I couldn't agree more.

Yeah, for us car enthusiasts we would like for ALL cars to be RWD or AWD, but our there... you know, in REALITY, were 99% of the buying public just doesn't know squat about cars, they just want something nice, simple and FWD is perfectly fine for them.

Besides performance cars, Chevy should almost exclusively be FWD. Buick should be FWD standard, with optional AWD, and Cadillac should be RWD standard with optional AWD. That would help distinguish one division from the others.

↓↑report

Hazdaz: I generally agree with your assessments of Chevy, Buick, and Cadillac except for the Camaro and Corvette. Those should stay as Chevys.

↓↑report

Funny, since the average Walmart customer drives an SUV or a full-size truck, they actually DO CARE about RWD. Go back and look at the rise in SUVs and you'll see it matches the decline in RWD cars being offered. The people want RWD.

↓↑report

I have to agree. They are sticking with their target market. They are also leveraging available tech and manufacturing. Of course the Impala is going to get larger and better. The LaCrosse just did. The Impala will remain the Chevrolet version of the LaCrosse built alongside it in Oshawa.

GM has done the research and seems to feel that it is enthusiasts who want RWD and we for the most part seem to be willing to pay the premium for it in either a sports car (Camaro) or luxury car (Caddy). Everyday family sedan shoppers want the FWD they are used to.

↓↑report

Not true... Look at the luxury brands and you will see. If they lined up Cadillac and no Cadillac was FWD, then this would be a good move. But... What is the point of the impala if there is a Malibu? There should be RWD Impala to compete with the 3 series BMW.

What do you think would happen to the sales of BMW if it suddenly started outputing the 3 series to FWD?

FWD is a lot cheaper to make and that is why they are going that route. Still. I believe there is market for everyone and the impala RWD would have been the way to go.

Besides, it has been an excelent cop car. Why not back to those roots?

↓↑report

Even if it were RWD, the Impala is far too big to be a 3-series competitor; it's sized between the 5 and 7 series.

RWD may not be inherently more expensive, but by the time you're done engineering a RWD platform that is sophisticated enough to get good press and give the RWD car sufficient predictability in bad weather, you have spent a lot of money.

FWD has won the market battle for everything but niche cars. And there are good reasons, especially the aforementioned predictability and interior room. Remember, FWD is usually engineered with the engine out in front of the transaxle, so in addition to losing the center tunnel, an FWD car will typically have a longer interior for the same wheelbase and overall length.

↓↑report

Kinda figured GM would be firm on FWD for the next US Impala. It's clear that GM execs looked at their historical data and realized that a huge majority of their customer base doesn't really care about RWD. I'm sure they have data/statistics that indicate that the average consumer thinks RWD is only associated with sporty, gas guzzler cars & trucks.

It would be smart if the next Impala was engineered on a platform that has standard FWD with optional AWD trims. That's something Cadillac of yore lacked.....but even if you look back a Cadillac in the 90's & early 2000's, you see that GM sold thousands of Caddies that were FWD only. I've known very few people that assumed that all Cadillacs were RWD only b/c it is a luxury brand (they really didn't know), but they were quickly corrected.

It's crazy to think that it was basically a small Cadillac import (Catera) that kinda fueled the return to RWD within Cadillac's car lineup. Now, it's like pulling teeth, trying to get Cadillac to make a new RWD car smaller than the CTS.

↓↑report

quote from Christian de Saint Preux:
- "What is the point of the impala if there is a Malibu?" -

Simple, the Impala is full-size while the Malibu is mid-size. Like the Taurus to the Fusion, the Avalon to the Camry etc. Note how all of those are FWD as well (though the Fusion and Taurus do offer AWD). I suspect the next-gen Impala and Malibu will potentially offer AWD as well, the platform they are built on does have that capability.

↓↑report

Government. How creative.

↓↑report

They did. It bombed in the market.

Rear-drive adds cost, weight and fuel usage. It decreases useful interior room and from-a-standing-start traction in inclement weather. It gives a slight dynamic advantage that hardly anyone cares about.

I really wonder why they're bothering with the Impala at all. Full-size cars offer no real space advantage over modern midsizers, and anyone who does need the room is going to get a crossover, trucklet or minivan anyway. Every manufacturer's sales figures bear this out. Other than fleets, who buy the Impala because it's simple and the parts are cheap and easily sourced, the car is an also-ran.

↓↑report

@psar...

1: the whole market bombed. Not necessarily the G8 car itself. Now that the dollar is tanking, as well, it becomes very hard to make any money importing anything.

2: RWD needs not add weight. G8 was heavy because it is a BIG CAR. Taurus and MKS are just as big, and just as heavy, or heavier. Miata/RX8 are RWD and not heavy. Kappas are not that heavy. Infiniti and BMW build mid-sizers that are not as heavy as G8, but are still RWD.

WEIGHT depends on the chassis, and the finishing materials for it, which are dictated by purpose, not by drivetrain layout.

3: RWD doesn't add cost, appreciably. The cost offset of having longer parts to install in a factory is likely offset by having to design to tighter tolerances and clearances with FWD transverse systems, and trying to cram all that hardware under the front of the car.

The only reason RWD is not more common, is because the whole rest of the market is geared to produce FWD cars, and when factories are tooled up that way... it is cheaper to stay that way. A RWD car factory would be cheaper to continue to build RWD cars, as well.

Another commenter put it well that most of the market doesn't care, and doesn't know the difference.

But it is a sad day for those who do know, and who DO care, because they (we) are the ones being sold out, and left behind. And when we're either forced to accept the lowest common denominator, or otherwise just stop caring... they'll be able to foist appliances on everyone even more easily, instead of working to build a better product, and bringing improvement along for the ride.

↓↑report

+1 to BoxerFanatic.

FWD is predominant in the market because it is cheaper to build-- that's the extent of it: simple economics. That said, if all you want to do is get from point A to point B, then FWD is perfectly sufficient. However, if you are "into" the car you're driving, the separation of steering and propulsion duties is the path to superior handling. RWD isn't the cure-all, though. I've driven many RWD cars that had numb steering and wallowy handling, but the performance potential of a RWD car is far higher than that of a front-driver. And typically the more horsepower you give a FWD, the worse the steering gets, to the point that high-performance variants of FWD cars are often AWD to minimize torque steer. Also, a RWD car with snow tires is just as capable in the winter as a FWD car equipped with the same. I've owned several of both and would much prefer RWD in the winter.

Overall, I think most drivers don't care about the FWD vs. RWD argument. But informed auto enthusiasts do. I'll save further ranting for my pro-manual-transmission arguments!

↓↑report

Here here to Boxer.

To buttress Ed's complaint, GM has an opportunity to satisfy a niche with a sedan that is already federalized and a differentiator from it's competition. As one moves up in income and family count, but is still an enthusiast, he has one RWD choice from GM-Cadillac. A real stretch for many. So GM opens up the enthusiast-you know the guy everyone asks there opinion on cars-to a competitor.

I thought Bob was smarter than this.

↓↑report

Why is it GM's job to offer an affordable RWD car for the masses?

And why doesnt anyone else?

Maybe because its just about impossible.

The G8 lost money on every sale. And GM can't afford to do that.

If you want a RWD sedan, buy a CTS V6 - its about as affordable as RWD sedans get. And, if 300 hp isn't enough for you, I'll bet you'll have no problem buying a supercharger or turbo for it since its the same engine as a Camaro.

↓↑report

Stop it! You're making me cry. You guys get all the good toys. Why must you torture us like this? You're a mean man, Mr. Shaw.

↓↑report