Quote:
Originally posted by Ardax
I've got to disagree with you here... Chevrolet DID bring back the Impala in 1994. It re-debuted with a 5.7 V-8. It was sold this way until 1996, then it disappeared again until 2000, when it was brought back again with a V-6.
|
The cited URL is only valid for the original access. Start a search from the Kelley Blue Book home page. Having done same, I discovered this in a review of the 2000-2001 Impala from:
http://www.kbb.com/kb/ki.dll/kw.kc.r...0&11&00impala3
Quote:
|
With the exception of the 1994-96 Impala SS, a low-volume dress-up of the Caprice, ...
|
The Impala was only a renamed Caprice. BTW, one police force in Montgomery County had a running lottery on their Caprices - which one would drop its transmission next. They failed that often. A cop from an adjacent police department that used Fords said mockingly, "At least our door handles don't fall off."
Even the new Chevy Traiblazer, an SUV only with a V-6, provided more horsepower than that 95 Impala. My point is that in the 1990s, most of us stood brainwashed by things that were inferior. The mid 90 Caprices were a classic example of inferior America products that could not be exported. They cost too much to build AND failed too often.
BTW, it was just before that period that GM management complained that Japan would not buy American cars. Again, most of us let them brainwash us rather than first look at the numbers. During that period, Mercedes sales to Japan increased something like 20 to 30%, Ford 8%, VW I think was about 40%, and Opel was something like 72%. But GM sales decreased 2%. Why? Cars such as the Caprice were so poor that the only export were to people who HAD to buy them. People overseas just did not want GM crap.
I believe about that same time, Toyota sold a small 3.0 liter V-6 Supra that output 320 HP. That was more horsepower than even the Chevy Corvette. With a smaller engine and with less car wasted around a grossly oversized engine, that 1995 Toyota was clearly the superior car if engine performance and acceleration is your criteria.
Why am I suspicious, but unable to make firm conclusions, of that hydrogen research? There is a gross shortage of facts from the research and the rumors fly contrary to the current science. But then that was what Star Wars was all about. Again the common thread - what are the numbers and where are the facts?