April 16, 2012 at 6:37 pm #38258
I saw this article but to me it might be SS but I’m not sure. What do you guys think??
April 17, 2012 at 12:55 am #39582
We did a write up addressing the same thing. The lack of brake enhancements is a dead give away that it’s not anything more powerful than what was revealed in NYC. It could be a hybrid. Or it could be an LS model without all of the body parts, which is probably an even higher possibility considering we don’t really know what the front fascia of the Impala LS will look like (it was the high-end LTZ that was at NYC). But this model’s front fascia is pretty conservative (no fog lamps, less grille detailing) — something that an LS model would sport.
April 18, 2012 at 9:32 pm #39591
Given that the Commodore is going to come over in one way, shape, or form, an SS variant of the Impala would be somewhat redundant, if not pointless — wouldn’t you say, guys?
April 22, 2012 at 10:37 pm #39637
Well the Impala is fwd and the upcoming car is a rwd so it wouldn’t be completely redundant, but I don’t think its necessary as long as bigger v6 is available in the regular impala.
April 23, 2012 at 7:16 am #39642
Sure it would. When it comes to performance, the FWD/Epsilon II-based Impala will be inferior to the SS/Commodore in every way. It’s just like comparing the Regal GS and the CTS. Both are around the same price and performance levels… but one does performance better thanks to a platform/chassis and drivetrain layout.
April 24, 2012 at 8:36 am #39653
Is an “SS V6 Impala” considered an “oxymoron”? Tradition dicatates that an SS is a rearwheel drive with a big V8! Consider the last real SS…1996 Impala with a corvette engine, my last Impala. A V6 SS Impala will just be another rental car. GM can put pretty paint and bigger wheels on a “dud” but it is still a “dud”.
April 24, 2012 at 8:39 am #39654
the only way i see an ss happening is if its awd with the lfx other than that no thanks
April 24, 2012 at 9:40 am #39655
@chevtothemax Even the LFX wouldn’t cut it! It would have to be the LFX TT… similar to the Ford Taurus SHO. Luckily, GM is working on such a mill:
April 24, 2012 at 11:42 am #39658
sweet a lfx with twins. thats gonna be one strong engine. will that be put in the silverado aswell. anyways yes a tt lfx and awd only awd no fwd in the hypothetical ss impalla
April 24, 2012 at 11:43 am #39659
Even with that powertrain, I’d still reserve the SS moniker for RWD performance… if anything, make the sported-up Sonic, Cruze, Malibu, and Impala a Z-Spec.
April 24, 2012 at 12:18 pm #39660
ya z-spec works i just wish they could streemline that a little the sonic z22 the cruze z24 the malibu z26 and the impalla z30 oh and the spark z11
April 24, 2012 at 2:28 pm #39662
Or streamline it by naming any “souped up” line Z-Spec. I’m a fan of simplicity, have you noticed? 😀
April 24, 2012 at 2:43 pm #39664
i have do you think it wuld work if you drpped the -spec and just had it the z
April 24, 2012 at 2:50 pm #39666
That would work, too. Unfortunately, I know too many smarta$$es who will about the reason it’s named “Z” and whether it’s due to the car being slow and always coming in last (like the last letter of the alphabet).
April 24, 2012 at 3:15 pm #39667
ya so true. i personally like the idea of having the numbers after the z. relevent of size/performance. like the new rwd sedan can be called the z32 cause there will be more performance then the impalla z30. these could be like amg they do up the regular cars then have a few of ther own. it could be the corvette brand we’ve mentioned before and then the c7 vette can be thier halo and the camaro can be normal chevy’s halo. the future z28 and zl1 will be under the same sub-brand. there would also be the code and a roadster ala solstice, and a smallish mid-engined car ala fiero to.
April 24, 2012 at 4:01 pm #39669
You mean the chronically undercompeditive rebadged Caprice cum Impala SS barge of 20 years ago?
Screw ‘tradition’, all of it. Nothing says an SS has to be RWD and a V8. In fact, the Impala SS of 1996 is overlooked today becasue it didn’t do anything to EARN the SS badge.
Want to know what car of late did earn the SS badge? The turbocharged Cobalt SS. I don’t recall the 1996 Impala SS ever going to the Nurburgring and setting a production car record in it’s class, or even compeating in SCCA compeitions. Probably because the Impala SS had inferior power to weight ratio and didn’t do anything partically well enough to warrant a replacement in the 21st century.
The calls for an SS Cruze are endless, and globally. Impala SS’s, only if you can be bothered to remember that worthless heap.
April 24, 2012 at 8:00 pm #39670
April 25, 2012 at 8:21 am #39672
yes but it should be an awd version for the ss. the cruze ss can be fwd. but for a car on a platform that can take awd the reasons not to for the performance version just aren’t there.
April 25, 2012 at 6:38 pm #39677
If Chevy wants to have an AWD SS Impala, they’re free to do so. As long as the car in SS trim sets the bar far and high above its compeditors, it’s drivetrain and powertrain won’t matter.
I’m not against RWD + V8’s on SS trim cars; there are times and places for such cars. I’m just opposed to it being seen by some as a permanately unchangeable formula that must never be challenged; and that it must be implimented in cars today desite them being the setup not being practical or possible to even make.
April 25, 2012 at 11:10 pm #39678
Go back as far as you want…Impala SS’s have always been bigger cars that packed a punch! Save “Nurburgring” for the Corvette and Camaro. The 1996 Impala SS has one of the best resale values of most cars in that era. So much for worthless heaps!
Corvettes and Camaros are not front wheel drive and they never will be…they have a powertrain that matters. So should an SS Impala! As far as permanately unchangeable formulas why else did GM and Ford bring back the 1960’s design on their Camaros and Mustangs? The formula worked then and it works in the 21st century.
April 26, 2012 at 1:52 pm #39684
grawdaddy i dont see why you’re trying to justify an impalla ss to me. i fully agree that there needs to be one. i was just stating that if they are making a ss impalla why wouldn’t they use the better handling option ie. awd/fwd. i am not against a fwd ss model actually i’m fully for it id love to see a cruze ss and maybe even a sonic ss. im fine with those being fwd. and to tell the truth i’d like to see a malibu ss with awd to go up against lancer evos and impreza wrxs. just shooting that out there.
April 26, 2012 at 2:25 pm #39687
“As far as permanately unchangeable formulas why else did GM and Ford bring back the 1960’s design on their Camaros and Mustangs?”
Because they didn’t.
They’ve introducted ‘Retro’, a mere sytling language, and judging from the sales figures, it’s at the end on it’s lifecycle. Ford has recently announced that the next Mustang will be revolutionary, not evolutonary. That’s one more nail in Retro’s coffin, and the 6th gen Camaro will likely follow suit.
If GM and FoMoCo really did try to apply a 1960’s design today, it wouldn’t even pass a crash test. Pencil thin A-pillars, benchseats, no-crumple zone, no airbags, X-frames, drum brakes, not even Stabilitrack. Yeah, GM and Ford want to be losers by making inferior cars like they did 50 years ago because things like the 21st century scare them.
It’s sounds like you want GM and Ford to go bankrupt.
April 26, 2012 at 8:31 pm #39692
@Grawdaddy Let me educate you…retro definition is, “reviving styles and designs of the past”. The 60’s is in the past where the style and design of the Camaro, Mustang, Challenger and Dodge Charger of today came from. Anyone with common sense knows you would not use the mechanics of a past era today. GM, Ford and Dodge are far from losers!
Any true gearhead would not even mention GM and Ford going bankrupt. Not even in jest!
April 27, 2012 at 2:49 pm #39710
Allow me to repost what I typed because you seem to be suffering from poor eyesight.
“They’ve introducted ‘Retro’, a mere sytling language, and judging from the sales figures, it’s at the end on it’s lifecycle. Ford has recently announced that the next Mustang will be revolutionary, not evolutonary. That’s one more nail in Retro’s coffin, and the 6th gen Camaro will likely follow suit.”
That’s right, ‘Retro’ is a styling lanugage and it’s dying. With it, all the horry old trash will go with it and nothing can change this.
April 28, 2012 at 10:42 am #39724
April 28, 2012 at 6:09 pm #39738
I hope I can offer a fresh perspective on the topic: for some reason, automobiles (and perhaps furniture/household furnishings) is the only industry that for some reason is pressured to be more historic, classic, and “retro”. Nowhere else do we see this kind of thinking.
For instance, can you imagine if people were insistent on a “retro” look to their phones? Maybe that would result in a smartphone with a rotary dial… or a phone in the shape of a banana (Nokia banana phone, anyone?) with a pull-out antenna. Just thinking out loud here… but I’m a fan of progress for the sake of improving quality of life, services, products, and the world; everything else — in that light — seems rather irrelevant.
April 28, 2012 at 10:01 pm #39749
rotary smart phone? isn’t there an app for that 😉 . and anyways phones aren’t sold on looks as much as cars and not nearly as much as house hold furnishings. people want the cars of old cause generally they look alot better in alot of peoples opinions. for example a classic belair or a jag e-type both extremely beautiful cars and people want that again.
April 29, 2012 at 10:37 am #39755
I’m pretty certain there is an app for a rotary phone pad.
What we’re looking for is an appeal within the field of industrial design that is lasting. The old chrome barges listed above may look appealing to a few, but with them comes their engineering shortcomings and inferior workmanship of the age that people of today simply will not put up with.
In contrast, the iPhone is pure utilitarian in a form that is instantly recognizable and is useable almost intuitively universally. On the other hand, many would say it’s form (along with everything else branded ‘minimalistic’) lacks a certain “Gemütlichkeit” because it isn’t seen as much more than a modern Swiss army knife.
April 29, 2012 at 6:11 pm #39760
Even with my poor eyesight I can see you still don’t understand that “retro” is more than just, “a mere sytling (styling) language”. It is the physical appearance of a past era. As they said in Motor Week this morning, the design and appearance of the 2012 ZL1 Camaro brings back the look of the 60’s. That is more than just language!
For your information, this “retro” hard sheet metal design is not going anywhere any time soon.
April 29, 2012 at 7:13 pm #39761
It is just, and nothing but, a styling language. It’s expected to come in style and then go out of style in exactly the same way as Landu roofs, whitewalls, chrome, rear window slats, tailfins, benchseats, column shifters, and opera windows went out of style.
But if you insist ‘Retro’ isn’t “going anywhere any time soon”, then be prepared to eat those words. Every last one of them.
“but buyers have since cooled on the Mustang’s retro look. Ford sold 166,530 units of the Mustang in 2006, but just 70,438 Mustangs found new homes in 2011. As such Ford has decided to give the Mustang a fresh look for the 2015 model year.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the next Mustang will adopt many of the styling cues found on the new Fusion in a bid to attract younger buyers. Those that have seen the 2015 Mustang say it looks nearly identical to the Evos concept and has a distinct Aston Martin flair to it.”
‘Retro’ is dying, and there’s not a damn thing you can do about it.
April 29, 2012 at 7:54 pm #39762
@Rick Perhaps “the physical appearance of a past era” translates into the appearance of a vehicle, thereby being a part of a styling language. That’s a small difference, as the result is appearance, i.e. exterior styling.
Outside the PT Cruiser, the Mustang was the vehicle that brought it back — the Camaro and Challenger followed. But the Mustang, as @Grawdaddy pointed out, is leaving that part of the design realm, and the Camaro may follow suit.
Retro happened — and will continue to happen in the future (over the next 5-10 generations of vehicles); but it would seem that for this and the next generation, it’s on the way out.
April 29, 2012 at 9:51 pm #39769
@Grawdaddy and @Alex The retro look of the 60’s that we see on the Mustang, Camaro, Challenger and Charger has no other way to go but to evolve into new designs. That is why we will see changes to sheet metal, engines, suspension, drivetrains and interiors; just as we have seen in the past.
My point was that “Styling language” that is used by the maufacturer and the media is just talk, vocabulary. Until you actually see rubber on the pavement it is all just talk. The “retro” look that we have today is looking at a past era vehicle copying the design and adding all the technology of today. Grawdaddy said, “Because they didn’t”, refering to the GM and Ford not bringing back the retro look of the 60’s. (his past comment)
Alex, there is no doubt that the Mustang is evolving (2015) but from what I’ve seen, that front end still looks “retro”. And I agree the Camaro will eventually evolve into a new design but until you see the rubber on the pavement it’s all talk or should I say “Styling Language”.
April 29, 2012 at 10:06 pm #39770
@Rick I see your point, but think you may be misunderstanding the “styling language” terminology.
Styling language refers to the actual design of the vehicle, not the literal “language” that’s meant to describe it in the media or in writing (or otherwise). A styling language is a set of physical and defining characteristics that define the styling/design of a vehicle.
For instance, the styling (design) language of modern BMWs, known as Flame Surfacing, is characterized by three-dimensional pressing of a body panel from a single press for multiple curves, which before necessitated several pressings or was done by hand.
The Flame Surfacing language translates “to the pavement” in what you see from BMW today — multiple bends/shapes in the body panels that flow together; that’s the design practice… a design implementation if you will, even an ideal — in some cases. It’s what makes the styling of all BMWs common to BMW.
In Chevys, for instance, it’s the dual-port grille, the swept-back wraparound headlamps, and the dual-cockpit layout of the interior — among other things — found in the Cruze, Malibu, Equinox, and Traverse. It’s the unification of a family of vehicles via design.
The Camaro, by contrast, breaks that design language by containing more “retro” design cues — thus having a retro design language. Even so, some of those styling elements were carried over to the new Malibu in the tail lamps and interior instrumentation.
So to wrap up that good ol’ monologue, a styling language has little to do with what’s seen in the media or talked about by people. It’s what designers use to define the looks of vehicles and associate a family/line of vehicles. Hope that makes sense.
April 30, 2012 at 9:17 am #39774
I understand that “styling language” can be synonyms with car styling, DNA (signature design), concept development, design language, design hype, prototype development, and the evolution or revolution of design. But in my opinion, it can also be just a lot of talk! Styles, concepts and prototypes that are shown at car shows and in magazines that never show up on the show room floor.
We all agree that the “styling Language” being used today is about the existing “retro” look of the 1960’s begining to evolve!
May 6, 2012 at 8:40 am #39864
i think what the designers today need to get back to is the ‘attitude’ the designers had in the ’60’s, ’70’s, even the ’50’s. there was no retro for them to fall back on. the designers were bold, and came up with new and fabulous creations.
looks wise the cars in that era were amazing and beautiful, partly because they were new and never seen before. and partly because they just simply were more artistic. we need more new , more groundbreaking, more imagination, we dont need to copy the designs (even though some are fantastic). we need to copy the designers mindset.
so lets get back to that ‘retro’ ‘attitude’. not nessesarily the retro ‘look’.
we see some amazing concepts, then, come to production, the style gets dumbed down, the suits in head office chicken out, or something.
just some thoughts,
May 14, 2012 at 7:05 am #39926
I would like to know now that we all saw the design of the New Avalon and the New Impala, which design would you guys like the best? Or compare all of those to the Revised Taurus which one you guys think it looks better?
May 14, 2012 at 9:25 am #39927
The Impalla by a longshot, then the Avalon (the only good looking toyota sedan), then the Taurus. no bias i just don’t like fords current design language. The new fusion had an amazing styling base (the evos concept) but dropped the ball. I’ve noticed that for the most part GM shows concepts that are really close to the real thing. while most other companies don’t it pisses me off to no end.
May 14, 2012 at 9:50 am #39928
The Taurus and Impala are like tied for me in terms of exterior styling, the avalon would be a distant third.
May 14, 2012 at 5:53 pm #39929
really I personally don’t like the new Taurus at all. I also went and got a look at the new avalon and while i stick to my comment that it is the best looking toyota sedan, i was actually thinking of the maxima when i posted that comment so the avalon dropps to a lowly third just behind the taurus
May 14, 2012 at 6:24 pm #39930
But then adding the Maxima and the Azera?? To me the Maxima just kinda fades away and the Azera doesn’t seemed that surprising at all
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.