Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Are you under 40 and think that you might not be able to afford a brand new vehicle when you purchase your next car? If so, a reporter would like to talk to you. Please reach out to [email protected] by 12/16 for more details.
Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Oldsmobile Aurora

16768707273112

Comments

  • mike98cmike98c Posts: 293
    Just because some of their website designers were hired by the previous mans administration at G.M. that knew more about soft drinks than cars, (cam what)? Is no reason to... Aw lets get em. What's Bob Lutzs e-mail. Olds may bo officially dead but I bet he might find the website a rather poor reflection on G.M. competency. You don't think they might have assigned all the screw ups to poor Olds by chance? Naw. Herbv, if it doesn,t coincide with the radio turned on and off, (Antenna). It,s the pump from the commpressor that feeds the load leveling air shocks. If it happens often other than shortly after starting the car your air shocks or an airline or even the pump head, might need replacing.
  • since we're on the subject of load leveling, i was just wondering if anyone here has taken theirs apart and rebuilt it. mine was running for 2 minute stretches at a time without putting out any air pressure, so yesterday i decided to take it out and tear it apart. it appears that there was some water that got in there somehow and made a mess out of things causing the valves to quit working. the aluminum and plastic parts seem pretty corroded, i'm not sure if it will function properly ever again.
    has anyone replaced or repaired their load leveling compressor?
  • mike98cmike98c Posts: 293
    There was a post some time back on caddy info.com from a seville owner stating that there is a provision for draining the water that builds up (happens in any system with a pump)as well as a list of parts that can all be replaced independently on the pump which included the head assembly and some other parts that I don"t recall.
  • autobahn95--
    I replaced the rear shocks on my '95 about a year ago. I replaced them with the stock GM replacement. The Olds dealer also installed them. The total cost for the two shocks and the labor was about $320. They have really worked out well for me. I had about 85K on the car at that time.
  • garnesgarnes Posts: 950
    I posted some interesting info on lab analysis of used oil using an M1 filter and a Delco filter on the maintenance board.
  • cwiley1 --
    the rear shocks on my 95 were replaced less than 2 months ago. i bought them and installed them myself, only cost me $94 for the pair and about a half hour's time. and they were the factory AC Delco reactek shocks.
  • Where did you find the shocks for $94?? The GM employee discounted price is $130/ea.
  • after a little searching on the internet, i found the cheapest place to be:
    www.yoursource-autoparts.com.
    i haven't found better prices yet than this site.
  • HenryHenry Posts: 1,106
    Today someone stole my passenger side front Hub cap from my Classic.

    Why? WHY? why?
  • mike98cmike98c Posts: 293
    Henry, I feel your pain! I was in a mall in [non-permissible content removed] Rapids Minnesota, I had just washed the car and waxed everything including the wheels. I glanced back at the car before going into the mall. Coming back tothe car about 15 minutes later I thought the front wheel looks strange, the light never reflects off the wheels like that! As I got closer, I saw a hubcap was missing, AGHH. I walked aropund to the other side and saw... The other front was also missing!! I ordered a couple from the caddy dealer, they should be in next week. (sigh).
  • With a little thought, the wheels could be designed so that hubcaps are not needed. The nuts would have to be exposed, but they could have a cover.
  • I also had a hubcap stolen from my 95 a few weeks ago. They are simply too easy to pop off in about 2 seconds with only a screwdriver. I bought one from Hubcapsonly on the internet for $25 including shipping. Although advertised as used it didn't have a single scratch.
  • HenryHenry Posts: 1,106
    I am not getting it.

    Is there a rough group of Aurora owners out there stealing hub caps?

    Of all the things to take off a Classic, why the hub caps?

    Now I know how the Mercedes owners felt a few years back when the kids were taking the hood ornaments off the car because a music group member wore a Mercedes emblem.

    However, I dont see wearing an Aurora hub cap as being COOL.
  • The kids were taking more than just Mercedes hood ornaments. I lost one off my 90 Riviera and they were taking DeVille hood ornaments too. Stealing the plastic hubcap insert seems a bit strange to me. A well designed wheel should not need the cap. The cap covers the center of the wheel and ususally the nuts that hold it on. If the nuts are exposed, and if the wheel is designed with a center (instead of a hole), then a plastic cap is no longer needed.
  • I have a 96 classic and would like to know if there were many changes to the 97 classic that would make a set of 97 manuals inappropriate for my vehicle?
  • Sinatra2-

    I have a 97 and the 97 manuals also. They should suffice for your 96 as the main changes are additions: larger front brakes, a compass in the rearview mirror, an outside mirror reverse tilt-down feature, and cast control arms. All of the 'classic' things we need to change should be the same...
  • One of my fog lights burned out. Anyone know if this is an easy thing to replace, or do I have to go to the Cadillac dealer and pay $3000?
  • I change my fog light on a regular basis (wiring problems) any ways . yes it is fairly simple . All you have to do is push the plastic cover inward and stick your hand in and pry it back . you will see the fog light assem. Or you could just remove the bottom plastic piece all together ., I think that it is attached by pop rivetes. It is no harder than the head light
  • hammen2hammen2 Posts: 1,313
    Both of mine burned out within a week of each other. I picked up replacements (Sylvania 893's) at AutoZone for $7 each, but haven't had the time to attempt replacement (maybe this weekend)...

    --Robert
  • Nice ride over at Cardomain.com. I noticed you have the aftermarket wooddash kit. Did you get 4 pieces for the power and heated seats, I hear that when you order a kit they send you all four either way. I see you only used 2 for the headed seats. Do you still have the other 2 pieces without the heated seats that you did not use? Let me know. Peace.


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

  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    I'm sure Taylor reads this forum completely. Also, you can contact him through Cardomain. So could you refrain from posting the same message repeatedly? You posted this one to Taylor three times. It's kind of annoying. Thanks.
  • D'oh!
  • garnesgarnes Posts: 950
    Great to hear from you Zinc1. I'm sorry if you have posted this before, but what kind of car did you end up getting?

    Whatever you get or got - just don't take it to that garage you mentioned on your site that goofed up the Aurora.
  • I posted a question a few weeks back about vibration in the front and asked if anyone experienced wheel balancing problems with the 2001s. Well, I found out what it was today. With only 11,000 miles, BOTH outer tie rod ends are shot; and not a little worn either. If the wife had hit something, I think it would have been noticeable on the tires and rims. Since I wash the car weekly,I doubt this is the case.

    Just thought you all might want to know.
  • HenryHenry Posts: 1,106
    Does the Classic look better with the fog lights on or fog lights off.

    I usually drive with the fog lights off.

    Just looking for opinions.
  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    Do you mean at night, or what? Some people have them on during the day. It seems like in the 80's it was cool to drive with foglights on at night because only sports/sporty cars had them. But now, everyone drives around with them on. It's sort of like spoilers... Every wannabe car has one. I don't use mine unless it's rainy or foggy. They don't do a whole lot, but they do fill in the sides and just to the front of the car well. Not that it matters much if you're going 40 or anything.
  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    to see all these auto magazines call the Infiniti M45 attractive. I've read like three different reviews and none of them critizised the styling. Some even praised it. The new Aurora got lots of slams for being "boring" or toned down too much (which I think is crazy, it's just more subtle attitude). Anyway, have you all seen the M45? It answers the question "What would delivery-van styling look like on a car?".

    It also annoys me when they say it's the only $40,000 mid-sized lux car with a V-8. I suppose it's true, though, as an Aurora would never cost that much. I guess a car has to have an analog clock in it to be a luxury car...
  • garnesgarnes Posts: 950
    Zinc1 - I can see the attraction in that warranty, and although I'm not a Hyundai guy, they do seem to offer a lot of car for the money. Maybe you should be doing the commercial where YOU are the guy "telling everybody".

    RJS - maybe you should skip the magazines. I will be glancing once in awhile, but rarely buying. Perhaps writing letters to the editors would make you feel better, but overall, if they are serving crap, I'll spend my time and money elsewhere. These magazines get a lot of advertising dollars and are basically staffed by people that are import oriented (I'll bet that's what they have in their garage). So it's just human nature that objectivity will be as far away as the (maybe) closest galaxy. Come on, these guys aren't going to put a domestic car over what they spent their hard earned money on.

    It's kind of like these mutual fund managers that would go on the financial shows and talk up the stock they where holding in the fund.

    If you buy a car and it's really important as to what some pin-head thinks about how it feels going around pylons, and your ego is on the line as to what this pin-head thinks, then the magazines may be important. But if you look at things rationally and analytically (like an engineer) and know a slab-sided featureless car when you see it (even that can be an objective point), then you are never going to be happy reading these things.
  • garnesgarnes Posts: 950
    BTW - I think I like the new Aurora style as much as the classic. I have a 98, but the new Aurora is one of the most subtly beautiful cars on the road. The fenders still flare out but are chiseled with an edge. The front is better looking than the classic, and I the rear isn't as dramatically swept back, but is still very clean.

    I sure hope the new STS looks good. I'm a sucker for good looking sheet metal and interior. Assuming the quality is there, the styling just has to be there for me if I'm going to spend a lot of money.
  • HenryHenry Posts: 1,106
    I was talking at night. I dont usually use mine cause I dont really want to wear out the bulds for no reason. Although on tha point I have ben told that the bulbs will actually last longer if you use them. Who knows??

    I like the look with them off also.

    Henri

    P.S. - Finding the hub cap center piece is proving to be a royal pain. Now I know why mine got stolen. Some guy probably "ordered" one from a less then reputable shop.
  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    I just found this and thought it was interesting. Even with the sales drop-off and eminent demise, they still made some minor changes to the engine. Maybe because they changed them on the Northstar. Anyway, it's interesting. Basically the engine has a new forged-steel crank and polymer-coated pistons. Probably not a big enough change for me to trade mine in... :)
  • larryfllarryfl Posts: 214
    I drive with my fog lights on (at night)on my '95 classic. No real reason except I like the way they look. Yeah, the lights a little better but not enough to justify having them on all the time. I've been doing this for the 18 months I've owned the car and haven't had one burn out yet (knocking on wood)- but it could happen any time.

    Henri, I haven't had a center hubcap piece turn up missing yet... but since I've seen you and a few others post on the board about it, I've notice at least one other classic in my area without the front ones. How strange is that? Is this the new thing to rip off, a' la the Merc and VW ornamentation of years past?

    RJS - I agree with you 100%. As a former Infiniti Q45 owner, I tend to keep up with Infiniti. I really like the latest Q and the G35... but the M45 is uglier and duller than a camary! I don't know what Infiniti was thinking, but these car magazines continue to show their complete and total biased for anything non-domestic.
  • jonbgoodjonbgood Posts: 157
    The classic looks awesome with the lamps on. Seeing one cruise down the road at dusk - with the sunroof vented up and the fog lamps on is what finally sent me over the top to go buy one.
  • jonbgoodjonbgood Posts: 157
    When my '99 is in the garage - I hear a high pitched squeak (of maybe a chirping is a better description). Still under warranty so I can afford to be picky. Any ideas? I'm taking it in for an oil change today and I'd like to know something before the dealer tells me its "nothing". Also, the suspension makes a very noticeable squeaking noise when I exit the car. (I'm only 195 lbs - so no jokes please!) Is this normal? Car only has 22k on it.
  • About to hit 100K on my awesome black 1998 classic. Just wondering who is well into the 100Ks and maybe coming up on 200K miles. How are the classics holding up? thanks
  • garnesgarnes Posts: 950
    Thanks for the link. Very interesting. That lighter crank should translate into a little more peak power too - shouldn't it? If so, maybe it's really small and not worth mentioning, but I would not be surprised if it actually made a significant difference and it's just not going to be documented by GM.
  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    Yeah, I'd think it would make some difference since there is less resistance from the weight of the crank. But I don't know. I guess it would be kind of like when you put a lighter flywheel on a car. It doesn't change the power the engine makes, but does change the weight it has to turn while making it. I don't know, though. I don't think the weight saps power like friction does. So it wouldn't be like an engine that goes to a roller valvetrain for less friction (which can free up about 5+ lb-ft, apparently). Maybe the polymer piston coating would reduce friction enough to make some difference. It would have been nice if they said that, even if they didn't change the rating. It could add 3-4hp and they could just say they didn't want to change the rating (what with the difficulty of having to then change the website... But really, they'd have to change the brochures and sales stuff and all).

    Actually, the website should get fixed, and the weight distribution thing on the media.gm site is now correct. So the media.gm site should be all correct now. I emailed a nice person within GM Communications who was very helpful about getting them corrected.
  • garnesgarnes Posts: 950
    I was looking at a high performance 350 for my 77 monte, and the crate motors with the aluminum pistons sure seem to start cranking out the power over the cast iron pistons. Sure there are other differences probably in the heads and all too. There is a big difference between aluminum and cast iron. Probably not as much weight difference between steel and cast iron. But still if it's lighter, it should help.

    The polymer thing struck me as not making much difference. I'm basing that on the fact that my 2 oil analysis (and comments from the lab) has showed that there is almost no wear going on in my engine. If you are insane and use M1 oil and change it every 3k, there is very little, if any, friction that could be eliminated by some other advancement. Just MHO. Last test showed only 1 ppm of iron and 1 ppm aluminum. That's as low as they can detect. Also, there just doesn't seem to much of an accumulation of dirt (the small stuff that the filter can't get)to wear things when you are changing that frequently. I'm sure the polymer stuff is great for withstanding some abuse, but if you are a maintenance nut, I don't see it making any difference.
  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    I just wanted to post my impressions while they were fresh. My wife and I went and test-drove a 1999 black Aurora. It has 45K miles, Autobahn, sunroof, gold package (who cares), Bose, 12-disc changer, and heated seats. The interior was a light grey. Keep in mind that we just went for a test drive so take it for what it's worth. Also keep in mind that I'm used to my car.

    I really like that the pillars are felt-covered. They are plastic in the new car. The classic is much more cockpit-like with all the buttons on the doors. I think it's neat, but sort of prefer the cleaner interior on the new car. I also like the center cluster and instruments on the new car better, although the center cluster on the classic is neater (more in keeping with the cockpit theme). However, the trip computer is a great idea with the flip-up cover because you can just select the info you want to see rather than scrolling through it like on the new car, and you dont' have to see all those buttons all the time. Visibility seems a bit better in the new car because it feels a bit more upright. However, this is not everyone's preference. I like how the dash and doors integrate on the classic much better. It's much cleaner. And the vents on the doors really direct air at the occupants better. I didn't realize the dual-zone control was on the passenger door on the classic too. I really think that's neat. Oh, the new Aurora has framed windows. I tend to prefer that because when the window is partially down they bang around when opening the doors. However maybe they don't do that on the Aurora. I didn't try it. Framed doors also tend to have fewer leak/alignment problems. Non-framed windows look cooler when the window is down and the door is open, though.

    Driving, the classic feels a little more floaty. The new car is more buttoned-down. However, the classic is better over potholes and transfers less noise. My car makes a "thud" over potholes, although very little feel is transmitted. Just the noise. But the classic didn't "thud" nearly as much (I drove on familiar roads, so it was a good way to compare). The steering is noticeably lighter on the classic. I like how the wheel has thick parts right where your hands go. But the new wheel is thick everywhere.

    Ok, please no anger, but my car feels faster. I punched it a few times, and one time I punched it from a light on a 55mph road. I put it in 2nd, trac off, power button on (in). It laid down a bit more of a patch than my car can, but it feels like my car pulls harder above about 3500 rpm. I stayed on it until about 70. The car was an autobahn, the fuel tank was at about 1/4, and it was a nice 80 degree day. It was just me and my wife in the car, and I've punched it in 2nd/TC off in my car plenty of times with her riding with me. Of course, feel is very subjective. The amount a car lifts up, the engine noise, and all sorts of things can skew the impression of acceleration. So take it with a grain of salt. Oh, the engine noise is different. I really noticed that there is more intake noise on the classic. It's not objectionable, but there is a difference. I think it allows a little more exhaust burble to come through on my car since the intake isn't as loud.

    Driving both, it is easy to see where the new car came from. Many similarities to the classic. They are both really excellent cars. The tranny on the classic was sooo smooth. Even under hard throttle the shifts were quick yet not jarring. It really helped underscore that mine shifts hard. It isn't hard compared to other cars, but it is smooth sometimes and hard others. Which is why I thought something was up. So I guess I need to shop around for another dealer. Mine just says it's normal (and a mechanic on a ride-along tried to tell me the 4T-80E is supposed to be a hard-shifting tranny...). So maybe I'll try a Caddy place. It was nice to take a classic for a drive. I'd never been in one before. It really is a great car. I can't believe it didn't sell better, or that Olds is gonna be gone soon...
  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    There is a press kit now on GM Powertrain's advanced technology. It's got stuff about the new high-feature V-6's, as well as the new Northstar and displacment-on-demad. It's pretty neat.


    http://209.61.155.43/division/powertrain/press_kits/future_tech/index.html

  • hey woodranch-had my '95 classic for quite some time now. She's got 136,000 on her and I haven't had any problems since I bought it...other than an unnatural obsession with driving, but I guess that is to be expected. Anyone else with more miles?
  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    Here's what Autoweek surmised about the Aurora. This is from their annual model guide. They go over the changes and such, and then have their little opinion of each car. Here's the "In Our Opinion" on the Aurora: "The General's best car - too bad Olds couldn't sell it". I'd say that sums it up pretty well.
  • garnesgarnes Posts: 950
    Yeah, but don't ask them what they think of the 4.0 compared to the glorified Camry - the ES300 for the same (probably even more) money.
  • fjk57702fjk57702 Posts: 539
    I think that a big part of the sales problem was price. At the introduction, the price was $32000. By the time my 98 model was in production, the price was $37,500 or so. Way more than it was worth. They are doing the same thing to the Park Avenue - its $40,000 now (Ultra).

    I hope that the CTS will not be inflated in the same way. The CTS is probably the car that the Aurora should have been in the first place - rear wheel drive, good handling, luxury options. I am waiting for a decent engine and hoping that the SRX will not cost too much.
  • HenryHenry Posts: 1,106
    " I am waiting for a decent engine and HOPING that the SRX will not cost too much."

    I always say that HOPE is whats left when reality fades away.

    Henri
  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    It's depressing to think what the Aurora could be with the next generation (or even with just an engine update). The new "high-feature" 3.6L V-6 that will appear in the CTS makes 260hp (at 6500 rpm) and 250 lb-ft (at 2800 rpm). So imagine what sort of horsepower the Aurora V8 could have made... Assuming they tuned it for more torque instead, it probably could have easily made 280hp with 290+ lb-ft... Actually, extrapolating from the new RWD Northstar's power, the Aurora should make about 285 hp and about 270 lb-ft with variable-valve timing. I guess I'll have to start viewing the Northstar as the next Aurora V8 since there won't be anymore Aurora engines. :(

    FJK, I'd have to disagree with the CTS being what the Aurora should have been. I wouldn't buy a CTS even if the exterior looked like the Aurora. The interior is smaller and I hate the interior design. I like the wood and all in the Aurora. I hate the lack of it, and that angled steering wheel, in the CTS. I also prefer FWD as I don't notice any torque steer, I didn't buy the car to autocross, and FWD is much more predictable and useful in bad weather. I don't know why Cadillac wants to go RWD for the Seville (except that they want to be BMW for some idiotic reason...). RWD also intrudes on the passenger space more, and vibration can be more of a problem with the driveshaft. And I think the Aurora has good handling. Especially for the driving I do. I would also find it very difficult to pay $35,000 for a vehicle with a 6-banger.

    You are right about the price. At least on the classic. I think between 95 and 96 the price went up like $5000-6000 so they could offer more rebates. Pretty dopey. The 2001 was noticeably cheaper than the 1999, even the 4.0. Plus, it had extras like stability control, 17" wheels, and Solar-Ray glass. So I don't think price was nearly the problem with the current car. I think lack of advertising was the problem for it. Plus, Olds really didn't have time to turn it around. It wasn't until 2000(2001) that they really had the Alero/Intrigue/Aurora lineup (in 1999 they still had the Cutlass, LSS, and 88). And the next year Olds got killed. That's just not enough time. Oh well...
  • What issue was the Aurora comment in? I heard Caddy was looking for a hybrid design from the Corvette engine to put in the CTS...
  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    It was the most recent AutoWeek. October 7, 2002. That's really all they said about the Aurora, though. They mentioned no more V6, and about the last 500 being collector's editions. Also, they didn't list it with luxury cars, which sort of annoys me, but whatever.

    The 3.6 "high-feature" V6 has been in the works for the CTS for a while now. It will most likely be the new base engine. That 3.2 isn't really that great. There will be a whole line of "high-feature" V6's in varying displacements. They will probably replace engines like the 3.5 and 3800s in more upscale-ish cars. The downscale-ish cars will get versions of the 60-degree OHV V6's (3.4 and 3.1 currently). Apparently they've been updated to be more reliable (fewer leaking problems) and to be a bit more powerful and efficient. I doubt there will be anymore 90-degree V6's. Apparently the CTS V-series (the new name for Caddy performance cars) will have a version of the Corvette V8. But I doubt that will happen in other Caddy V-series cars. Really, it seems a bit too rough-and-tumble for a Cadillac in my opinion.

    But I guess time will tell. I think the new Northstar looks good and the prospect of a Cadillac V-12 is awesome. I just wish a Cadillac with luxury, style, and a V8 could be had for under $40,000. Maybe I need to buy another Aurora, seal it in a big bag, and open it up in about 5 years... There was some talk of a small high-tech V8 for front-drivers (no bigger than about 4.0 liters). I haven't heard any GM news on that for a while, though. It was supposed to be a 75-degree engine so it would be quite a bit smaller than the Aurora V8 (which isn't that small. Supposedly it can support up to 5.4L of displacement).
  • fjk57702fjk57702 Posts: 539
    When the Aurora was introduced in 94, it was supposed to be a BMW 5-series/Lexus 400 class car. Obviously it was a lot cheaper. The 95 Aurora's ride and handling were not quite up to par. This was due (I think) to some suspension issues that were corrected by 97/98. I know that my 95 Riviera did not ride quite as good as the 98 Aurora does. I think that the Aurora's handling is quite good for a FWD car, but it simply is not a "sports sedan" which was the target market. This is probably why the Aurora just never quite sold like they wanted.

    I for one do not like the Aurora repair costs. $1200 to replace a valve cover seal is bad. I would guess if the car were RWD, that cost would be much less. To replace the power steering pump requires removal of the radiator first! Of course with a RWD probably you would still have to remove the radiator to fix anything on the front of the engine.

    The CTS is aimed at the 5-series. The next STS is aimed at the 5-series V8. The CTS is really aimed more at the highend 3-series/lowend 5-series. The SRX is said to be a CTS wagon, so the northstar should also fit into the CTS. But I think the SRX will be a bit wider body. I do agree that the CTS interior is too lowend compared to the Aurora - which is way too lowend compared with my 86 T-type Electra. GM interiors are just too much plastic now.

    The 2001 Aurora price is better, but now its a LeSabre (not a Park Avenue/Deville), so its still overpriced. With nav and other stuff the price is $40,000. The CTS with nav, sport pkg, zenon lights is close to $40,000 too. I hope a RWD (not AWD) SRX with goodies will run only a bit over $40,000 and have lots of room for stuff. The CTS does have 5 speed automatic.
  • rjs200240rjs200240 Posts: 1,277
    ...Greg, after you said wait until AutoWeek does a comparo that will surely bash American products. I started to think are there any decent reviews of American cars? Then I remembered. I watch MotorWeek on PBS (surprising they are pro-American, ehh?) whenever I notice it's on. They are always pretty even-handed in their reviews. But I don't catch it that much because I only happen to notice if I'm watching some TV and it is on. I guess I need to find out when it airs.


    They have an archive of their reviews on their website. I found one of the 2001 4.0. It's pretty good. I noticed a few little things like they mention the power recline/lumbar on the drivers-side only (the driver's and passenger's seats have the same adjustments) and the transmission-life monitor. I wonder if they had an early car or if they just looked up some of that info later and it was listed wrong. Anyway, I thought this was one of the best reviews yet. Of course, that's because I agree with most everything they said in it.


    Greg, so far I haven't noticed any comparos in AutoWeek. Even their car reviews are pretty short. I think they focus more on breaking auto news and motorsports. I like it so far (as there just isn't as much opportunity to be offensive). Maybe I'll let my subscriptions to Car & Driver, Motor Trend, and Road & Track run out and just read AutoWeek and watch MotorWeek. But then I'll miss out on C&D's tuner showdowns and R&T's excellent photography of exotic and classic cars. I guess I won't miss anything in specific about Motor Trend. I'm not really sure why I started subscribing to it.


    Does it seem like the board has been pretty slow recently? Is everyone out enjoying an early-fall drive through nature? If so, post a picture and a narrative about it... :)

Sign In or Register to comment.