Well, I had some time to kill and decided to take a dark blue Saturn Auru XR 3.6 for a spin.
The Good:
Nice looking with a decent amount of room.
The dash looked great with most of the controls having a quality feel.
Drivers seat was plenty comfortable and I liked the driving position, most controls were well within reach and the guages were easily visible.
Plenty of power. The Aura is plenty quick and felt like it was in the ball park regarding the Acura TL and Maxima I've driven lately. The Aura was very strong off the line. Once underway, didn't feel like 250HP & 250 ft-lbs of torque, but this isn't a light car either.
Paddle shifters/manual mode worked well. Shifts could have been quicker, but certainly no worse than others I've driven. Plus it would allow the engine to hit the rev limiter w/o upshifting and wouldn't downshift on its own unless coming to a stop. Just the way I like it.
Ride was firm yet unpunishing and the car was very quiet when not being pushed.
The bad:
The first new GM car I test drive in years and it has a squeak in the dash. Hmm, maybe things haven't changed much.
Driving over small abrupt bumps made the suspension feel a bit unrefined, like I was driving a cheap car.
Torque steer. Don't floor this car unless going in a straight line on a smooth road. I was driving about 40 on a road that was smooth but had a decent crown to it. It required both hands to fight the wheel when flooring the gas.
Only GM could makes such improvements to the dash, yet install the cheapest and flimsiest center console storage bin/arm rest I've ever put my hands on. Definitely put a damper on what at first sight seemed like a very nice interior. The pull out cover over the drink holders was cumbersome to pull out and didn't lock into place with any precision. The arm rest/center console storage lid's 2 way action was very cheap as well. With rock hard plastics that felt like it could break at any time.
Who in there right mind would offer a car with a manual mode trans and no redline on the tach. I know the engine is protected with a rev limiter, but still I expect a red line. I know this is nit picky, but it's something that bothered me a bit.
Steering wheel controls, while looked nice, used a small tabed divider that my fat thumb wouldn't fit between thus making them cumbersome and uncomfortable to use w/o using my index finger. Not how I thought these are to be used.
Steering feel was to heavy for my tastes and offered little feed back. The model I tested had 18" rims, but going thru my favorite S curves didn't yield any smiles. The Aura felt heavy and slow to respond, certanly didn't encourage any fast driving thru the twisties.
Overall, I liked the car and I think many people will be happy with it. I don't know if I could buy it. It disappointed me in a few key areas that are important to me. The 3.6 was plenty smooth, but had a harsher sound at high rpm than I expected.
The trans was quick to downshift, but sometimes down shifted a bit clumsy under heavy throttle. Maybe more miles would correct that.
I think the styling is good, definitely stands out from the competition in this price range.
I was expecting to be impressed, but it didn't happen. I'm certainly not as exited I was prior to the test drive. Regardless, I'm very picky, so the complaints I had probably won't bother a more traditional buyer. I think GM has a winner overall.
Your my kind of critic diesel. I'd rather you come out and tell it the way you see it pal and I trust your opinion over some car maggot editor. I'm glad you took one for a test run pal, since I respect you alot.
Maybe it means Drive To Slow? You know the car you was following some ten miles at 45 MPH on a 55 MPH road, the Cadillac DTS. Does Volvo have a model like that, maybe the ES, for Especially Slow?
Still think names would work better on Cadillacs, though it really doesn't matter. -Noname
Not necessarily. I'm looking for a car for the wife to drive. So it's up to her. She has been leaning towards a Mustang GT convertible (we need to be able to seat 4), but mentioned the other day she will consider a sedan.
As for the Aura, I'd probably pick it over a Camry or Accord for various reasons. But I'd have to drive an Accord EX v6 again, it's been a while since I've driven one. Though the idea you can get a 6 speed manual with a v6 interest me.
I'll definitely take my wife to look at the Aura again. There is lots to like with the car. Driven as a sane person it drives fine. I just won't be autocrossing with it;)
I guess my expectations were a bit to high, that doesn't mean the Aura is bad, it's far from it. In the $24-28k price range, I think the Aura is competitive. Not something I've said about a GM vehicle in a long time, so I think that says a lot.
At this point, I'd probably just spend the extra cash and go with an Acura TL. I really liked the car. A certified used TL with 20k miles and a warranty to 100k will cost about the same as the Aura and I'd probably would go that route.
GM should bring back named cars rather than using acronyms. Notice that Buick named the Lucerne rather than an acronym such as LCE.
I agree. In fact, instead of eliminating a whole division like Olsmobile, GM should have made one of its (unique) body styles or platforms the new Oldmobile. This would be instead of a whole line of cars which simply are body doubles with a different nameplate. They should eliminate the duplicates: i.e, don't make Trailblazers, Envoys Rainiers but just one of these, perhaps the one which is most popular. I think GM should have a GM dealer "store" which would sell and service all Buicks, Pontiacs, Chevrolets, Saturns and GMC's. Perhaps they could keep Cadillacs, Hummers and Saabs separate.
This lack of duplication would save GM some money and keep all body styles unique and characteristic of one nameplate.
At present, Cadillac is part of Chevy, Pontiac, Buick and GMC are together. Saturn is separate, but can be serviced at some GM dealerships where Saturn is not found for hundreds of miles.
I personally think Cadillac's selection of three letter names is goofy, but Cadillac has been in the habit of changing its naming scheme periodically. In the beginning they started with Model A. At some point the switched to Model 30. Then the V8 models were named after the size of the engine I think. In the thirties (1930's), the V16 was a series 90, the base car was a series 60. The LaSalle, not quite a Cadillac, was a series 50.
What, Cadillac is part of Chevy? Does that mean I get my CTS with a 3.6 V6 for $28K?
... just kidding.
Saturn has some good looking showrooms and dealerships. Will make a good American made, Euro designed cars, division. Perhaps more promise there than Chevy has to offer. If Pontiac and Buick are dropped, Saturn may end up with the little performance car all to themselves.... or maybe not, perhaps Chevy gets something good again. :shades: -Loren
Our old Cadillac dealer was Oldsmobile/GMC/Cadillac. With the demise of Oldsmobile, the dealer took over the Pontiac/Buick dealer and made it Pontiac/Buick/GMC, but I guess that GM said that the Cadillac franchise must go to the local Chevy dealer, who now has it.
So, here to get a Cadillac, one goes to the Chevy dealer. Or Chevy-Cadillac dealer.
I owned a Acura TL, and liked it alot. The 07' TL, Type-S is pretty nice. It was just a bit of a disappointment they didn't do more on the refresh. I like you have high expectations. The Aura XR with Morraco brown leather interior does impress me from a photo standpoint. I of course never driven one though. I currently am going to buy my grand ma's Aurora next month and then wait and see. I am leaning towards a Volvo S80, or I might wait until the Lincoln MKS to come out. Yes if the the Cadillac CTS, is enough to grab me then that will be a option. I also could just buy me a used 1990 Ford Mustang 25th Ann. convertible and be guaranteed happy. The used Aurora, gives me lots of options. I could even then just buy a new 09' Camaro for fun :shades:
I'm not in a desperate situation and love to be able to decide on what's best for myself and my family. I guess their is several choices out there. I do know if Acura pulls out on it's redesign a cool looking 2009' SH-AWD Acura TL, that would be most likely the way I'd go from a cost/value standpoint. The rumors I've heard say this car will have about all the "Gadgetology" one would want at a under $45K price, making the TL the best vehicle IMHO ever made.
A single Cadillac, store I agree couldn't survive but one mixed with a couple of other brands still could do very well. Dalhart, Tx has a population of 7800 and has Buick, Pontiac, GMC, Cadillac. Phil Like, of Dalhart does very well and Cadillac, is one of his top sellers he told me.
The Aura XR I test drove had the Morroco brown leather and was very sharp. Thumbs up on that option. I liked the interior a lot except for a few cheap parts.
I'll add that the car was very stable in cornering with little body lean. I prefer more road feel and more responsive "turn in". The car didn't feel "eager" to go fast thru the twisties. The brakes were strong enough w/o being soft and mushy as GM brakes used to be.
It isn't really fair to compare the Aura to a TL since they are several thousand dollars apart, but I am since we'll be considering a TL too. I haven't driven a CTS, so I'll probably look at those as well.
Well you have to compare the Aura to the Camry and Accord, that's a fair comparo pal.
The CTS, I wouldn't buy one unless you get a helluva deal on it.
I'm saying all this as a pal. I'd yes like to see you buy GM, but my stances have changed over the last few months. I'm at the point where I want to buy american, if they deliver something of interest. If the Japanese or Europeans offer something better, them I will have no other choice but o buy from them. I however have fell in love with Volvo, which is owned by ford, and the vehicles are union made by people that in my book get a fair wage which is important to me. I will always be a GM, supporter and do beleive the cars are getting better each yr. as we press forward. I'm glad you took a XR for a ride and was actually looking forward to hearing feedback on it. I was never in the market for such a vehicle like the Aura, but was interested to see if it was a camcord alternative. I am keeping my hopes up high on the 2007' Cadillac CTS. If the CTS has my gadgets, then I'll probably buy a CTS-V, when it comes available. However a Volvo S80 or Lincoln MKS isn't even close to being out of the question. I have strong feeling for both of those Fords, and since they are a bit bigger and roomier I think both areviable options. I can't get myself away from the Volvo S80, and knowing how safe my family would be in one makes it stand out in the crowd.
The new Lincoln MKS looks good too, but I won't be able to wait that long.
The only way I'd buy a CTS is used. Volvo's are nice, but they can get pricey.
I don't have any doubt the Aura can hold it's own with an Accord/Camry. It's better in many ways and worse in a few. I really don't want a Cam/Cord mainly due to them being freakin everywhere. Though, I'm always impressed when I get the chance to drive a frieds '03 EX v6, I just haven't been around it in a while. And the XR is certainly more rewarding to drive than my MIL '05 Camry XLE v6, which is so smooth but very boring.
Isn't that about 7% for the overall US market? In the entry level luxury performance sedan category (CTS, IS, 3 series, G35, TL) I expect the number to be 15% or more. Anyone has researched this? Still, Caddy dealers don't carry stick probably because Caddy doesn't attract enough young buyers.
Finding a stick in a sedan much over $20k outside of VW, Mazda, Infinity, and BMW can be tough to find.
I wanted to drive a manual Acura TL and my local dealer didn't have one new or used and they said they rarely get them. Same with Nissan, finding a manual in a Altima v6 and Maxima is almost impossible around here. I guess Nissan has dropped the manual as an option in the 07 Max.
Suprisingly, I went to a Honda dealer a month or so ago and they did have one Accord EX v6 with a 6 speed manual. I didn't drive it though.
So, will this Aura make Camry/ Accord buyers switch to GM? What do you think? We will know the answer in a year or two ... but speculation can't do any harm. And, what about the interior/ exterior styling - will this stand out in the sense Chrysler 300 did?
So, will this Aura make Camry/ Accord buyers switch to GM? What do you think? We will know the answer in a year or two ... but speculation can't do any harm. And, what about the interior/ exterior styling?
That's a tough call. I don't know what kind of capacity GM has to build Auras or what their sales target is, but I don't think they'll have a problems selling them.
I like the way the Aura looks inside and out. But, will it be enough to make someone trade in a Cam/Cord they've been happy with for years. That is tough to do. I don't see the Aura targeting the avg. Camry buyer, but it certainly could get attention from those considering a Honda.
Hopefully it doesn't take sales from the Malibu/G6.
GM will not mind Aura taking sales from Malibu/ G6. Most Malibus and G6s on the road are low-end models (I rarely see high-end models on the road with leather seats, panoramic roof, big alloy wheels, etc.). Aura will probably fetch more $ per car.
I haven't test-driven Aura. Just looked at it from distance. Apparently, the styling is not bold like with Altima/ Mazda6. Of course, I need to test-drive one to find out more. I will probably test-drive one next year when I start shopping for a midsize car. Currently, Mazda6 is on top of my mind.
I've test driven several Mazda6s. The Mazdaspeed 6 is a blast to drive, but a bit expensive.
The v6 model Mazda6 offers better road feel and handling over the Aura. The 6 is more fun to drive too. That said, the 3.6 v6 in the Aura is way better than the 3.0 Duratech in the Mazda which is gutless under 4000rpm. A stick isn't hard to find in a Mazda which I like, but the 6's interior felt somewhat cheap. The XR is definitely the nicer car, but if you want great handling and braking, the 6 maybe the way to go, particularly if you want a manual.
Now I hear Fords new 3.5 v6 maybe finding its way to the redesigned 6 which will at least help in the engine department.
I don't want a manual. I want a safe, nimble and reliable car. I don't like Camry. And, presently have Mazda6/ Altima/ Accord in mind (in the order mentioned). If 3.6 V6 in Aura is impressive, I will add it to my list. I want to pay for V6, all kinds of airbags/ ABS/ traction control. But I don't want to pay for leather/ OnStar. So, I'll be checking out all these carefully before buying.
The 6 is definitely nimble, but with an auto trans, it might be a little on the slow side. If it gets the new Ford 3.5, that should take care of the lack of torque problem. I'd suggest at least giving the Aura a test drive.
yikes, someone would choose a G35 over a CTS? Are you freakin kidding me? You could only make that decision if your ONLY parameter was horsepower. Even the CTS interior is better than the G35. Have you actually driven both cars?
When I see a person in a G35, I see someone who is a poseur. "I want to LOOK like a guy who drives a sports sedan, but I don't really want to buy a sports sedan" The seats STINK. The handling is fine, for the price, but nowhere near any of its competitors. It's a FAKE sports car.
which is a shame, since I do still like the exterior appearance of the coupe
I can't believe you guys are debating the naming conventions.
Didn't it have a turning radius of like 40 feet? or was that the RL?
is the TL the only recent Acura that anyone likes? (forgetting about the nuts who "love" their MDX minivan...I mean "SUV" :P )
Well the late RSX used to be well liked until it got long in the tooth.
I like the looks of the RL, but for the money they go for, I'd get a BMW.
When I look at different cars, it's just hard to beat what a TL offers for the $$. Yes it's turning radius of 40', but a G6 is over 39' and I drive a Suburban, so that'll feel like I'm turning on a dime.
I test drove a used 04 with 30k miles and it felt more solid than most of the new cars I've driven lately.
I know the early ones had some trans issues, but I'd prefer a stick anyway. It's not like GM transmissions don't fail either. I know way to many people with late model GM trucks/suvs that have replaced transmissions lately at low mileage. Myself included.
Aren't Volvos still suffering from reliability issues, and pretty expensive for FWD? Yeah, I know Audis are too. I bet ya once the 2008 CTS hits the market next year, the first generation will drop in price. You know, the I gotta have the latest look urge -- past look may get cheaper to buy. And I like the current look.
Question on FWD cars, are you running a bit more air pressure up front than rears? I think my PT recommends equal air pressure, but it is not what anyone would call a performance car. But I can break the front tire free off the line Doesn't really go fast, but it makes a little noise.... well, for a brief chirp. Anyway, I am wondering about those test drives, with cars like the Aura, how they air the tires, and if you really could feel any difference. I imagine any spirited driving would upset the salesperson, just a bit. :shades: Will try to take a look at the new Aura soon. Looks good enough in the pics.
Have you considered the Dodge Charger, if looking at RWD cars? I would like to drive both the CTS and the Charger on the same day to see how close, or according to some, how far apart those two may be in handling, and overall feel. -Loren
What is wrong with the G35 handling? It is the same chassis as the Z, is it not? Looks like poor gas mileage. Heck, you could get a Mustang GT for around $25K, for plenty of sport, and it eats gas about the same. Are you saying the CTS can out handle the G35? I take it you like the CTS. Like it better than the BMW3 series?
Let's take it all the way for lettering only for GM. Just use GM and GMC and letters. Let's see the GMCT for truck. The Solstice will be the GM S followed by the coupe, the GM SC. Or maybe not Still think that Toyota Racing Division, in letters leaves something to be desired, the TRD. Alright, who cares. -Loren
There's nothing "wrong" with the G35, it's just not as good a car as the CTS. The seats in the G35. Ohmigod, the awful seats. I guess I care about seats more than the average guy. I guess I can admit that. Hi, My name is alp, and I care about car seats in entry-level performance sedans.....in fact, I care about seats in all vehicles....I'm obsessed with CAR SEATS!"
:-)
And I think the BMW3 is a better driving experience than the CTS, though I'd hate to spend that kind of money for that kind of reliability.
The Mustang is a Ford. Is anyone here really going to buy a Ford? I guess if you only want a Nissan (the G35), you'd be happy with the Ford.
For "value" I understand why a person buys a G35. But we all know the car is NOT as good a drive as it should be, or as all the owners want us to pretend it is. The CTS is a better drive than most people think, and it can be bought at a decent price. The BMW's problem is only cost and reliability. There's no problem with how the vehicle performs.
"Who cares?" re the names? Does that mean we have DETENTE?
I hope Socala, is okay. I haven't heard a peep from him in a month or so.
Yes, I was wondering about him too. He did generate a bit of excitement here.
Rocky, I think you're going to have to hold down the fort until he returns. We enjoy your enthusiasm! Do you live in/near Dalhart? I've flown into the airport there, that's a long story...
I think your comment about car seats is very insightful. When I think about many of the cars that I have driven, the seat dictated a large portion of the driving experience but it was seldom mentioned in reviews unless the seat is extraordinarily uncomfortable.
It would be nice to see lumbar support available in all vehicles (without having to replace the seat with an aftermarket seat). Many vehicles (even quite expensive ones) do not even offer lumbar support, and if it is offered, it is usually offered to the driver only.
The supportive and comfortable seats of my 1998 (!!!) Volvo S-70 are one of the reasons that I still have it. Volvos do have good engineering and handling- the issues are with maintenance, especially electrical stuff. And my non-turbo Volvo 2.4 is more than adequate for my needs, and gets about 22-23 mpg city, which is not bad (although they recommend premium fuel for it). And many people I know that have Volvos have similar experiences, even the people with newer Volvo S-60's and S-80's.
I like the Mazda6 also, but I was looking at a 5 door with the 4 cylinder engine. The Mazda6 with the 6 cylinder is not that powerful (compared to the new Toyota Camry 6), doesn't get good mileage (19 or 20 city MPG is what it is rated) and does not have a good maintenance history. But I hear that 2008 is when the new Mazda6 will be here.
Wish GM had a worthy competitor in my book for the Mazda6- the Malibu and the Pontiac G6 don't appeal to me.
G35 favors: - The G gives you 280 horse. The CTS is 215 - The G is available in coupe or sedan and sticks are easy to find - The G has leather seats with dual manual lumbar supports. The Caddy has leatherette with no lumbar - The G has HIDs. The CTS has halogens - The G has 18 in wheels. The CTS has 16s - The G has tilt and telescoping steeting column. The CTS only tilts - The G has larger front and rear discs
The Caddy offers On Star, a better stereo, sterring wheel mounted HVAC controls, and an EC mirror which are either optional or not available on the G.
Seat comfort is very subjective. If the G35 seats are uncomfortable for you, so be it. I've always found Nissan's seats to be comphy.
On top of a 65 horse advantage, this list is pretty damning. The G is just a better car with a more sporty character and a better value.
Mazda6, Fusion, Five Hundred, Edge will all get the 3.5 ... question is how soon Ford can ramp up production of 3.5 and redesign the vehicles. GM is facing the same problem. GM wants to drop the 3.4 pushrod and use new 3.6 or 3.9 engines - but ramping up the production and redesigning the vehicles to use the new engine are harder than said. Looks like I need to seriously consider Altima - its V6 is much more attractive. In fact, I have test-driven a 4 cyl Altima already - even the 4-cyl feels strong and the car handles very well. I will also give Charger (with 250 HP V6 and not the Hemi) an outside chance. I will start test-driving all these next spring.
Much of your comparo - and I use the term here lightly - works only if you compare the G35 to the 2.8 CTS.
In fact, the 3.6 CTS has a base price much closer to the G35. And of course, the 3.6 stacks up much closer to the G35.
Using your system, we may as well compare the CTSV, which has 140 more ponies than the G35.
And finally, again with the manual. Manuals are available for the CTS. I continue to believe most who buy luxury cars would just as soon order one than buy something the dealer had on the lot and every Joe and their mother test drove.
"In fact, the 3.6 CTS has a base price much closer to the G35. And of course, the 3.6 stacks up much closer to the G35."
With the 3.6, the base price is actually about a grand more than the G, and it's still 25 horses short (280 to 255).
The step up to the 3.6 makes leather standard and adds some wood trim, but the features list is otherwise largely unchanged.
"Using your system, we may as well compare the CTSV, which has 140 more ponies than the G35."
The CTS-V was envisioned as a competitor to the BMW 5. The 5 actually doesn't have any problems with wheel hop under heavy acceleration, so you'd be better off comparing it to a 71 Nova that some kid dropped a 454 into in hs back yard. That would probably have wheel hop too.
"Much of your comparo - and I use the term here lightly"
Don't be so pompous illogic. You'll give us NYers a bad name.
When you buy a car off of the lot and it has 4 or 5 miles on it, just how many people do you think have handled it?
I am not sure what leatherette is or where you got it but CTS has a full leather interior which means all leather is real, from a cow.
Full leather seating
Most leather interiors use a vinyl substitute in various amounts. From non seen side panels to backs to everything but the part the butt and back touch. Usually low end cars use less leather and higher ones use more. It is a way to save money because the buyers usually cannot tell.
In fact the G35 is not all leather, it is leather appointed which in industry speak means vinyl is used in areas.
Leather-appointed, heated, 8-way power driver’s seat with adjustable lumbar support and 4-way power front-passenger’s seat
CTS also has 17's available but the basic issue it that the CTS is geting old and needs to be updated. Hopefully they will drop the 2.8L and just have the 3.6 in close to 300 hp.
I am not sure what leatherette is or where you got it but CTS has a full leather interior which means all leather is real, from a cow.
Leatherette is a modern microfibre fabric that looks and feels similar to leather.
The 2.8 comes with leatherette base but has a leather option. BMW 3 Series and Mercedes C Series do the same.
A vegetarian, I actually appreciate the leatherette option. I just wish you could get it with the 3.6 otherwise loaded.
There is an even better synthetic out there called ultrasuede. GM did use it on some models, but apparently discontinued it. I use ultrasuede furniture for the lobbies of the public buildings I manage and really like it. Perhaps it holds up less well in the direct sun, etc. that cars are exposed to than leather or leatherette. As far as I know, GM has not explained why it dropped it.
The CTS-V was envisioned as a competitor to the BMW 5. The 5 actually doesn't have any problems with wheel hop under heavy acceleration, so you'd be better off comparing it to a 71 Nova that some kid dropped a 454 into in hs back yard. That would probably have wheel hop too.
One of the buff mags, either C&D or R&T reported axle hop on an early production model. All the CTSV online detractors since have picked up on this. Subsequent testers have not referenced it that I know of.
They do reference the power of the engine that nevertheless can behave quite civilly (plus get decent gas mileage) during every day driving. The BMW Ms have never been known to get decent mpgs no matter how you drive them.
Comments
The Good:
Nice looking with a decent amount of room.
The dash looked great with most of the controls having a quality feel.
Drivers seat was plenty comfortable and I liked the driving position, most controls were well within reach and the guages were easily visible.
Plenty of power. The Aura is plenty quick and felt like it was in the ball park regarding the Acura TL and Maxima I've driven lately. The Aura was very strong off the line. Once underway, didn't feel like 250HP & 250 ft-lbs of torque, but this isn't a light car either.
Paddle shifters/manual mode worked well. Shifts could have been quicker, but certainly no worse than others I've driven. Plus it would allow the engine to hit the rev limiter w/o upshifting and wouldn't downshift on its own unless coming to a stop. Just the way I like it.
Ride was firm yet unpunishing and the car was very quiet when not being pushed.
The bad:
The first new GM car I test drive in years and it has a squeak in the dash. Hmm, maybe things haven't changed much.
Driving over small abrupt bumps made the suspension feel a bit unrefined, like I was driving a cheap car.
Torque steer. Don't floor this car unless going in a straight line on a smooth road. I was driving about 40 on a road that was smooth but had a decent crown to it. It required both hands to fight the wheel when flooring the gas.
Only GM could makes such improvements to the dash, yet install the cheapest and flimsiest center console storage bin/arm rest I've ever put my hands on. Definitely put a damper on what at first sight seemed like a very nice interior. The pull out cover over the drink holders was cumbersome to pull out and didn't lock into place with any precision. The arm rest/center console storage lid's 2 way action was very cheap as well. With rock hard plastics that felt like it could break at any time.
Who in there right mind would offer a car with a manual mode trans and no redline on the tach. I know the engine is protected with a rev limiter, but still I expect a red line. I know this is nit picky, but it's something that bothered me a bit.
Steering wheel controls, while looked nice, used a small tabed divider that my fat thumb wouldn't fit between thus making them cumbersome and uncomfortable to use w/o using my index finger. Not how I thought these are to be used.
Steering feel was to heavy for my tastes and offered little feed back. The model I tested had 18" rims, but going thru my favorite S curves didn't yield any smiles. The Aura felt heavy and slow to respond, certanly didn't encourage any fast driving thru the twisties.
Overall, I liked the car and I think many people will be happy with it. I don't know if I could buy it. It disappointed me in a few key areas that are important to me. The 3.6 was plenty smooth, but had a harsher sound at high rpm than I expected.
The trans was quick to downshift, but sometimes down shifted a bit clumsy under heavy throttle. Maybe more miles would correct that.
I think the styling is good, definitely stands out from the competition in this price range.
I was expecting to be impressed, but it didn't happen. I'm certainly not as exited I was prior to the test drive. Regardless, I'm very picky, so the complaints I had probably won't bother a more traditional buyer. I think GM has a winner overall.
So it's a thumbs down on you buying one ?
Rocky
Still think names would work better on Cadillacs, though it really doesn't matter.
-Noname
-Rick James
Thanks Rock,
Not necessarily. I'm looking for a car for the wife to drive. So it's up to her. She has been leaning towards a Mustang GT convertible (we need to be able to seat 4), but mentioned the other day she will consider a sedan.
As for the Aura, I'd probably pick it over a Camry or Accord for various reasons. But I'd have to drive an Accord EX v6 again, it's been a while since I've driven one. Though the idea you can get a 6 speed manual with a v6 interest me.
I'll definitely take my wife to look at the Aura again. There is lots to like with the car. Driven as a sane person it drives fine. I just won't be autocrossing with it;)
I guess my expectations were a bit to high, that doesn't mean the Aura is bad, it's far from it. In the $24-28k price range, I think the Aura is competitive. Not something I've said about a GM vehicle in a long time, so I think that says a lot.
At this point, I'd probably just spend the extra cash and go with an Acura TL. I really liked the car. A certified used TL with 20k miles and a warranty to 100k will cost about the same as the Aura and I'd probably would go that route.
But as many can relate, it's up to the boss.
I agree. In fact, instead of eliminating a whole division like Olsmobile, GM should have made one of its (unique) body styles or platforms the new Oldmobile. This would be instead of a whole line of cars which simply are body doubles with a different nameplate. They should eliminate the duplicates: i.e, don't make Trailblazers, Envoys Rainiers but just one of these, perhaps the one which is most popular. I think GM should have a GM dealer "store" which would sell and service all Buicks, Pontiacs, Chevrolets, Saturns and GMC's. Perhaps they could keep Cadillacs, Hummers and Saabs separate.
This lack of duplication would save GM some money and keep all body styles unique and characteristic of one nameplate.
huhh?
Saturn
Pontiac/Buick/GMC
Cadillac/Hummer/Saab
Chevrolet
... just kidding.
Saturn has some good looking showrooms and dealerships. Will make a good American made, Euro designed cars, division. Perhaps more promise there than Chevy has to offer. If Pontiac and Buick are dropped, Saturn may end up with the little performance car all to themselves.... or maybe not, perhaps Chevy gets something good again. :shades:
-Loren
So, here to get a Cadillac, one goes to the Chevy dealer. Or Chevy-Cadillac dealer.
I owned a Acura TL, and liked it alot. The 07' TL, Type-S is pretty nice. It was just a bit of a disappointment they didn't do more on the refresh. I like you have high expectations. The Aura XR with Morraco brown leather interior does impress me from a photo standpoint. I of course never driven one though. I currently am going to buy my grand ma's Aurora next month and then wait and see. I am leaning towards a Volvo S80, or I might wait until the Lincoln MKS to come out. Yes if the the Cadillac CTS, is enough to grab me then that will be a option. I also could just buy me a used 1990 Ford Mustang 25th Ann. convertible and be guaranteed happy. The used Aurora, gives me lots of options. I could even then just buy a new 09' Camaro for fun :shades:
I'm not in a desperate situation and love to be able to decide on what's best for myself and my family. I guess their is several choices out there. I do know if Acura pulls out on it's redesign a cool looking 2009' SH-AWD Acura TL, that would be most likely the way I'd go from a cost/value standpoint. The rumors I've heard say this car will have about all the "Gadgetology" one would want at a under $45K price, making the TL the best vehicle IMHO ever made.
Just my $0.02 cents... :shades:
Rocky
Rocky
The Aura XR I test drove had the Morroco brown leather and was very sharp. Thumbs up on that option. I liked the interior a lot except for a few cheap parts.
I'll add that the car was very stable in cornering with little body lean. I prefer more road feel and more responsive "turn in". The car didn't feel "eager" to go fast thru the twisties. The brakes were strong enough w/o being soft and mushy as GM brakes used to be.
It isn't really fair to compare the Aura to a TL since they are several thousand dollars apart, but I am since we'll be considering a TL too. I haven't driven a CTS, so I'll probably look at those as well.
The CTS, I wouldn't buy one unless you get a helluva deal on it.
I'm saying all this as a pal. I'd yes like to see you buy GM, but my stances have changed over the last few months. I'm at the point where I want to buy american, if they deliver something of interest. If the Japanese or Europeans offer something better, them I will have no other choice but o buy from them. I however have fell in love with Volvo, which is owned by ford, and the vehicles are union made by people that in my book get a fair wage which is important to me.
I am keeping my hopes up high on the 2007' Cadillac CTS. If the CTS has my gadgets, then I'll probably buy a CTS-V, when it comes available. However a Volvo S80 or Lincoln MKS isn't even close to being out of the question. I have strong feeling for both of those Fords, and since they are a bit bigger and roomier I think both areviable options. I can't get myself away from the Volvo S80, and knowing how safe my family would be in one makes it stand out in the crowd.
I guess time will tell....
Rocky
Rocky
The only way I'd buy a CTS is used. Volvo's are nice, but they can get pricey.
I don't have any doubt the Aura can hold it's own with an Accord/Camry. It's better in many ways and worse in a few. I really don't want a Cam/Cord mainly due to them being freakin everywhere. Though, I'm always impressed when I get the chance to drive a frieds '03 EX v6, I just haven't been around it in a while. And the XR is certainly more rewarding to drive than my MIL '05 Camry XLE v6, which is so smooth but very boring.
I wanted to drive a manual Acura TL and my local dealer didn't have one new or used and they said they rarely get them. Same with Nissan, finding a manual in a Altima v6 and Maxima is almost impossible around here. I guess Nissan has dropped the manual as an option in the 07 Max.
Suprisingly, I went to a Honda dealer a month or so ago and they did have one Accord EX v6 with a 6 speed manual. I didn't drive it though.
That's a tough call. I don't know what kind of capacity GM has to build Auras or what their sales target is, but I don't think they'll have a problems selling them.
I like the way the Aura looks inside and out. But, will it be enough to make someone trade in a Cam/Cord they've been happy with for years. That is tough to do. I don't see the Aura targeting the avg. Camry buyer, but it certainly could get attention from those considering a Honda.
Hopefully it doesn't take sales from the Malibu/G6.
I haven't test-driven Aura. Just looked at it from distance. Apparently, the styling is not bold like with Altima/ Mazda6. Of course, I need to test-drive one to find out more. I will probably test-drive one next year when I start shopping for a midsize car. Currently, Mazda6 is on top of my mind.
The v6 model Mazda6 offers better road feel and handling over the Aura. The 6 is more fun to drive too. That said, the 3.6 v6 in the Aura is way better than the 3.0 Duratech in the Mazda which is gutless under 4000rpm. A stick isn't hard to find in a Mazda which I like, but the 6's interior felt somewhat cheap. The XR is definitely the nicer car, but if you want great handling and braking, the 6 maybe the way to go, particularly if you want a manual.
Now I hear Fords new 3.5 v6 maybe finding its way to the redesigned 6 which will at least help in the engine department.
When I see a person in a G35, I see someone who is a poseur. "I want to LOOK like a guy who drives a sports sedan, but I don't really want to buy a sports sedan" The seats STINK. The handling is fine, for the price, but nowhere near any of its competitors. It's a FAKE sports car.
which is a shame, since I do still like the exterior appearance of the coupe
I can't believe you guys are debating the naming conventions.
??
Didn't it have a turning radius of like 40 feet? or was that the RL?
is the TL the only recent Acura that anyone likes? (forgetting about the nuts who "love" their MDX minivan...I mean "SUV" :P )
The coupe is decent looking.
I really have hopes for the CTS Coupe. GM has a chance for something pretty cool if the whole thing looks as good as the glimpses appear to suggest.
??
Didn't it have a turning radius of like 40 feet? or was that the RL?
is the TL the only recent Acura that anyone likes? (forgetting about the nuts who "love" their MDX minivan...I mean "SUV" :P )
Well the late RSX used to be well liked until it got long in the tooth.
I like the looks of the RL, but for the money they go for, I'd get a BMW.
When I look at different cars, it's just hard to beat what a TL offers for the $$. Yes it's turning radius of 40', but a G6 is over 39' and I drive a Suburban, so that'll feel like I'm turning on a dime.
I test drove a used 04 with 30k miles and it felt more solid than most of the new cars I've driven lately.
I know the early ones had some trans issues, but I'd prefer a stick anyway. It's not like GM transmissions don't fail either. I know way to many people with late model GM trucks/suvs that have replaced transmissions lately at low mileage. Myself included.
I had a bulletproof Legend - but CR gave it a black mark for the MT tranny. Guess what? I went through 3 CV joints in 24,000 miles. UGH!!
They used the Accord tranny, but added 1,000 pounds to the car and it ripped that baby apart, with wondrous frequency.
Other than that, the car was solid and a dream to drive. I was sad that it had that problem, since it just wasn't fixable.
Question on FWD cars, are you running a bit more air pressure up front than rears? I think my PT recommends equal air pressure, but it is not what anyone would call a performance car. But I can break the front tire free off the line
Have you considered the Dodge Charger, if looking at RWD cars? I would like to drive both the CTS and the Charger on the same day to see how close, or according to some, how far apart those two may be in handling, and overall feel.
-Loren
Truedat. Brains are working and producing effectively over there. Good ideas. Good cars. Good warranties.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Let's take it all the way for lettering only for GM. Just use GM and GMC and letters. Let's see the GMCT for truck. The Solstice will be the GM S followed by the coupe, the GM SC. Or maybe not
-Loren
:-)
And I think the BMW3 is a better driving experience than the CTS, though I'd hate to spend that kind of money for that kind of reliability.
The Mustang is a Ford. Is anyone here really going to buy a Ford? I guess if you only want a Nissan (the G35), you'd be happy with the Ford.
For "value" I understand why a person buys a G35. But we all know the car is NOT as good a drive as it should be, or as all the owners want us to pretend it is. The CTS is a better drive than most people think, and it can be bought at a decent price. The BMW's problem is only cost and reliability. There's no problem with how the vehicle performs.
"Who cares?" re the names? Does that mean we have DETENTE?
That IS a victory.
Peace in our lifetimes.
:-)
Yes, I was wondering about him too. He did generate a bit of excitement here.
Rocky, I think you're going to have to hold down the fort until he returns. We enjoy your enthusiasm! Do you live in/near Dalhart? I've flown into the airport there, that's a long story...
It would be nice to see lumbar support available in all vehicles (without having to replace the seat with an aftermarket seat). Many vehicles (even quite expensive ones) do not even offer lumbar support, and if it is offered, it is usually offered to the driver only.
I like the Mazda6 also, but I was looking at a 5 door with the 4 cylinder engine. The Mazda6 with the 6 cylinder is not that powerful (compared to the new Toyota Camry 6), doesn't get good mileage (19 or 20 city MPG is what it is rated) and does not have a good maintenance history. But I hear that 2008 is when the new Mazda6 will be here.
Wish GM had a worthy competitor in my book for the Mazda6- the Malibu and the Pontiac G6 don't appeal to me.
G35 favors:
- The G gives you 280 horse. The CTS is 215
- The G is available in coupe or sedan and sticks are easy to find
- The G has leather seats with dual manual lumbar supports. The Caddy has leatherette with no lumbar
- The G has HIDs. The CTS has halogens
- The G has 18 in wheels. The CTS has 16s
- The G has tilt and telescoping steeting column. The CTS only tilts
- The G has larger front and rear discs
The Caddy offers On Star, a better stereo, sterring wheel mounted HVAC controls, and an EC mirror which are either optional or not available on the G.
Seat comfort is very subjective. If the G35 seats are uncomfortable for you, so be it. I've always found Nissan's seats to be comphy.
On top of a 65 horse advantage, this list is pretty damning. The G is just a better car with a more sporty character and a better value.
In fact, the 3.6 CTS has a base price much closer to the G35. And of course, the 3.6 stacks up much closer to the G35.
Using your system, we may as well compare the CTSV, which has 140 more ponies than the G35.
And finally, again with the manual. Manuals are available for the CTS. I continue to believe most who buy luxury cars would just as soon order one than buy something the dealer had on the lot and every Joe and their mother test drove.
As does the CTS.
With the 3.6, the base price is actually about a grand more than the G, and it's still 25 horses short (280 to 255).
The step up to the 3.6 makes leather standard and adds some wood trim, but the features list is otherwise largely unchanged.
"Using your system, we may as well compare the CTSV, which has 140 more ponies than the G35."
The CTS-V was envisioned as a competitor to the BMW 5. The 5 actually doesn't have any problems with wheel hop under heavy acceleration, so you'd be better off comparing it to a 71 Nova that some kid dropped a 454 into in hs back yard. That would probably have wheel hop too.
"Much of your comparo - and I use the term here lightly"
Don't be so pompous illogic. You'll give us NYers a bad name.
When you buy a car off of the lot and it has 4 or 5 miles on it, just how many people do you think have handled it?
Full leather seating
Most leather interiors use a vinyl substitute in various amounts. From non seen side panels to backs to everything but the part the butt and back touch. Usually low end cars use less leather and higher ones use more. It is a way to save money because the buyers usually cannot tell.
In fact the G35 is not all leather, it is leather appointed which in industry speak means vinyl is used in areas.
Leather-appointed, heated, 8-way power driver’s seat with adjustable lumbar support and 4-way power front-passenger’s seat
Leatherette is a modern microfibre fabric that looks and feels similar to leather.
The 2.8 comes with leatherette base but has a leather option. BMW 3 Series and Mercedes C Series do the same.
A vegetarian, I actually appreciate the leatherette option. I just wish you could get it with the 3.6 otherwise loaded.
There is an even better synthetic out there called ultrasuede. GM did use it on some models, but apparently discontinued it. I use ultrasuede furniture for the lobbies of the public buildings I manage and really like it. Perhaps it holds up less well in the direct sun, etc. that cars are exposed to than leather or leatherette. As far as I know, GM has not explained why it dropped it.
One of the buff mags, either C&D or R&T reported axle hop on an early production model. All the CTSV online detractors since have picked up on this. Subsequent testers have not referenced it that I know of.
They do reference the power of the engine that nevertheless can behave quite civilly (plus get decent gas mileage) during every day driving. The BMW Ms have never been known to get decent mpgs no matter how you drive them.