Dedicated to the Promotion and Preservation of American Muscle Cars, Dealer built Supercars and COPO cars. |
|
#1
07-01-2005, 08:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Why not Impala?
I have always wondered why people refer to the Bel-Air and Impalas as simply Chevrolet? I was just looking at an old photo of Baldwin Chevrolet in 1968 and it lists all the Motion tuned cars on the window, SS-427 Chevelle, SS-427 Camaro, SS-427 Chevy II, SS-427 Corvette and then it reads SS-427 Chevrolet which I assume is the '68 Impala. Why?
|
|
#2
07-01-2005, 08:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why not Impala?
I think it's because you have up to four different trim levels on essentially the same vehicle being called four different models (Biscayne, Bel Air, Impala, and Caprice). In the Chevelle line, you could have the 300, the 300 Deluxe, the Malibu, and the Concours (not to mention another name or two for the wagons), but they are all Chevelles. Another term referring to the various full-size cars is merely 'Passenger'. Clear as mud, right?
 
__________________
Bill Pritchard 73 Camaro RS Z28, L82, M20, C60
|
|
#3
07-01-2005, 09:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Why not Impala?
Another explanation might be that the full-size was considered the flagship car or the mainline car. All other models (Camaro, Chevy II, etc.) being sub-models. You could think of it as a holdover from the days when Chevrolet only offered one design (say, 1940) from which the various models (wagon, coupe, sedan) derived, all using the same forward body design.
Still clear as mud? I guess the first break with the "mainline" model tradition would have been in 1953 with the Corvette and then again in 1960 with the Corvair.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
