I know that the current Impala series offers a front bench seat. I’ve seen photos of some.I know --dinosaurs and all that. But after searching and searching, I cannot find which models have it so I can look for it LT?, LS?.. all seem to have the front buckets. Any one can help so I could narrow it down on cars.com?
It is possible that a bench seat is on the options list, in order to accomodate those who are into that type of thing.
Not that there is anything wrong with it!
I would be stunned if a real bench seat was an option. A split bench maybe, but not a full on bench seat.
Safety requirements for the front occupants are different from the rear and I don’t know how they would get around that 3-point harness and front air bag scenario.
At the Impala ‘build it’ web page I found a 40/20/40 bench option for the LT. See if it works for you (looks like 2 buckets and a soft center section to me).
The LT! Thank you alot Texases for finding that. Yes, that 40/20/40 is the right description, I shouldn’t have called it a bench VDC.
On a different topic, I did not realize that federal regs or policy had made such an effect on car design. You guys broaden my horizons. Makes me wonder what a reg free, market driven only car would look like.
A “regulation free, market driven only car” would probably be a Ford Model T or similar. Maybe the Benz Patent Motorwagon?
Government regulation is nothing new. Thank God.
Does Robert yearn for the days of dagger-like knobs strewn across the dashboards of cars that also boasted inadequate brakes, smog-belching exhausts, single-circuit hydraulic systems, non-collapsible steering columns, doors that popped open too readily, no air bags or seat belts, and rigid structures that did not yield in a controlled manner in the event of a collision?
It is one thing to want an old-fashioned bench seat, and another thing entirely to succumb to a Luddite-like philosophy that automatically assumes all safety and emissions-related regulations to be a bane on our existence.
Can you clarify which automotive regulations you object to?
Dear mleich and VDC,
Points well taken. I remember those days! Bare steel dashboard and those nicely chromed steel daggers Hard to believe now… I am glad for regulations and those you cite, and seat belts,better engines, ignition systems, for steering columns less likely to skewer me, etc.
As for example of my issues, I think these are styling, or perhaps mileage related, not safety. Here are a few specifics:
Windshield rake angle that reduces visibility near- above and near-below-If you get a bit too close to a traffic light and try to look up, you will realize what I mean. Is this the result of the feds mpg requirement, virtually requiring the car maker to gain every possible tenth of a mpg? If so, it seems it is at the cost of reduced visibility and safety. Or is it simply a modern design call?
Roofs are now oval shaped over the passenger cab, reducing the level usable ceiling area. Only a reduced area near the drivers head is at full height. Try leaning forward… More mileage related requirements?
The high rear end, reducing rear window visibility. Yes, you can add a video camera. Is that an improvement?
So I wonder if these, being almost universal, are simply designs of the times, or the result of explicit government regs or required in order to get to government mileage requirements? And yet, where does it stop? How much is too much?
Thanks for your interest and response.