Oldsmobile Aurora

rjs200240

I think that DIC mileage thing is different on the new Aurora. Mine really doesn't appear to do that "weighted" average you've noticed on yours. It usually does agree with the fuel used pretty well. Also, if I do a lot of stop and go, and then a lot of highway, the mileage doesn't artificially come up to high levels. Usually the stop and go is pretty detrimental to the overall mileage (just like it should be).

But, I think you are definitely right about other factors being involved. I don't think that .5 mpg increase on one trip compared to another can be chalked up to the K&N. Rocket3_50, that's pretty good mileage, though (same with your 30+ fjk). My best so far was about 24.5 or so. But on long trips, I tend to go about 80 mph. Although, I'd also imagine the V6 gets better cruising mileage than the V8 does.

javidogg

I would recommend for you guys to take those remotes to your Local GM/Olds Dealer, because the Dealer will reprogram the remotes that you have into your Aurora's system, after that the remotes will be in the car's system, so when the remotes run out of batteries, all you have to do is replace them with fresh ones and follow the instructions on reseting the remotes.

Since "wwilfert" bought new ones from ebay, you would have to program them first at the Dealer, so your Aurora can read them in the computer system. Hope that helps.

I had to do the same when I got my 1999 Aurora, the dealer were I bought my Aurora gave me another Aurora's remotes (I know that sounds ghetto), they told me to take them to any GM/Olds dealer and they would be able to program them to my car.

At the end it was all useless since I went with an aftermarket Clifford alarm, I just did not want to be keyless for a couple days before I decided to get the Clifford alarm, the Clifford alarm came with it's own remotes. Also the dealer paid me for taking the remotes to my local dealer which was around $45 dollars. Good luck and keep us posted. Peace.

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

Henry

NOt to beat a dead horse but . . .

I am noticing a number of Classics without the center piece of the wheel. I asked two people abot it and they both said that they came off while driving. One guy said he hit a bump on a turn and loss the cap. The other person, a woman, just said she lost it while down south.

My mechanic did say that mine came off a little too easy when I took one off for him.

I am saying this to say that maybe as the car ages, whatever GM did to hold on the cap get weak. It looks like they are held on by a wire. Maybe the wire may need to be tightened due to slack that comes into it over time. For those Classic owners, maybe its time to check the caps to make sure they don't "fall off".

However, I still think mine had a little help "falling off."

Henri

garnes

Check the "tabs" on the inside of the center cap. They break off really easy. If one is missing, it will come on and off "too easy" but will generally still hold.

Maybe I was lucky, but before I got the 2001 wheels, I was getting centers for the original wheels from a wheel (junk) dealer for $20 each. Just call around. Regular junk yards may have them. Look for wheel places.

blk97aurora

My '97 service manual contains a programming procedure that includes using a fused jumper between terminals 4 and 8 of the Data Line Connector. It also states that Tech 1 or Tech 2 can be used to program transmitters. I have not used this procedure yet.

wwilfert: Does this sound like the procedure you used for your '98?

wwilfert

blk97aurora: Yes, that is the same procedure. My procedure came from the GM 5 CD set of service manuals. Programming was easy. They recommend a "Fused" jumper to protect against any shorting. If you are careful, a pc of wire works fine. No reason for anyone to go to dealer to have rke programmed.

autobahn95

hey everyone,
i noticed something today that seems a little unusual to me about my wipers. I was driving in a very slight mist of a rain (not even enough to turn the wipers on even at the slowest delay). What i was doing, is pushing the wiper control arm up, for the "mist" function whenever needed.

The unusual thing that i noticed is that most times i would get one cycle of the wipers (as expected), and about once every 4 or 5 times it would do a "double" and i would get two cycles of the wipers. It didn't seem to be related to how long i held the wiper lever or related to how often i held the lever up either.

Has anyone else noticed anything like this on their Aurora?? Mines's a black/black '95 with Autobahn by the way.
just curious.
thanks

Henry

I was watching Lethal Weapon 4 on television. I noticed that in the chase scene where Mel Gibson is trying to get onto a moving truck from a car being driven by Danny Glover, two of the cars following Danny Glover in traffic were Classics.

If this was Oldsmobile's idea of product placement, no wonder the company is closing down. Who notices the traffic cars in the background? (Besides the Auroraholics on this board.)

Henri

mcclearyfl

Blk97 aurora refers to success in programming his remote door openers using the workshop manual. This procedure does not work with '95s, and the '95 manual offers only a dealer visit. My web research also indicates that the ONLY way to get them programmed is to go to the dealer. I still await anyone's suggestions to the contrary.

Henri must have a very cooperative dealer. It typically costs about $40 to get them programmed, more if the dealer insists on charging a minimum of 1 hour labor.

Chris

rjs200240

Do you want us to take up a collection to buy you a new hubcap? Now that you mention it, I do remember that from LW4. Danny was driving a new-style Grand Am, right? Doesn't one of the Aurora's run over something big that falls off the truck at some point?

mariposarosada

My wipers always do two cycles when I push the stalk up--I hate that! I would love to get them only do it once. I also have a 95.

Does anyone have info on this?

mariposarosada

I've only ever driven one Aurora--my own. It seems to me that, in comparison to other cars, the gas pedal, the brakes, and the steering require a lot of effort to function. Is this so?

Back in the day, I drove a car without power brakes. The Aurora brakes feel a lot like the brakes in that car did.

Eventually, I'd like to drive another Aurora to be compare. In the meantime, let me know what you think.

Henry

I really had not noticed that. For a time I had a 91 Mercury Capri convertible with the Classic. I did not notice that the pedals on the Aurora were harder.

Henry

At $50.40 per center cap from the dealer please wire the funds directly to the dealer.

Yeap something big did fall off the truck at the Aurora. I don't remeber if the car ran over it or not.

As far as programming the remote for free. When you spend over $9,000 at your dealer's service department, I bet they will throw in a free remote programming also. (Let's hear it for after market warranties.)

rjs200240

Here is some info from a Caddy engineer (or so he is claimed to be) about the differences between the 275 and 300hp Northstars. I found it pretty interesting, and you might too (you don't have to be a motorhead).

As far as hard pedals and steering, I found the 1999 'Roara that I test-drove had about the same pedal feel. However, the steering was quite a bit lighter. What sort of cars are you used to Mariposarosada? I mean, if you used to drive 80's Cadillacs or Oldsmobiles, then yes, the steering will probably seem heavy. Otherwise, I don't think I'd describe the car I drove as being "heavy".

larryfl

I also own a '95. My intermittent wipers only hit one cycle when I tap the stalk and not hold it.

I have noticed the steering seems to "tighten up" at weird times. I don't think the '95s use Magnasteer, but some earlier variable power assist. I can appreciate that Olds increased the effort somewhat to give it a semblance of road feel. However, mine does sometime seem to increase the effort at inopportune times -- like entering a pretty good curve at cruising speeds -- certainly gets my attention, anyway.

As far as the gas or brake pedals, I haven't noticed any difference between them or my wife's 2002 Impala LS. EXCEPT that every once and a while at very slow speeds, especially if I'm just pulling off and then have to hit the brakes, they don't stop very well at all (I hit a panic stop and the car just slows down to a stop). I suspect there's some sort of vacuum deficiency under those certain conditions keeping it from a hard/fast stop.

Larry

javidogg

Today, when I was on my way to the store (JEWEL), I remembered the topic about the wipers, well these is the thing, if you tap the wipers up once it will wipe one cycle, but if you tap the wipers up and hold it for more than 2 or 3 seconds it will wipe two full cycles. Hope you all get this, if not go out and try it on your Aurora and you'll see what I mean. Peace.

Javs

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

mariposarosada

My wipers cycle twice, no matter how quickly I tap the stalk up. Maybe it's sticking?

I'll get out the lube and have some fun tonight.

Henry

You know you are obcessed with your car when you finish talking about the Aurora by saying . . . .

"I'll get out the lube and have some fun tonight."

cwiley1

I tried the wipers on my '95 today. The results were similar to Javs, if I push the lever up and release it on the wipers upward travel it will stop after the first wipe, but if I release the wipers on the downward cycle it will wipe the second time. I haven't tried the '97 yet.

rjs200240

I can't believe it. The Aurora is the best all-around car I've ever had or been in. Yet for some strange reason, I keep thinking about ZR-1's... I guess I miss my Corvette more than I though. The things I love about the Aurora over the Corvette are it's engine. The Aurora engine is way sweeter (though ultimately not as powerful). The 'vette only ran up to about 5400 rpm, and there was little point in even running into the 5's as it was way out of steam. I love how the Aurora pulls up to 6200 strongly, and I absolutely love the sound it makes. There is definitely something "high-tech" about the sound a DOHC V8 makes vs. the sound a pushrod V8 makes. The things I miss about the 'vette are it's smaller size, nimble handling, rowing the gears, and the muscular appearance the C4 had. I guess that's why I've been thinking of ZR-1's. That LT-5 is all aluminum with DOHC and variable intake geometry. It revs to something close to 7 grand if I recall (6800 maybe?), and the sound it makes is incredible. I've heard them on a few occasions and they sound amazing. They have that high-tech sound merged with a muscle-car grumble. Plus, there is just something about owning a Corvette. When I wave to other people in Auroras (heck, they are rarer than 'vettes) the drivers usually ignore me or give me strange looks. They are still pretty costly, though. About $40 grand for a 94 or 95 with low mileage. The '94 was the first year of the 5-spoke wheels, and also they had a nicer interior. Maybe I should just spend a few grand and have the Aurora blueprinted and polished. There is something cool about a big car (especially when it looks as good and is as nicely appointed as the Aurora) that hauls butt.

I noticed an interesting comment in C&D regarding their test of the G35 coupe. They didn't do instrumented acceleration, but rather tested it at Sears Point International Raceway as a preview. Here is what was interesting: (some crap about how the car was designed by some engineer who worked on Nissan's LeMans effort) "So we were confident the car would feel at home on a racetrack. Apparently, the Japanese engineers wanted to be sure and added oil coolers to the cars we drove, as well as conducting extensive brake tests beforehand."

So apparently it isn't like C&D doesn't realize that they are getting ringers, it's just that they don't care. I'm sure they will in later articles mention how durable and composed the G35 was at Sears Point without bothering to mention how the car was specially prepared for the track. Not to mention, if the engineers bother to make changes to the car prior to a magazine testing it, who's to say those changes are limited to what they mentioned? The most insulting part is how this same issue contains an in-depth article on how they test cars, in which they conclude: "Although our numbers may not always be the fastest, at least you can be confident they are an honest and consistent representation of a vehicle's performance." Yeah, it's just to bad the vehicle they are testing bears only a resemblance to the one you are buying...

rjs200240

I was really all over the place in that last one, ehh? Looks like it could have used some proofreading too. Sorry about that.

gisom

Have you tried to replace your cabin air filter yet? Just wondering. No fellas we do not have them in the classics.

rjs200240

I pulled it out to look at it, and shook it out. It's real easy. The panel is labeled. All you have to do is open the hood. Then you push the little clips and remove the panel. The filter slides right out. To tell the truth, it isn't sealed in there particularly well. I'm sure it helps, but it's no hospital system or anything. But I'd guess the air flows at it, so I bet most of it goes through the filter. After 12K miles, it wasn't very dirty.

garnes

You just got to give up on those magazines. That GM guy hit it with calling them "Buff" magazines or whatever. They do seem to only care about peak numbers too.

They are never going to be totally honest because that would be like saying there is no Santa. People buying the new Accord V6 would love to believe it will do mid 6's with an automatic and give a mustang GT a run if you had the manual. That one was so far over the top that it did it for me. That and the WRX doing mid to high 5's but the street start was 7.4 or something (and they never bother to mention this ridiculous disparity and what that means for real driving). Anyway, advertising dollars would disappear and readers would be mad. Oh yeah, don't forget how poorly some cars perform compared to their earlier "first drive" tests when they do the muli-model comparison tests.

Oh, you will love this - I saw a bunch of BMW infomercial kind of stuff on the speed channel. They were flying around in the M3 and it had a really fat steering wheel. Somehow fat steering wheels are bad only on Auroras.

I still have to mention the one article I saw where the 350Z was doing (if you did the math) 85% at the wheels. Maybe I'm unaware of something, but that seems like a red flag to me. I've seen the vette dyno'd and it was around 75%. Big difference.

Hey - I'll let you know how the Corsa sounds in a couple of weeks. If you do this, you will be up to 270 HP (maybe more) with the K&N and the power curve will be really fat on the top end with that new Aurora, and perhaps you will be even happier with the performance.

Henry

I dont know if all the Classics have them, but my 95 has a round something on the vinyl piece below the dash board. It is located by where your keys would hang down from the steering wheel.

Does everybody have this piece? Is so, let me know the year of the car. Also, does anybody know what it does??

Henri

blk97aurora

Henri,

My '97 has what you describe. It is a vent to draw interior air past a temperature sensor for the HVAC system.

Henry

These things belong on a Nissan Sentra maybe. But a 2 ton Aurora???

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WWWAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

I got them on my 95 two days ago and I already want them off. These things on wet roads have less grip than my 20,000 mile Z rated Toyo's.

Anybody want a set of Yokos CHEAP??

Henry

The center piece that I brought off of ebay finally arrived. It is great to be whole again.

Henri

fjk57702

I traded my 98 aurora. Now I have an SLS.

kemo444

I just broke in a new set of "Kuhmo" tires that i purchased from tirerack.com. these things are great tires. I had never heard of kuhmo's before, but i'm glad i took a chance on 'em.

mariposarosada

I got the Kumho tires from Tire Rack as well. They rock! MUCH better than the the Michelin's I had on there with the Autobahn package. They handle better and are a lot quieter. Still not as quiet as I'd like, but quiet enough that I now notice wind noise around the windows. I no longer get that annoying tea kettle whine on concrete highways.

Additionally, we just had a couple of inches of snow here, and they plow right through it. Granted they're new, but the traction control didn't even come on. I'm thrilled!

Oh yeah--only 52 bucks each, too.

rjs200240

It looks like the Bonneville will soon be available with a 4.4L version of the Northstar V8. It makes 285 hp, so I'd guess it is tuned like the 300 hp Northstar. I'm glad there will be a non-Cadillac out there with this sweet engine, but it's too bad it will be inside some Pontiac styling. I don't think I could bear the red-lit gauges to get that satisfying engine. The new styling is a lot better than the previous over-done stuff, but it still isn't exactly understated. I wonder if the FWD Northstar will eventually incorporate variable valve timing or if it will just gradually fade away as more cars switch to RWD...

fjk57702

I would guess this new engine is based on the VVT northstar. I really like the engine in my SLS - the 275 HP 4.6 northstar. It seems to have lots of low end torque - more than the Aurora - and driving the car gently results in upshifts at 2000 RPMs. The Aurora would usually want to wind up to 3000 even when I used a light touch on the throttle.

rjs200240

The VVT Northstar is for RWD application only. The Bonnie is a front driver. I'd bet it makes 285hp because it has the cam tuning of the STS not the SLS.

fjk57702

Well, the 4.4 is a new size northstar, so exactly what engine it is based on is open. The RWD engine is extensivly changed for RWD applications, so the 4.4 may have the HO tuning. The HO tuning should produce about 285 HP with 4.4 liters. VVT is something that could be added to the existing FWD version of the engine I think. This 4.4 may be an upsized Aurora engine too, since the Aurora will be gone.

rjs200240

It's just too bad Olds isn't around for it. Pontiac is really putting excitment back in their lineup. The GTO looks great, and the concepts of the GP and Bonnie look much cleaner, although still pretty aggressive. Plus, that 4.4L V8 sounds great. Saturn will have a 200hp Ion coming out. And the CTS V-series is going to make around 400hp at, get this, 7800 rpm. That will be the highest-revving production pushrod engine GM's made (as far as I know). Even the ZR-1 only revved up to 7000 rpm, and that was DOHC. And there are a lot of GM parts coming out for the small cars like the Cavalier and Sunfire. Heck, even Buick is feeling it with portholes, chrome exhaust tips, and 17" wheels on the Park Avenue Ultra (it is Buick after all). It's sort of a shame to think of the higher-performance Aleros, Intrigues, and Auroras that could have been.

golic

Is there any truth that the aurora brand was goint to go to another division? Buik/Pontiac. I had thought I heard this "rumor" ahwile ago.

rjs200240

I'm sure cars will fill some of the segment the Aurora covered, though. But I doubt the Aurora name will be passed on. The other divisions already have cars in a similar spot as the Aurora, and they probably have much better name recognition.

The Aurora platform is already used by Cadillac, Buick, and Pontiac, and the Premium V8 is shared with Cadillac and soon Pontiac. So if you meant Aurora parts, other divisions already have them.

I guess the Bonneville GXP will be the closest thing to the Aurora, but I doubt it will have an interior like the Aurora's. I really love how it is conservative yet still very sporty. I also love the wood and chrome accents. The interior is sporty yet elegant, and not overdone. The same is true of the exterior. Sporty yet elegant.

herbv

Last April I bot a 2001 Aurora 3.5 I bought the car because I love the way it looks. Inside and out. I had previously owned Bonnevilles, 1990, 1993 and 1998. Still have the '98. They have been wonderful automobiles in terms of durability, reliability and ride. But the cabins have a cheap tacky look about them so I decided this time to buy the Aurora. The best thing about this purchase is that the car had 11M on the odometer and it cost only $21M. I would have been very dissapointed had I paid over 30 grand for this car when it was new. I have had the car since April and have not had any problems. However, the ride sucks. It clunks and thunks over ripple in the highway. There are no rattles. Just an annoying thunking when it hits a bump. Also there is a lot of road noise coming into the cabin. The feeling I get is that this car is very poorly insulated.
Everytime I get out of the Aurora and into the Bonneville I think I am going from a Corsica to a Caddy.

Could this ride be improved with different tires and shocks.? The tires are Goodyear Eagles and I guess the shocks are OEM.

hammen2

There's a chronic problem on the Aurora and Intrigue with the Intermediate Steering Shaft needing lubrication. Without it, it clunks and rattles going over bumps. I helped my mother-in-law test drive a new '01 Aurora still on a dealer's lot (don't ask :-) and it was very annoying.

There is a Technical Service Bulletin and this procedure generally takes less than an hour. I'm not sure if it's entirely the cause of your problems, but I'd start there.

--Robert
'98 Classic owner

rjs200240

The Olds dealer by me still has a 2001 4.0 brand new too. It's the car in their showroom. I keep wondering how much they'd take for it, but it's that metallicy silver color that I don't care for. Also, I don't think it has a sunroof.

hammen2

This 01 is the dark blue color, and it's loaded. It's one of the early 01's - no OnStar - but it has everything else on it (V8, chomes, Bose, etc.) The dealer wouldn't come down from $32k on it, which is ridiculous. They didn't even know if it would come with the 5/60 warranty (never titled, but still around 500 miles on it from test drives). One of the headlights and one of the taillights had condensation inside, probably from sitting.

My mother-in-law works for GM, and thus she can order a new loaded '03 for about the same as what they are asking for the '01. She also has old GM card dollars and wants to use them while she can (GM is ending the "double-dipping" practice next year).

She owns a pearl white '98 Classic, and it was making creaking and groaning suspension-type noises. Took it to her dealership, who heard the problem, claimed to check everything, but couldn't resolve it (still charged her $75). Took it to another dealership, they cleaned the rust off and applied lubrication to the bushings, and the car's quieter than it's ever been. Only cost her around $60. When she went to go back to the first dealership to demand her money back, they were gone - must have taken their GM buyout.

Now that her '98 is working OK (she's got the same extended warranty as I do), she's no longer thinking about trading it in and getting a new Aurora or a CTS - instead she's looking at adding a second vehicle like the Vibe or Saturn VUE (she's retiring in the spring, and wants to buy something new while she still can afford to).

I still have a couple of years before I'll retire my '98 Classic as my daily driver. Due to the family discount, I stick with GM cars (other than the AMC Javelin I learned to drive in, and a junky Dodge Omni I had while in college, that's all I've owned/drove).

I do like the CTS, but, while it is sportier, it is a drop from the Classic as far as amenities goes. I wouldn't get one with the current Opel engine. The new Bonneville GXP intrigues me - retaining the V-8, but losing the cladding and most of the overstated Pontiac styling. My wife has a 2001 Grand Prix GTP, and it's been a decent car, but the interior is terrible (I can spin the HVAC control without it clicking into place, but my local dealer says it's working as designed). Maybe I'll undergo my mid-life crisis and have to get one of the new GTO's. Other than that, I don't see anything in GM's future lineup that interests me...

--Robert

garnes

I'll be keeping my 98 for another 4+ years as the extended warranty should last me. I've only got 35k on it now. With the intake and exhaust improvements, the car is just a blast to drive. But in 4 years or so, that GTO sure looks like a strong possibility. Hopefully the hype will be subdued by then, and new car/slightly used prices are reasonable.

Don't forget the new STS. That should be pretty cool.

53rocket

I recently had the same problem with my 2001 4.0. After replacing both outer tie rod ends at 14,000 miles,I later had the bad noise in the steering column. My car too had to have the intermediate steering shaft lube. It still makes rather loud noises over bumps. Some people blame it in the bigger rim size,leaving little sidewall height to absorb the shock from the road. Others can't understand why they can't manufacture cars with shorter sidewalls for handling and still get a decent, quiet ride. I have the Michelin MXV plus 4s on my car. I've come to accept the noise. I hope that someone comes up with a solution. To me, this is the only feature of the car I don't like.

larryfl

It's finally getting time to replace the Continental Conti-Touring tires on my '95 after 47K miles. I am off the road now and so am planning to keep the car for at least another couple of years (97K miles and counting).

I have been very happy with the contis and will probably replace them w/ a new set. BUT, I'm also thinking of Michelin Pilots.

The Contis will run just under $500 installed. I haven't priced the Pilots.

Any of you have opinions (stupid question). What should I do?

Larry

garnes

I have the 2001 Aurora 17's on my 98 classic. I have the 235/55 Michelin MXV4's as well. No degradation of ride. It's just as nice as the 16's with the 235/60's. It's not the wheels or tires.

rjs200240

Is the sound you all are describing like a low thud? I get that when I hit potholes and such. It isn't jarring, and none of it transfers to the seat, but you definitely hear a low-pitched thud. This is just the way the car is. I would imagine it has more to do with the suspension tuning than anything else. The car got thicker anti-roll bars than the classic had. Since they try to prevent one wheel from moving more than the other (like what happens when leaning) they seem to make the one-wheel bumps a bit thumpier. While it is louder than I would expect, it isn't particularly bad. And the main thing is it isn't actually jarring. It doesn't bother me all that much.

herbv

Thanx for the feedback on the problem I think I am having with the ride on my Aurora. Somebody mentioned a "technical service bulletin". How can I get a copy of a "TSB"?

53rocket

I would agree that the bumps in the road are not jarring. I also should have mentioned that the comments I made were from some of the reviews I read about the car (OK guys, try to be nice to those Japanese loving magazines. I agree with you 100%. I stopped reading Consumers Reports many years ago because they favored the foreign cars). I too think the suspension is tuned for this type of ride. Maybe they should have left an inch or two of softer spring (strut) reaction to avoid this. I guess I notice it more than most because I often drive with no radio on - you know, solitude from the kids....

So it seems that I have had the most problems so far, stalling from a crank sensor that had to be reprogrammed, tie rod ends going bad at 14,000 miles, steering column noise. Anything else to look out for?

By the way, this doesn't scare me enough to get rid of the car. I just convinced the wife to get an LS so I can have the Olds. Maybe if I get real lucky, I'll have my '53 Olds done as well. Yeah right! We'll be looking in the spring.