We have quite a dichotomy here. Look up the word "aurora" on dictionary.com and one of the definitions you get is, "the goddess of the dawn." But there's no dawn going on at Oldsmobile, as the recent announcement of the ultimate demise of the GM division attests.
While in some ways the news wasn't a big shock, it was still a punch in the stomach for those who have fond memories of all those Cutlass 442s and "Rocket" V8 engines from the division's heyday. Recent times haven't been kind to the General's sandwiched-in-the-middle division, despite relatively decent cars like the pair of 2001 Auroras we're examining here.
Redesigned and reskinned for the 2001 model year, it seems any chance this car might've had to gain steam in the sales arena will surely get tanked by the announcement that Oldsmobile will not be around after about model year 2004. That's too bad, because the Aurora has notable unique content not shared with any other GM car (or platform) such as the 4.0-liter V8 engine that stands tall on its own merits. After all, how bad can an engine be when an entire racing series (the Indy Racing League) uses this basic design for what essentially amounts to a spec engine for the sanctioning body?
Since the Aurora is the only V8-powered GM car extant other than the Cadillacs, the F-body twins and the Corvette, a look at the revised DOHC 4.0-liter is a good place to start. Although there's lineage with the 4.6-liter Caddy mills, this Olds powerplant comes only in the Aurora, which does tell you that GM was, at one point, serious about trying to make the Oldsmobile division regain some true identity, and with it, market share. Once Oldsmobile goes away, we can only hope this fine powerplant will see its way into other GM models. Wouldn't a 4.0-liter V8-powered Grand Prix GTP or Buick Regal GS be a tasty proposition? Or how about putting some spirit into Chevy's bland Impala with an SS version that's worthy of the name like its '94-'96 Corvette LT1-powered predecessor?
Anyway, Olds says the current 4.0 is updated over the previous-generation car. Still the same architecture, the upgrades primarily make the engine quieter, cleaner (meeting low-emission vehicle requirements) and more miserly. Internal changes include the introduction of a low-friction valvetrain, redesigned pistons and an update of the cylinder-head combustion chambers.
Fifty horsepower short of the 300 found in the burliest Cadillac Northstar 4.6, the Olds 4.0 makes its power peak at 5,600 rpm — the approximate point at which the 4T80-E four-gear transaxle provides its full-throttle upshifts, well short of the engine's 6,400 rpm redline. The 260 foot-pound torque peak arrives at a slightly-loftier-than-expected 4,400 rpm, but an impressive 90 percent of this figure is on deck from 2,300 to 5,600 rpm.
While the V8 has plenty of "pleasing low-end punch," as one editor noted, our track-test numbers didn't show the performance the Aurora 4.0 is really capable of. That's because we had to test the car at a facility other than our normal sea-level location. The car's zero-to-60 time of 9.0 seconds was indicative of the fact that we were nearly 3,000 feet up, which cost at least a second in the standstill-to-60-mph sprint. Any vehicle accelerates slower in thinner air, thus expect this car to get to 60 mph in about 7.6-7.8 seconds at sea level. For the quarter-mile, the approximate one-second factor also applied as our car covered the elevated quarter-mile in 16.8 seconds at 84 mph. However, our other battery of tests aren't affected by altitude and the Aurora 4.0 stopped from 60 mph in 134 feet and traveled through the slalom at 56.7 mph. More representative acceleration figures were obtained with out V6 test car, which is discussed below. Expect the V8 version to be at least as swift if not more so.
But this merry Oldsmobile isn't meant to be a dragstrip sprinter, rather it's intended to be a choice in a segment populated by some heady competition in the form of the Lincoln LS, Chrysler 300M, Lexus ES 300, Infiniti I30, Acura RL, and BMW 5 Series (525i and 530i). Going in, the Olds has an advantage as the only one with a V8 other than the Lincoln in the price segment (excluding BMW's 540i because it's more than 50 grand).
You'd think that one of the few V8s in the above-noted group would count for a lot, but, in general, we didn't think so. Our persnickety staff noted a bundle of issues most pertaining to build quality.
Maybe we had a fairly weathered test car, but putting this example under the microscope netted a lengthy list of things that clearly let you know we're not talking about a Lexus here:
- Both rear door handles were "tweaked" so that the rearmost edge bows out and the leading edge was dented in. They didn't sit flush with the door.
- The plastic trim affixed to the bottom of the windshield could be easily pulled up at the corners.
- The whole front fascia was slightly crooked, and the gap between the hood and left front fender was wide near the windshield and tight near the leading edge of the hood. However, Oldsmobile did a nice job of assembling the exterior of the car and ensuring reasonably tight clearances in most other areas.
- Inside, the coin box door was misaligned.
- The passenger's side lower console panel could be peeled away from the dash.
- The plastic bezels housing the steering wheel controls didn't line up properly with the airbag cover.
- The right rear grab handle trim was loose.
- On the driver's side, the B-pillar trim was installed partially over, rather than under, a rubber gasket. One editor fixed this himself.
- Velcro tape and magnets hold the headliner in place. Pull on the headliner at the forward edge of the sunroof and the whole works rips away from the Velcro tape.
Driving dynamics and interior packaging were better, and while we were less than enthralled with the how the interior is bolted together, the way it works got considerably more pleasing feedback from those who drove the car. We liked the cabin's style and the driver-centric centerstack was also a nice feature. This arrangement makes it easy to use primary controls and provides the driver with a confident "in command" feeling. We also found the metal-ringed gauges a neat touch and the big speedo and tach were very easy to read.
The front seats are quite comfy — especially on longer trips of more than 100 miles. But rear seating got tight when the front seats were adjusted for taller editors. We found full contact of knees and shins with the front seatback, and the rear seat bottom offered marginal thigh support. "This is supposed to be a full-sized car?" quipped one backseat driver. Although the EPA calls it a midsize, it's not a mid weight, with the V8 car having nearly 3,900 pounds of mass.
While maybe not ideal for backseat passengers, the rear seating area is perfectly suited for small children from a safety standpoint. The rear seatbelts work well with child safety seats. They can be snugged down tightly with no slack in the belt after installation.
Moving back up front, other tricks are plentiful for the Aurora's driver. For example, the Driver Information Center (DIC) can be programmed with several features to your liking and it monitors all major functions including fuel range and gallons used, average fuel economy, oil pressure, battery voltage, tire pressure, engine oil and transmission fluid life index, date and elapsed time. We also found the steering wheel controls for the radio and HVAC system quite intuitive and easy to operate. And one of the more thoughtful features on the radio concerns adjusting the bass, treble, fader and balance. One knob controls all these functions and you push a button to set the function you want the knob to control. Once that function is set, it stays that way until you decide to change it. The result is that you don't have to scroll through all the functions to get to the one you change most often.
Overall, driving the Aurora is a pleasant experience. As noted in our First Drive, the steering is responsive and provides good feel for the road. After more time in both the V8 and V6 versions (see below) we also felt the car is similar to driving a decontented Cadillac Seville or, in the case of the V6 car, an upscale Intrigue. However, some staffers felt less impressed with the steering, though still agreed the car is considerably better and lighter feeling in terms of handling compared to the previous-generation Aurora.
We found the brake pedal offered nice feel and progressive modulation. But some asserted that to stop the car quickly, more pedal effort was required than initially expected. Once drivers got used to the system, though, the brakes and the standard ABS system imparted a confident feel.
The suspension does a good job of managing bob, sway and roll. On bridge transitions, the nose settled quickly despite the weight over the front axle. Also, we found that some actual road feel was being transmitted through the steering and suspension, notable only because the car keeps occupants nicely isolated to road conditions during urban driving. On twisty roads, the car handled the S curves with authority; barely a whimper emitted from the Michelin tires. While it's easy to get the front end to push, and the Aurora doesn't feel as tossable as a Lincoln LS or Chrysler 300M, it delivered more than expected based on experience with the previous-generation model.
Though we didn't get into enough trouble during our test drive (a good thing, no?) to bring it into action, the Aurora's Precision Control System (PCS) merits mention. Billed alongside traction control as a crash avoidance system, PCS is standard on the V8 Aurora and optional on the V6 version. Comprised of four major components, PCS includes two wheel speed sensors monitoring wheel speed and direction, a steering angle sensor, an integrated yaw sensor and a hydraulic control unit that compares the turning angle of the car to the turning angle of the steering wheel. If the system detects a difference between the two inputs, the hydraulic unit applies and adjusts either of the front brakes to bring the car into alignment with the needs of the driver. In other words, get too spirited, or quickly encounter an emergency situation, and PCS will likely be a major player in saving the driver's tail and keeping the car out of the cheap seats. Finally, PCS is automatic and its functioning is transparent to the driver save for an indicator light on the dash while it's in operation.
Those two or three editors who spent the most time in the Aurora came away with what amounts to opposing views. One said that he felt the Aurora is a legitimate alternative to such cars as the Lexus ES 300 — especially if one wants to stick with an American nameplate for patriotic reasons. If nothing else, cross shopping the Aurora with the Lincoln LS and Chrysler 300M is a wise use of your time, should you be one who doesn't want your hard-earned money to go overseas. While the Lincoln offers rear-drive and V8 power, the Aurora's 250-horsepower engine is a door-to-door match for the LS' 252-horse 3.9-liter V8. While the Aurora is front-wheel drive like the 300M, the 300M doesn't offer a V8.
In a heated debate another editor felt he doesn't see GM capturing any sales from the 300M and LS, and now that Olds has been given the ax, he's probably right. In several ways, with regard to cabin design and refinement, the Aurora is better than either of the two American entries, but overall, it's more like a Continental or LHS in terms of ability. "Think of it as a cut-rate Seville SLS or a racier Buick Park Avenue, and it isn't likely to disappoint," he said. "But cross shopping it with other entry-level luxury cars, however, will likely result in placement of the Aurora near the bottom of people's must-own lists." In the end, we'd have to say the Aurora is one of those cars that we can't categorically recommend you buy or not buy. It has enough going for it that's worth a close look, but the generally better-built competition is tough, and you should look at all those choices, too, before you make a final decision.
Aurora V6
The previous-generation Aurora came only with a V8. Now the car is available with a 3.5-liter V6, the same engine as found in the Intrigue. Besides the engine and the notable price difference, the V6 comes with 16-inch wheels and tires compared to the V8's 17-inch combination.
Many might think the V6 car is a cut-rate version of the V8 version. Not so. We found the V6 Aurora to nearly match the more expensive sibling in just about every category. In short, we'll make the call and label the V6 Aurora a better value. While the difference in price is more than $5,000, the V6 comes closer to the V8 out in the real world than it does on paper. In fact, save for a label on the trunk and the smaller wheels, the difference between the two from a visual standpoint is virtually nil.
As we noted above, we didn't get a chance to compare the two cars head-to-head, because we had to test the V8 version at a high-altitude facility, which slowed the car. We ran the V6 tester at sea level, though, and it seemed as it would've come much closer to the V8, if not be right on top of it. Running to 60 mph in 7.8 seconds, the V6 continued through the quarter-mile in 15.8 seconds at 89 mph. Its braking was better too, stopping from 60 mph in 129 feet compared to the V8's 134 feet.
Having driven all four cars, it's safe to say the V6 Aurora compares more favorably to the V8 car than does a V6 Lincoln LS against a V8 LS. In the end, the choice depends on your desires and budget. Now if only the V6 Aurora were available with a manual transmission in the same way a V6 LS can be so equipped
Add A Comment »