2014 Chevrolet Impala Debuts

[papilgee4evaeva]

If GM were smart, they would sell or regionalize Buick to the Chinese, include all developed US models for a full line of vehicles allowing

GMNA to reposition Buick's image as a more independent brand with separate dealerships, move high series Buicks back to Chevrolet.

 

Judging by Ford's experience, it will take about five years globally to reposition Chevrolet changinge its image from bargain basement brand

to similar level as Ford brand, the knock on effect to GM by expanding Chevrolet, eliminating Buick.

 

I doubt GM has the will or even the desire to do that, the herd mentality says there's safety in numbers.

Ford-Lincoln getting so close to Chevrolet-Buick-Cadillac-GMC must really confound GM bosses

Given the rollout of models, I'm not sure how "high-series Buicks" can move back to Chevrolet since they all began as Buicks to begin with.

 

As a matter of fact, almost all of GM's newer FWD platforms debuted as Buicks:

- Enclave was the debut model of Lambda (along with Acadia and Outlook); Traverse came a year later.

- LaCrosse was the debut model of Epsilon II LWB; Impala will be here four years later.

- Regal was the debut model of Epsilon II SWB; Malibu came two years later.

Delta II (Cruze/Verano) and Theta II (Equinox/Terrain) are exceptions.

 

Also, I think that in Europe, Chevrolet replaced Opel as the entry GM brand. So I think they're trying to be the value leader around the world.

[jpd80]

Given the rollout of models, I'm not sure how "high-series Buicks" can move back to Chevrolet since they all began as Buicks to begin with.

That's the problem, Chevrolet waited an eternity for new vehicles like Impala while Buick got LaCrosse, why weren't they delivered together with XTS.

 

I gotta get over this, GM is not Ford and they do some weird looking things but that's because it suits their philosophy in keeping factory order

books full as well as dealers and customers happy. It's a delicate interwoven network that if unraveled incorrectly could destroy the lot.

GM is not Ford, I have to move on and accept that they have a different philosophy and goals for the company that includes all brands.

[RichardJensen]

I question whether our unwavering faith in some "invisible hand" is a sound basis for a durable economy too. They have the advantage of being able to direct effort where they see it needed

- to paraphrase Churchill, capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others.

 

- the advantage you cite presupposes proper information gathering and proper decision making mechanisms. Sadly the possession of that level of power and authority pretty much precludes the proper exercise of it. One could argue that the soviets enjoyed an advantage over the US for exactly the same reason: The ability to direct effort where it was needed.

 

Practical experience suggests that the results are seldom sustainable and inevitably less efficient than Smith's 'invisible hand' which was not so much a prescription for an economic system as it was a description of how all economic systems worked, which is what led to the notion that the best system would be one which interfered least with the exercise of that invisible hand.

 

BTW: Did you see that Google put the American Parthenon on their search page on Mies' birthday?

Edited April 9, 2012 by RichardJensen

[V8-X]

Thoughts, hmmm. Better than the outgoing model, of course. But simply lacks appeal.

 

The front clip reminds me too much of a Crosstour. The profile picture is quite good, minus the rear hip crease, and degree of slope on the rear windshield. Looks like they tried to hard to make it look sporty with that rear window slope. Not enough angles from the rear (that I've seen) so can't say I like/dislike it. But from what I see, it's just okay, nothing real appealing.

 

Interior is simply a mess. That brown/tan soft touch material on the dash that goes into the door panels, the M shape (or as another poster stated receding hair line design) is a big no no. The HVAC and other knobs look typical GM cheap material. Dislike the area around the gear selector, whatever that material/color is. And who the hell was the person who designed the steering wheel, and what were they on??? I thought the new Ford corporate steering wheel was ugly, but Chevy sure one upped Ford here.

 

Boy I miss our '62 Impala SS. Now that car had class and style. This simply looks run of the mill with nothing special about it. I'm sure GM will sell a ton of these, just not to me.

 

And you're right, the steering wheel is HIDEOUS and the cubby behind the screen makes no sense, I don't get why this is valuable to anybody.

 

But in the end, this makes the Taurus (and even the MKS) look dated and obsolete.

Agreed on statement 1, but totally disagree with statement 2.

Edited April 9, 2012 by V8-X

[630land]

Makes Taurus "obsolete"? My a$$$!

 

No AWD and Hondaish* looks make new Impala kinda dull. Ford's D platform is turning out to have long legs, making $$ with Explorers.

 

And not all old Impalas were SS sports machines, most were run of the mill family cars, with 2 barrel carbs and powerglides. From 1977-85, Impalas were plain as white bread.

 

*Honda has lost their mojo, so looking like an Accord Crosstour is not a good thing.

Edited April 17, 2012 by 630land

[rmc523]

Yeah, I see nothing outdated about the '13 Taurus. The interior of the Impala has more curves and swoops, but the Taurus is so much "cleaner" looking inside than the Impala.

 

Me either - I'm with you there too - prefer the Taurus - I don't like how many interiors are throwing all sorts of curves, swoops, and different shapes into their designs these days.

 

I'm with everyone else on the hip crease - it's too evident for my liking. Can definitely see the Camaro influence in the front - something almost looks off on the front end, though.

 

Overall, however, it's obviously a massive improvement over the current model.