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
Well just kiddin
I didn't generalize about all media outlets, and I didn't refer to any particular review. So no, you don't "got it".
Hopefully I don’t have any grammar errors in my post for you to correct.
Yes, pretty much all media outlets favor foreign cars, but to varying degrees. In many, even most, cases it is not favoritism that leads to the foreign car getting the good review-it is that it has earned it. I don't dispute that.
However, in some cases it goes beyond that and into mindless import a** kissing or habitual domestic bashing-Edmunds and Car and Driver are the worst offenders. Compare these to say, Motorweek or Motor Trend, and you see an additional level of bias.
All I want to know is why Edmunds always manages to be one of the first to test drive new imports and is always the last to test domestic models. Dont give me crap about lack of test models when EVERY major publication has tested the Aura already.
Not sure if this is considered bias but I guess it would be!
(Sorry, just ribbin' my Canadian buds - couldn't resist.
Also be sure to read the counterpoint by Erin Riches, she totally rips the car and said it is a mediocre offering that is inferior to the Sonata and Fusion.
Many reviewers compare the 3.5L to other V6s which I understand but the 3.6L is Aura's premium model. Saturn probably should have just given the XE the 2.4L like the G6.
To keep the reviewers happy? Gotta love it. You can get the HP of a V6 for the price of a 4 cyl. Wonder what a customer would want.
Don't get the idea I'm an apologist for Edmunds, but none of us knows how thrashed the test car was by previous reviewers before Edmunds' reviewer(s) got his/their hands on it.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/reviews/healey/2006-10-19-aura_x.htm
I wonder if the cost savings of the cheaper V6 with the improved HP over a 4 cyl. is a good compromise? I mean if you want a less expensive vehicle but desire some HP it may make up for a few less MPG?
Need to read one more review I guess. Fairly positive review by James Healey (link in post #775) but he too had somewhat negative comments about the 6 speed automatic and OHV engine.
Drivers who are accustomed to a good Japanese OHC V6 engine are going to much prefer the 3.6 OHC over the pushrod engine. The Aura is marketed towards import buyers afterall.
They seemed to be reaching though. i.e. complaining the chrome was too shiny!!!
John Melton, bargaining chairman of United Auto Workers Local 31, said employees would begin producing about five hybrids a week, cars that will be road-tested before GM begins making them for public sale next year.
Mike Morrissey, a Saturn spokesman, said the Aura Green Line would be in production and in dealer showrooms by the spring of 2007.
The Aura Green Line will be the second hybrid vehicle made in the Kansas City area. Ford Motor Co. makes a hybrid version of its Ford Escape-Mercury Mariner sport-utility vehicle at the Claycomo plant.
In 2004, GM said it would build a hybrid version of the Chevrolet Malibu in 2007. Paul Marr, the Fairfax plant’s manager, said last week that a Malibu hybrid now would be made after the Aura Green Line’s launch.
Melton speculated that GM decided to make a hybrid of the Aura first because the Saturn brand already has produced a hybrid SUV, the Vue Green Line. The Aura Green Line’s power train will be similar to the Vue Green Line’s, Morrissey said.
The Aura Green Line will be what some auto observers call a “mild hybrid,” which has a smaller battery pack than a full-hybrid vehicle such as the Escape and Mariner. A mild hybrid allows the engine to be turned off while coasting, braking or stopping, yet restart quickly. However, unlike a full hybrid, a mild hybrid does not allow the electric motor to power the vehicle at any speed.
One advantage of a mild-hybrid vehicle such as the Aura, according to auto reviewers, is that it will have nearly the same amount of trunk space as a non-hybrid version.
The standard Aura gets 20 miles per gallon in city driving and 28 or 29 miles a gallon on the highway.
While Saturn has not released any fuel economy numbers for the Aura Green Line, Melton said he expected the hybrid version to get 10-15 percent better gas mileage. The mild-hybrid version of the Chevrolet Silverado pickup gets about 10 percent better gas mileage than the conventional Silverado.
GM launched its Saturn Aura production at the Fairfax plant in August. Last month, 40 percent of the vehicles made there were Auras and 60 percent were Malibus.
A price has not been announced for the hybrid car, but the suggested manufacturer’s price for the conventional Aura ranges from $19,945 to $23,945.
Drive the uplevel XR with its high-performance V-6 and sporty suspension and you wonder where, sweet car, have you been all this time?
But get behind the wheel of the base XE and the impression is less impressive: Nice car. Could use some tweaking. Pretty darn good, though.
If the 2007 Aura were typical of Detroit-mobiles the past decade, Toyota, Honda and others not native to the USA surely would have found it tougher to gain so much market share. The XR, especially, seems a reasonable alternative to a Honda or Toyota. As a new model, Aura can't boast the enviable track record for high quality and strong resale value that the top Japanese models can, however.
Lisa Hutchinson, director of Saturn's brand and product development, calls Aura "the biggest launch of the year" for the General Motors brand. A Green Line version — Saturn-speak for mild hybrid — is slated for next spring. That will be a four-cylinder gasoline engine, augmented by a small electric motor, as in the Saturn Vue Green Line SUV.
Saturn likes to brag that the Aura has a V-6 engine standard, while rivals have four-cylinder powerplants in their base models. But the memory of $3 gas this summer might make buyers more interested in the perceived fuel-economy benefits of a four-cylinder.
Two Auras were tested: A preproduction XE that would be priced $21,795 and a nearly loaded, regular-production XR, $26,919.99.
The XE and XR were challenged on Virginia interstates and two-lane back roads in the vicinity of this village. Here's what stood out, good and otherwise:
Styling. Crisp, handsome, sufficiently tailored to draw at least brief notice from those import fans who heretofore wouldn't have considered a domestic car.
Interior. Nicely done; classy for a mainstream sedan. The back seat is reasonably roomy. The contours of the seat back are a bit lumpy, though, compromising comfort. Saturn likes to point out that it bothered to wrap the inside of the windshield pillars in cloth instead of presenting them with a hard plastic surface. Nice touch. Even the interior of the trunk is well-done. Fully lined, which not only looks classy, but also cuts noise.
Performance. The word has many meanings. Here, we'll consider it a reference to how the cars went, stopped and turned in routine-to-vigorous driving. For that, Aura is a mostly strong performer. The XE, intended for most buyers, corners reasonably well, stops confidently and has sufficient pep to prevent anxiety during merging and passing. Its bargain-oriented four-speed automatic transmission shifts quite nicely, snicking through the gears up or down without pause or jolt. The XR, for sporting types, slices corners more finely because of a tauter suspension that might actually feel a bit too stiff for some folks. The XR's uplevel V-6 has more power than you get in the XE and delivers it willingly, almost wantonly, to the delight of all with a pulse. But XR's supposedly more-sophisticated six-speed automatic transmission pauses and jerks on full-throttle downshifts. Different gearboxes, tuned differently for different users, Saturn says. Hmmm. What sort of folks asked for a hesitation followed by a lurch on downshifts?
Features. A lot of useful equipment is standard, including sound-deadening glass, height-adjustable driver's seat and GM's OnStar telecommunications system with a year's free emergency-notification service. A generous array of safety hardware also is standard, resulting in good scores in federal crash tests.And some unusual items are available. Heated cloth seats, for instance; no need to buy leather to get the bun warmers. A four-panel panorama roof slides open and stacks to provide an open-air ambiance.
Oops. Power-mirror adjuster is small enough that it's hard to use and is on the windshield pillar, too far from the driver. You have to lean forward to use the control, at which point you're not able to tell whether the mirrors will be set properly once you lean back. A buzzy rattle issued from that same driver's-side windshield pillar on the preproduction tester when the road surface was coarse. The production model had no such problem, a good sign. XE's 3.5-liter pushrod-style V-6 was crude-sounding on start-up, although it quieted as it warmed. GM calls that engine "high value," as opposed to the more sophisticated "high feature" overhead-camshaft 3.6-liter V-6 in the XR. You can translate the GM terms as "cheap" and "refined."
Fuel economy. Respectable; mid-20s on both test cars despite plenty of lead-foot moments. Conservative driving should yield impressive numbers, if the testers were true harbingers.
Sales technique. Saturn promises to keep its one-price, no-haggle approach. That doesn't mean no discounts; just that everybody who buys from the same dealer should get the same price.
Aura makes a strong case for itself, but anybody who's driven a 2007 Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Nissan Altima or Hyundai Sonata or Azera knows that a strong case is merely the price of admission.
I like the exterior design for the most part. There might be a bit too much plastichrome used but it's a nice design overall. The 17-inch wheels look good. The thing that struck me was that it's not a very big car in reality -- looks bigger in the pictures I'd seen.
I got behind the wheel and was able to get a fairly good driving position. The steering wheel seemed a bit far away and I couldn't see if it telescoped or not. The mirror controls are not on the windshield pillar as the previous post claimed but on the door frame, and yes, they are small and too far away. There is a cubby at the bottom of the center stack (probably where an ashtray would have been) that is covered with a door that is a bit cheap-feeling in function, but would be a handy space. There is also a power outlet there as well as in the center console. The center armrest slides back and forth, and also opens up to reveal storage. There is also a sliding horizontal door covering more space just forward of that and behind the shifter that is used for cupholders. All good.
This one had a gray fabric interior which wasn't bad; it was a woven fabric and not the usual mouse fur. The seats were reasonably comfortable if a little narrow. The cabin itself is narrower than what I'm used to (I drive an Intrigue) but looks comfortable for two. The gray interior gets plastic faux-stainless appliques and they didn't do much for me, but the overall interior design is attractive, although the carpet used on the floor looks incredibly thin and cheap. There was one there with the beige interior that comes with faux-woodgrain and it was much more attractive.
I got into the back seat with the drivers seat set for where I would keep it. Room is tight back there. Legroom is barely acceptable but would be tolerable for relatively short trips -- the backs of the front seats are scooped out for a bit more kneeroom and the front seats allow your feet to go under them. But the sloping roof takes its toll on headroom. If I sat upright and leaned back my head hit the roof, so I had to slump or bend forward a bit. Too bad. Really the back seat is only good for two adults -- three would be an almost impossible squeeze, but kids would be fine of course.
I opened the trunk and resisted the temptation to swipe the carpet floormats and cargo nets that were there from the factory (just kidding, they'd be useless to me). The trunk is a bit small compared to my Intrigue. Not a whole lot of height. Of course, except for when I'm carrying a couple of golf bags I almost never use all the space I have now so it probably isn't a big deal, but the lack of height would make carrying bulky items a pain. The trunk is nicely finished, though, and the lid opens very high.
All in all it made a very good static impression. But GM Canada has priced this car way too high in Canada. The version I saw would be $21-22K in the US, and stickered at nearly $27K here. The XR with leather priced out at $36K on GM Canada's website. That's way too much. With their no-haggle pricing that's way too much money for this car, no matter how nice it is.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I think Healey is correct about the smoothness of the 4 speed automatic. But I also think it's not terribly efficient in extracting the engine's power.
I'm no fan of the Chevy-based pushrod V-6s but the current version is quite good. I'd say you're unwilling to accept the fact that GM offers a V-6 in its cars whereas in comparable models the Japanese makers fob off a 4-banger on the buying public. Having been in a few Accord 4-banger shakeathons, I'd take the GM V-6 for the same (or less) money.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
About mileage: I get 32MPG at 60MPH and 28MPG at 75MPH. The 4 cylinder engines are pushing just as much car and must work much harder to do the same thing. We're talking about a 1-2MPG gain tossing a four in an Aura with a major penalty in performance. The four really would only offer perceived economy - not real world value.
After seeing the Aura in person today, I am very impressed. A well equipped XE for $21,000 is an excellent value. Saturn is moving forward and GM will recover nicely.
I currently have an Aura XR. I totally disagree with Healy's comments. The 6-speed works great in either auto or manual mode. I tried downshifting and stomping on the throttle and then stomped the throttle and downshifted. No lag, noise or drama other than very quick acceleration. This car is great fun to drive! Procedure: crusing 35-40mpg in 5th gear - three quick taps to 2nd and hit the gas and hold on.
I don't buy the argument that a good 4 cylinder will only get 1-2 better mileage though. I believe it would be more than that for the way most people drive. And the current I4 engines from Honda and Toyota are quite smooth, refined and punchy (though no match for the 3.5 V6). With 5 speed transmissions they're not working that hard either.
Offering a V6 at the price of the competitor's I4 is an interesting strategy. I still say those import car buyers looking for a top notch V6 will either pony up to a Aura XR or look at a Honda, Toyota, or Nissan.
Absolutely! Those that desire 250 HP+ will go for a DOHC V6. But if you look at the Camry and Accord only about 30% or so get the V6 (at least that was the numbers 2 years ago). The rest buy a 4.
Of course the 4 cyl for the Aura has already been announced for its Green Line version. This is the same engine as in the Solstice/Sky GXP with a mild Hybrid at a low price. So perhaps we will see a very peppy 4cyl (164 hp, 159 tq vs. 177/166 in Sky) with great gas mileage.
The Camry 4 has 158/161 in base version and 147/138 in very expensive Hybrid version. So in all cases the Aura is a bit more powerful. Also look to see a more powerful 3.6L in a few years in the Aura
MPG for Camry 4 is 24/33 and 40/38(hybrid). Aura 4 hybrid will give more power than either 4 cyl version but will probably give around 30/36.
So in the end the OHV V6 (vs. 4) gives buyers another choice that is inexpensive, more power and most will find quite acceptable. Once the auto 6 speed is up to volume it will be dropped in behind it.
Especially from the standpoint of people not really into cars, the number of cyllinders realy stands out. the V6 has to be smoother than a honda/toyota 4, and offers more power and much more torque.
I think they need to add the 6 speed auto to the base package, therefore tipping the base fuel economy to 30mpg.
That makes for strong advertising,
Base Aura, v6 power, 30mpg, for a 4cyl price!
That also increases the image of saturn as well
The new pushrod V6s and V8s from GM are very refined. As I said, C&D noted the 3.9 sounded like an OHC engine. The difference between the OHV and OHC designs is essentially the sounds they make. I dont know that a sound a measure of refinement because the engines can have different sounds but still be smooth and quiet. The notion than pushrods are low tech is incorrect and there are OHC engines out here that have 2 valves per cylinder just like GM's pushrods. Gm's OHV engines also have technology that you arent going to find on the HEMI or even some OHC engines. Keep in mind Chyrsler doesn't even have any sort of VVT on its SOHC V6 yet. Honda doesnt have dual VVT on it's SOHC V6.
Edmunds released their "most wanted" list and there are only two american cars on the list (out of 32) and the 6 was named best sedan under $25k. The Aura is bigger, better looking, faster and fresher but the 6 still took the prize. Wow.
Unwillingness of American companies to come up with up level designs and go instead into high-volume low-end market is depressing. There were times some 40 years ago when "Made in USA" meant something and American cars were envy of the world. Just go to automotive museum and take a look.
Everything you ever asked for!! (I4 with turbo awful expensive alternative, few use it)
GM does have "modern" high technology DOHC engines just like the japanese in 4/6/8 versions. They just offer lower cost OHV engines also. GM vehicles like the Aura/LaCrosse/Lucerne/CTS/SRX/STS/Acadia/Enclave/Outlook/Vue/Aveo/Solstice/Sky/S- aab/Cobalt/Ion/G6/XLR/DTS etc. all offer DOHC engines
DOHC are just a whole bunch more expensive than OHV's. That being said GM has really put some technology into the OHV's which not only significantly improve them but do make them a bit more expensive than the old versions.
It is a much better version of the same platform then the G6. The steering is A LOT better than anything else in the chevy/pontiac family so far. However the 4 speed auto and the base engine combo sucked. The car had a hard time keeping the speed while on cruise control. There is a huge power gap between 2000 and 3500 rpm - and it shows on the highway in the worst way. The interior room - was average, but the roof line is very low and It is very hard to get in and out of the vehicle. My colleague who is 6' 2" had a hard time getting in and out and his head rubbed the ceiling most of the time. I would give it a 6.5 out of 10, but it is still far behind even the Sonata. Maybe the XR would be better.
I've driven everything in the midsize category and Aura is NOT even close. Altima, Maxima, Camry and Accord are much better. Azera and Sonata are much better as well. I'd take an Azera Limited vs. Aura XR any day for the same price.
Read the technical info about GM's engines on their powertrain site and then tell me their OHV engines are low tech. As for low revving, the LS2 redlines at 6500, the 3.5 and 3.9 redline at 6400 and the LS7 redlines at 7000rpm. The 3.5L in the Aura redlines higher than some DOHC V6 engines. The old camry V6 engine redlined at 6200rpm, but the new one may be higher. The DOHC V6 in the Tacoma redlines at 5500 rpm which is lower than any of GM OHV engines, even their V8s. As I just stated, several of GM's OHC engines have VVT which you wont find on the HEMI, Ford's SOHC V8, Chrsylers SOHC V6, Ford's 3L DOHC V6, etc. Mercedes just started using VVT within the last two years when they switched over to DOHC heads for their new V6 and V8 engines.
Every American automaker has OHC engine designs and Ford doesn't even make any OHV engines. Chrysler only has one. GM's newest version of the 3.6L V6 makes 275hp which is more than Toyota gets out of the same displacement with their non conventional fuel injected V6. What are you talking about?
There's a reason (besides price) why so many consumers settle for 4 cylinder Accords, Altimas and Camrys, you don't feel like you're paying a penalty for driving one. Perhaps that's why GM doesn't offer a 4 banger in the Aura - it wouldn't match up very well against the 4 cylinder imports.
I driven OHV V6 GM cars and the engine comes accross as high tech as a tractor. Their latest OHV engines are better but they're still no match for a good OHC engine.
True, Chrysler and Ford do make OHC engines but their V6s don't quite measure up to those from Toyota, Honda and Nissan. Ford's new 3.5 may be a different story. At least when GM designs an OHC engine it's a great one.
Changing direction. A couple of times you have stated the Aura looks better than this car or that car. The argument only works if one has the same styling tastes as you. I agree with you on the Sonata but not on the Passat.
Sonata is much better. As far as the power is concerned, the base XE is a dog, especially on a highway going up-hill.
You should try to drive it for 5 hours straight in different traffic conditions and then tell us how it is.
A short test drive tells me nothing!
At first I was impressed too, but after 2 hours on I-695 and I-83 I realized that it is a glorified Malibu V6. forget about quick lane changes with quick acceleration – the XE is too slow for that.
I'd take G6 GTP over the Aura XE any day of the week.
But I’d take an Altima V6 over any of those two.
Did you actually try to get in and out of Aura without bumping your head? I don't know about you, but for me - after it happened a few times I was very disappointed with the roof line. No way would I buy one - Saturn should offer them with a warning and a hardhat. :P
Funny, but I found the G6 GT Sedan preferable to the G6 GTP Coupe, perhaps because the sedan GT promised less than the GTP and therefore came closer to matching that promise. That said, I'd still go with the Saturn XR than either of those, and for the price difference between the XE and XR, the XR should be a nobrainer to all but those extremely short of cash...and then we'd be looking at other alternatives...or should be.
GM's four banger is just as refined as any Toyota or Honda 4. The G6's base engine redlines at 6900, has dual VVT and very good specific output. I have driven an Ion with the smaller version of this engine and it is very refined and quiet.
Any tractor engine that is as smooth as GM's new OHV engines must be pretty damn good. I dont think you have sampled any non-3800 pushrod engines. The 3.5, 3.9 and Vortec V8 engines are very refined. They are just better, they are better than some OHC engines like Ford's duratec or Chryslers 3.5L. As I stated, VVT has allowed these engines to rev freely and redline without losing steam. The 3800 couldnt do this, but the newer engines can.
BTW, the camry's four cylinder DOHC engine redlines at 6200rpm.