Ask the Car People.SM


Oldsmobile Aurora

5876 messages,  Last post on Mar 23, 2012 at 3:08 PM

You are in the Oldsmobile Aurora Forum.

What is this discussion about? Oldsmobile Aurora, Sedan



Messages Page 222 of 588

#2211 of 5876 by garnes

Jan 11, 2002 (6:46 am)

cwiley1 - you can get a K&N for the Aurora at Auto Zone or anyplace that carries them. You will have to order it. It is about $73 from the zone. K&N only "lists" it for a 1997 because that is the only year Aurora they tested. But I've called the dealer and the part number for the air box on 96 through 99 is the same I believe. The 95 is different - probably for the reasons you mention. I'm not sure about the filter fitting a 95. It should as long as the outer box all fits and seats the same. I have one on my 98. It comes with a gasket to fit on the top part of the box.
 
The filter adds about 7 peak HP and 4 peak torque at the wheels (about 9 HP and 5 torque at the engine). I've dyno'd it. You won't feel much unless you open up the air box. The K&N doesn't add much until 5200 rpm. Below 5200 it adds 1 to 3 HP at the wheels. Conversely, the box modifications help the most below 5200. When you add them together it actually makes a difference that you can feel a bit.
 
Hope that helps. If you want more HP mods just post something. There is more you can do.
 
MsJoker - Henry is right. The Aurora or any car this technical can get you really good at the high miles. The early ones seem to have a few more issues. There is a glut of used cars on the market from all the new car incentives. Edmunds has a good used car customized price guide. Try to get the VIN number and run it through car fax. Also call Oldsmobile with the number and they can give you the warranty history of the car. That may help you know if the car has had chronic problems. Admittedly, the car can lure you in with the good looks, but be careful.
 
Anybody have any info on the Aurora's drag coeficient compared to other cars?

#2212 of 5876 Cd by rjs200240

Jan 11, 2002 (7:37 am)

As far as I can tell, the Cd for the 2001 Aurora is .32. I don't know what it was for the 95-99 Aurora.
 
If you are looking for K&N filters (or just about any other part from a somewhat major aftermarket manufacturer) then I would try ordering it from Summit Racing Equipment at www.summitracing.com. They have always had the lowest prices when I bought parts for my Corvette, and they can get just about anything. The filter for the 95-97 Aurora is part# 33-2086 and you can find it if you search for it by manufacturer. It is listed at $52. For you 2001-2 owners, the K&N filter is part# 33-2063-1 and is $40. These part numbers are from K&N's site. Interestingly, both filters seem to have a lot of V-6 applications as well. I wonder how well the V-8 breathes through a paper filter that is used for V-6's.
 
While searching for info on the Cd, I noticed some performance figures on the 3.5 Aurora that I thought were interesting. They are close in 0-60 times (although not so close above 60) yet the 3.5 has taller transmission gearing in the first three gears, plus a taller final drive ratio (3.29 compared to 3.71 for the 4.0), not to mention it is missing two cylinders. This is an impressive testament to the 3.5's broad power. I hope the engine doesn't disappear from GM next year. This year is the last for the Intrigue and the 3.5 Aurora (the 4.0 will make it to 2003). I much prefer the V-8, but it will be a shame if this powerful, efficient, and smooth V-6 vanishes...

#2213 of 5876 by garnes

Jan 11, 2002 (1:39 pm)

rjs - yep, that's the part number and man is that a lot cheaper. I really overpaid.
 
How does that .32 compare to other cars? I have no reference for this stuff, but it is interesting.
 
You are right, the V6 torque curve looks really flat in the brochure with a high percentage of peak torque all over the rpm range. It's an impressive motor, but I think it is leaving with Olds.
 
As for gearing, I see your perspective very well. Car & Driver reviewed a pontiac somthing-or-other with the Toyota 1.8 in it. It's really quick but utilizes a 4.43 final drive (same as transaxle - right?) Anyway, this 2800+ pound car gets 2 mpg better mileage than my 98 Aurora and the city difference is not much better. My reaction was "so what, they geared the snot out of the thing for the quickness and now you got a compact/subcompact that is hardly more economical than my highway cruiser that weighs 1,100 pounds more" Is that really engineering?? Sacrificing one operational atribute (mileage) to make a bunch of acceleration-only minded editors happy is no accomplishment.
 
You are right, the 3.5 does everything very well for what it is.

#2214 of 5876 engines by fjk57702

Jan 11, 2002 (2:01 pm)

The 3.5 V6 is a northstar engine. The northstars are all in the process of being replaced by new designs. The V6 is to be replaced by a new 60 degree line from 2.8 to 3.8 liters. Some turbocharged. September issue of Motor Trend had a few details. This has not been announced, but Ron Zarrella did confirm the intent. Lutz hasn't cancelled them yet.

#2215 of 5876 msjoker and 95 Aurora by nne3jxc

Jan 11, 2002 (2:45 pm)

msjoker:
Looking at the Kelly Blue Book website (www.kbb.com) it sounds like the price is pretty fair. BUT, I would have to agree with Henry that it's an awful lot of money for a car with 111K -- especially a model with a questionable reliability record. If you poke around a bit you should be able to find one with lots less mileage for not too much more. I bought my 95 in August with only 60K on it for $9000.
My advice is: if you can afford to pay a few $1000 more, look around for a newer or lower mileage Aurora.

#2216 of 5876 Thanks Gang by Henry

Jan 11, 2002 (8:31 pm)

My Physicians at Norman Gale Olds, Buick, Pontiac (Cedar Knolls, New Jersey) looked the car over to see if it had the new harness discussed in the 9/94 TSB. My car has a build date of 12-1-1994 and it has the upgraded harness.
   
Thank you for the information.

#2217 of 5876 by cwiley1

Jan 12, 2002 (10:43 am)

garnes--The '95 and '97 stock air filters are the same, so the K&N filters are probably the same. What year air cleaner are you trying to modify? Would the restriction in the '97 air cleaner make any difference? I can't tell much difference, the '95 seems to have more pep, maybe because it has more miles and is loosened up.
 
rjs200240--Thanks for the K&N filter part#. I am going to check on them.
 
msjoker--I have had less problems with my '95 than with my '97. I don't think I would own an Aurora without the extended warranty. I just purchased the extended warranty by "WARRANTYBYNET, INC". I have 86k miles on it, and every time it goes into the Olds shop it always comes to more than $300. The factory warranty and the 1st extended warranty paid for itself many times over. I haven't had to use this last extended warranty yet.

#2218 of 5876 by garnes

Jan 12, 2002 (8:32 pm)

cwiley1 - Mine is a 98. I really don't know what the inside of the 95 air box looks like but it would be interesting to compare the difference. If you can see most/all of the air filter surface when looking through the clean air outlet on the 95, then it may be like the newer air box with the liner removed. When I was goofing around on the dyno, I did compare the difference in performance with the stock top part and the modified top (always using the modified bottom). The opened up top seemed to add about 2 to 3 HP at the wheels through the curve. You won't feel that. You really have to modify the whole box and use the K&N to feel a little something. When you do it all, there is as much as +10 HP and +10 torque at the wheels in certain parts of the power curve - but not at the peak. You can feel that extra kick when you are climbing up the rpms.
 
Maybe the difference you feel is that the 95 has the 3.71 "autobahn" transaxle, and the 97 has the 3.48.

#2219 of 5876 Warranty ??? by garnes

Jan 12, 2002 (8:39 pm)

Well, I really love this Aurora after 9 months - just as much as the day I got it. I would really like to keep it long term. After reading the discussion on repairs and warranties, I'm wondering. I still have about 1 year of the factory warranty.
 
Warranty by net seemed to quote some reasonable prices. Are they reputable? Henry - how does your warranty gold price compare to warranty by net?? Do they ever hassle you??
 
I know this subject has been discussed a lot in the past, but I'm hoping that you guys can make a suggestion and/or issue any warnings about certain companies.

#2220 of 5876 MSJOKER 95 Thoughts by silotwo

Jan 12, 2002 (9:06 pm)

I have a 95 I purchased with 60k miles for $9,100 in July. Previous owner was meticulous with maintenance inside and out. No major problems here, but I only drive 20 miles round trip to the office and an occassional 200 mile highway cruise to visit the in-laws. And as others have said, the car is so technically sophisticated, that one should expect some problems. I have been annoyed with a power window that works on and off, always works when I drop it off at the dealer though. They pretty much have an attitude that electronic and electrical ghosts in these cars aren't surprising, and when it finally breaks completely they are confident they will be able to fix it.
 
Fortunately for me, I knew nothing about the Aurora when I bought mine. Just stumbled across it when I was picking up a Silohoutte for my wife. Test drove it over a weekend and it just seemed like a natural fit. Two months later I got the dealer to accept my cash offer and I am just as thrilled driving it today as I was the day I brought it home.
 
I must say that $5,850 at 111K does NOT sound like a good deal, especially sight unseen. There is a 95 with 73k miles on the local dealers lot, super clean, listed at $7,900 (actual market price will probably be around $6,500 when it sells). So I'd agree with the others that a much better deal can be found and I strongly suggest you look very closely, in person, at any car you are considering. I live in the Northeast andin general, Aurora's don't sell quickly here. I am watching a 98 with 38k miles as it sits on a dealers lot for five months now, price gets better every month.
 
I'll also share my experience with the 2001/2002 model. Test drove an 02 with the 4.0 and although impressed, was still content when I got back in my 95. Rented a 2001 and 2002 on my last Florida trips, only the 3.5 is available as a rental. Both cars were fine in stop and go and in highway cruises at 75+ MPH. If the 3.5 sounded less stressed under acceleration I'd be content with one.
 
Both the 01 and 02 had the front wheel vibration I heard others mention at around 65MPH. My 95 is smooth as silk at any speed, and surprisingly gets almost the same average MPG as the 3.5.
 
The olds dealer said the 3.5 goes away entirely after 2002 because it does not meet new emmission standards for 2003; they say that is the reason the Intrigue goes out of production and the Aurora can only be had with the 4.0 after 2002.
 
Happy hunting, take your time, look closely, get the service history and a new gas card with a zero balance, and you just might experience the ROAR for real.

Messages Page 222 of 588

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement