The lesson to be learned from the Epsilon II platform so far: What makes a terrible Cadillac turns out to be a very good Chevy.
Ford/Lincoln could certainly learn from this. They won't. But they could.
The last-gen Impala was much like the pre-discontinuation Taurus: completely happy with its standing as a fleet-sales mogul and not at all concerned about selling to actual carbuyers. The addition of the LS4 5.3 liter transverse OHV V8 was neat, but it was never lack of power that held the car back (though, admittedly, during the LS4 years, the available sixes were sorely lacking in the refinement department).
The car's real problem was that it was stubbornly being built on a twenty-five year old platform--something I expect from FoMoCo, but not the General. It was also a platform that grew and grew and grew over the years. It just wasn't suited to being a Real Car. As rental fodder it was great, especially the later models with the LFX V6. But there was just no reason to OWN one.
And don't think I'm defending the last-gen Impala. It was inexcusable. A great demonstration of what's been wrong with GM leadership for a very long time. The good news is that the NEW Impala (along with the ATS and upcoming Omega platform products) shows that GM seems to finally have discovered that you need to build cars people WANT TO BUY, and not just cars that are financially acceptable to produce.
As to the new model:
It's pretty nice-looking. The haunches don't quite work as well as they seem to think they do. The rear looks a little awkward from some angles (particularly the front quarter view, where the strange trunklid seam gets emphasized weirdly). And the rear quarter glass has that "trying to look interesting but really just ends up like every other car" thing going on, like a 2nd gen M45 or a 5th gen Altima.
It's nice to see that GM finally figured out what the Hell they're doing. Toyota's fresh attempt at degeezering the Avalon is doomed. The RLX was doomed before it ever existed. The Taurus and MKS are jokes by comparison (heavier, less roomy, less powerful, uglier, and with vastly inferior powertrain options). Nothing with power to the front wheels and room for 5 actual adults stands a chance against the Impala.
darylzero wrote:I always associated the Impala with an ugly looking car, but I think this looks very good.
I don't mean this to be rude, but you must be pretty young if that's the case. Aside from the last-gen (which I still wouldn't call ugly, just bland) the Impala has been consistently attractive. In fact the 1966 Impala SS is a top-3 contender for Best-looking Sedan Ever Made.
Mid-90s models were long, low, and sleek, without being overstyled or obnoxious. Late-90s models were a little bland (and those tail lights were ugh), but they were still restrained and clean. The 2000s model was very outdated looking from the start (it always reminded me of a late-90s Altima). But it wasn't overdone or outright ugly.
