Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
It's a beauty for sure.
Best wishes to all
Ken
Why is it so easy to find picts and info on the Cadillac Cien, a car with no possible production possibility; but it is so difficult to find any info or picts of the XLR which will be coming out in 2003? GM's NAIAS website doesn't even show the XLR as being one of the cars on display there. What the heck?
Anyway, 26K for a new 4.0 sounds pretty darn cool to me. I got a great deal in March of '01 on a 98 with only 13k miles on it. I thought something must have been wrong with it, but everything checked out and it's been a great car.
Ask the dealer about that. If he says it does transfer...please let me know because then I'll have to raise hell and get mine.
I'd go for it, assuming the car checks out with no major problems. Have them run the VIN and pull up the history of the car and show it to you. That will list all the work done on it by a GM dealer.
Campo57
http://autoweek.com/specials/2002_detroit/production.mv
Back to the Aurora... As to the amount of leather in it: I know (now) the door inserts are fake, but what about the center console? It seems real to me, mostly because of the stiching. Anyone know if it is leather? I checked out Lexol's website, and I have to say their product seems better. Their explanation of using a sponge and water along with their cleaner to lift the dirt out makes sense. Their product seems sensible. I think I will use up my Meguiars and check out the Lexol. Maybe it won't be as greasy as when I used it in my 'vette...
I was checking out a Car and Driver comparo with the Aurora in it.
http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/comparisontests/2000/May/200005_comparisontest_vicep.xml?&keywords=aurora&page=1
They complained about the thick steering wheel which I really like. They also cite the interior as being somewhat cheap because it goes in a lower-cost V-6 version too. I was surprised by this. The plastics have a nice soft look to them. Plus, even $80,000 cars have plastic in the dash. What should it be? All wood and chrome? I think they just felt it had to be cheap if there is a $30,000 version of the car. They mentioned that it had to be loaded up with options just to get into the price range of the other cars in the comparo... It would seem to me that this is a positive thing. It almost seemed as if they put it in last place and had to come up with bad things to justify it. I can understand the criticism that it isn't as sporty, but don't make stuff up... The Aurora was the only car that performed better in lane-change maneuvers with it's stability control on (although I don't know how they turned it off). I thought this was interesting because I think it is definitely true that traction control and stability control from one maker is not the same as from another. There is a lot of fine-tuning and programming that make them work the way they do. I think GM doesn't get enough credit for these sorts of things (or for their exceptional transmissions that are used by both BMW and Mercedes).
One thing I find strange is that the PCS in the Intrigue can control all four brakes, while in the Aurora it only controls the fronts. I wonder if this is just because that's how it worked out optimally, or if they cheaped out and only wanted to get a two-channel system?
Yeah - the plastic thing is a mystery to me too. The domestics seem to have a secret supply of this really "cheap" looking of feeling plastic and the imports have a monopoly on the good stuff and I'm blind and can't tell the difference I guess. I get an opportunity to ride in other peoples cars at work a lot and see a lot and I see little if any difference. One note - The Accord seats are downright minimal and not very comfortable at all for longer trips - but Edmunds actually notes the comfortable seats as something "for" the car.
The Aurora has a back seat not to their liking, the front seat was too big (I've never heard that one before) and the steering wheel they did not like - oh boy what a crummy car. The Lexus GS 300 performance did not sound like it did too well - a little underpowered compared to the others. I submit to you that this would be a major sin if offered by a domestic, but the "L" gets the usual pass because they like some other aspect of the car so much it more than makes up for it. Typical. How about the GS styling??? I'm sorry, but I've never liked it. It's round and fat looking. There is nothing chiseled or graceful about it at all. Ah, but it is a "Lexus". So what if it is slower and ugly -the carpeting and wood trim have them hipmotized.
And the handling thing is a bunch of crap. I just don't get an opportunity to drive like I'm weaving between pylons - this stuff is irrelevant to 99% of driving. The pylons and hair-pin roads just don't happen much if at all for most people.
Yeah I like the steering wheel too (the 98 is fat too) and I love fat seats! I'm not fat, but the more seat I got around me the better - especially when doing the interstate cruise.
It seems they want everything to be crossed with an M3 to some degree.
After reading it, I'd score points for the Aurora for many of the reasons they don't like it.
Try reading their article about the new ES 300. They describe it as "a Camry with frosting" and then basically rave about the car. Man - a Camry with frosting has got to be the most accurate and most revolting notion of a car - especially if you're paying well over 30k for the ride. But is has the "L" thing. (one neat thing in the article is that they did note a slight increase in performance with "more area under the power curve" even though peak power is the same)
I also noticed in their summary that one of the Aurora "low's" was "down-in-a-hole rear seat". If anything, the rear seats are very elevated in the Aurora. You get a pretty good view out the front windshield because they are raised up.
I get the feeling the GS 300 got high ratings because they liked the GS 430 and don't want to admit the only thing they liked about the GS 430 was the engine (which is obviously absent on the GS 300). It's an engine that costs about $9000 though (over the 300)... It had some of the worst handling and acceleration times, yet it was ranked 3rd of 8. They seem to think the Lexus performs abysmally with elegance... Apparently this sets it apart from an Aurora that hustles through their tests but "complains" while doing it. They even point out that the GS would perform better if they put on different tires; as if every freaking car they had wouldn't perform better if it were equipped specifically to compete in these tests. It seems as though this counts as much as actual performance when it comes to the Lexus, though.
The Jag was like $43K and had a V-6. And it cost $2,000 to get the memory seats and a garage door opener that are standard on the 4.0 Aurora. The $40K BMW didn't even have leather standard!
I'm glad I stirred up a long post from you Garnes. There hasn't been much on the board lately. I caught your dig about "area under the curve"
sbeaupre: You could measure them by tightening an adjustable wrench over the pipe until it is snug and then measure the gap in the wrench. I doubt there is much difference between the interior dimension and the outer dimension. The pipe isn't that thick.
I put a lot of Lexol on the seats this weekend. Although it doesn't smell as good as the Car Brite, I have to say that is perhaps a little better. If you use it a lot - say several liberal applications rubbed in really good within a week - I notice the leather getting progressively softer. You will be happy. My car has some years on it and I'll bet the first owner did not do anything for the leather, so going nuts like this makes a difference. A new car like yours would not need that.
Anybody - the Old's service guy told me that Chevy is picking up the Aurora V8. Is this true? Would they drop that into and Impala for the SS or Monte for a true SS? I have not heard this one before.
I will let you know how they work out.
EXPENSIVE. I BOUGHT NO EXTENDED WARRANTY. JUST
HAVE THE 5YR 60K. ANY SUGGESTIONS OR INFO RE:
OUTRAGEOUSLY EXPENSIVE REPAIRS. ALSO, PAID 25K
FOR A STANDARD 8CY. USED GM CARD DOLLARS. HOW DOES THAT SOUND? THANKS
Garnes: I know Chevy has picked up the Aurora IRL V8. They are taking over for Olds Motorsports in IRL racing. The word from GM was that this would mean Chevy would be fielding a race engine that is not based on a production engine (not in a production Chevy anyways) ,which is allowed. As far as I know Chevy isn't using the Aurora V8 in any production cars, and it seems more likely that this engine would go to Buick. Buick doesn't have any V8's in their lineup (along with Saturn) and have the type of crowd that might appreciate the smooth V8 more. Really, I can't believe old people like the 3800 in the LeSabre and Park Avenue. I can understand the Century as it is their low end. It makes sense in the sportier Regal GS purely because of it's grunt, but the Regal is Buick's worst-selling car. The Impala SS and Monte Carlo SS are rumored to go back to rear-wheel drive cars. This would enable the use of an LS-1 derivative that would be cheaper and probably more popular with the Chevy crowd than a smaller DOHC V8 would be (hey, I love the Chevy V8).
Oldsman01: I hear you on the Altima. I keep expecting car mags to drop the other shoe. The interior is hideous. Those gauges are awful!! I'm not too fond of the exterior either. I hate the clear taillights, and the car looks a bit like a balloon. Plus, it soars up to almost $30k once you add things like ABS (not standard!) and leather.
Anyone notice how companies are touting steering-wheel-mounted controls like it is some new thing? This really annoys me. Just like Volvo claiming to have invented seatbelts (Ford did) and that Mercedes timeline commercial where they point out the dates Mercedes added new features to their cars, and imply that these were inventions for Mercedes, which isn't the case. Hey, anyone remember the navigation system that Oldmobile debuted in 1995 (called Guidestar)?
I've only ever owned GM cars, and only ever cared much about American cars. Therefore my experience is limited about the subtleties of other cars. Plus, the thing I am curious about aren't the things you see in brochures or on websites. You have to own the car or know someone with one. Anyone know if non-GM cars have the subtle personalization features that GM has? Like how long to have the interior lights on for, and whether to lock the doors when you start driving, or whether to unlock them once you park again, or even things like the theater dimming (which I love) or the auto-dimming rearview mirror, or even automatic headlights? Many of these things have been on GM cars since the early 90's. Even trip computers are rare on non-GM cars, but just about every GM car has them. For many of these things, it seems like GM is way ahead of the game. The Corvette had ABS in 1986, and traction control in 1993 (traction control was an option on the Jag XK8 until 2000). In 1984 the Corvette had a trip-like computer that could display average mileage, instant mileage, trip-odometer, estimated range, and such things as oil and coolant temp, voltage, and oil pressure. It even told you if the coolant was low. By 1986 (and maybe in 1984) it could monitor for low pressure in a tire. I just think that GM does a lot of the little things well, but doesn't get much credit for them. On a test-drive or a magazine comparo those little things don't really come into play. However, over years of ownership they really make you appreciate a car.
Tipsicobob: Interesting note about wheelspin. I never thought about the loading of the frame by the engine. Do any or most front-drivers use limited-slips?
I also read on C&D a review of the Accord with the 4 banger. They noted it was so quiet that you could not tell the engine was running. I had to re-read that to make sure I was not missing something. I get to drive an '01 Accord from time to time and have always noticed the large amount of vibration making it's way right to the steering wheel. I attribute this to any 4 cylinder really. Maybe this new Accord I've driven has a problem, but I don't think so. It seems just fine, but doesn't resemble the descriptions in the magazine reviews at all. More and more I discount the subjective stuff (which is the bulk of these articles). It rarely seems to mirror real life driving experience in any way.
Clear tail light plastic - it seems to be a popular aftermarket thing with the greasy kids that also put on the coffee-can exhaust tips, but that doesn't seem to make it a minus to any import that come from the factory that way.
Plastic - My 98 sure seems nice - so does the Impala.
I wonder how many warped "crummy" rotors were really just killed by the goobers at these service places.
rjs - oh yeah, I've noticed that to about the standard features on the domestics. A lot of them are really very nice and have been around forever.
I too hate when shops torque the crap out of the wheel lugs. It can definitely warp the rotors, can damage calipers from the warped rotors, can break the mounting bolts(or worse, stress and crack them without breaking), can warp the wheels, and all sorts of other problems. Not to mention the agony it causes if you get a flat tire and have to break them loose with the puny little bar in most trunks. Anytime my car goes to a shop where they take the wheels off, I loosen up the lugs and then retighten them.
Just a tip: If you are going to jack your car up, make sure to break the wheel lugs loose while it is still on the ground. If you try to break them loose while on a jack, you might pull the car off of it. Same thing with tightening them. Tighten them up somewhat, but wait until it is back on the ground to crank them down to the specified torque.
Thanks. I'll check this out.
Regarding the Aurora's 4.0 engine, the entire northstar engine line is being redesigned, so if buick gets a V8, it should be one of the new ones, not an old one. Buick may get one of the trick dual cam V8's with 3 valves per cylinder and VVT. A prototype gets 300 hp and 295 ft-lbs from 4.3 liters.
The local garage indicated that they didn't think it would loosen, but that the torque rating is for a dry nut and that any lubrication would allow a bit more force to be transmitted to the wheel than intended. Yet another angle. Man, I feel as though I left the baby on top of the car or something.
I swear the goofy wrench instructions said to do this, but apparently it's not good.
Oh well, guess I won't be getting out of sales tax.
Actually, given that my insurance provider has a pretty good mechanical breakdown policy, I may skip the GMPP completely.
on it, that is why the gm points were used.
Thanks.
Just shows though that there will continue to be very good deals around for 1-2 year old Auroras for the next couple of years.
Best wishes to all
Ken
I have a pristine teal 1995 Aurora that I would like to sell privately. Any suggestions as to where I could advertise? I'm in Los Angeles. Thanks!
Ben
If that doesn't work, then start paying. I would think your local paper would be the best bet.
And how did you find a V8 with no options?
http://web2.airmail.net/nunnally/sts/stsmuffler.htm
Anybody notice the Edmunds review of the new Acura RSX? They tested the 4 cylinder and it did not have much power at all I guess. Funny thing is that they give you data on braking and handling, but I did not see anything for acceleration. Gee, I wonder why? It just seems that when an import doesn't measure up, it really gets glossed over. Correct me if I missed something, but that is weird.
After looking at the Type S performance, I have to believe the regular version should perform quite well. That's still a lot of power for such a light car. They did not seem to be impressed though and did not list anything - but maybe I missed it.
One other note, barely more than 30 mpg on the highway from a 2700 lb car with a manual transmission is not too good and with the city at 24 that doesn't help much either. Basically, a significant portion of the performance is achieved by cashing out a lot of the economy you would expect from such a small car by gearing the car very aggressively. When you can find cars that literally weigh almost 800 lbs more that get similar fuel economy, you know something was sacrificed to get the performance. I'm not an economy minded driver, and certainly performance and economy don't mix, but I still think the gearing is a little hoaky. Just MHO.
Before putting them on ebay, I thought I would post them here. Sell new for $120, will take $80 including shipping inside US.
Contact me at Barney@texas.net
Oh ya I have a beautiful cappuccino 2001 Aurora 3.5. Thanks for any help.
You guys might find this interesting - I grabbed a sample (got the container from the dealer that the lab uses)of oil from the last change and had it analyzed at the lab. I have not been billed yet but it is about $30 I think.
I had 2,955 miles on the oil. The car has about 26k miles.
I discussed the results with the lab and apparently the "wear metals" were extremely low and they said the car was doing much better than average. This is so even when factoring for the dilution due to the 8 quarts of oil. For example, they measured 14 ppm of iron and they said normal was 50 to 100 ppm. If the car held 4.5 quarts, I guess that number might be 25 or so. Still doing great. Aluminum only measured 1 ppm. Dirt (silicon) was only 4 ppm - again factored for the dilution, I guess it might be 7 on a 4.5 quart car. They said you want to see dirt below 19 ppm. So I guess the K&N and my modified air box are doing just fine.
They did attribute the low wear numbers to the better protection of the M1 oil. I personally think the biggest edge of protection comes from the fact that it flows so much better at cold start-ups, and the rest is that it doesn't shear as much under stress.
They said their tests were for particles in the 7 micron range which will pass through an M1 filter too. They also said that regular filters only filter down to about 25 microns or so and that the high efficiency of the M1 down to 10 microns definitely helps reduce the wear in addition to the oil's performance.
The 8 quarts in the engine do help dilute contaminants and reduce the engine's wear too.
They also said that the discoloration of the M1 oil (Probably regular oil too I guess) to a brownish color over time was a normal color change from being heated and cooled. Having your oil look a little dirty after a thousand or two miles is good too and shows that the oil's "detergents" are doing their job. The days of "look how clean the oil is after 3,000 miles" doesn't mean anything - or might not be so good.
I guess I could go a lot longer between changes, but they did note that the more frequent the change, the less the contaminants accumulate (at least those too small for the filter to pick up).
No antifreeze in the oil, and no leaks, so I guess having to add a dribble (less than an ounce I'm sure) every 6,000 to 8,000 miles is normal and somehow a little evaporates.
Why did olds decide to make the a/c come on with the defrosters? It is incredibly annoying and why would they do this when you use it to clear/unfog your front windshield in the cold winter mornings?
Has anyone in here done the fuel pressure regulator install themselves? I can get one with a lifetime warrenty for $70 and Im just curious as to hard hard the install is. I dont think it should be too hard, it located right underneth the plastic Aurora engine cover. Anything I should know before do this? Also how much did the people who had this done pay? If the price of labor is right maybe I'll just have the dealership do it.
Really, defroster is a misnomer. It basically defogs the window. If you have frost on the window, you are much better off getting out and physically removing it.