Oldsmobile Aurora

stickking1 · September 2003

Do you have a pic to post?...I have noticed an area or two that have very funny looking scratches on my 95....just a bunch of tiny straight line scratches. I know they are not from me, but I don't know where they are coming from, you can barely see them. I'll try to get a pic up...but if you have one, throw it on too.

-Brian

Henry · September 2003

I dont have a pic of the paint. I think they would be hard to photograph. The dealer said that the scratches should appear on most of the flat horizontal surfaces of the car (including the car's "biceps"). If this is what you are seeing, then we are talking the same thing.

stickking1 · September 2003

I'll get a pic of it...since I have yet to deliver on your public request for a picture of the classic in the dark (that was you, wasn't it?). How long are the scratches? I have many that are on the shoulders (front wheel well) of the car, about 6 inches in length that run in the direction of the wind. There are more on the hood, but are only about an inch long at the very edge by the windshield.

I have tried to correct them with my Porter Cable, but no luck...this would explain some things. When I first noticed them, I thought my toweling method had been causing them...but that's not it. I'll try to get a picture tonight or tomorrow, have to wait for the light to be right...plus I just waxed the car, so they don't show up very well.

-Brian

bryanttarvin · September 2003

Hi everyone,

Been lurking for awhile and thought that it was time that I checked in.

I have another interesting tidbit to share that I discovered about how to tell the 2001-2003 Auroras apart when your inside the car.

I noticed this on my 2003 Collector's Edition Aurora and other regular 2003 Auroras on the Olds dealer lot when I was buying my car. All 2001-2002 Auroras that have the BOSE CD/Cassette sound system had the BOSE moniker on the cassette tape door from the pictures and video clips that I have seen. All 2003 Auroras that have the BOSE CD/Cassette system, as I have, have the BOSE moniker now just under the digital clock and radio frequency display on the right lower side of the radio display face plate.

Does anyone know why Oldsmobile changed this location for the 2003 model year? My own guess is that the BOSE moniker could now be seen at all times and would not be hidden when the cassette player is being used. Also, it looks and matches the way they have been doing it for years on the Cadillacs with BOSE. Just thought that this way very interesting and another Aurora particular to add to the list.

I am still loving my Final 500. I finally got my Collector's Appreciation package in early August and found out that my car is #55 out of the 500. That is very cool! My plan is to try to keep this car forever and put no more than around 200 miles on it for its entire life. I want to keep it in collectible condition and status, as I hope that they will be very valuable 20+ years from now.

I currently have the car at my local GMC dealer (used to sell Oldsmobiles, but stopped selling them in 2001) for many minor flaws the car had from the factory to be fixed. The car has about 114 miles on it right now.

Let me know what you all think about this car having any chance of being a true collectible in the future and your suggestions how to properly store the car as such. I currently store it in a storage unit.

Thanks!

Bryant Tarvin

rjs200240 · September 2003

Just my thoughts here...

For one, that's cool about the Bose logo. I thought the tape door was a dumb place to put it. It isn't visible at all, even without a tape in (unless you are about 4' tall, or tend to rest your head on the center console).

I don't think that a Collector's Edition Aurora will really be a super valuable car 20 years from now. For example, look at the Collector's Edition Corvette from 1982. The last of the Stingrays, and one of the first Corvettes to use fuel injection since about 20 years prior. That's 21 years old, and while worth more than a regular 1982, they aren't particularly expensive. What they are though, is enjoyable and fun to drive. As is your Aurora. By only putting 200 miles on a car that already has 114, you are only cheating yourself out of the enjoyment of an incredible machine. The car will probably age better being driven than it would being parked.

Sure, don't drive it to the store, or keep it out of the rain if you want. Put some 3M film on the front to keep the paint perfect from chips if you want. Only drive it places you know you can park it from harm if you want. Only drive it to work on beautiful days when you don't have a lot of work to do and can enjoy it if you want.

But please, please, drive that thing. Drive it on winding backcountry roads. Drive it on scenic hilly highways. Take a two week vacation and drive it across the country. Drive it on a cool fall day with the windows down, colored leaves whipping above the sunroof. Drive it on a tree-lined road on a warm evening as the sun is just beginning to set. Crack that throttle open and hear that beautiful roar. Drive it around town so everyone can see what amazing cars Oldsmobile built throughout its lifetime. That's what it was made to do...

And take a lot of pictures along the way!

Just my two cents.

javidogg · September 2003

Hey rjs, I could not have said it any better, drive the Aurora and enjoyed it.

Many of us are not that lucky to own or in reality don't have the money to spend on a Final 500 Aurora, but if you have one, drive it and enjoy the beautiful machine, those type of cars only come one in a life time, god forbid and some thing happens were you won't be able to drive for the rest of your life and then what, you never got a chance to feel the car out there.

Bryan, I'm happy for you and your Final 500 Aurora, number 55, did I mention that's my lucky number by the way.

Well have fun, and be safe.

Peace.

Http://www.cardomain.com/id/javidogg

stickking1 · September 2003

I was showing off my new wheels and we got to talking about the Northstar. He said that Caddie has a supercharged 4.6 on the way...didn't know what car it was intended for, but he said to expect well above 400 hp. Anyone hear about this yet?

BTW..he has a new 4.6 in his garage that he has for sale. I guess he taught a class for GM that had to do with the Northstar...well, they used the complete engine in the class for demonstration and just gave it to him when they were done(!!). He is trying to convince me to buy it so we can put it in the Aurora. I'll have to take some pictures of it sitting in his garage some time...quite a sight!

nne3jxc · September 2003

I haven't heard of a Supercharged 4.6 liter Northstar, but the the new Caddy XLR (aka Cadillac Corvette) has a 320hp in a rear-wheel drive setup. (first production use of the Northstar powering the rear wheels if I'm not mistaken.)
Of course, there is the 2005 STS redesign coming up -- maybe that will have a supercharger.

Jim

Henry · September 2003

Could you please ask your friend IF the 4.6 will fit into the Aurora? there was a postng a long time ago where one guy asked the tech at a dealer about the switch. If memory serves, the tech showed him the bottom of the block on the 4.0 and told him that the 4.6 had a different bottom that would cause the engine to sit TOO FAR up in the cradle. In other words, you would not be able to close the hood of the Aurora if you put in the 4.6.

Any of you other "old timers" remember the posting I am referencing?

Henri

pat · September 2003

Henri, you might can use the "Search This Discussion" feature on the page bar to look for that post. It's a cool new feature that with the right keywords should find exactly what you are looking for if it was here in this discussion.

stickking1 · September 2003

Henri...I'll have to ask him about that next time I'm over there...better yet, maybe I'll snap a few pics of his 95 STS up on the lift and the Aurora, it'd be an interesting experiment. I had asked him about all of the other things fitting (electrical, emissions and computer) and he was confident that it could be done. I don't know if he had thought about the actual physical difference though...

I'll also have to ask him if it is the 275hp or 300hp version of the engine. I should have been over there last summer with the camera...when he and my brother rebuilt his Northstar, that would have been fun to watch!

Henry · September 2003

I am not sure if the posting was on this thread. There were two other Aurora threads before this one was created (aurora and Aurora 2). Remember, this thread was Aurora 3 until the name was changed to reflect the upgrade in the Edmunds software that allowed for longer threads. The Aurora discussion dates back to 1998.

The 4.6 sits higher under the hood then the 4.0. That is why if you park a caddie and an Aurora side by side the 4.6 looks bigger than the 4.0 (you are seeing more of the engine).

fjk57702 · September 2003

I think that the Aurora engine is a smaller bore version of the 4.6 and that the block is the same. However, the Aurora's powertrain (engine and transmission) may be packaged differently. Cadillac's have a radiator grill and so there may be more room under the hood. I do think that the radiator grill helps with cooling, I only saw my SLS's temperature gauge move slightly off center once this summer. The Aurora was always running a bit warm when the outside temperature was over 85.

By "packaged", I mean that the attachment points could be quite different, so putting a caddy engine in an Aurora may be more trouble than it's worth.

wingnut396 · September 2003

Hi all, been a while since I visited these boards.

My 98 Classic has been giving me this error more and more often as of late. The car will simply not turn over and afte the DIC initializes, the message "Clean key and wait 3 Mins" displays on it.

I have tried gently cleaing the Pass Key with a soft eraser (old computer tech trick for cleaning contacts). I have switched from my primary iginition key to my spare and the problem continues. It has not been only mildly aggravating so far, but I don't want to end up stranded due to a computer error. Perhaps I need to get some pipe cleaners and try to clean out the ignition on the column itself. Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

Otherwise the car is running great. Past two years since I picked it up and I still love the thing. One of GMs bests line ever produced IMO.

pat · September 2003

Henri, the "Search This Discussion" is active for any discussion you have open ... you can use the keyword search to find the other Aurora discussions and then go from there.

You can also use the Advanced Search (link below the keyword search). The search features here have been enhanced tremendously and are extremely helpful now.

stickking1 · September 2003

Just pasted this from another forum....have not been able to link to the exact article yet, so forgive me if anything is in error.

DETROIT - Cadillac today announced pricing for its all-new 2004 CTS-V high-performance luxury sedan. The CTS-V will arrive in dealerships beginning in January priced at $49,995, including destination and delivery.

CTS-V is the first in the new V-Series line of Cadillac luxury performance vehicles and features a 400 horsepower 5.7-liter V8, six-speed manual transmission, large Brembo performance brakes at all four corners, 18-inch wheels and tires, retuned shock absorbers and a host of interior and exterior styling refinements.

Like the original CTS, CTS-V was refined and validated at Germany's famed Nurburgring to meet the expectations of the world's most avid driving enthusiasts.

"V-Series will take Cadillac's performance credibility to an entirely new level," said Jay Spenchian, Cadillac V-Series marketing director. "As the first in a series of high-performance luxury vehicles, CTS-V proves we are serious about winning over a new generation of luxury performance car enthusiasts."

kayaman420 · September 2003

What a perfect time in our economy to expand your line of $50,000 vehicles.

rjs200240 · September 2003

Are you kidding?? The CTS V-series looks like the biggest performance bargain around!

garnes · September 2003

I have to agree with RJS. A Corvette nicely optioned with the standard 350 HP engine is pretty much the same price. I've been in a CTS and think it's a lot nicer than a Corvette - plus you are getting the LS6 engine. This car is an incredible luxury/sport/supercar deal. To even come close, you have to spend many 10's of thousands more.

About all the import enthusiasts can do is regurgitate the same-ol (subjective/imaginary)fit/finish, "cheap" plastic and maybe the jab at the pushrod engine when this thing hits the street. It's only natural I guess when a car like this delivers the same performance and respectable luxury for 10k to 30+k less.

I'm excited about the GTO, but admit that someday I might want a CTS-V. I'd go the slightly used route though. I'm guessing that a used CTS-V would not likely be abused.

kayaman420 · September 2003

I think it is a great vehicle. I just would like to see GM working on some affordable sport vehicles except the Pontiac stuff. Like how dodge did with the new Neon SRT. Fast as hell for under 20K. Too bad I dont like Dodge. I just think that with todays economy if GM would create a nice sport / luxury car for under 25K it would make them more money than a new line of 50K cars. I guess im just jealous that all the new cars that are coming out that I would want are way out of my price range. Seems that they are forgetting about the mid level stuff and all the enginering efforts are going towards the high end automobiles.

rjs200240 · September 2003

Saturn Red-line, Impala SS, GTO...

I realize the GTO isn't under $25K, but it's only $33K. A guy I work with paid more than that for a used 350Z (he paid more than I did for my brand-new, ordered-just-for-me Aurora)...

Henry · September 2003

I have decided to blow up to $1,000 on the 95. Any suggestions??? RSM, corsa, take Pat out????

Kirstie_H · September 2003

Did you ever find the post you were looking for?

kirstie_h
Roving Host & Future Vehicles Host

Henry · September 2003

I did not find the post. I tried the search feature that was mentioned but it did not come up. I think it was in eiher the "Aurora1" or "Aurora2" threads that preceded this one and they have been archived.

Henri

hammen2 · September 2003

...I think the Corsa is $995 + install (another $250-$300). If $1k is your ceiling, I think the Corsa is out. I have heard of others putting FlowMasters or other exhaust systems on, for less than the Corsa.

Personally, this is the #1 thing I'm waiting for once my car is paid off next April (as long as Corsa will still offer the STS system). I already know a good exhaust shop (my co-worker used them to put FlowMasters on his '69 Firebird convertible). I look at the pictures of Greg's Aurora, which mine is a clone of (black '98, though I have the stock chrome wheels), and have lust...

--Robert
who should really get back to work :-)

ethink · September 2003

When did Zinc's Classic Aurora Website disappear?

Is there a copy of it anywhere?

I know that Zinc sold his Aurora Classic a while back and was not going to continue to develop the site. But it was such a great repository of information.

I, for one, will miss it. ;-(

Steve

1996 Aurora
79,200 miles
Autobahn
Black / Black
Borbet Wheels / Bridgestone Turanza LHS Tires
KYB Struts

hammen2 · September 2003

I used Adobe Acrobat to make a PDF of the site. It didn't include any of the downloads, but had all of the pictures, etc.

Unfortunately, the PDF is about 50 MB in size - a little large to email... maybe I'll post it to my web site. If I do, I'll post the URL here...

--Robert

rjs200240 · September 2003

CORSA!

You should've talked to Taylor before he got rid of his car. Maybe you can still salvage it from him if they didn't sell the car yet. A few bucks for the old one to get re-installed, a few bucks to ship, and a few bucks for his time and I bet you could do it under $1000...

stickking1 · September 2003

Do you mean this page, or am I mistaken?

http://members.fortunecity.com/zincster/

I still have it bookmarked in my browser and visit it from time to time to get pictures and various info. Actually, I was just on there a day or two ago to get that wallpaper he had posted.

-Brian

ethink · September 2003

I have searched this forums as well as a Google Web Search for Polyurethane Bushings for 1996 Aurora. I also checked the Energy Suspension site.

I would really like to restore the suspension on my 1996 Aurora which is about to hit 80,000 miles.

I recently installed KYB struts in the front.

I am about to install Bridgestone Turanza's LH-S with a forced-wheel balance and 4 wheel alignment.

I would like to replace the front, lower control arm bushings at this time.

Are Polyurethane Bushings available for the 1996 Aurora?
If yes, could someone share this information.

If there a recommended alternative to Polyurethane?

TIA,
Steve

Henry · September 2003

I dont remember why he said it but my mechanic at the dealer recommended against putting the polys on the 1995. I will have to check with him as to wht the issue was with the car to see if it aplies to the 1996.

Henri

And Robert, I did post to Taylor saying I would buy his whole car and use it to put in the 4.6L (try anyway) but he never responded and sold the car.

I was reminded by my "friend" that I had already blown a few thousand on the 84 Riv. Therefore, I might want to cool my jets on the Aurora since the Classic is out of warranty and known for high repair costs.

I wish I could show you guys my toy Riviera, but I do not know how to post pictures to this board.

Henri

garnes · September 2003

kayaman - I really don't think those Neon SRT's are really that fast. From what I've seen of all the "pocket rockets" is that they do well if launched just right from 0 and then they give a lot back from any kind of a rolling start. Maybe the SRT is different, but I doubt it. And I really wonder about what's sent to the magazine for testing vs. what's sent to the dealer for you to drive - especially on this type of car. And yeah, any kind of power experienced while sitting on an upholstered milk crate is going to "feel" fast too.

As for the expensive stuff - well, just wait and get one slightly used. Save 5 figures in $$, and look hard for a nice one. It's amazing, but there are a lot of people that buy something and then change their mind of whatever for something else. These people are great. They can pay for up to half of your new car.

garnes · September 2003

Henry - you can get it and always switch it to that 99 you say you might buy someday.

Anybody getting a Corsa exhaust for the classic, just let me know and I'll e-mail you pictures and a description of what the guys did to make it work on my 98. The only thing I'd do different is have the connection between the converter and the resonator welded. I'm going back to have this done. It's loose now. No biggie, it still sounds the same and performs the same, and isn't going anywhere but I want it solid.

Make sure you find a shop that can weld 304 stainless steel.

Also - keep in mind that it's difficult to get the tips just right. Mine are exactly the same height from the floor or the bumper, but they are angled just a tad different (in the vertical axis) which makes one seem "low". If you are exactly behind it at the right height, and look for it, you can tell. But it's very minor. It's tough to get it just right as they do have to make some adjustments to make it fit the Aurora - just so you know.

nne3jxc · September 2003

The address changed a while ago. It seems to be available on Fortunecity as well as here:http://trak.to/aurora.

rjs200240 · September 2003

Bushings exist to absorb some vibration and harshness and to have some give instead of having metal on metal attachments. Polyurethane is a much harder material than rubber, and while it will likely last a lot longer, it won't do as good a job on small vibrations and such. I would stick with rubber on a car like the Aurora if I were you. I don't think you want a buzzy car just to improve the handling a tad. I mean, it's an Aurora after all...

ethink · September 2003

My 1996 Aurora has 79,500 miles (70% is highway miles). I recently (about 6 weeks ago) replaced the original MacPherson struts with new KYB struts and boots.

The ride is now much firmer AND the high speed vibration (between 72 and 75 MPH) is much MORE noticeable.

I will be replacing my Pirelli P6000 Sport Veloce (after 40,000 miles) with Bridgestone Turanza's LH-S. According to my research and discussion with my tire dealer, the Pirelli P6000 Sport Veloce have a rather stiff side wall which results in a somewhat stiff ride.

I chose the Bridgestone Turanza LH-S tires because they are supposed to be a much smoother riding tire than the Pirelli P6000 Sport Veloce's.

http://www.tirerack.com/survey/SurveyComments.jsp?additionalComme- - - nts=y&commentStatus=P&tireMake=Bridgestone&tireModel=- - - Turanza+LS-H

The LH-S's will be mounted on Borbet Type E wheels that I have had for the past four years.

http://www.tirerack.com/upgrade_garage/WheelSearch.jsp?changeColo- - - r=Choose+Color&filterSize=16&filterFinish=All&filterS- - - pecial=Pricing&autoMake=Oldsmobile&autoModel=Aurora&a- - - utoYear=1996

The tires and wheels will be "forced balance" of on a Hunter GSP9700 machine:

http://128.242.141.111/pub/features/intro.cfm

Based on information in this forum and at the Aurora and Cadilac forums at GMForums.com, it appears that the forced balance of the wheels and tires is the most likely fix for the high speed vibration problem on these cars.

Here is how you can find a local shop that has a Hunter GSP9700 that can do a forced four wheel balance.

http://128.242.141.111/pub/search/findgsp9700.cfm

Since I have made the investment to improve the ride of my Aurora, this seemed to be an appropriate and logical time to renew/replace the bushings in the the suspension. After all, my Aurora is (7) years old (mfg. date April 1996) and has approximately 79,500 miles.

This is the reason for my interest in polyurethane bushings for the suspension on my Aurora.

http://discussions.gmforums.com/showthread.php?t=47005

I welcome your thoughts and comments on this topic.

Steve

rocket3_50 · September 2003

For the New Classics has anyone else reported on the keyhole? Here's what I observed:

2001 V6 - There's a keyhole in the front passenger door handle.

2003 - There is not a keyhole in the front passenger door handle.

What about the other New Classics?

Ken

rjs200240 · September 2003

Hmm, I thought the 2001's didn't have the passenger keyhole either. My car doesn't. I think it's pretty cool. Gives a nicer look to that side.

New Classics? Don't you mean new Aurora's vs. classic Aurora's?

fjk57702 · September 2003

I think that a car has to be relativly "old" to be called a classic. My Grandmother's 1950 Buick might be getting to that age sometime soon. But the first generation Aurora is still a bit too young for that.

rocket3_50 · September 2003

So, what we have so far is:
2001 V6 keyhole
2001 V8 ?
2002 V6 ?
2002 V8 no keyhole

Henry · September 2003

I beg to differ. As the last great sedan of the oldest car company in America, the name Classic fits. The styling is unmatched by any sedan on the road. When you see the 95-99 Aurora, you know exactly what you are looking at. While I take nothing away from TNG (the next generation) Auroras, they are not as eye catching as the original. Classic is not just a question of age it is also a question of taste and style.

Speaking of Classic styling, I finally parked my 84 Riviera along side the Aurora. I believe that the Riv is actually longer than the Aurora! I then parked the Riv along side my neighbor's Saden deville and they were the same overall length.

WOW these cars are long.

(No wonder I can never find a parking space in NYC.)

Henri

rocket3_50 · September 2003

So, what we have so far is:

2001 V6: keyhole, trunk lid piece, steel pipes
2001 V8: ?, solid trunk, steel pipes
2002 V6: ?, trunk lid piece, stainless pipes
2002 V8: no keyhole, solid trunk, stainless pipes
2003: no keyhole, trunk lid piece, stainless pipes

Have I got that right?

Oh, yeah, on the "New Classic" - I just call it that as a kind of a joke to myself because it reminds me of "New Coke" vs. "Classic Coke". Production of New Coke didn't last very long, either, just like the new Aurora.

fjk57702 · September 2003

My 71 Riviera was both wider and longer than the 79-85 Riviera I think. Engine was 455 cubic inches.

garnes · September 2003

For anyone that gets this done, I highly recommend that all the tires be broken down and placed in their optimal location. When they test it, they often won't make any adjustments if it "passes" - about 15 or 16 lbs of up-force. If it passes but can be made better - make them do it. I think there is a difference in ride between say 8 or 9 lbs and 15 lbs.

If the tire or rim is 100% - no "high spots" then of course it won't matter where the tire is mounted on the rim. The high spot in one cannot be positioned with a corresponding low spot.

kayaman420 · September 2003

Many things attribute to the 1st gen Aurora being called a Classic. The things that Henri stated above and the fact that it was orphaned. Also the term is used in a different way than like a 57 Chevy or something. I think it is more of a moniker or nikname than the true definition of Classic.

fjk57702 · September 2003

The first generation Aurora's styling was used on the Intrigue. Something about these cars did not go over with "classic oldsmobile buyers". As a result, Oldsmobile was doomed.

kayaman420 · September 2003

reason olds was doomed was horrible GM marketing. The Aurora was pound for pound the best car GM ever produced. So they decide to not tell anyone about it. Makes a lot of sense. Heck nobody even knows who makes the Aurora unless you own one. Most people think it is a Japanese car until I say Olds. Then They ask what year and I say 1995 and they almost fall over. GM should have jumped behind the Aurora and rode it to the promise land, but for some reason they decided to hide it in the closet.

Personally I think it was a Cadillac conspiracy??? any takers on that theory?

fjk57702 · September 2003

Oldsmobile is GM's marketing division for Oldsmobiles. They are the ones who goofed. However, most of the car magazines ran pre_introduction test drives of the Aurora months before it went into production. These articles were all quite complimentary of the car. These were pre_production cars though. After the car went into production, I saw advertisements for it in a number of non_automotive magazines, so I don't think that Oldsmobile failed to advertize. In fact the Aurora was a decent seller in 1995 and early 1996. I think the sales slowed in 1997 after the price tag run up. The car was worth the orginal $32,000. My 1998 had a $37,500 (more or less) price tag. My car was a program car, so I got a fair deal on it, but the car was probably only worth $33-34,000, not the $37-38,000.

The 1992 Seville was planned for a later introduction on the Aurora platform, but Cadillac realized that the Seville was in trouble and needed redone sooner than the Aurora platform could be finished. This also explains why the northstar V8 was not available till a year later. The entire Cadillac line was upgraded to the 92 Seville body in 94. The Aurora platform was put into production a few months later, but they were not ready for the 94 model year.

hammen2 · September 2003

a) the car didn't even have the Oldsmobile name on it, except for the radio.

b) they contemplated renaming Oldsmobile to Aurora. The stylized "A" logo almost became the Olds division logo. Frankly, I wish they'd done that - would have been a clean break from the past. The "traditional" Oldsmobile buyer wanted a bench seat, and was unhappy with the model lineup in 2000.

c) they were going after the "import" crowd with the Aurora/Intrigue/Alero. Yet, wasn't Saturn supposed to do that? I still think the styling between the Aurora and the first-generation Saturns was complementary. I would have tried to combine the divisions - Saturn has just recently got an SUV, and will soon get a minivan, revamped mid-size car (the L-series still isn't selling), etc. Think of what they'd have had if they had the Oldsmobile product in 1998/1999.

d) the dealer network. Frankly, it sucked, especially service. This is another place where "Saturnizing" the brand might have saved it. I know John Rock (ex-Olds head) wanted to go fixed, non-negotiated pricing on the whole Olds line, but the dealer body revolted. Disgusted, Rock eventually walked away from Olds and retired.

e) the Aurora did have a number of lemons. Likewise, the Intrigue did have a number of build issues. UAW-GM relations were in the pits in the late 90's, and this led to some of those things. Had the Aurora been built somewhere other than Lake Orion, MI or the Intrigue built somewhere other than Fairfax, KS, it would have certainly helped.

Someday there will be books written (if they aren't being worked on already) about the colossal mistakes GM made with marketing the Oldsmobile brand since 1989 or so (the original date of the "not your father's Oldsmobile" tagline).

Bottom line is, as someone who buys only GM cars (I'm not pro-union or Buy American, but I have relatives who are autoworkers, and I want to keep them employed/insured), the death of Olds means the demise of the most attractive car lineup (IMHO) that GM offers. Caddy is coming on, but one size ($$$) does not fit all.

*sigh*

--Robert

Henry · September 2003

I have noticed that any negative comment about the car produces a relatively quick armanda of postings.

I really dont think there is a more passionate group out there than us Aurorians.

"Don't Tread on Us"

Oldsmobile Aurora

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles