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
Your post about the airbox mod was actually pretty clear. I haven't really opened up the box, but it seemed clear what you were saying. I'll have to check it out one of these days.
As far as the mufflers, if you want more sound, but not intrusive I would check out Corsa. They seem to be the best bet for not being overpowering. I have heard good comments on their Corvette system (not all Corvette owners want a raucous exhaust) as far as the quietness while cruising and increased aggressivness when pushing it. They have a Caddy exhaust that apparently fits the 2001+ Aurora with no probs. That caddyinfo site really didn't have much testimony as to how quiet it really is. Just make sure your factory exhaust isn't ruined (cut up) by whatever place installs your aftermarket exhaust. That way you can always go back if you don't like it.
I put Castrol in my 3.5 Intrigue and am loving the results. If you want more info on syntheic oils, drop by the synthetic oil thread here on Edmunds.
The reason that winter driving uses up the oil faster is because the oil takes longer to warm up. The oil-life monitor considers oil temperature as one of its factors. Because the oil is cold longer, the monitor shortens its life quicker.
I kind of agree with you on the exhaust preference. When I was in that Corsa STS, there was a very slight note cruising at 70. If you listened for it, it was there. I just wish I could compare it to something. I hope to get a ride in a friend's new Vette just to compare what is "normal" for a performance car.
When you stomped on it, it sounded so tough, but not overbearing or increasingly loud as the rpms got higher. For now, I think I made the right decision to stay stock.
Musclecar97 - I'm glad you like the box mod. If you get another one, you would be free to cut away and not have to worry about the liner thing. Don't forget extreme motor sports is supposed to be offering a true cold air induction for these Northstars. I can't wait.
About the mass air flow sensor - well, I guess I'll 'fess up to my dyno blunder some 4 or 5 months back. Really did not want to, but here goes. Laugh all you want guys. And if anybody is counting this was a second blunder (remember pulling the temp sensor with the car running? Car still ran great but dyno numbers dropped off a bit) Anyway, that cleared itself in a day or two and further tests were done to satisfaction.
Here is what happened - I disconnected the battery for 30+ minutes as you are supposed to when installing the Granatelli MAF. This is to clear out the computer and not have it averaging data from the stock sensor (the computer "remembers" or something like that and learns/averages driving data). When the battery is reconnected, the AC comes on for the first start after the reconnection. I did not notice the little green light on until I was pulling the car off. It was a nice day out with the temp at 65 or 70. I think the compressor was indeed on. The results - I pulled the same HP with the AC on and torque was down about 2 or 3. Assuming the compressor was on, this is pretty impressive, but is certainly not a very good test. Oh well. That's what you get clearing the path for the first time I guess.
Hence my questions some time back about compressor and HP usage. I think the darn thing works though. I think it basically just lets more air through because of the removed screen and then it is recalibrated to accurately communicate the higher air flow to the computer. The calibration is the key I think. Just removing the screen may help a little, but I'll bet the air flow patterns across the little sensor wires are different and who knows how well that is picked up by the stock sensor and communicated to the computer.
The grannatelli is bench calibrated for the new air flow. I think the talk about bigger diameter is questionable because it seems the throttle body port is smaller than the stock MAF anyway. Granatelli ordered my new MAF from the dealer and then they modified it. It's a stock fit. They tried to bore it out a little and it seems a bit crude and I really don't think it matters. They said my MAF "flowed 38% better than stock" on their bench when they were done. This really means nothing to me. For example, under what pressure differential - how does that test compare with real operating conditions? No way is there 38% more air flowing under full throttle. I don't think the cylinders were that starved before.
But hey, it seems to indeed add some punch. And the dyno seems to prove this. I may go back in the spring.
Hope this helps. Let me know what you think.
I would like to see GM make the oil monitors to allow a choice of either pure synthetic or conventional oil. With pure synthetic the oil change interval should be extended to about double that of conventional oil, if not much more. With Mr. Goodwrench oil, my oil changes cost about $25, and Mobil 1 would probably add at least $30-$40 on to that. Still cheap really, but if you only had to change the oil half as often, then the cost is nearly the same.
Anyway, I don't plan to drive my Aurora much beyond 100,000 miles, if that. The dealer likes putting Mr. Goodwrench in, since they get it by the barrel, instead of by the quart.
That oil analysis I had done indicated extremely low wear for the 3,000 mile interval. Yes, a lot probably is due to the cold start-up protection, but I like to hammer that V8 sometimes and apparently the M1 keeps everything protected.
Thanks
I don't know if this is what you are looking to do. Disconnecting the battery for an extended time is supposed to be a good idea when adding any modification that changes the engines performance.
RJS- How's your Aurora doing?
Thanks
Aurora5000: My car is doing well. I posted a link to some pictures under "pictures". I still need to take it in sometime because it has an abrupt 1-2 upshift sometimes. It only seems to happen once the car has warmed up, and when the throttle is applied on the light side. I have a feeling it just needs a reprogram or something as opposed to a mechanical problem. I just hate leaving my car at the dealer.
Carlo8: What year are you talking about? There were quite a few different colors from 1995 to 2002.
I keep thinking about that Corsa system... They do make one for the 2001-2002 Aurora. It is $995 though... I wonder how the tips fit in the body cutouts. It's hard to tell from that picture on caddyinfo.
I do not have a shop man. yet.
I guess after I do it, I can reset the computers by the 30 min. unplug.
I had some mild tranny issues. First I find out the trans. gasket is not tight and I tighten myself then find out trans it too full of fluid and have to remove a pint. I was told run fluid level in the middle of range on stick.
I would like to have just the Corsa mufflers w/ stock chrome tips.
I am trying real hard to stay out of the dealership if possible.
Also the inside front door panels make noise when the door is shut, both sides have this problem.
The tires ride great but have very weak sidewalls.
I backed up 2 feet from a dead park, not fast, backed into a curb and blew out a hole in sidewall big enough to stick two fingers thru. Michelins MVXP? on 17" stock rims.
Write me at Aurora050@aol.com I would like to see pics.
Was the tranny fluid warm when you checked it? The fluid rises significantly as it gets hotter. You don't want to check it when it is too hot to touch, though. It will be higher then. When it is warmed up (but still touchable) it should be up to the "Hot" mark on the stick. That sucks that the pan was dripping.
I did check the fluid level, though, to make sure that wasn't why it was shifting rough. The level was right on. It shifts the 2-3 and 3-4 super smooth, and the 1-2 is super smooth sometimes (especially before it warms up). I hope it's a minor problem. I'm trying to stay away from the dealership too. I just don't trust other people with my things. No one cares as much about your stuff as you do...
I really think the recalibration is important. If you have more air flow, and the MAF isn't communicating this fact accurately, then your gains will be reduced. I think just removal of the screen itself probably requires some recalibration because the air flow characteristics across the wires will be different. I think the screen is supposed to straighten the air flow for the sensor. Based on my (admittedly weird) dyno test, the thing seems to deliver the 8 to 12 wheel HP that Granatelli told me. The car does seem to accelerate better as well. It's hard to tell when you add these things incrementally.
One other interesting note on the Granatelli MAF - a friend gave me an article where they tested the effects of the Granatelli MAF on a Camaro V8 with an induction and cat-back system and then tested it on a highly modified engine. The result was that the gains were substantial on the highly modified V8 but the lesser modified car with just the better induction and exhaust gained very little. However the article noted that since the testing, Granatelli made some changes to their sensor in order to make better gains on a more stock engine.
Aurora5000 - On my 98 (assuming the new and old 4.0's have the same layout and components) the MAF is the black plastic cylindrical unit with a plug/wires clipped onto it, and it is connected directly to the throttle body with 3 screws. The screw heads are 7mm. The one on the bottom you can't see and it requires a slow approach and you have to feel your way through. It's not hard. Just remove the air tubing that connects to it and there is room to work. I bought 3 extra screws from the dealer just in case I dropped one and could not get it back.
I kind of wondered about asking for just the mufflers from Corsa too. It would add a little power and if you wanted to switch back, it would not be a big deal.
from the ride I had in the Corsa STS, the car will definitely sound different. It won't be loud, but the totally whisper quiet cruise will be gone as well. I guess if I had a vette at one time like rjs, I might know what is an acceptable exhaust note at a cruise.
http://www.geocities.com/aurora402002/maf.html
Garnes, the car probably does have a temp sensor in the airbox as well. The MAF determines both the velocity and temperature of air together. The mass of the air moving through is determined by the volume of the sensor, the speed of the air, and the temp. The way it works is there is a little wire that the MAF sensor trys to maintain at a certain temperature. The amount of voltage it takes to hold the temp steady tells it how much mass is flowing through the sensor. If you have a certain baseline of a certain velocity of air at a certain temp moving through the sensor, then increasing the velocity will require more voltage to maintain the wire's temp. Likewise, colder air at the baseline velocity will require more voltage too. In both cases more mass of air is moving through the sensor than in the baseline. However, the temperature alone can't be isolated from this so most cars have a temp sensor as well. This is what I meant by saying it measures how much and what temp the air is. I said it inaccurately (shame on me).
I haven't specifically noticed the temp sensor in the air box, but I bet there is one somewhere.
It's a little hard to swallow that the MAF could add that much power. That would be about 15hp at the crank. I can't imagine the MAF is a big restriction to the airflow. I would think the only way to get a big improvement would be if it lied to the computer in an effort to get the car to crank up the timing and fuel. However, this would be like an aftermarket chip, and can be performance at the expense of efficiency and safety (the stock programming is conservative with the timing for a reason).
If you just cut out the screen, more air would flow past the wire, and this would be noticed by the stock MAF. I would think it would only matter if you altered the size of the MAF so that it's volume was larger.
Having my 'Vette wouldn't have helped you Garnes... After putting on Flowmasters and removing two cats there was nothing acceptable about it's cruising...
Your sensor housing is at definitely different than the old one. It could be removed and replaced in one minute with a simple screw driver.
I still think it can be a bit more complex. After talking to Granatelli, I was left with the understanding that the stock sensor would not accurately read the higher flows unless calibrated for more flow, but the stock sensor did just fine with the air box mod and K&N. So I'd say this doesn't really add up.
However, I really think that when you remove the screen, the air flow patterns or characteristics can be changed. It's possible that although there is more total flow, there could be less flow at the location of the wires. On my MAF they are very small short wires located in a little "pocket" at the middle. This is all just speculation, but after removing the screen, I think it may be really important to recalibrate the sensor against a known flow rate so that you know it's still reading right. The screen adds almost no resistance to flow for air hitting it straight on, but under a turbulent air flow scenario, any air hitting the screen at an angle is going to be deflected greatly.
When you look at the removed stock sensor, you can see that how turbulent air flow could get "backed up" by that screen. I would imagine the air flying through the tube and at the MAF would have some turbulence.
That's one theory at least.
Since the addition of the K&N and MAF, I've noticed my mileage to be a bit better. There has been no inefficiency at all. The car runs as nice as ever and I have no complaints with the MAF.
I guess I'll just have to dyno this again to satisfy this curiosity. It's a blast too.
Just a thought.
Before I destroy the screen, I will need to do more research about this. I am going to move on the side of caution and would hate to tear up or alter something before I know the full story and implications if possible.
RJS- have you removed yours???
Appreciate all of your help.
Who was it that had the delyed starting issue with me? The car did not do it for a long time and then it did it last night. DID you ever find out what the problem is??? The car has not stranded me anywhere, it is just a little unsetteling.
An experiment on the caddyinfo.com site showed a 3 to 5 HP increase at the wheels from deleting it - on the 4.6. You may want to look at that too.
Also - some time back, a guy on the Lincoln LS board got a granatelli MAF and dyno'd it and came to the conclusion that it added about 10 or 11 HP at the wheels.
Hope this helps. I think I will be going to the dyno again this spring just to test it again. I'll post the results.
I'm sure the Granatelli MAF improves flow, especially after looking at the screen on the stock one. It looks like the substrate in a catalytic converter. I also doubt it would be harmful or anything. I just don't think the possible flow increase is worth the money or worth replacing a part that is working fine.
Chassis dyno's aren't overly reliable because they don't have repeatable results. Many things can affect their readings like ambient temp, the engine's temp, the tranny's temp, even the tightness of the straps holding the car down. If you notice, the power peak is usually different when in different gears even though the engine is at the same rpm. They are good tools and provide some info about the performance and the increase trend, but I don't feel like they can make accurate assessments to the precision of 5-10 hp.
My question is: Exactly what is it that you want "saved" from the Aurora. The second generation Aurora is not the same car the first generation Aurora was. The styling is completely different. So that must not be it. The cockpit style instrument panel? Is that really worth saving? Or is it the big FWD sedan with turing suspension. This is optional on the buicks. The northstar engine is being replaced (V8's as well as the V6), so the 4 liter engine is not going to continue.
I would much rather see a good RWD sedan in an affordable price range become available with a decent engine that doesn't cost a mountain of money to maintain.
I'm very comfortable with the condition mine's in so I think I'll keep her. One of the reasons I feel that way is the maintenance records. The car has had the tranny power flushed twice before I bought it (pre 50K miles). I just had it flushed again. My experience with my Q45 earlier taught me the importance in flushing (not just changing) the trans fluid every 25-30K miles. It shifts smoothly and I can tell absolutely no problems with it. Also, the fuel injection system (fuel and mass air)has been cleaned and serviced by the dealer three times to date. Finally, I am adamant about changing the oil every 3K miles (that's every 3-4 weeks with the mileage I put on it).
So wish me luck! I plan on keeping this one for another 50-60K miles or so (1.5 to 2 years)
I'm very comfortable with the condition mine's in so I think I'll keep her. One of the reasons I feel that way is the maintenance records. The car has had the tranny power flushed twice before I bought it (pre 50K miles). I just had it flushed again. My experience with my Q45 earlier taught me the importance in flushing (not just changing) the trans fluid every 25-30K miles. It shifts smoothly and I can tell absolutely no problems with it. Also, the fuel injection system (fuel and mass air)has been cleaned and serviced by the dealer three times to date. Finally, I am adamant about changing the oil every 3K miles (that's every 3-4 weeks with the mileage I put on it).
So wish me luck! I plan on keeping this one for another 50-60K miles or so (1.5 to 2 years)
In addition, when I've visited the dyno, I'd do extra runs to verify repeatability and I've been amazed at how repeatable the test results were - even though the engine temp varies a little between tests ( I do make sure that there isn't any huge temp difference though). The results from run to run are ALWAYS spot-on consistent.
Perhaps the accuracy could be off a certain %, but as long as it is consistent/repeatable, you will be able to measure changes very accurately. That's all I care to measure anyway.
Garnes - we expect dynos with a baseline at completly stock, one with all stock and new MAF, and finally one with the K&N, airbox mods, and the new MAF so we can see the total gains...you'll have all day won't you. And remember, don't mess this one up, we're all counting on you.
I wish I could do all that, but yeah it would be all day and a lot of money. Besides, I already have most of what you want posted on caddyinfo.com - just not exactly in that order.
It shows all stock with paper, stock with K&N, and air box mod + K&N. Then the overall graphs show stock with paper vs. box and K&N.
It will be awhile before I go back - I want it to warm up. It will be granatelli MAF vs. stock MAF - both using the better box and K&N. I have to admit it is a lot of fun. Your blood really gets moving.
If extreme motor sports comes out with a good cold air induction to replace the box, I think I'll just interpolate their stated dyno results (and trust them) from the caddy 4.6. Since the 4.6 is just bigger (and the STS peaks at the 6k)it "breaths" a bit harder, and because the 4.6 uses about the same size filter/box arrangement, it would probably realize a little more of a % gain from an induction system or any intake improvement over the 4.0. Simply put, I think the 4.6 may be a little more restricted than the 4.0. At most, you'd expect 4.0/4.6 (87%)of the gains, but maybe it would be only 70% to 80% - just a guess. Maybe there are other variables, but that should be in the ballpark +/- a couple HP.
RADIO - Not that this is a big problem but, does anybody's radio eject the CD when the car is turned off? It does not do it all of the time, it is every now and then (I hate every now and then issues - they are hard to fix).
LARRYFL - cute posting.
This is of course a totally subjective thing, but the current STS is OK, but is not too exciting to behold. I think it still looks a little stodgy.
You have a good point in that there is hope in the next generation of Cadillacs. A better Northstar and hopefully some fresh styling will ease the pain of the missing Aurora.
I have searched unsuccessfully for an Accel replacement for our Aurora coils. What is the part number? Wells is a brand I have not encountered; where can those be found? Regarding plugs -- I expect to replace mine in the not too distant future so I will be interested to learn from your experience. Why did you go with the Bosch wires?
The Sept. 11 posts are worth re-reading, we should not forget.
I finally received my salvage-yard air box. A surprise was that the top did not have the white plastic insert, and there is no evidence that one had ever been there. I assume this may have come out of a 1995 Aurora since the parts microfiche shows different part numbers for '95s vs. '96-99s. The part number (25099862) molded into the inside air box bottom piece is exactly the same as my '97; the part number of the top is 25099861.
Anyway, with my new air box top installed, there is noticeable (but not unacceptable) intake sound at and near WOT. Given your dyno results, I agree that we have added about 10 peak HP and 10 peak pound-feet with the K&N and less-restrictive intake path. Good bang for the buck! I'll be interested to see what the Granitelli MAF will do for you.