much gas and the road is crowned or sloped, you begin to head for the ditch.
RWD can get you fishtailing but the cure is to let up on the gas and your slight rearward CG transfer helps a bit.
I don’t think there’s a hill you’ll climb with FWD that you can’t climb with RWD unless your front/rear weight distribution imbalance is extreme. And I don’t think that I’d want such a car for normal driving, anyway.
By the bye, are you sure the ‘89 Sable was RWD? The ‘90 was FWD, per Edmunds.
By the bye, are you sure the ‘89 Sable was RWD? The ‘90 was FWD, per Edmunds.
Airglow never said the Sable was RWD. All 20 years of Taurus/Sable production were indeed front drivers.
FWD v. RWD is a worthwhile discussion, but this is a piece of crap because it looks like piece of crap and handles like a piece of crap. When it comes to car design, I’m vein and so are all of us. We should be. So why can’t GM make something other than rolling abortion of a car?
The same suspension as the base model?? Give me a F–in’ break. I drove one of these and it handled worse than a ‘98 Civic.
All we get are excuses as to why GM can’t build a desirable sedan and promises of better products in the future. What a joke. I want to buy American, I really do, but I refuse to do so long as GM, Ford and DCX turn out garbage. We know they can do better…. cars like the European Focus prove it.
Lutz was quoted in the WSJ today that the new Malibu due out next year is a car he hopes people will rent and then say, “Holy smokes, it’s fabulous”. It looks better than any Chevy product, save the ‘Vette, but $20 and my left nut say it’s just another half attempt to catch up to where VW was 6 years ago. Looking forward to seeing that hunk of waste taking up space in the rental fleet’s parking lots.
Lets hope its cheaper and easier to fix than a VW – Its got to have some pluses.
It might even rent better than a sebring
Every time it snows in Kansas I see 740s and E-class MBs stuck all over the place. EVERY TIME!!!!