Official Pics 06 Chevy Impala

[XtremeGrandAm]

and here is the impala

[XtremeGrandAm]

Back view

[XtremeGrandAm]

last picture

[2001GAGT]

hummm... I wonder if that has teh motor to back up the nice set of dual pipes coming out the back and the SS badge?

[angelluv98]

I think the rear end is a much needed improvement from the current model, but they should have done something differently with it. To me, it looks like the rear end of the new Ford 500, which resembles a Focus. :roll2:

[RXZKNZ]

a good motor? i think all maximas are pretty fast.
from the looks of the picts XTREME has posted of some of the new GM, that Dodge Magnum is starting to look pretty good.
REX

[XtremeGrandAm]

I agree I'm not really sure what GM is thinking......

[bobgagt]

Yeah that looks weak... not intimidating at all...

[Gamebay11]

I thought it looked like a Stratus when I saw it, and I bet its not even rear wheel drive. For shame Chevy, for shame.

[99GrandAMSE]

... not bad :)

[Loopy]

Originally posted by Gamebay11
I thought it looked like a Stratus when I saw it, and I bet its not even rear wheel drive. For shame Chevy, for shame.


You're right - it's probably not. Because it's a family sedan, not a race car. No matter what engine is in it, it still has four doors and toned down body lines to reflect that it is a family sedan.

[TA^Guy]

Looks nice, I like it!
Originally posted by 2001GAGT
hummm... I wonder if that has teh motor to back up the nice set of dual pipes coming out the back and the SS badge?
Well I know the previous ones had a option of the famous Supercharged 3800 Series II V6. But the previous generation also had a prototype with a LS1/Transaxle (4T65-E IIRC). And with cars like the Boniville getting a Northstar and Grand Prix getting a version of the LS series engine I don't see why GM wouldn't put a V8 under the hood. I think it would dumb of them not too, especially one with DOD technology.
Originally posted by bobgagt
Yeah that looks weak... not intimidating at all...
It's an Impala, not a Camaro. SUre they show the SS, but I'm sure their first instint when designing it wasn't 'Lets make this family cars scare little kids and old women!'
Originally posted by Gamebay11
...and I bet its not even rear wheel drive.
I bet it isn't either.
Originally posted by Loopy
You're right - it's probably not. Because it's a family sedan, not a race car. No matter what engine is in it, it still has four doors and toned down body lines to reflect that it is a family sedan. :agree: You got it!

[XtremeGrandAm]

2006 Chevrolet Impala Specs
Base engine: 3.5-liter V-6
Horsepower: 210
Height: 58.7 inches
Width: 72.9 inches
Length: 200.4 inches
Curb weight: not determined
What the automaker says:"The '06 Impala and Monte Carlo wear a new look, both inside and out, that conveys sophistication and exudes big-car roominess."
What you should know: Chevy woos fans of big power with an optional 303-hp, 5.3-liter V-8 in it's mid-sized cars.
Production possibility: Production starts next summer

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by XtremeGrandAm
2006 Chevrolet Impala Specs
Base engine: 3.5-liter V-6
Horsepower: 210
Height: 58.7 inches
Width: 72.9 inches
Length: 200.4 inches
Curb weight: not determined
What the automaker says:"The '06 Impala and Monte Carlo wear a new look, both inside and out, that conveys sophistication and exudes big-car roominess."
What you should know: Chevy woos fans of big power with an optional 303-hp, 5.3-liter V-8 in it's mid-sized cars.
Production possibility: Production starts next summer
Well there you go just as I stated above.

3.5 liter V6 as a base model and the same optional 5.3 Liter LS series V8 as found in the Grand Prix GPX.

[04REDGT1]

I kinda dug those round tail lights. Now it looks like a Pontiac. What is Chevy thinking?

[DominionTuner]

Even with a V8 being optional, its still FWD!!!!!!

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by DominionTuner
Even with a V8 being optional, its still FWD!!!!!!
Yeah sucks, but atleast they are moving in the right direction.

And with companies like Chrysler building more RWD vehicle maybe GM will soon see the light and go back to right wheel drive also.

[Pte Socks]

Why do some hate RWD cars? Dont some realise that RWD is terrible for winters and for me, buying a car, id have to drive it in the summer AND winter. Ill take FWD anyday.

[Loopy]

:agree:

[bobgagt]

Actually... the RWD in the chryslers is attached to a seriously awesome traction control system (that can be turned on and off). We went for a ride in a hemi magnum and the dealer was trying to whip a donut in a parking lot... couldn't. Everytime it would barely break lose it would correct itself... and this isn't retard traction control like ETS is... this stuff works.

So I'd say normally RWD would suck, but a lot of companies are getting away with it, and a lot of people are driving these cars in winter so... I'd say both still have benefits, but I'd drive it either way.

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by bobgagt
Actually... the RWD in the chryslers is attached to a seriously awesome traction control system (that can be turned on and off). We went for a ride in a hemi magnum and the dealer was trying to whip a donut in a parking lot... couldn't. Everytime it would barely break lose it would correct itself... and this isn't retard traction control like ETS is... this stuff works.

So I'd say normally RWD would suck, but a lot of companies are getting away with it, and a lot of people are driving these cars in winter so... I'd say both still have benefits, but I'd drive it either way.
Your correct. Chrysler has come along way from '80s Eccono crapboxes most people associate the name with. The ETS on the Maginum is supposed to rival the best on the market.

Either way I'm a RWD person. I hate FWD, and hate it even more in the snow. The problem is most people are to lazy to learn how to drive. They expect to get in a vehicle and have it do everything for them. IMO, in bad weather RWD is easier to aim the vehicle in the proper direction when the drive wheels are not getting traction. When a FWD drive has no traction under accleration you are unable to steer the vehicle. The only benifit FWD poses in bad weather is the added weight on the drive wheels. This can be easily over come on a RWD vehicle by adding weight to the trunk and filling your fuel tank regularly.

[jayhawk]

I think, in my opinion, the best traction control in so far as snow, has got to be a manual tranny. And yes, I know I sound like a skipping record.

[DoubleOZeroGAse]

I believe it was Motor Trend, maybe Road and Track that did a comparo between class rivals of FWD vs RWD in all kinds of scenarios....The Chrysler rear-drivers were whooping the asses of the FWDs they were up against because of their traction control systems, and they were alot more fun in the dry!! The only thing that is still definatively better in poor traction situations is AWD....Subaru Imprezza WRX STi rules all (at least in the snow and ice).

[thegeswho3]

So are your guys that are looking for RWD going to take these cars down to Taledega or drive them to work? I think GM is very smart in continuing with FWD for the Chevy and Pontiac sedans. They are battleing Toyota Avalons and Camries, not a 1966 Impala SS 357.

[grandampassion]

very true, but with almost 15 years driving experience under my belt in FWD, RWD, 4WD, and AWD, for the pure pleasure of driving, i'd take a RWD any day. FWD are too hard to control in the winter when the drive tires break traction, awd usually kicks in and out like a malfunctioning limited slip diff., and 4WD's, well, too many people feel invincible in a 4WD so they have become dangerous on the roads. Run a 4WD off road, and AWD on a road race track, a RWD on the main road and leave the FWD to the sport tuner imports and their fans.

*steps of his soapbox, waves and walks away.

[thegeswho3]

15 years huh, u been drivin since you were 14? And what makes you think that FWD is hard to control in the snow!!!!!! your crazy, where do u live, Florida. Everybody here in the north knows that you need FWD to get around in the snow.

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by thegeswho3
So are your guys that are looking for RWD going to take these cars down to Taledega or drive them to work? I think GM is very smart in continuing with FWD for the Chevy and Pontiac sedans. They are battleing Toyota Avalons and Camries, not a 1966 Impala SS 357.
Obviously they aren't battling a '66 SS, but look at Chrysler's move to RWD. Chrysler's sales have been on a rise due to it too.
And how many BMW do you see with FWD? Remember it's easier to push a vehicle than pull. FWD cars where built in the attack of econobox wars. Small cars, smaller engines, etc. They try to glorify the fact that the engine weight makes for better traction, which maybe so. But what they don't tell you is that when your drive wheels control your steering and they are spinning due to rain snow or ice that you will have a more difficult time controling the vehicle.

Originally posted by thegeswho3
And what makes you think that FWD is hard to control in the snow!!!!!! your crazy, where do u live, Florida. Everybody here in the north knows that you need FWD to get around in the snow.

In snow storms we will take my lowered RWD S10 before we take my wifes FWD GA anywhere. They are both equiped with snow tires but the RWD simply give better control. And yes, I have owned FWD, RWD, and even AWD vehicles. My Subaru rocked in the snow but between FWD and RWD I'll take Right Wheel Drive over Faux Wheel Drive anyday.

Biggest problem with FWD is that most people driving these days have never owned a RWD so they don't know how to handle these is bad weather conditions. They feel it is worst since they have different handling charactoristics. But if they took the time and effort to learn and understand how to actually drive a vehicle (which 75% of the people on the road do not know how to drive) they would be able to benifit the added control of RWD.

So for a commuter to drive work I'll take a RWD anyday, good weather or bad. More fun and better control, who can argue that?

Not sure what a circle track as to do with FWD or RWD vehicle but I can tell you RWD does reign supreme on the drag strip due to weight transfer and traction. High speed circle track, especially one with banking like Taledaga the drive wheels is not a issue. Traction and handling isn't based on FWD or RWD this is where balancing the frontal drag and overall downforce and lift comes into play.

And why should GM (or any manufacture) be following FWD imports? Why is it so hard to get a vehicle noticed in this market flooded with FWD crap? Sure GM has stepped up and started dropping transverse V8 under the hood. But why not offer the market something different, like RWD? Why do the same boring thing everyone else is doing when they can break away and give people more choices, and be in limited company of only a few other manufactures that do the same as opposed to the majority that all offer 'cookie cutter' vehicles with the same boring drivetrains?

Originally posted by grandampassion
very true, but with almost 15 years driving experience under my belt in FWD, RWD, 4WD, and AWD, for the pure pleasure of driving, i'd take a RWD any day. FWD are too hard to control in the winter when the drive tires break traction, awd usually kicks in and out like a malfunctioning limited slip diff., and 4WD's, well, too many people feel invincible in a 4WD so they have become dangerous on the roads. Run a 4WD off road, and AWD on a road race track, a RWD on the main road and leave the FWD to the sport tuner imports and their fans.

*steps of his soapbox, waves and walks away.

4WD is a totally different story. Just like FWD, and RWD you have to learn how to properly drive it. 4WD DOES give you better traction when your stuck, but if you don't respect it you can loose control as easy or easier than RWD or FWD.

You also mention LSD. A Limited slip differental is better for dry traction where you want both wheels to bite the tarmac. But when it comes to rain, sleet, snow and ice a limited slip is actually worst. Often enough around a corner the slick road surface doesn't allow enough friction for the clutches in the LSD to become disengauged. This causes the inside wheel to spin underpower easier, which results in less control. The only benifit to a LSD say in the snow is that you can put down fairly even power to both wheels to help you dig your way out of a sticky situation.

[thegeswho3]

Well, you missed my point. People arguing that the new Impala should be RWD are looking for a sports car or a racer. Thats not what Chevy is trying to sell, its a family sedan.

Mabe you are right that most people dont know how to drive a RWD, so most people are gunna buy these new Impalas! Chevy is going to sell a ton of them. Im glad that your RWD S10 goes good in the snow, but can you honestly tell me that going around a turn in bad snow is safer in a fish tail prone RWD? There is a reason that every new car (other than BWM and Christler 300C, both "sport" sedans) is made with FWD. When in bad weather you want the tires that are pointing in the direction that you want to go to be the powered wheels. If you're trying to go up a hill in the snow, and your rear wheels are pushing forward, the front tired will slide uncontrollably off to the side.

I realize that you people like your RWD cars, they are more fun to drive. They get better track times and handeling. I just want you to admit that Chevy will sell a boudnle of the perfectly engineered family sedans, because thats what they are.

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by thegeswho3
Well, you missed my point. People arguing that the new Impala should be RWD are looking for a sports car or a racer. Thats not what Chevy is trying to sell, its a family sedan.

(other than BWM and Christler 300C, both "sport" sedans)

So the Magnium, 300M, and all BMWs aren't family cars, they are sports sedans? Granted a few BMW are sport sedans but I think you don't understand what they really are. Sorry if you honestly think the big 300M is a sport sedan your extremely wrong.

Im glad that your RWD S10 goes good in the snow, but can you honestly tell me that going around a turn in bad snow is safer in a fish tail prone RWD?
Yes because I don't fishtail, not uncontrolably. In bad weather a light thorttle foot goes along way.

When in bad weather you want the tires that are pointing in the direction that you want to go to be the powered wheels. If you're trying to go up a hill in the snow, and your rear wheels are pushing forward, the front tired will slide uncontrollably off to the side.

Wrong. If your drive wheels are spinning they are not getting traction. And if you are trying to steer while they are spining the wheels will NOT turn the vehicle. It will simply plow forward, or in whatever direction the vehicle wants for the most part.

This is where RWD is superior because if the drive wheels are spinning the front wheels used to steering the vehicle are not, this allows you to still be able to control the vehicles direction.

And if all else, if the front tires are sliding forward and not turning in the right direction due to low traction, you can slimply blirp the throttle to point the vehicle in the proper direction.

I realize that you people like your RWD cars, they are more fun to drive. They get better track times and handeling. I just want you to admit that Chevy will sell a boudnle of the perfectly engineered family sedans, because thats what they are.
Sure FWD will sell, why wouldn't it? Even me a hardcore RWD fan purchased a dozen of them in the past 12 years.

I've pointed out before that we can ask for it all and we should be happy it has atleast a V8. But to be honest it simply would be a better vehicle if it were RWD.
Originally posted by thegeswho3
not a 1966 Impala SS 357.
BTW, what the heck is a Impala SS 357? lmao.

[thegeswho3]

An Impala S 357 was the Super Sport Impalas sold in th 60's that had 357 cubic inh enine in it.

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by thegeswho3
An Impala S 357 was the Super Sport Impalas sold in th 60's that had 357 cubic inh enine in it.
um, GM never built a 357cid small block and sure as heck didn't install one in a '66 Impala.

IIRC the 283 was the standard V8, with optional 327 or 396 avalible.

Want to compair it to a real Impala the '63 Impala Z11 was best Impala ever built powered by a 427 BBC.

Always helps to know what your talking about before having a conversation with those that do. :D

[thegeswho3]

327 357, my bad, i was still 20 years away from being born, and 20 cubic inches has nothing to due with my point.

[thegeswho3]

I've pointed out before that we can ask for it all and we should be happy it has atleast a V8. But to be honest it simply would be a better vehicle if it were RWD.

It would simply be a different car, all together. GM doesnt think "hmm, lets build a family sedan, but a V8 in it, look like this, o, and i guess we gotta decide whether it will be FWD or RWD."
They car is based off of a FWD family sedan platform.

Always helps to know what your talking about before having a conversation with those that do.

being right and having the GM engineers and the American public agree with you is more important that 60's cubic inch statistics.

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by thegeswho3
I've pointed out before that we can ask for it all and we should be happy it has atleast a V8. But to be honest it simply would be a better vehicle if it were RWD.

It would simply be a different car, all together. GM doesnt think "hmm, lets build a family sedan, but a V8 in it, look like this, o, and i guess we gotta decide whether it will be FWD or RWD."
They car is based off of a FWD family sedan platform.

Always helps to know what your talking about before having a conversation with those that do.

being right and having the GM engineers and the American public agree with you is more important that 60's cubic inch statistics.
Holy christ... Seriously obvious it's based on a FWD car, you can't build a production RWD car on a FWD platform. I mean they could, but the cost of retooling, etc would be a waste and easier to either use a current platform or design another. But why isn't GM saying "hmm, lets build a family sedan, but a V8 in it, look like this, o, and i guess we gotta decide whether it will be FWD or RWD." Chrysler has and every crappy snobish magazine praises them for it too. Look at the positive ratings the Magnum, 300M, have already received, not to mention the up and coming Charger.

Right now Chrysler IMO is looking better than they have in the past two decades. Three new RWD family vehicles, with optional V8 power no less and the fastest production truck ever. Not to mention a sport compact that gives the top imports a run for their money.

being right and having the GM engineers and the American public agree with you is more important that 60's cubic inch statistics.
Sorry but just because you like FWD better is your opinion, not 'the general public'. And to be honest you can't speak for GM engineers because your not one of them. Just because GM doesn't develop them doesn't mean the engineers do not want them or don't design them. It goes far beyond that, most of the concepts that you and I would never see are killed by the bean counters and penny pinchers in suits, not the guy developing the vehicles. Jon Moss for example used to always give GM RWD toys. For example his NASCAR inspired LT1 powered RWD MonteCarlo in the mid 90's. And since I'm sure you don't know who Jon Moss is he was one of GM's top engineers and held the title of Specialty Vehicles Manager. Father of the '94-'96 Impala SS, brain child behind the current Silverado SS, and has build some of the sickest toys ever to be placed in GM's famous 'Toy Box' like the 572cid ZL1 Camaro. Not to mention cut his teeth with GM back in the day by being one of the engineers who designed the famous 'chambered exhaust' for the first generation Camaros.

I'm sorry I corrected you on your classic cars, but just like most things history repeats it's self and if you don't know where you came from, you won't know where your going. Same reason they teach history classes in high school.
Originally posted by thegeswho3
327 357, my bad, i was still 20 years away from being born, and 20 cubic inches has nothing to due with my point.
PSSST, 357-327=30cid, not 20. :D

Once again I'll state my point because you obvious didn't understand...

Yes GM will sell plenty of vehicles trying to compete with just about 85% of the other family sedans on the market. But if they took a chance and developed something out of the norm or every other family sedan (as Chrysler has done) they could step a head of the rest and have a vehicle that exceeds beyond the typical family sedan. Because lets face it, most families are purchasing Supercharged SeriesII 3.8 Impalas or even 5.3 liter V8 Impalas. Most families purchase cars like the Grand Am for example, which happens to be one of the best selling GM vehicles. The 'SS' version of these vehicle target the group of people that want power and performance but yet still have a family to haul around. The same type of people that purchase BMWs and such, it's just too bad that everyone that wants a fun RWD family sedan can't afford a BMW. Which is where Chrysler has stepped in, and GM should consider.

[thegeswho3]

ok, i give up, your jollys can be recieved for being right on the grand am owners club.

Fact of the matter is FWDs own the road and will continue to because of their practicality.

If you want a sprts car buy the many RWD modes out ther, but leave Chevy alone to make a great new FWD model,

[TA^Guy]

Oh yeah oh so many RWD sportcars on the market, right again you are. :lol:

Sorry you couldn't bring more to offer to the debate, don't get so bent and have a nice evening. :D

BTW, how do you run 16.0@98.8 MPH? Did you have a 4 second 60' time? Because a trap speed of 98mph belongs on a 13 second car, not a 16 second one.

[thegeswho3]

Debate? There is no debate. Americans buy FWD cars. I know, and agree with you, that RWD preforms better and is probably more fun, but they will not sell as every day family sedans. I am not, let me repeat, I AM NOT arguing with your point of view. And stop trying to make me look dumb with your technical BS. I am a mechanical engineer. If i wanted to sit down and see how long it should take a 98mph car to hit the 1/4 mile i could. Just trying to make a point buddy. I am just saying that FWD cars will work better for daily driver family sedans. And anybody will tell you that FWD is better in the snow, so dont even try to argue with that . Good talking with you, sorta.

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by thegeswho3
Debate? There is no debate. Americans buy FWD cars. I know, and agree with you, that RWD preforms better and is probably more fun, but they will not sell as every day family sedans. I am not, let me repeat, I AM NOT arguing with your point of view. And stop trying to make me look dumb with your technical BS. I am a mechanical engineer. If i wanted to sit down and see how long it should take a 98mph car to hit the 1/4 mile i could. Just trying to make a point buddy. I am just saying that FWD cars will work better for daily driver family sedans. And anybody will tell you that FWD is better in the snow, so dont even try to argue with that . Good talking with you, sorta.
Your a mechanical engineer and you couldn't come up with better reasons for your argument? *Note* an "arugment" doesn't mean your technically arguing with someone, it is also expressed as a discussion in which a disagreement is expressed. Weather your a mechanical engineer or not it doesn't have anything to do with the conversation. I went to school of auto mechanics and works in teh field for 4 years before I realized I hate fixing peoples problems and doing it day in and day out made it less enjoyable doing it on my own time.

The only people tha twill argue that FWD are better in the snow either A) never drove or owned a RWD in snow or B) do not know what they are talking about. Technically yes, the FWD WILL get better traction due to the added wight over the drive tires. But it doesn't mean that it give you more control over the vehicle.

As for your 1/4 miles times did you actually run your car or just make something up? I'm sorry about the technical 'BS' as you put it but that isn't what is making you "look dumb". For a 19 yearold 'mechanical engineer' you would think your facts would be correct. When building/designing things you don't just guess numbers do you? I hope you do your 'mechanical engineer' homework better than you research your information when in factual discussion about automobiles.

I am simply having a normal conversation and stating both facts and opinions, so don't get so worked up over it.

[thegeswho3]

I will try this one more time. I agree with you. I have said nothing different (except for the RWD in the snow thing). I would be more prone to buy a RWD Impala/Monte Carlo if I did not live in central PA where it snows like crazy. I am jeleouse of your knowledge about cars (the whole 66 small block thing, the way you know how long it should take a 98 mph car to get thru the quarter).

I would have enjoyed talking with you and learning if you haden't come out attacking me every time. You have been rude and got pleasure out of point out little mistakes in my knowledge, or even typing, that have nothing to do with what I am saying.

The fact of the matter is GM WILL MAKE A FORTUNE OFF OF THE NEW CARS. They will battle with Camrys and Accords and hopefully win. I would also like to see something different and sporty from GM (preferibly under the name Chevelle), but that is not what these cars are for.

Also, i take offense at your comparing what i post on some Grand Am forum to what I do day in and day out with my engineering. I could sit here and show you how accomplished I am at the age of 20, but thats not what im here to do.

Good luck with your life, congrats on a great deal of knowledge, and hopefully I have cleared up what i am trying to say. You wont see me post here again.

[99GrandAMSE]

... there is just WAY TOO MUCH happening in here for me to read ... cya :lol:

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by thegeswho3

The fact of the matter is GM WILL MAKE A FORTUNE OFF OF THE NEW CARS. They will battle with Camrys and Accords and hopefully win. I would also like to see something different and sporty from GM (preferibly under the name Chevelle), but that is not what these cars are for.
Have I ever once argued this fact? Actually I agreed with you that GM will sell plenty of FWD vehicles but I honestly feel that GM would sell just as many if they were RWD. I know people that purchase vehicle that don't know if they are FWD or RWD. A guy at my wifes work thought his new mustang V6 was FWD, even after she told him it wasn't. And I've had others either tell me they didn't know or ask me which theirs is. I think that to most the general public it doesn't matter if a car is FWD or RWD. As for the FWD being better in the snow that is just what the automakers wanted everyone to believe in the 80s. This way they could get people to support their decision on building their more ecconomical compacts.Originally posted by thegeswho3
Also, i take offense at your comparing what i post on some Grand Am forum to what I do day in and day out with my engineering. I could sit here and show you how accomplished I am at the age of 20, but thats not what im here to do. If your offended then why bother even saying what you do?

Sorry you feel I'm attacking you but I was rather stating my opinions along with facts. My pointing out your unusual quarter mile time was something I noticed long before we even had this discussion, and I know for a fact I'm not the only one it raised eyebrows with. And since no one else would ask you I thought I would make a mention about it and see what your reason behind it was (typo, guess, etc).

I'm not here to make you jealous of what I know, I just share what I know and correct things that I know are false. Worst thing about the internet is that it's not only a way to share information but it's the most common source of misinformation as well. When I see something that I know is incorrect, I will point it out along with the correct information. I have made automobiles my life for the past 17+ years (yes since I was about 10). My first modification I did was swap a four barrel intake and carburator on to my friends '70 Chevrolet pickup when I was 14 years old followed by working on a '79 Camaro LT with a 350 and getting my friend's MustangII running. So when it comes to cars I can become a stickler for details.

Nice chatting with you, don't get so worked up over stuff and I'm glad you learned something new from it. If all else everyone can come away from the conversation with a little bit more infomation to work with.

[chadillac3]

Originally posted by thegeswho3
Also, i take offense at your comparing what i post on some Grand Am forum to what I do day in and day out with my engineering. I could sit here and show you how accomplished I am at the age of 20, but thats not what im here to do.



How exactly did you get a BSME before the age of 20?

[thegeswho3]

Who said that i have my BSME? Im only 20, granted that is young for a third year student.

I was offended because he somehow compared my researchless comments on this Grand Am forum to my school work.

Mabe if i wasnt studying to become an engineer i would have time to post more than what comes off of the top of my head here, but i have more important business.

I see that you are an Electrical Engineer. Congrats, and you should understand the work that goes into school and the offense that i took at his comments.

Thank you for your question.

Sincerely,

Engineer in training
Cory Eberhart

[chadillac3]

Be careful when you say things like "...dumb with your technical BS. I am a mechanical engineer. If i wanted to..." before you actually have the degree and are working as one. :)

[2K SE]

Back on topic. I like the new 2006 Impala. But it should be RWD j/k.
One of the best snow cars I have ever driven was the 1974 VW Superbeetle. Not only was it RWD but the motor was on top of the drive axle(s).
I also drove the RWD cars of the 70's and was completely floored by how much better the traction was on the FWD. My first FWD was an 89 Cavi and more than once I was able to get up ice/snow covered areas much better than RWD. Heck I even remember easily getting up a short incline coming out of the video store and then helping push a RWD up that same incline.
And my last car purchase was a RWD, Pontiac on top of that. So I will drive either but the GA gets out alot more in the snow than the Goat. I don't like it out in the snow but if it was as good as the GA I would drive it more in the winter. I feel VERY safe in the GA so that may be why I feel that FWD is better for traction. Just my $.02 but isn't that what this thread has turned into?

[thegeswho3]

I get your point, sorry for the confusion.

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by 2K SE
Back on topic. I like the new 2006 Impala. But it should be RWD j/k.
One of the best snow cars I have ever driven was the 1974 VW Superbeetle. Not only was it RWD but the motor was on top of the drive axle(s).
I also drove the RWD cars of the 70's and was completely floored by how much better the traction was on the FWD. My first FWD was an 89 Cavi and more than once I was able to get up ice/snow covered areas much better than RWD. Heck I even remember easily getting up a short incline coming out of the video store and then helping push a RWD up that same incline.
And my last car purchase was a RWD, Pontiac on top of that. So I will drive either but the GA gets out alot more in the snow than the Goat. I don't like it out in the snow but if it was as good as the GA I would drive it more in the winter. I feel VERY safe in the GA so that may be why I feel that FWD is better for traction. Just my $.02 but isn't that what this thread has turned into?
Now you say better traction with your FWD, which I would agree due to the weight on the drive tires, but what about over all control? Say steering and vehicle responce on slick surfaces?

That is what I despise about FWD. When turning or manuvering the vehicle on slick surfaces and your drive wheels aren't getting traction it's pretty much hopeless when your drivetires are spinning free and not controling the vehcile's direction of travel.

[thegeswho3]

Your right TA. RWD could help in a cornering situation (except for the hole fish tail thing if you give it too much gas). But it think the biggest reason for FWD in the snow is trying to climb a hill.

RWD have a tendeny to let the front (heavier) side of the vehicle swing around to the back if it is just being pushed by the rear wheels. As it turn out, it is easier to back up a hill in a RWD when conditions are bad.

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by thegeswho3
Your right TA. RWD could help in a cornering situation (except for the hole fish tail thing if you give it too much gas). But it think the biggest reason for FWD in the snow is trying to climb a hill.

RWD have a tendeny to let the front (heavier) side of the vehicle swing around to the back if it is just being pushed by the rear wheels. As it turn out, it is easier to back up a hill in a RWD when conditions are bad. I agree, backing a RWD up a incline is easier than going forwad. But the only time I've had those problems was going up steep inclines and/or having to come to a stop on them.

In the winter I generally get a set of decent snow tires (no studs) and put 2 sand bags in the back and I'm golden for the season.

:)

[92CamaroRS]

Originally posted by thegeswho3

It would simply be a different car, all together. GM doesnt think "hmm, lets build a family sedan, but a V8 in it, look like this, o, and i guess we gotta decide whether it will be FWD or RWD."
They car is based off of a FWD family sedan platform.




just a little tid bit, the Monte Carlo originally was a Right Wheel Drive vehicle, Along with the Grand Prix, and alot of other names GM is using.

[thegeswho3]

I know that, but theyre current arcitechure is meant for FWD, that is what i meant. When they totally redesigned these cars they didnt were FWD, so how can a new derivative of them become RWD.

(I am assuming that you meant Rear Wheel Drive vehicle.

[car audio dave]

ive been trying to see if anyone has noticed this, but i havnt seen...this car is a holden commodore. its an already established chassis and body. its a cheaper solution than building a car from the ground up, and apparently holden feels that the FWD platform for this car works better on their roads, so thats why we end up with it.