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
By the way, I drove a Milan as well. Nice ride, handling and I like the 6speed tranny, but the car seriously lacks noise supression, and the seats aren't that great, and that interior dash design!! Poor, poor!
My Maxx seats, built by the same supplier as Saabs' (and possibly Audi A3s' (base design is very similar)), are firm, but not "hard". Those seats conform to you and I found the bottoms very comfortable for a 14 hour trip. However, the backrest part's not as conformable due to a bulge at the very bottom (stylistic decision ??).
The Audi seats felt like the Honda Civic Hybrid seats - hard bottoms but well shaped back. You didn't sit in them rather than "on" them.
The Aura XR Leather seats seemed halfway between these - firm, but conformable.
The XR's engine mated to the new GM 6 sp tranny was impressive. A smoother shifter than that of the Camry. The engine was responsive especially on the highway. The Toyota salesperson discouraged me from taking the Camry on the highway, so I was not able to make an apples to apples comparison. The Camry did have good power but as mentioned before not as smooth a shift action.
I have seen many negative comments re: the interior of the Aura, both in materials and roominess. The Camry certainly did have better materials and slightly more room, but I did not think that the interior of the Aura was drastically inferior. The Aura was roomy enough for me (6'4 285 lbs.) and compared to my Mazda 6 it is a significant improvement.
After looking at the Edmunds TMV with a comparably equipped Camry (basically the JBL sound system) the Aura comes out about $2,000 under the Camry. Add in a supplier discount and that could be closer to $3,000 cheaper.
My bottom line opinion, the Aura is a better driver than the Camry, but the Camry has a nicer interior, but not $2,000 better. GM has done well with this car.
As for the interior, I did find some faults but it LOOKS nice and is very functional. Unlike some people on here I didnt find the interior cramped at all. The issues I noticed were disappointing but minor and not enough to make me spend $3000 more on a camry or Altima. Comparably equipped versions of either car are quite a bit more than the Aura and I think that is good for Saturn. I really want to sit inside the new Altima but I did sit in the new G35 today and I have to say it had hard plastics in many of the locations the Aura had them.
Drive one. Hard. You'll see. Probably as quick or quicker than some manufacturer's V6s. And zero vibration even at 6000+ rpms.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
The BIG question for me, and I'm sort of glad I don't need a car now, is the build/reliability factor; I'm used to Hondas; haven't been disappointed by them, but I really like the solid road/handling feel of the Aura.
Thanks,
Jeannine Fallon
Corporate Communications
Edmunds Inc.
I test drove and compared with Camry SE/V6, Infiniti G35, Nissan ALtima, Accord EX/V6, and Honda Civic SI. The Aura has the best combination of performance, value, good assembly quality, and good interior and exterior appearance.
Very impressive engine and transmission performance, suspension is very nice balance between good road handling and smoothness. Very, very quiet. Excellent upgrade radio and XM package; sounding even better due to the overall quietness of the car.
Rear seat wireless headphones are gimmicky, with no place to stow. Would rather have had heat/air vent in console for rear seat passengers.
If you want to talk to the reporter, be sure to drop an email to Jeannine as described in her message.
When using the steering wheel mounted shift paddles you first have to place the main console shifter into "M" for manual mode. The selection of the manual mode seems to be used to tip-off the transmission controller that you may be interested in some "spirited" driving. Once this happens the manual downshifts do become rougher as the controller does not reduce engine torque during the shift. In other words, the shift is more abrupt but faster and more positive than a normal fully automatic shift.
This transmission seems very good to me. You can have it smooth in normal operation, but then switch to more aggressive gear changing in the manumatic mode.
Not sure when it will happen but as production of the 6 speed is increased (new tools) they will be partialed out to vehicles. The 4 speed will die when the 6 speed is tooled up completely. Very expensive capital expense
But they have in a comparison test though it was with a manual. The Accord V6/auto has been tested and involved in comparison tests from C&D.
Something we can agree on! Great car but not nearly enough power when it's saddled with the automatic. Looking forward to when the next generation TSX gets the turbo.
"V6 also lags most rivals in refinement"
The road test of the new Altima is now available on CG. So much for Nissan solving their torque steer problem. It looks like the Altima my not be a more impressive car than the Aura afterall.
Anyway C&D tested the Altima and gave it raves for how they handled torque steer. Not that it did not have torques steer or it was not bad, just that the Altima was great with it.
Are you saying someone else had a problem with it?
Here's the link: Road Test
Well never mind.
The fierce low-speed torque steer that V6 Altima's suffered from has been greatly reduced to lowering the engine 1-2" and thereby reducing the axle half-shaft angles to each wheel. It is still there in tight turns to the right under acceleration, but now it is easily manageable. Also, I think the new CVT transmission power delivery/torque converter takes the edge of the torque steer.
About that new CVT, NO FUN FOR THE ENTHUSIAST DRIVER! I miss the sound and feel of multiple gear upshifts under acceleration; the ALtima feels tame despite good objective performance measures due to CVT efficiency. Traffic merge at 50-70 MPH is a hoot with the CVT. It is slow off the line and 0-30, but very strong a highway speed+.
Anyway, I liked the overall driving feel, styling, and value proposition of the Saturn Aura better. I think GM/Saturn has done something right (for once) with this car and I want to encourage them (with my business)to continue to move in the new direction.
It is noteworthy that the Aura XR model uses monotube shocks, ALUMINUM front struts, and ALUMINUM rear links. Also, visual inspection leads me to suspect that some of the disk brake assembly and even the alloy wheel are light-weighted to reduce unsprung weight and increase compliance. Note that Aura XE does not have these expensive suspension bits, only the XR model. The bottom line is that it works as well as the Passat and new G35, and better than the Altima, Camry, Accord, and Acura. The Acura is light, tossable and fun to drive, but the I felt the suspension clunk (and self steer) on rebounds over cresting/dipping roads.
Yes, amazingly the Aura XR is true performance breakthrough compared to the usual GM (non Corvette) fare. It is not a perfect car, it has some flaws and room for improvement to be sure, but if you try one I think you will like it, plus you get to laugh all the way to the bank on the savings over competitive rivals.
I think Nissan is taking a big gamble with making the CVTs the ONLY automatic choice for Altimas and Maximas. I am interested to see what the automotive press has to say about it; the European press has not been kind to the CVT equipped Nissans.
There are no structural/mechanical differences in the XE / XR suspensions/brakes. There is different tuning of springs/shocks/rubber isolators but that is it.