Saturn Aura

62vetteefp

My name is Edward, and I'm a Saturn basher.

Ever since the first one rolled off the assembly line in Spring Hill, Tennessee, 16 years ago, I have wantonly ridiculed Saturns and the Americans who buy them.

In the early days, when one of our reporters came to a staff meeting with the recording of a Saturn engine and compared it with the sound of a Waring kitchen blender, I howled with delight. It was wonderful.

For a decade and a half, I've loved to ridicule Saturn's brand DNA by describing it as the car for people who don't like cars but need transportation and want to be treated well at the dealership. You know, like librarians.

Nothing could make me give up my shameful ways. Not the SL1 or SL2. Not the L series, the Relay, the Vue, the Ion or the Outlook. They all just reinforced my view that Saturns would always be dowdy and dull.

But something happened to me when I drove the Sky, that better-looking sibling of the Pontiac Solstice and next year's Opel GT.

"This isn't bad," I thought. "It must be a fluke."

Later, because I'm a judge of the North American Car and Truck of the Year awards, I spent some quality time in a Saturn Aura. It changed my life.

Now, thanks to General Motors product czar Bob Lutz, I'm in recovery.

At first I was skeptical of his plan to have Opel and Saturn share vehicles. After all, it didn't work last time when Saturn L-series cars were reworked versions of the old Opel Vectra. But the Aura, which is based on the new Vectra, is a swell automobile.

The difference? Last time, the company created the L series by Saturnizing an Opel. This time, it Opelized a Saturn.

GM's ability to execute the plan surprised a lot of people and may be why the Aura is a finalist for the North American Car of the Year. The other finalists, the Honda Fit and Toyota Camry, are formidable competition. But if you had told me a year ago that a Saturn would be a finalist, I wouldn't have believed it.

Gosh, it's great to have that off my chest.

nrborod

Pat, thanks for the info. The new Accord coupe design sure looks pretty rad. But, I'm most curious about the sedan. And, the new 4cyl sedan...will it be ALOT quieter and smoother, so that I don't have to think of a 6? For me, that will be the ticket--maybe, otherwise, I'm going to get an Aura which I like so far, more than anything else around for the dough(didn't like the Hyundai offering)

pat

You're welcome. Feel free to join the conversation there. There are more comments you might like to see starting here: thegraduate, "Honda Accord vs. Ford Fusion" #214, 8 Jan 2007 1:34 pm.

vanman1

Saw my first XR on the street today. Beautiful, what a classy looking mid-size sedan. The big wheels and upscale looks at home next to the Lexus in the other lane.

It will be interesting to see how the new Malibu stacks up in terms of looks and price.

62vetteefp

Better and cheaper per the press that have compared them.

vanman1

I have a feeling a 2.4L Malibu = 3.5L Aura in terms of price. If so, I would tend to lean Aura as the rear LEDs and a few other things really give the Saturn a more upscale look plus I like the 3.5.

We shall see.

m1miata

Nope, not anti-GM. I do like the Cadillac CTS, the Corvettes and some other cars they have made. The Aura is a pretty good effort. As for agreeing with the car experts? Well I usually see things about the same, though not always. They loved the New Mustang interior, and I do not like it much. They loved the instrument cluster, which I really disliked on the '05 model. As far as the Citation goes, all they had to do is try hard braking, and they could experience swapping ends - well documented. Anyway, most of that era FWD GM did not impress me much, that is true. Owned some which were poor to OK. The GM models pre-'74 were pretty good, and now there are some better quality FWD and RWD cars coming out from GM. As for the Aura, one of the best things they did with this Saturn is to not use the electric assist steering, and to keep the base model at a good priced V6. I think the experts opinion varies as far as how great the handling is, and such. Will be interesting to see how many times, in car magazine reviews, the Aura beats the Camry, Altima, Accord, Azera and other cars; especially after the Accord finally does arrive.
-Loren
P.S. Yes, I realize that many of the cars nowadays, are returning to those horrible foot brakes, so I may get stuck with using such a device in the next car.

m1miata

Why would the New Malibu cost more? Shouldn't the Malibu be a couple thousand less with a four banger, say $18,500, then say $22,000 with the 3.6 V6? The Aura is a set price, and the Malibu should be discounted with ease. Soooo, say a $24K price tag equates to $22K anyway. So it may end up being a less expensive version to an Aura. Like you said though, perhaps less upscale with less expensive tail lights, and other details.

I was thinking that they would someday make the Malibu RWD and keep the Impala as FWD. The Malibu could replace the Monte Carlo for NASCAR. Just a thought.
-Loren

m1miata

I thought it this car is on an elongated G6 platform, and looks like an Opel style wise. And yeah, the Aura and Sky are bring new life to Saturn.

Unless I got it wrong, the Opel hatchback to come Saturn will actually be the Euro model.

I personally would consider buying a Solstice Coupe, if they ever build one, and my aching back gets better. My sports car days may be over.

-Loren

m1miata

I'll take that back about adding the after market grill. On second thought and a second view, I prefer the original look.

As for Aura look vs. New Malibu, as judged by photos, I am kinda liking the interior of that Malibu. Exterior wise, the Aura tail may look more classy.
-Loren

bporter1

Last night I test drove my second Aura. I had driven one a week earlier, and was not very impressed with it. I thought the steering was too tight, the throttle was a little sticky, and I felt like I was sitting in a hole. Well last night's drive really changed that perception. I was amazed at how quiet it was, how it drove, and how it handled the bumps, and the curves. The 3.5 has more than enough power, and you honestly can't beat the price. Count me in as a new Saturn customer when I finally purchase a car in a month or two.

redsfan1

Which have you bought? Would you go with the XE or XR and why?

vanman1

I hope you are right and the Malibu is cheaper. I think the MSRP will be the same but like you say, you should be able to negotiate some $$ off.

That said, the Outlook is MSRP'd less than the Acadia so don't be surprised if the Malibu is MSRP'd a little higher.

walterquint

I haven't browsed the messages here extensively, but does anyone wish the Aura offered an entry-level 4cyl? The 6cyl's are fine, but they may not steal sales from 4cyl Accords/Camrys. And a major auto mag found the Aura gets 15-20% worse mileage than the 4cyl Japanese offerings (with not much acceleration benefit). On the major internet car-selling site, a typical Aura is at least $1300 more than an Accord 4cyl.......Give me an Aura with the excellent 2.4L Ecotec and stick, price it at $18,500, watch the sales rise......and if it steals Malibu sales, so be it.

m1miata

I don't think dropping a four in the Aura is going to lower the gas usage all that much. If gas mileage is important, the new Altima four banger is likely a best choice. The Aura is going to be a competition amongst the sixers, and that's about it. Looks like Aura loses in gas mileage on the six cylinder when compared to the new Camry. All these cars now are pretty close price wise, and performance wise in four cylinder and six cylinder models, so it may come down to personal preferences and dealer experiences. The dealerships of Saturn have a pretty good reputation over all. The Aura looks pretty fresh. If you are strictly going by gas mileage, maybe the Altima wins in that respect? I think the four in the New Malibu will make sense as a low priced entry car. At the moment, my only concern for the New Malibu is that GM ran the name down over the years, and people may not equate it to anything more than a rental car. If you think of it as a Malibu of late 60's, beauty comes to mind.
-Loren

nrborod

I'm wondering how many people on this board have driven the new Camry 4 cyl? I have and was very dissapointed by the performance of the drivetrain. The response is sluggish--probably due to the unresponsive 5 spd auto. Personally, I want something that moves a bit, that is quiet, smooth and affordable. For me, the Aura XE may be that car, even though the mileage is less than thn the 4 cyl Accord I'm now driving(2004 model). If Saturn could put in a 4cyl that didn't feel like a 4, I'd consider that as well.

62vetteefp

Yes the Aura will be getting the 4 cylinder AND it will be a hybrid. Therefore it should get pretty good MPG. It will not be the expensive Prius type hybrid (expensive hybrid sales have dropped with the close/under $2 gas price) but the Vue type that will be affordable for those wanting higher MPG at an affordable price.

Malibu will be priced UNDER the Aura. Chevy is holding the low price anchor for GM. Saturn will be slightly higher and with the no haggle MSRP even a bit higher than the posted MSRP's show.

isartam

The I've driven the Camry with the 2.3-liter, though not with the V-6 or the Hybrid. Of course, the four will be the most popular model. What I found out was that the 2.3 was adequate in the Camry though no barn burner by any measure. Of course, most buyers don't plan to burn many barns. Here's a review of the Camry with the four.

thegraduate

A 2.3 Liter? I think you mean the 2.4L 158 hp model, right?

The Accord once came with a 2.3L, but not the Camry. In the last ten years, the Camry has only had 2.2L and 2.4L 4-cylinder engines.

m1miata

Maybe the Altima is what you are looking for for HP and speed in a four banger. The base Aura, with the six may be a tad quicker than say the Camry, or Accord four cylinder, while burning a bit more fuel in the process. The Aura should be a lot more quiet than the Altima, which is not noted for being all that quiet on the road. The few bucks spent on fuel may be worth it, if you decide to go with the six cylinder Aura. And the four speed automatic may prove to be reliable. That CVT in the Altima sure is interesting. I wonder how it will perform over time? I have not heard of major problems with them in the Murano. Seems like Toyota, Honda, GM and other big players have shied away from the CVT transmissions - wonder why?

savetheland

2.3L is Mazda/Fusion. Camry has 2.4L. My friend has both I4 and V6 Camrys. When he bought V6 he’s been disappointed because did not feel any difference He is on his third Camry in 7 years. Probably it was his first and last V6 Camry.

I for record have 2.3L in Ford Focus at it is way better than V6 Camry and it does not have turbo. I can imagine if Ford woke up and put turbo there. But Ford as usual screwed up again - in new Focus there will be no 2.3L and no hatch, forget about turbo.

m1miata

Can't tell the difference between this???
Toyota Camry XLE - V6 3.5L (268 hp) 6A 6.70 seconds 0-60
Toyota Camry LE - I4 2.4L (158 hp) 5A 9.08 seconds

Those are the numbers from MSN Auto and I do believe I have seen quicker times listed. I would say that both engines get the job done, but gosh the V6 just gets the job done faster. Seems pretty snappy 0-60 time there for the V6 and rather impressive compared to some sports cars of a few years ago.

The Aura:
Saturn Aura XR - V6 3.6L (252 hp) 6A 6.74 seconds 0-60
is great. The 3.5 engine is suppose to be around 8.2 seconds, which is closer to the four cylinder Accords and Camry autos, though some will still prefer the V6. If the four is as smooth as a six though, and is not really that much slower, then it becomes a toss-up / personal preference. If power is your thing, the Aura XR or Camry V6 is gonna get ya there so much faster, I can't see how people could say they can not feel the difference.
-Loren

62vetteefp

Probably talking about the previous Camry.

trauppius

Toyota and Honda have been using CVTs for some of their hybrid vehicles. Nissan is using CVT in Altima, Maxima and Murano. Ford is using CVT in Hyrbid Escape and AWD Freestyles. Audi uses CVT in some models as well.

They are proving to be reliable; I have a CVT equipped 2005 Freestyle with 41,000 miles and have not had any problems thus far.

Enjoying my Aura XR very much; getting about 22MPG with outstanding performance.

1487

Saturn's website list mileage as 28/35 for the hybrid which would be better than every competing 4 cylinder midsize sedan. I assume that is using 2007 standards so the real mileage is likely to be 26/32 or so. I dont think Saturn really expects to be a huge volume car like the Malibu and thus the gas only four cylinder wont be offered. Having a hybrid powertrain standard in the four cylinder model is a good way to make the car stand out.

nrborod

I drove the Murano recently just to see...that CVT was a strange experience. Kept waiting for the shift--no matter how subtle. Must take some getting used to....
As for quiet in a car, I'm tired of raucous drone in 4 cylinder cars. That's why I was attracted to the Aura XE, in part, anyway. It's alot quieter than anything I've owned.
Quieter and LESS vibration over all. Once I tried that, I could see how tiring all that vibration can be over time.
I'm 55 and trying NOT to buy a Buick less I turn into my father once and for all!! Maybe the Aura will save me!!

driverdm

VW doesn't need to sell more Passats because they sell at a higher transacation price. The Passat starts in the $23K-$24K range. And at that point the argument could be made that it is still just as or more luxuriously equiped than an Aura. Remember, you can't get a Passat with clothe seating. And for those of you that may jump on the leatherette. It is definitely better than clothe and trust your average passenger won't even know, it is very deceptive and high quality as VW is known for. What your passaenger may see is the push button start, the umbrella holder in the door, the electronic parking brake, the quiet interior, etc. It is definitely a near luxuxy car which is why VW is dropping the cheaper Passat models as per a article from Autoweek with the Head of VW of America today. If your car isn't selling, you add production of the lower models and try to get volume that way. The thing about VW, is everybody coming in the door wants options and the cars are selling for a higher transaction price. The base model then becomes seen as a strip down version and isn't desired. Not bashing the Aura as I love that car but giving the Passat its just due.

redsfan1

I have heard you can't bargain on a new Saturn? Is this true, all other places like Honda and Pontiac, you can bargain. Also, what is the 399 extra fee for some protectant they charge for the outside and for the seats? Thats the biggest crap I think.. Please give me advice. I am looking at possibly a XE.

m1miata

That's easy, just remind them that you do not recognize side stickers as anything but fictional. Refuse to even consider it while talking price. If you feel a lower price on the vehicle is in order, then simply hold out for a bit more on your trade-in. If you have no trade-in, try for add-ons free of charge which you could use, like custom grill or wheels. The no-haggle price, with no side sticker, seems to be pretty fair. The $21K is about what a Sonata is, and is less than a Fusion/Milan retail for a V6. I test drove one today, and it was pretty impressive. The base cars are quick enough. Did not test the 3.6 V6 version which I am sure is faster, especially between 50 to 90 MPH range. Seems like a comfortable and quiet car. Cornering is good. Call me old fashion, I am still a RWD fan. Now if I was anywhere near snow country, I may sing a different tune. This Saturn is the first one, in a long - long time which at least caught my eye, and got me in to the dealership for a test drive. The XE seems like a good value, and I bet the XR with the 3.6 V6 is a bit more spirited and refined option. Worth the $4K ? - depends on the individual, no doubt. I personally will keep all options open, including cars like a used CTS, which I really liked after a test run.

-Loren

jaxs1

Just look at the MSRP on the Saturn and decide whether you would prefer a competing car with a higher MSRP that you could get discounted to the same price or less. If not, then the price is good enough at MSRP. If you would prefer the other car, buy the other car.
That is the easy answer.

62vetteefp

Part of Saturns claim to fame is no haggling on the MSRP. Many would rather buy a car this way and that is one reason why Saturn is tops in Dealership satisfaction. However many do not like it and therefore should stay away from a Saturn dealer if they feel that way.

As far as the interior treatment. Since Saturn dealers are forced to hold the MSRP both up AND down they do some of the same tricks other brands do and add expensive priced items to make more profit. Go to a Lexus dealer and they add $5000 chrome wheels to an ES. This interior treatment is the same thing. I personally would not pay for the treatment. Find another dealer and see if they are better. Issue is that the Aura is in tight supply and dealers are trying to make a few more bucks. Are doing the same thing with the Sky. But look at one of their old models and I bet their is no treatment forced on the buyer.

nrborod

I've been a Honda driver for a long time. When I first looked into the Aura, I was impressed for the price. There are few conveniences lacking which I quibble about, but overall, the XE moderately optioned seems like a good value at Saturn's sticker. For the most part, I think Hondas have been a little overpriced. Question is reliability....

vanman1

The Aura is all pretty proven technology, engine and transmission are all tried and true. GM midsize sedans are all made in 2 plants for the most part with very good quality and reliability. I wouldn't give it much thought, even as a first year car.

m1miata

The local dealer always seems to have 6 to 10 in stock. Just tell them you won't pay the side sticker. How about buying one as it comes off the truck before they add junk to it. It is not like they are rare as a Sky or Solstice.
-Loren

1487

Edmunds tested the XR finally. For some reason whomever wrote the article thinks the Accord V6 has more power than the Aura XR which it doesn't. HArd to believe they dont fact check these reviews before putting them online.

blue330xi

6.4sec is quick for a car of this class. I still feel they should have given it more like 270hp so it could compete 1:1 with the new camry. It is much lower priced then an equally equipped camry which is where it needs to be to sell well. In the auto show here in vegas I too noted the somewhat cheep interior materials but they are way ahead of the last midsize saturn I sat in. Not sure what trim I sat in as I was not car shopping in this class.

chevy598

I didn't care for the XE interior at the auto show, but the XR is a different story. I thought the interior of the XR looked better than a Accord, and as good as the Camry.

savetheland

Accord actually has more power - power of perception. Edmunds probably talks about "perceived power".

vanman1

You don't need any credentials to write a car review or comparo or anything else for that matter. Lots of crap journalism out there.

pat

You can provide that feedback to the editors via the Help link on the right at the very bottom of the page. Go to the Contact Us tab at the top of that screen and you'll see what to do from there.

lemark1

I've never posted before, but I have driven the Saturn XR and really enjoyed the way it rode and its quietness, and wanted to share that along with a question on pricing. I also liked the exterior, although I found the interior still not as nice in overall appearance as some competitors, although certainly respectable. It did feel a bit small, although currently I drive a Buick Lesabre. But the driving experience overall was very enjoyable.

Before I would buy, I would certainly try an Accord and Camry -- haven't test-driven a recent generation model of these, although I seem to remember them feeling a bit larger. My question is why everyone seems to think that the Saturn is such a a better value, especially since it is not generally available at a discount. carsdirect for my area (NY vicinity) shows the Honda Accord EX 3.0 V6 with every option except Navigation available for $24,777 today. I believe the EX includes a sunroof, leather, etc. The comparable Saturn XR (leather, basic sunroof) even with a current $500 promotion comes out nearly $1,600 more. I don't know how an Accord would "feel", but it seems to sell for less and is likely to hold resale better (I know my Buick is abysmal in this regard!). So Saturn may indeed be competitive (although the Honda interior just seems somehow more upscale to me), but if so, it is competing on its merits alone... if anything, it seems more expensive than the comparable Honda. Thoughts?

m1miata

Well I don't know how Cars Direct works. Can you really get say a Dodge Charger with 3.5 engine for $21K? If that is the case, then perhaps an Aura is not such a deal. If comparing the retail pricing, when bought from the dealership, the $20,650 or say $21K on the Aura base does look pretty fair. Test drove the base model and it wasn't bad. After driving a Charger today, I would say if and that is if, it could be had for the same price, I would go Charger. I prefer the RWD. In the group of FWD cars, there are so many good ones in the mid-size to larger cars in the $20K to $25K range it is so hard to see any as really bad, or any as a blow out leader. As for looks, the Aura is pretty fresh looking. Is it better than an Accord or Camry though? First I would have to find out what I can really get one for price wise, then test a $20K to $21K range one against another make of equal cost range, then a $24K to 25K range one. Can you really get a Honda, Camry or Charger for these low prices you see listed on forums and at these sites selling cars, or are there other fees or something? Local dealers of Honda usually have say $26K to $30K V6 cars on the lot, with maybe, as if if lucky some $2K reduced price on the stickers. My goodness, if Mazda V6 car here are like $27K or more, which is high even after up to $5K off on car with old looking stickers, as in sun faded.

As for the Aura, after a test drive, and look over the vehicle, I would say, IMHO, it is not a bad value. Also on the value list I would say the Sonata and even the Charger. Sonata when bought in the $19.5K range and the Charger, if below $23K for a 3.5 V6. The Aura base seems pretty well priced. Did not test the 3.6 V6. Not sure I personally would go that high a price range on this particular vehicle.
I would really have to weigh the difference in resale with say the Camry or Accord, and if I prefered the RWD Charger which is better in other respects, before going into the $25K range. Would even consider the Azera for $24K if looking for upscale in FWD. And yes, I realize some of the styling is bit awkward on the Charger, but it is still lovable in other ways. Even the mean look kinda grows on ya. :shades: Seems so quiet, with a really fine engine/power/tranny and a large cabin space.
-Loren

62vetteefp

I picked up a brochure at the auto show on the Hybrid. It is coming out in the spring so I think it will be an '07 model. Priced under $23,000.

Compare this to the Camry at $26,000 with 187 hp(158 on engine w/o electric boost). MPG is listed at 40/38.

164 hp, 2.4L
VVT and electronic throttle control
100,000/ 8 year Hybrid component warranty (5 years on non hybrid powertrain)
All safety items standard including Stabilitrak and traction control

MPG is 28/35 which I think is using the '07 standards but it could be '08.

It looks like they are comparably equipped in the major options. So, the question is, is a possible city improvement of 12 and highway of 3 worth the $3000 delta.

I am waiting to see what the new '08 epa MPG numbers will show. I think the full hybrids will see a much larger drop than the mild hybrids (saturns) and the normal gas engined vehicles.

1487

The Aura GL will be an '08 model but its not clear if the EPA numbers listed are '08 numbers or not. I hope they are, but I doubt it. Expect the Camry's numbers to drop substantially with the new ratings since hybrids are going to be more adversely affected. I would say 32/30 for the Camry with the new ratings. The bottom line is that the mileage gap between the cars is going to shrink with the new ratings which is going to help the Aura. My guess for Aura with new ratings is 26/32.

brockman

The Aura Green Line will debut as a 2007 MY, not a 2008 MY. No EPA numbers have been determined.

nrborod

As far as resale value on the Aura is concerned, cosider the experience I had just this past weekend when when I inquired into lcurrent lease rates for an XE equipped somilarto the the Accord EX-L 4 cyl. The rate they came up with, for an XE, cloth int. standard sunroof, preferred pack and conveneience pack, 1K down, 3 years/15K miles per year, was OVER 400 per month. Boy, was I shocked!! I don't know what calculations went into those figures, but I'm sure part of it is the expected resid value of the Aura, which in a lease, we will ALWAYS pay for upfront. So, without any further shopping around, all I can say is while I like the Aura alot, for that kind of payment, I'd think twice. Any comments , suggestions will be appreciated....

nrborod

I have had 4 Accords at this point, and I can say without guessing that the highway mileage I've gotten has always been as good as the EPA numbers suggested. In the case of my 1998 Accord 4 cyl auto, I actually was amazed that I got BETTER mileage than the main sticker suggested: 32 Highway, with AC, 2 passengers, some luggage, driving 70-75 mph, AND tires that were often not properly inflated. Funny things, these EPA numbers. So, for the most part, if I buy a Honda, I now trust the estimate numbers. I am a moderate driver, with a steady foot.

62vetteefp

No EPA numbers have been determined.

There are in their brochure.

62vetteefp

And since you get epa with your vehicle then if you drive the same way with another vehicle you should also get the epa rate.

1487

you are the exception, not the rule. It doesnt matter who makes the car, most cars do not achieve EPA numbers in normal driving. This is why the procedure is being changed. Edmunds commented about how their long term camry wasnt acheiving the EPA rated 32mpg on the highway.