Last post on Mar 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM
You are in the Oldsmobile Aurora
What is this discussion about?
Oldsmobile Aurora, Sedan
Dec 15, 2001 (1:54 pm)
Resale: If resale value is ever going to be a concern, don't even consider an Oldsmobile.
Handling: Both twisty road and emergency handling are excellent in the 2001/2 Aurora 4.0L. I think that people who are snobish about rear drive take points off before they even get in the car, but then I am snobish about the Aurora.
Tires: If you don't like 235/55-17s, you can get an Aurora 3.5L V6 with 225/60-16s or look after market for whatever suits you, lots of other wheel and tire combinations will fit.
Likes:Power, handling, luxury, safety, 5/50 warranty. Being the only person on the road with one (In 16 months, i've seen 3 other 01/02 Auroras on the road). Did I mention POWER?
Dislikes: You can't get Bose sound and navigation system together.
#2073 of 5876 REX ?????
Dec 15, 2001 (2:23 pm)
Whatever HAPPENED to ZINC1 ?????
Dec 15, 2001 (2:57 pm)
zinc1 - if you are out there, post #2000 has been set up for you. Since you were No. 2 poster (really the first one) go for # 2000.
#2075 of 5876 Ron-Aurora 2002 Purchase
Dec 16, 2001 (11:44 am)
I have had mine 3 months and like it very well. Mine is 4.0 Cappachino. We got heated seats and the Bose 12 speaker system. That is it as far as frills. No 12 cd changer, moonroof or chrome wheels.
I looked at Aurora for 3 years before I bought. It came apparent to me that the reveiwers were people that DID NOT OWN the car or drove it for a period of time. Most of the Auto magazine reviews were very positive of the car.
The reviewers on other automotive boards that just go out and do a test drive of the car and write down critical comments seem to me to be inaccurate and short sided.
Our dealership got on the GM locator system and found exactly what I wanted within 300 miles of the dealership. I also got a " GM Supplier " discount. What that is, as it was explained to me, if the business you work for does business with GM, then you qualify for the rock bottom- no haggle price which I found out was Great. ASK FOR THE GM SUPPLIER DISCOUNT.
With the discount and very few options, we got our car for 32K AND CHANGE. Financing rates are great. We wanted to put our money into getting a V-8, just a personal choice. Also with the V-8, a lot of items are standard equipment and the V-8 engine to boot!!
I plan to drive my car 15 to 20 years so depreciation or trade value is not an issue.
HANDLING-GREAT NO COMPLAINTS
TIRES- The michelins do have a bit of road noise but do great on hugging the road in rain as I took my first 200 mile trip yesterday. Handling is superb.If you are on smooth interstate asphalt, the noise and ride is quiet. Minumun window and air noise. On the interstate, mileage was 24mpg at 75mph average. In town is 17-18 mpg. I USE REGULAR UNLEADED (87 OCTANE RATING) AND IT RUNS GREAT!!! Mileage shuld increase a little as it get broken in good. A certain amount of re-design of the engine has paid off. IT IS QUIET AND AS SMOOTH AS BABY S***.
Lastly...be patient...as it sounds like you are..
Good luck, good hunting, and good fishing...
Dec 16, 2001 (1:05 pm)
Aurora50 - wow, 32k for a V8. The Bose is incredible. I got it in the 98 (not as many speakers as you) and it really sounds great. I don't want to leave the car. Suggestion - how about smooth as a baby's bottom.
Do the new 4.0 Michelin tires have a tread life of 400 now? I think so. The MXV4's on the 98 are 300. The tires are very good, but the life span is not the best. Since I'll be getting the 17's for the new Aurora wheels I got, I was considering the MXV4's again. I hope they live longer now.
Dec 17, 2001 (6:52 am)
My tires are michelin MXV4 PLUS. Rated 98 H.
Radical XSE P 235/55 R 17.
I hear that the ones on the 16" factory are Goodyears? and offer a softer ride?
Mine work great but the car is built a tiny bit stiff for me but I am not complaining. Stiff for the younger buyers they are trying to reach but soft enough for the old folks on trips.
Good luck, good hunting and good fishing...
#2079 of 5876 Buy the Aurora!!
Dec 17, 2001 (7:03 am)
The only reason you should consider the 300M is price. The Aurora is just plain better than it. As far as resale, the Aurora might not be great, but then what makes you think the 300M will be? Especially when the 300N comes out. The Aurora has a way nicer interior, a smoother engine, and considerably better crash ratings. Plus, side airbags and stability control (the 300M has traction control, but it is low-speed only. The Aurora not only has all-speed traction control, but also the PCS yaw/stability control system). I too considered a 300M and an LS and an SSEi before buying the Aurora. I too agree that the handling is a non-issue because the Aurora is very crisp until pushed to ridiculous extremes. I test drove an LS with the sport package, and while it might handle better in 10/10ths driving, in everyday driving it is darty and overly sensitive (and I was driving a Z51 Corvette at the time, so I was used to an absurdly fast steering ratio). The 300M just wasn't as smooth (more noise carried through) and the V-6 was not cool sounding when you got into it. It sounded a bit rough and a bit loud. (The LS didn't sound that great either. It was all intake sucking, which I never cared much for. It sounds like it has asthma or got punched in the gut. When I think of performance, I think of sonorous exhausts not Dirt Devil intakes. Nobody talks about the beautiful symphony of a wide-open Ferrari V-12 intake suck.) The Aurora sounds sooooo sweet. Also, you can't get OnStar on the 300M, and other things like dual-zone climate control, rain sensing wipers, MagnaSteer II, and GM's cool interior lighting scheme. I believe the trip computer on the Aurora is also better. The 300M has crappy safety ratings from the IIHS (www.iihs.org), and I always am skeptical of Chrysler's quality. If you are worried about tire replacement price, I believe the 300M comes on 17" tires too. If you mean the Aurora's just aren't very meaty, then that's crazy. The 300M has 225/55-17's compared to the Aurora's 235/55-17's. The 300M special has 245/45-18s which probably don't up the handling all that much, but certainly up the chance of damaging the wheel. The warranty is better on the Aurora as well. Another small thing is I believe the 300M requires premium fuel. Anyways, other than offering a lower price, I don't believe that there is much of anything that the 300M does better (it is a little bigger in the back seat, and slightly bigger trunk). I thought the gauges on the 300M looked neat, but were pretty hard to read. They were a bit hard on the eyes. I think it was the double lines at each mark, and the font of the numbers (they seemed compressed).
- dual zone climate control
- rain sensing wipers
- luxury interior
- stability control
- side airbags and high safety rating
- low price
Lastly, I hope you weren't hoping to get an unbiased opinion from the Aurora board...
Aurora50: I believe if you look again, you will find that your Bose system only has 8 speakers, not 12.
Dec 17, 2001 (7:35 am)
rjs - I'd say you've really covered it.
aurora50 - I'm glad they are 400 now. The older 300's just don't hold up so great. I'll probably get the MXV4's again. I find them very quiet.
Since crash tests have come up, check this site out. http://www.crashtest.com Somewhere on the site they address the factor of weight as well. They note that it may be more important than all the other factors combined. It's simple physics, but it never seems to be addressed in most crash test discussions. The Aurora is plenty heavy and is therefore all the safer.
Dec 17, 2001 (10:19 am)
Yes, weight is a big factor in crash tests (probably the biggest single factor). However, test results are useful too. At the least they show how well a car will fare against a similar sized or lighter car. The reason that the IIHS and NHTSA don't mention weight is that they don't want people to buy bigger, heavier cars that consume more gas. The NHTSA and other gov't agencies are totally against this (the IIHS isn't a gov't agency and isn't nearly as bad. They can be pretty reasonable). Unfortunately many of their decisions have more to do with politics than the welfare of the consumer (just look at how the NHTSA handled airbags). Now, I don't like seeing tons of heavy SUVs driving around at high speeds either, but I realize that a consumer should be able to buy the product they want. Also, if I want to be safe, I will buy a car that is safe. I won't try to make others buy a car that is safe when it hits me...