Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options

Oldsmobile Aurora

1…4748505253…112

Comments

  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    OK, that would be great. I'm going very soon to the dyno to settle this once and for all. If this thing is a scam, then I would really like everyone to know. They advertise these things showing impressive gains with other cars. I know there is certainly some crap out there, but they seem like a reputable company that has had their MAF written up in various auto publications - but who really knows with the Aurora. I know some others have expressed an interest, and I wouldn't want anybody else to be disappointed.

    Extreme Motor Sports sells modified Caddies that are equipped with the Granatelli MAF and I'm sure they would like to know as well.

    One other thought - if extreme motor sports does come out with a cold air induction for the Cadillac and it seals/seats against the hood or hood insulator like the photos posted by 800wattaurora, then it probably would not work on an Aurora. I'd bet the hood would not fit the same over the heat shield.

    The unit would have to be enclosed to work on a similar car like the Aurora.
  • Options
    rjs200240rjs200240 Member Posts: 1,277
    But now I know if you're selling it, it's because it doesn't work. Now I can get it from you for mere pennies on the dollar... :)

    I wouldn't be surprised about the a/c turning off. Even when it is on, it cycles on and off (except when in defrost, I believe). On older muscle cars, you could blow up the a/c compressor if you turned it on while making hard runs. I don't think it is designed for the high-speed spinning that would come at 5-6,000+ rpms.

    800watt, the performance tuning sounds cool. However, I probably wouldn't suggest anything radical like cam work or a supercharger. To me, the Aurora is about luxury and performance. If you ruin the luxury, you may as well sell it and buy an Impala SS or a cop Caprice. You could have more balls, plenty of room, and no ruined luxury.

    As far as the airbox goes, it seems like a lot of money and time to spend if you can just modify the existing airbox to bring in outside air. However, if you are up to it I'm sure it will be cool. Maybe I'm not familiar with the Seville on that website you posted, or with the classic Aurora, but I can't figure out how outside air gets to that guy's cone filter. It looks like it just sits in the engine bay with some metal around it. I think the CAI would definitely help make some power, though.

    I said before that I didn't think the MAF would be worth it, though, and I still don't. I'm sure the stock MAF flows enough to make 300+hp, so I doubt it is much of a constriction. Also, by removing the screen, the airflow over the wire is less reliable, so the MAF doesn't work as well. I really think their "tuning" just gets it to report more optimal conditions to the PCM so that it will dial in more advance and more fuel, much like a chip would. On more heavily modified cars, the MAF might be a constriction so then it might make more sense.

    As for the exhaust, I would think one thing would be to make sure it can be removed easily in case you don't like it. In fact, if it was just clamped on then you could easily swap it to stock for road trips or something.

    All in all, the power seeking sounds cool. I can't wait to hear how all the RSM stuff works, and what it was like to install.

    I'm almost 27.

    Oh, more tire scoop. The Michelin MVX4 (MXV4?) Pluses are also used on the STS if that matters to anyone (same size as 4.0 Aurora)...
  • Options
    HenryHenry Member Posts: 1,106
    The 1995 Classics are "chipable" The 95's do not have OBDII. Since the 1995's do not have OBD2, could the www.CHRFAB.com chips be used in the 95's.

    800 watts, that question is for you.

    Also, you bring up another question. For 1995 and other years,
    why can't you just swap out the computers.
    If I got a performance computer from a StS OF THE SAME YEAR would I not be okay???

    I always wondered about putting the caddie northstar in my 95.

    However, one mechanic suggested that I just swap computers with the Caddie. The only question I have is whether an STS computer could run the smaller bore Aurora? His approach seems to be a lot less complicated than switching engines.

    Henri
  • Options
    HenryHenry Member Posts: 1,106
    In answering the question I posted above, please refrain from making any reference to temporal mechanics.

    With MUCH appreciation,

    Henri
  • Options
    800wattaurora800wattaurora Member Posts: 187
    I know that pre-96 cars are OBD I which are chip able. There are performance chips for 95's out there. As far as putting a caddy chip in your Aurora I wouldn't recommend it. Possibly it might work, but there's too many different variables between the cars. Such as it's a bigger bore, so the computer has a different pre-set MAP fuel ratio for the bigger Northstar. Also the internals of the engine are setup up differently too, such as Cams, etc.

    I wrote www.chrfab.com a couple of times to get info. What they told me was that None of their products are OBD II compliant. Meaning they never wrote a program to adjust for the modifications on a stock aurora. Their computer's are OBD I. Write them a letter they might be able to do something for 95 Auroras. Any Aurora drivers could get there manifold, or cam covers chromed if they want. To much $$ for just engine looks, just my opinion.
    This is from their site:
    "'93 to '95 engines came equiped with the OBD-1 computer which will allow the chip to be modified. '96 to '99 engines come with the OBD-II computer which can not be modified. We always start with an aftermarket computer which we taylor to the Northstar configuration."

    Exhaust, This letter was from www.corsa.com
    Taylor,
    We do not have a system for your car. The 2001 Aurora is built off the
    Cadillac Seville platform, that is why is this worked out so easily.

    Maybe a custom muffler shop can build you something.

    Thanks,
    Jim Browning Jr.
    Corsa Performance

    I'll probably go with DynoMax Turbo Flow. Maybe, i'll just have them clamp it on first to make sure I like the sound. Don't plan on switching my exhaust for road trips or for any other reason. Weld that sucker on. A little growl form the NS will sound great also freeing up some lost power.

    I've got 800 watts of amplified power to drown out any unwanted cabin noise. Considering entering in some amature stero contest's. I hit 135+dB's. That's pretty loud. Boston Accustics Pro series are amazingly clear. Never buy another brand

    Concidering getting my PCM re-flashed if I can find someone who's worked on Northstars in the area. I'm not looking to have a balls out Aurora with any serious internal mods or anything, I just want to make mine faster than most of those stock drivers out there (all V6's and ricers). I race my friends stock GTP and he beats me by 1-2 car lengths everytime, shortly I'll be the victor. he,he,he

    Anybody know how much a run on the Dyno should cost?

    Henry, you shouldn't have any problems finding a "chip" for your 95 Aurora. Look Hard.
  • Options
    800wattaurora800wattaurora Member Posts: 187
    She staring to ride a little looser than she used to. Time to up-grade the suspension, tighten it back up. Going with KYB struts up front and stiffer GM self leveling shocks in the back. You can get stiffer rear's from GM that fit.

    Anybody up-grade their anti-sway bars? Found this A while back:
    "I note in your posting of 27 Jan, #269 that you have installed Caddie sway bars (plural) in your Aurora. I knew that a 2000 Seville rear sway bar is a direct bolt in (GM part # 25666234) and that gets you a 22 mm rear bar. My 96 Aurora came stock with a 17mm rear and a 27mm front. I have already installed the 22 mm rear bar. Is there a front Seville sway bar that will fit? I know I can put in a 98-99 Aurora bar which is 29 mm but if I'm going to do it I might put in bigger if something is available. Thanks in advance for your info. To other readers: I also put in polyurathane end links and center bushings on my sway bars F & R and you could tell an immediate difference. Also KYB struts up front. Would recommend both the struts and bushings to anyone who wants to tighten up his classic Aurora."

    How much does this cost? Can I install them myself? Don't know much about sway bars other than thicker is better.

    Taylor
    86 442 (stock 307 HO)
    96 Aurora
    White/tan
    tinted windows
    Wood dash kit
    xenon headlights
    KILLER 800 WATT SYSTEM
    Alpine 7887 CD
    Boston Pro 6.5 Components
    Boston 6x9
    300.4 JL Audio 4 way
    500.1 JL Audio mono block Sub Amp
    2 10w3d4 JL Audio
    1 Farad Cap
    Monster cable all the way
    Custom Carpeted Install with JL Logo
    (FUTURE MODS)
    RSM intake kit, Throttle body, 1" torque plate (just ordered, IN THE MAIL)
    Custom Exhaust
  • Options
    rjs200240rjs200240 Member Posts: 1,277
    Not necessarily better. A thicker anti-roll bar will make the car more unsettled over one-wheel bumps and disruptions. The thicker the bar is, the harder it is for one wheel to move up and down without the other. While it will firm up the handling, there can be a definite trade-off on less-than-perfect pavement if you go too thick (especially when combined with firmer shocks). However, sticking with Seville bars would probably be ok as they have similar curb weights, and the STS doesn't ride too rough. Also keep in mind that some sway bars are hollow, so the diameter isn't as cut-and-dry. For 2001+ the Aurora went to higher-rate springs and smaller anti-roll bars (That's my understanding). This provides better roll-control but is still a soft cruiser. Actually, this has been my experience with it. It really doesn't lean too much in curves, and it is awesome over broken pavement. Sometimes you hear a little "thump-thump" of the wheels, but you really don't feel anything. It's quite the welcome change from my former Z51 suspended Corvette. I'm surprised I still have any teeth in my head after driving that thing for four years. However, it didn't lean at all whether turning, accelerating, or braking. It almost as if the wheels were bolted right to the body (sometimes it even felt like they were bolted right to my body).

    I don't know how the sway bars install on the classic Aurora, but I would bet you could do it yourself. They don't tend to be difficult. The hardest part is usually removing the bolts. Suspension bolts tend to be pretty big, and they also tend to seize up a lot (plus they usually have some pressure on them).

    Henri, I'm not sure what using a Seville computer would do. I doubt it would improve much. If anything, the computer would probably adjust to be similar to the 4.0 computer. It isn't because the Seville computer is more aggressive that it makes more power. It is because it has .6 more liters of engine (except on the STS, that has more radical cams). A computer tuned more aggressively for your engine would seem to make more sense than the wrong computer for your engine.
  • Options
    rjs200240rjs200240 Member Posts: 1,277
    the Intrigue board here at Edmunds. There have been a lot of recent posts about people wanting to soften their ride a bit. The Intrigue has much thicker anti-roll bars than a GTP/Regal GS and I think it is too rough for some Intrigue owners. The Aurora's more solid chasis might make some difference, though.

    Why do people want to change the classic's handling? Does it lean too much? I really enjoy the balance between crisp handling and soft ride of my car. I think I will probably stick with GM replacements as I don't think I want to alter the ride quality.
  • Options
    rjs200240rjs200240 Member Posts: 1,277
    It's a new version of the GTech Performance meter that is more like that AP-22 on caddieinfo. It's called the G-Tech Pro Competition Performance Meter and it captures data and has an LCD readout. I've only seen it in Mid-America Design's catalog that I still get (Corvette parts).


    http://www.madvet.com/products/productsPerformance.html


    I went to the GTech website but it had no info...

  • Options
    HenryHenry Member Posts: 1,106
    The 1995 and 1996 cars have a tendency to lean in the turns. the car from the factory has an excessive amount of body roll. When I first got the car I would call it Proud Mary cause every time I took a turn it was like "rolling on the rivvvvvv errrrr."

    In the later years, Olds put in thicker bars.

    Henri

    QUESTION -- How do I get a conputer that is more agressive for my chip able 1995????
  • Options
    HenryHenry Member Posts: 1,106
    MY IKE and TINA song . .

    Left a good job in the city . . . .
  • Options
    800wattaurora800wattaurora Member Posts: 187
    I'm going to seriously look into the sway bar thing. It's not that I don't think my 96 handles bad at all, in fact it's great. Especially compared to my last car 86 olds 442, rough ride but nice and solid feeling like the vet owner,(but it's not a quite like a vet). Anyway, ride handling can almost always be improved over stock suspension and suited to the drivers needs/wants. Aftermarket suspension products can perform better because there made out of higher quality compounds and also cost more than stock, less expensive materials = cheaper sticker price. There's all kind of stuff out there for BMW's, there's always room for improvements.

    I mostly drive on the highway to work at zincster speed, so a little less roll would be make the ride even better. I'll be introducing myself to the caddy parts department very soon. There's a olds/caddy dealer 10miles away, hopefully they've meet some other AA (Auroraholics Anumounous )members before. See if I can get them to re-flash my PCM. I'll beg if I have too.

    Can't believe it's snowing in Chicago on April 1. (Traction Active) (buzz)

    Anybody "CHIP" re-flash 96 or newer Aurora's?

    Taylor
    86 442 (stock 307 HO)
    96 Aurora
    White/tan
    tinted windows
    Wood dash kit
    xenon headlights
    KILLER 800 WATT SYSTEM
    Alpine 7887 CD
    Boston Pro 6.5 Components
    Boston 6x9
    300.4 JL Audio 4 way
    500.1 JL Audio mono block Sub Amp
    2 10w3d4 JL Audio
    1 Farad Cap
    Monster cable all the way
    Custom Carpeted Install with JL Logo
    (FUTURE MODS)
    RSM intake kit, Throttle body, 1" torque plate (just ordered, IN THE MAIL)
    Custom Exhaust
  • Options
    blk97aurorablk97aurora Member Posts: 573
    While perusing my 95-99 parts microfiche, I discovered that sometime during the 1997 model run the engine oil cooler was discontinued. This may account for the 8 quarts of oil required to fill after an oil and filter change instead of 7 or 7.5.
  • Options
    blk97aurorablk97aurora Member Posts: 573
    800watt:

    I have seen numerous references to stiffer Cadillac shocks that will fit Aurora classics -- but nobody supplies part numbers. Do you have them?
  • Options
    blk97aurorablk97aurora Member Posts: 573
    800watt:

    Garnes and I (plus others) have added K&N air filters and modified air boxes with good success. I want to add cold air, but haven't figured out an acceptable solution yet (hood air scoops are out). What model year is your Aurora?

    One thing to be aware of is potential intake air temperature increase with those cone filters. I have added a thermometer to my 1997's air intake. At steady-state at 40+ mph, the intake air is 2 to 3 degrees F. higher than the "outside temp" indicator. Removing the horizontal plastic deflector in front of the radiator causes that temperature to increase to 14 to 16 degrees F. I do not understand how this increased temp occurs, but it is real. A rule of thumb is that every 10 degrees F. increase in intake air temperature reduces power output by 1%.

    A possibilty for performance increase I have not seen in this forum is the MSD DIS-4 capacitive discharge ignition. It can modify spark timing and supplies higher spark voltage. Anybody tried it?
  • Options
    autobahn95autobahn95 Member Posts: 62
    Henry did you see the '99 Black on Black with Autobahn Aurora on EBAY?
    56,000 miles.
    your dream car?

    just thought i'd let you know.
  • Options
    jwadlejwadle Member Posts: 12
    Hello,
    I have a 97 Aurora with Autobahn pkg. I just replaced the front struts, mounts and bearings because the car was a little bouncy. Overall an easy job (shop wanted to charge me over $600.00). Problem is now I have a rattle from the right front strut area, which was never there before. When I first did the job, I did not replace the bearing(s) and mount(s). So after I heard the noise I went ahead and took the struts back out and replaced the bearing, and strut mount.. the noise is still there. I had a shop check everything out (as far as ball joints, tie rod, etc) and they say everything is tight. When the tire is shaken, with or without weight on tires, the strut does not move.

    Any help is Appreciated

    Thanks
  • Options
    rjs200240rjs200240 Member Posts: 1,277
    There are a few coolant bypass' for an Aurora (doesn't say what years) on Ebay. That can help augment a CAI by keeping the throttle body from heating the incoming air up as much.


    http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1817418250
    There also appear to be some EGR blockoffs.

  • Options
    jwadlejwadle Member Posts: 12
    Hello,
    I have a 97 Aurora with Autobahn pkg. I just replaced the front struts, mounts and bearings because the car was a little bouncy. Overall an easy job (shop wanted to charge me over $600.00). Problem is now I have a rattle from the right front strut area, which was never there before. When I first did the job, I did not replace the bearing(s) and mount(s). So after I heard the noise I went ahead and took the struts back out and replaced the bearing, and strut mount.. the noise is still there. I had a shop check everything out (as far as ball joints, tie rod, etc) and they say everything is tight. When the tire is shaken, with or without weight on tires, the strut does not move.

    Any help is Appreciated

    Thanks
  • Options
    800wattaurora800wattaurora Member Posts: 187
    Spoiler? Anybody have/put on a spoiler? Considering getting one, saw a nice looking one yesterday. What should it cost to prime/paint put on?

    I already have the K&N drop in, use them on all my cars. Need more power. The potential for more power just needs to be released.

    Blk97Aurora, how did you hook up that thermo? I know intake air temp will be higher, but can't stop it. What do you think of throttle body coolant bypass? Have to take off for winter.

    Jwadle, sorry can't help you with the rattle. Maybe crushed a bearing. What did the front suspension cost you? OEM or aftermarket?

    Garnes, How much do you pay for your Dyno runs?

    check out msg. #2548 for some GM part numbers for caddy sway bars and 99 aurora bars, no part numbers for shocks yet, i'll post them when I visit the dealer, next couple weeks.

    No autobahn package on my white 96.

    Taylor
    86 442 (stock 307 HO)
    96 Aurora
    White/tan
    tinted windows
    Wood dash kit
    xenon headlights
    Viper Alarm & remote start
    KILLER 800 WATT SYSTEM
    Alpine 7887 CD
    Boston Pro 6.5 Components
    Boston 6x9
    300.4 JL Audio 4 way
    500.1 JL Audio mono block Sub Amp
    2 10w3d4 JL Audio
    1 Farad Cap
    Monster cable all the way
    Custom Carpeted Install with JL Logo
    (FUTURE MODS)
    RSM intake kit, Throttle body, 1" torque plate (just ordered, IN THE MAIL)
    Custom Exhaust
  • Options
    blk97aurorablk97aurora Member Posts: 573
    800wattaurora:

    I removed the useless (IMHO) Heimholtz resonator from the intake hose. To close the hole I fashioned a plug out of a couple of pieces of 1-1/2" PVC pipe doodads. The thermometer is a relatively inexpensive Radio Shack indoor-outdoor type (on sale for $10). I drilled a hole in the middle of my PVC plug to insert the outdoor sensor into the intake air stream, then sealed it with RTV. Then I ran the small wire along the left side of the engine compartment, around the door seal, and located the read-out on top of the dashboard next to the A-pillar.

    I think the throttle body coolant bypass or block is a good idea for hot weather. I wonder if there is any reason to have a bypass instead of a valve of some kind to just stop coolant from going through the TB.

    Careful with the guy on eBay auctioning EGR blocks, ignition timing increasers, and TB bypasses. Check his feedback rating -- it's about 10% negative.
  • Options
    HenryHenry Member Posts: 1,106
    Came back from the NY Auto Show. There was really only ONE car worth seeing. If anybody is going to the show, I suggest you go to the Caddie display last.

    The new Caddie Cien is HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT.

    I am not lying when I say -- when I first saw the Cien my eyes started to tear (AURORA men don't cry!).

    If you see the Cien first, you will not be able to enjoy the rest of the show. I tell you this, every BMW and Mercedes paled in comparison to the Caddie.

    Only thing is the Caddie is currently priced at about $200,000.

    One interesting note about the Cien. When you look at the car dead on, you can clearly see the shape of the Classic.

    Henri
  • Options
    rjs200240rjs200240 Member Posts: 1,277
    Corsa now has sounds up on their site for the Cadillac exhaust system. Sounds pretty cool. I like it. It has that sort of DOHC sound. I can't put my finger on what it is, but it is the same sound I pick out when I hear a ZR-1. It has that tough Corvette gromble, but there is something else to it that tips off that it has DOHC...
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    OK, I tested the Granatelli MAF. Yep - it is no good. It actually caused a significant power LOSS. Roughly 7 or 8 HP all over the curve except at very high rpms. Torque was the same. The last time I tested it (after testing various air box alternatives) the HP was a little lower going up and basically peaked out the same. Torque was a little off.

    I also had the air/fuel mixture measured as well. That was the whole story. The A/F was significantly leaner at full throttle. The guy that runs the dyno noted that it was leaner than 12 (I really don't know all the numbers and where they should be) and that was not usually so good for max. power.

    I ran it up to 2500 rpm nice and easy and the A/F was in the high 14's - basically the same as stock and where it should be I think.

    So, RJS was right that it is worthless. My theory is basically that the thing is just not calibrated right. At those high air flows the air flow is interacting differently with those little wires, and if it is not calibrated to communicate correctly with the computer as to what is really happening, it's not going to help.

    Bottom line - stay away from this. I'm not very happy to say the least but I hope that I save somebody from this stuff.

    Other note - The tests were very spot on repeatable.

    Funny, I thought this thing was helping - gee that power of suggestion is something - isn't it?

    Oh well, live and learn - and the rest of you can log on and learn. All the testing has been a lot of fun and incredibly interesting. I don't think I have reason to do any more though. That's it. Just be happy with the induction mods and maybe do the exhaust.

    I will be sending the results to Granatelli - maybe they will make good on this, but I'm not going to hold my breath. I might also submit these results to caddyinfo.com.
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    Henry - I would not bother with a Caddy computer. I don't see how that would do anything. Do call superchips. They did at one time have a chip for the 95. I don't think the claims of +20 HP and +33 torque listed on the web site are even close to reality, but it should help if it is available.

    +33 on the torque would make the engine produce more torque than the Aurora V8 used in the new Shelby (290) - not going to happen.

    The guy at Cadillac Hotrod Fabricators. did suggest dropping the 4.6 into the Aurora. That is not a bad idea for an old one with a tired out engine or a problematic one. I'd look for a used and reconditioned engine. Dropping a new one in is about 9k I think.
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    800wattaurora - If you are in the Chicago area, then a road trip to the Cleveland is no biggie - especially in an Aurora. Ask Jim Browning Jr. if they would do a custom job for you if you visited. They will have to work it in at a slower time - like fall or winter maybe. Jim was going to do this for my car for about $1200 - installed but I had a last minute change of heart. There systems are pretty cool though.

    Also note the cone vs stock test on caddyinfo.com. The cone lost power - and the hot air was noted as the culprit. If you shield it, you have to make sure it is seated against the hood/hood insulator or else hot air will just flow in over the top.

    RJS - Are you considering the Corsa for your car again?? I thought the same thing about the 97 Caddy cone system. It must just be pulling the air from the inside of the fender - the stock opening I think.

    Another note - today at the dyno, I got the most HP at the wheels yet - over 202. Maybe a little more. I really did not care about the details. I just noted the total failure of the MAF. The atmospheric conditions from day to day really make a difference. There is no way you could really test something unless you did it back to back on the same day.
  • Options
    blk97aurorablk97aurora Member Posts: 573
    garnes:

    Something doesn't add up. Torque and hp are directly related through RPM of the motor; if you know two of them, you can calculate the third parameter. I can post the equation if anyone is interested. So what doesn't figure is that the hp was down 7 to 8 but torque was the same. I wonder about the calibration of the dyno.
  • Options
    s2261s2261 Member Posts: 14
    I have had a rattle as well. The dealer said it was the aftermarket brake pads. Try applying the brakes when you hear it to see if it goes away. Apparently the AC/Delco pads have a clip on the outboard pad to hold it to the caliper. I have purchased 2 different brands of aftermarket pads and neither had a clip for the outboard pad. I'm not 100% certain if this is the cause. I just did shocks/struts tires and alignment and the noise is still there. The alignment shop didn't say anything was loose.
  • Options
    rjs200240rjs200240 Member Posts: 1,277
    Garnes, that sucks that it didn't help. Blk97, I thought the same thing about the torque. I think the MAF would help if your engine made more hp than the MAF could supply air for. In that case, the lower accuracy of the MAF would be more than compensated for by the larger volume of air it could deliver. The grate over the MAF is there for a reason, and I suspect it is the only way the MAF can operate accurately (which would explain the poor A/F ratio). The ideal A/F ratio is 14.7.

    That +20/+33 for the SuperChip seems quite a bit out of line. I don't really think chips help much except to firm up tranny shifts. They mainly reduce the reliability of the car by advancing timing to the edge of knock. I hated the Hypertech chip in my 'Vette because it required a 160 degree thermostat. If it was hot out, the temp would climb into the 200's anyways (I mean, if it opens at 190 and climbs to 200s, it will climb there from 160 as well). At that point, it would knock if I punched the gas too hard. Plus, the lower temp thermostat is worse for the oil life because it doesn't get hot enough to evaporate out water and acids that build up.

    There is a Car and Driver article on chips that is interesting:

    http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver /features/1999/October/199910_feature_chips.xml?&page=1 (crap, I can't post longer than 115 letters in a row. So cut and paste the link and remove the space after "xp/Caranddriver". Clicking the link won't work.)

    Their conclusion is that japanese and german chips are undefinably sportier than American ones... Just kidding.

    Actually, there was a recent C&D comparo of a Lexus SC430 and a Mercedes CLK430 where the german bias was soooo obvious. The Lexus was faster and stopped shorter than the MB, but they concluded the MB was "sportier" on the track. Interestingly, though, on the track the MB actually caught one of it's brakes ON FIRE... It still won the comparo, though.
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    If I said the torque was the same - I'm sorry. It was late.

    They were BOTH DOWN. They were both down about the same too. The more I look - it was as much as 10 all over. Yikes. Needless to say, it's back in the box.

    I'm not sure if torque and HP always move in tandem. I believe others here have argued that a certain improvement can add HP but not torque.

    I'll keep you posted as to Granatelli's response. The A/F ratio really clinches it for me.
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    When I ran the car up to 2500, it was 14.7 just holding at 2500. It seems fine for regular driving, but that of course is worthless.

    Under full throttle, it's not 14.7 - even with the stock. Under full throttle, from 4000 to 4800, it's about 12.5. From 5000 on it's in the low 11's.

    I believe that's what it is supposed to be under full throttle. The car does perform at spec. The granatelli leaned these numbers out a full point to 13.5 and low 12's respectively - and power was down. When the car ran richer than that (because I pulled the temp sensor - a different day) the power was down too. So the stock unit has it right where it should be.

    Funny how that mistake back last fall actually provides useful information now.

    Anyway, I strongly believe that if the unit was calibrated correctly there should be a gain. However, as RJS points out and I have acknowledged before, removing the screen is going to do some weird stuff to the air flow patterns across those wires. If the unit is not calibrated correctly for what is really flowing through the thing you can pretty much expect a too lean or too rich A/F ratio.

    Interesting - the A/F ratios were about the same as when I tested it last time with the AC "on". Autobahn95 is right - it was probably kicked out at full throttle anyway.
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    Yeah, I did say "torque was the same". I meant the same crummy results. I gotta be more careful. It was late.
  • Options
    ewtewt Member Posts: 127
    "Under full throttle, it's not 14.7 - even with the stock. Under full throttle, from 4000 to 4800, it's about 12.5. From 5000 on it's in the low 11's. "

    Low 11s is very rich for a normally asprirated car. I shoot for 11.5/1 on my Toyota Supra running high boost. I'd bet there is some power to be made there if a chipmaker could lean things out somewhat. Normally aspirated cars usually make the best power in the mid 12/1 range at WOT.

    Eric
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    ewt - Well, the granatelli MAF had it in that 12.5 range past 5000 and it was not so good. One run with the stock sensor had it pretty close to 11.5 past 5000 at WOT, the other was a tad richer. The power on the runs was pretty much the same. There were maybe small difference - nothing worth mentioning. Based on the performance I've seen from a range of A/F ratios by now, the factory set up seems to be pretty good. Could it be a little better? Probably a little - maybe. I don't think the factory set up would be that bad, and so far it performs better than other A/F ratios I've experienced.

    I still say the stupid thing probably flows a little more air. It just doesn't read what is happening correctly and thus the A/F ratio is not right. You can't fuel it right if you have bad air flow data. I think it is that simple.

    It seems that the 14.7 or so is the best for cruising, idling or regular light driving.
  • Options
    ewtewt Member Posts: 127
    "Well, the granatelli MAF had it in that 12.5 range past 5000 and it was not so good. One run with the stock sensor had it pretty close to 11.5 past 5000 at WOT, the other was a tad richer. The power on the runs was pretty much the same. There were maybe small difference - nothing worth mentioning"

    Interesting. Just goes to confirm that there usually isn't much power to be had by tweaking factory fuel ratios on relatively stock cars, chipmakers claims to the contrary. I wonder why it needs to run that rich?

    Eric
  • Options
    herbvherbv Member Posts: 6
    I have my eye on an Aurora at my local dealer but I have some questions. The car is listed as a "2001" but it was originally titled in March of 2000. The dealer claims that all Auroras produced in 2000 are "2001" Is this true?

    I assumed that the warranty on these cars was for 5 yrs or 60,000 miles. The dealer says that the warranty is for 36,000 miles and the 60,000 mile was an inducement to new car buyers. He claims the 60,000 warranty is not transferrable. True?

    The owners manual says that the car has traction control but there is no switch on the console. Is it possible to have traction control without an on/off switch?

    The car is a 3.5 in beautiful condition. It has 11,000 miles and the asking price is 21,990. I can probably buy it for 21,000. I am also considering an extended warranty. 5 years, 60,000 for $1500.

    Does it pay?
  • Options
    autobahn95autobahn95 Member Posts: 62
    Garnes -
    i hate to hear that your new mass-air flow sensor isn't working even as good as stock. i sure hope Granatelli offers to buy it back or improve it in some way.
    i haven't been able to find that article about the A/C kicking out at full throttle anywhere - but after reading your posting about the air to fuel ratios being the same, it seems to backup what i read previously.
    good luck with any future mods.

    hopefully within the next year or so, i will be able to play with my Aurora a little. i want to drop a 4.6L Northstar in from an STS Caddie. i have the tools and facilities to do the job, plus an entire machine shop in my garage to make brackets or anything that needs to be customized. i also have pretty good knowledge of working on cars, so really the only thing lacking right now is the few thousand bucks for the bigger engine.
    someday my idea will become reality.
  • Options
    ewtewt Member Posts: 127
    "I'm not sure if torque and HP always move in tandem. I believe others here have argued that a certain improvement can add HP but not torque."

    As somebody else pointed out, there is a mathmatical relationship between the two. HP =(torque * rpm)/5252 At a given rpm, if HP/torque goes up or down, the other HAS to go up or down. It is possible to increase peak torque or peak hp without changing the peak of the other because they usually don't occur at the same rpm. Another HP/torque anomoly is that they have to be equal at 5252 rpms.

    Eric
  • Options
    hammen2hammen2 Member Posts: 1,284
    herbv, there was no model year 2000 Aurora - it was "in between" the Classic and the New Aurora. The New Aurora went on sale in early 2000 (not sure what month), so, being titled in March is about right for one of the first ones off the line.

    GM did not offer the 5/60 extended warranty until later in 2000. I'm not sure if it's something they came up with only after they announced the death of Oldsmobile, or if it was an incentive before. In any case, this incentive was not offered when your car originally went on sale (one of my beefs with the new Aurora - went from the 4/50 warranty on the Classic to the standard GM 3/36). I'm not sure if the extended warranty is transferable, but the point is moot in your case.

    I know there are some engineering revisions between the early 2001 and the later ones, but I don't know specifically what they are (Hardesty, where are you? :-). The price of $21k still seems a little high to me (and be aware, as long as you know up front, the resale value of Olds cars is in the toilet. If you plan to drive it until the wheels fall off, you're fine. I'd check cars.com to see what similarly-configured 2001's are going for.

    Lastly, I wouldn't buy an extended warranty from a dealer. They've got 50% markup. I'd look at one of the third-party companies (I have, but haven't yet used, 1SourceAutoWarranty; others mentioned here are WarrantyByNet and WarrantyGold). If you feel more comfortable with a GM warranty, at least get a price quote from CapperAutoCenter and then take that back to your dealer (again, there's tons of room to negotiate on extended warranties - like 50+% markup on their part).

    Hope this helps,

    --Robert
    black/black/chromes/autobahn '98 Classic
  • Options
    ewtewt Member Posts: 127
    "I'm not sure if torque and HP always move in tandem. I believe others here have argued that a certain improvement can add HP but not torque."

    As somebody else pointed out, there is a mathmatical relationship between the two. HP =(torque * rpm)/5252 At a given rpm, if HP/torque goes up or down, the other HAS to go up or down. It is possible to increase peak torque or peak hp without changing the peak of the other because they usually don't occur at the same rpm. Another HP/torque anomoly is that they have to be equal at 5252 rpms.

    Eric
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    ewt - I used to think that a chip or a unit to reprogram the OBD2 was the big answer. But the more I looked into it and hearing comments from you and RJS, I really don't think they are the greatest. I even remember watching a gear-head show on TV (Crank & Chrome)where they had a 2000 Corvette. They put a K&N induction kit on it and got +21 HP at the wheels. Incredible. They dyno'd it right there. Then they used the superchips "microtuner". I think it added 10 more HP at the wheels. They were disappointed and then explained - "oops we forgot to tell superchips that we added an induction kit. They would have made a modified program for us."

    Maybe that had some truth to it, but I wonder if that "microtuner" ever did much. +10 on the Aurora is pretty cool from anything, +10 on a 2000 Corvette is not a big deal for such a sophisticated program change.

    Autobahn95 - oh man. Let us know about the 4.6 in the Aurora if/when you do it. The Aurora is just so cool looking. Definitely worth a 4.6. All your mechanical resources sound great.

    ewt - yeah, my air box mod added peak torque without peak HP and it is just the way you said. The box mod is helpful up to a certain rpm. Apparently after a certain rpm, the air flow rate and flow characteristics inside the box are no better than stock - so yeah the peak torque gained but the peak HP did not - or not much. But I got HP and torque through most of the curve with it.

    I don't expect Granatelli to do anything. I'll let you know. Somehow I don't really care much. It's not the end of the world. I've had a lot of fun, learned a hell of a lot, and hopefully will prevent someone else from getting crapped on.

    It's nice to know that the K&N products do what they claim. That's one good thing.
  • Options
    800wattaurora800wattaurora Member Posts: 187
    Garnes, Too bad about the MAF, I was hoping you'd say it made great improvements, than I'd have to get one. Bummer that it dosen't. I think the sensor would help for seriously modified engines, where stock air flow is the weakest link.


    How much were your Dyno runs? What was Highest HP made. Under stock rating of 250?


    I still plan on using RSM's intake, throttle body, and tourque plate. I will go through it all and dyno before and after, and again (with exhaust). I'll post all over and let Aurora owners know the truth about is it possibly to gain performance.


    Recap, imagine this intake http://webhome.idirect.com/%7Ersm1/aurstb.jpg

    with a heat shield kinda like this http://jadcock.oldsgmail.com/cadsls/filter.html

    Note that the RSM kit angles down lower and more towards the opening where the stock air box pulls air from, more than the caddy does. This should give a greater opportunity for outside air than engine compartment air. My heat shield/air deflector will be different than the caddy. Figuring out how I'll make it sit against the hood. Might use thick tin foil mock up, attach it and close the hood, what ever didn't krinkle up, thats how tall it will be. Also still plan on ramming some air. Haven't taken out the stock air box, other than to through a K&N filter in. So hose placement hasn't been decided. I'll make it work. Will take pictures of parts, install, dash kit and the 800watt stero system. Where can I post pictures w/o my own site?

  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    rjs - couldn't open the link. Sounds good. I like the way you point out bias in these magazines. It's a sad joke sometimes how problems will be dismissed for certain cars.

    On another note - Get a look at the April 8 edition of Business Week. It's got a great article about Cadillac.

    They note that Bob Lutz looked at the finished design for the new STS and said "It looks like a kid with a big forehead". It was sent back for redesign of several areas on the body to make it "beautiful". Apparently the designers were going after the "most headroom in its class". Give me a break. I'm 6'3" and my Aurora with the moonroof is still fine. Who are these goofs trying to impress - the NBA? I know this is all subjective, but I say get the pin-heads out of design that would sacrifice looks to add headroom to a car that probably had plenty to start with.

    These guys probably worked on the Aztek too. Who knows.

    Anyway, from the article, it sounds like this thing might look great. It will have more power than the 4.6 and maybe a supercharger will be an option. If it looks good, this could be a great car to pick up used 4+ years from now - or buy a new one in 2004 if you got the big bucks.
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    800watta - The place I've gone to would charge 85 and I'd do a lot of runs and screw around with variations on the box (intake from bottom only, stock side inlet only, both) as well as the basic thing I wanted to test. I think this guy I've used is pretty fair considering how much time he'd spend with me. It takes a while to set it all up. Make sure traction is OFF, and you are in 3rd - 1 to 1.

    If you have never done it, it is a big rush. The heart gets pounding. It's a blast.

    Most HP was about about 203 or so. Other days most was about 198 with the mods. Stock air box with a clean paper filter was 189 to 192. This is measured at the wheels. 189/250 = .756 192/250 = .768. That seems about right for what makes it to the wheels I guess. All my tests have been done to a car with 20+k miles and I've pampered the thing with M1 changes very frequently. It's running true I believe. For reference the 2000 vette on Crank&Chrome I mentioned above got 265 at the wheels. 265/350 = .757. It's rear wheel drive and different in a lot of ways I'm sure, but it's all in the ball park.

    Don't get hung up on the numbers. Just look for changes. There are different HP standards. My tests were listed as SEA HP and torque. Also, the dyno computer compensates for atmospheric conditions and applies a correction factor. Yesterday it was .99. It's been .98 and sometimes 1.0 to try to correct for a standard condition. It is OK, but still not good enough to use one day against another. You MUST test things back to back on the same day in my opinion for the spot-on comparisons. The correction factor is not real sensitive to conditions. It just keeps thing "reasonably close" in my opinion. Two different days might use .98 but the conditions are a little different. Just a little more temp or pressure change and it changes to .99 That will change the calc by 2 hp even though the atmospheric conditions were perhaps just barely enough to change the program.

    Make sure you test stock with clean paper vs your modification.

    Suggestion - try placing a piece of tape to the edge of your heat shield. Close the hood. If it sticks to the hood or insulator, then it seals. If not, you still have a gap. There may be some way to measure it all out - but it seems hard to know where the inside of the hood is when closed. You may have to experiment with the tape thing - you may need a little something on the back to make it stay in place as you drop the hood. Try 2 sided tape.

    Also - Call Wheel to Wheel. They made a scoop that goes into the inside of the fender to catch the air flow inside the fender. They made the 398 HP deville and do the GM pace cars. Call them. They are very nice. Just ask for the guys that know about the Tim Allen 398 HP deville. I think I'll call them again. They were going to send me some info on that.

    Another note - I'm not trying to dissuade you from trying this induction, but Wheel to Wheel modified the air box on that Deville as I did. I laughed when they started describing it to me. I felt a little better about doing it then. I think your system has a lot of potential and might even be better. I am interested to know how it goes.

    Good luck.


    Oh - that MAF is just a piece of crap. It would not help under any condition IMO. It just doesn't seem to be able to measure air flow correctly. Hence worthless. Cool paper weight though.
  • Options
    rjs200240rjs200240 Member Posts: 1,277
    Garnes, did you cut and paste it? I don't know why I can't post a "word" with more than 115 letters in it. This means any long link can't be posted (at least by me...). I will put a link to it on my little Aurora website. It really is worth reading.

    800watt, you can just get a Geocities or Yahoo (or a million other) free websites to post your pictures on. If you want, send them to me at aurora402002@yahoo.com and I will make a little page for them.

    Herbv, hammen2 is right, but he didn't mention the traction control. It was an option on the 3.5, so your car may not have it, but the owners manual will still mention it. If there is no button, I doubt it has it. Plus, look on the build sheet under the spare tire cover in the trunk. The traction control will have the code "T2C". Cars introduced after Jan 1 of a given year can either be that year's model or the next year's. The Aurora introduced in early 2000 chose to be an early 2001 rather than a late 2000 model, so your 2000 build date would still be a 2001 model. Olds was still kicking when it came out, so the 3/36 warranty was the norm. The 5/60 didn't happen until the word came down that Olds was getting pulled.

    Supposedly the 4.6 "next-gen" Northstar in the XLR will make around 315hp. Perhaps it will be a bit more robust with a flatter torque curve than the current 300hp version.

    I don't think chasis dynos tend to be good for estimating crank power, but rather just for seeing trends as Garnes noted. However Garnes, I think you meant SAE horsepower (as in Society of Automotive Engineers) not SEA (as in the ocean). How do you keep it in 3rd while still putting the pedal to the floor? Do you just measure a limited rpm range like 4,000-redline?

    800watt, I might suggest just buying a G-Tech type meter and measuring performance instead. It would:
    1) be more interesting to know the time shaved rather than power gained.
    2) be more consistent (coolant temps matter a bit less, plus proper cooling happens as the car is actually moving) and can be standardized with NHRA tables for atmospheric conditions.
    3) be more likely to accurately reflect any ram-air/cold-air induction because air is actually moving past the car as you drive.
    4) be about $200 and you can test your car as many times over as many days as you want.
    5) could be used to measure other mods such as suspension and brake upgrades.

    There is an interesting device from the UK on caddieinfo, and also GTech seems to have a new one with similar features as well. I posted a link to see the GTech one earlier. It looks pretty cool. I think if I were to break down and buy an exhaust I would probably buy a GTech or something similar to see what it really does.
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    rjs - I'll send you a picture of the 98 when I put the new Aurora 17's on. I think it should look great.

    You have some good points on the G-Tech kind of equipment. As long as it is accurate, you can measure the effect while actually moving and test more to your hearts content. Could be a lot cheaper in the long run too. Caddyinfo.com has some good stuff comparing different models of such units.

    I am really looking forward to the new northstar. It should indeed have optimal HP and torque characteristics together with the variable timing added. I hope there will be a supercharged option too. Sounds like the new STS has a chance of really looking good and with the handling shown in the CTS and added power, this car could be awesome.

    I tried to cut and paste and did as you said, but it "couldn't open the site" or whatever. I am really interested in reading it.

    The chassis dyno is fine. If you were there I don't think you would doubt the repeatability. It amazes me too really. Anyway, if you measure say a 10 HP gain, or loss and you figure 75% is getting to the wheels then 10/.75 = 13.3 at the crank. Use 80% 10/.80 = 12.5. That's not bad at all. I really don't want to get into a discussion as to % gets to the wheels, but I'm confident that the change has been measured accurately and it's not a stretch to estimate within .5 to 1 HP what happens at the crank for a typical 5 to 10 HP mod. This applies to engine mods of course. I realize a tighter shifting tranny can give more power to the wheels even though the engine is the same.
  • Options
    garnesgarnes Member Posts: 950
    rjs - yes - SAE. Going fast again. Man are you grading me or what?

    I put it in 3rd. It goes through 1, 2, and 3. You can look at 3rd (about 4100 and up) or you can look at the power gains "through the gears" which has the entire rpm range shown. My graphs on caddyinfo.com have MPH on the x-axis for the "through the gears thing" but you can see the power gain just the same all the way up. You can look at any gear at any rpm range really. What ever you want to print out.

    I think the new Northstar will be a 4.2 L. I think the new Caddies will be incredible cars.
  • Options
    jwadlejwadle Member Posts: 12
    Well I feel stupid... It was a bad new strut.. Guess that should have been my first guess.. Oh well..

    In answer to another question, about price and what kind of struts: they are the sensatrac struts by monroe, and the struts we $78.00 a piece, then $80.00 a piece for the mounts and bearings.. All in all a pretty easy job, just be sure that have an air or electric impact wrench, that strut mount nut is very very hard to get on and off with out spinning the shaft, even if you have a hex wrench in there.

    Oh yea, the car rides great, very much like I wanted it to ride, the old struts even though they were not leaking or anything were shot. I pushed the shot in and they took about a 1/2 hour to pop back out.

    Jim
  • Options
    rjs200240rjs200240 Member Posts: 1,277
    Garnes, that was very interesting. Here is a link if anyone else is interested. There are some other articles about GM that were interesting as well.

    http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_14/b3777001.htm


    Jwadle, are the OEM struts gas-charged? Not all struts push out, or push out hard. All they really need to do is dampen. The springs do the pushing. Some shock/struts push real hard, but they don't all do that. Glad you got the rattle resolved.

  • Options
    beachloverbeachlover Member Posts: 17
    I'm going to disconnect battery to replace steering wheel buttons/airbag. Anyone advise as to how to proceed to make sure radio works after I'm done?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles