I remember the first time I sat in a Saturn. It was a white S-Series wagon on the L.A. Auto Show floor. This was during the show's public days in January 1993, and back then I was just a fresh-from-college car nut versus an automotive journalist. I'd seen all the advertisements about "A Different Kind of Car from a Diferent Kind of Car Company." I distinctly remember sitting in the passenger seat and feeling like my legs were cramped. I tried moving the seat all the way back but quickly confirmed it already was all the way back. "Hmm," I thought to myself, "too bad this 'different kind of car company' can't make a vehicle that's comfortable for a six-foot male." I've been consistently under whelmed by Saturns ever since, so it was with great anticipation I took the new Aura for a road test last night.
Let's talk about the exterior appearance first. To me, it looks like an Audi A6 with a Sky front grille. This is not a knock on its exterior design. I think the A6 and Sky both look fine, so I don't have a problem with combining them. I would point out, however, that plenty of folks shot down the Ford Five-Hundred when it debuted because they saw it as "a Volkswagen/Audi" knock off. If that was your position on Five-Hundred, you must take the same position regarding the Aura. I didn't, so I don't.
Interior design is easily the best of any Saturn product. I drove an XE model (yes, the picture shows an XR, but my photo turned out horribly and I can't find an XE photo anywhere...), so that meant no leather seats. But it did have the optional upgraded audio system, woodgrain trim and power driver's seat. I like the soft, amber lighting that comes down from the roof and out from the door releases (very Audi-like). The gauge cluster also uses amber-and-while lighting, so it seems Saturn has committed to the color amber as the Aura's underlying...well...aura. Where the interior design falters is in the area of material quality (I'll deal with that in a second) and rear seat leg support (not leg room, but support). The rear seat bottom is too low and too shallow, meaning my knees were bent too much and my thighs were hanging over too much floor versus seat (seems Saturn still hasn't mastered the art of making a six-foot male totally comfortable -- at least one riding in the back of the Aura). The front seats are fine, but they too could provide better support in the upper torso/shoulder area by being a bit wider. Our test car did have the power-adjustable pedals. Overall, front seat comfort should work for most people, but I feel like the car's interior layout skews a bit toward smaller -- dare I say female? -- passengers. I know Saturn has long been seen as a "girl" brand by many analysts, but I would think they want to get away from that image...
As for interior material quality, it's kind of all over the map. Big items, like the uppder dash pad and the upper door panels, present a nicely-textured surface wtih a soft-touch feel. But if you dig just a little bit (put your hand in the door pockets, run your hand over the console, open the storage lid on the back of the center console, etc.) you'll see and/or feel plastic flashing. Same goes for the door lock knobs, which are downright gritty (I know this because the Aura locks all of its doors as soon as you pull it out of park, and it won't unlock until you put it back in park unless you pull on the locks themselves, not even the power unlock button will release them -- which I hate!). The cloth on the seats was passable, as was the cloth/foam material on the headliner, but Honda and Toyota still have GM beat in overall material quality.
In terms of driving dynamics, the car is far better than either the Malibu Maxx or the G6 with which it shares a platform. The steering is precise and has better feel than the Malibu, but it's also a tad heavy, which is very GM-like ("Those damn journalists keep bitching about our steering feel. I know! Let's make it heavy. Heavy steering feel equals good steering feel, right?") Wrong, but at least it's precise and not overboosted. The steering works well with the suspension tuning to control body roll without sacrificing ride quality. And, despite being the less powerful (224 hp) 3.5-liter engine and four-speed (versus the larger engine's six-speed) transmission, the Aura moves out with authority. The tranny picks gears quickly and effectively, and the engine provides a broad range of useable torque. I wish the engine was a bit more refined in terms of sound and vibration when it revs up, but as the lesser of the Aura's two drivetrains, this one gets the job done.
Bottom Line: It's the best Saturn ever, even if it's probably not the best midsize family sedan on the market. Our XE test car came in at $24,000 with options. I need to try the XR trim, but the idea of a faster version of this car (with leather seats) can't be a bad thing.
Time for a comparison test!
By darmok
on August 18, 2006
09:21 AM
You can find a lot of XE photos on SaturnFans.com. In the photo gallery, there are a number of photos from a test drive of an XE by the site's owner.
I would agree with your impressions on materials quality. I sat in an XE in my local dealer yesterday, and there were some surfaces which didn't quite measure up. That said, the Aura gets points from me for aiming higher than some other midsizers. Materials quality may technically be better in the Mazda6 and Altima, but they don't even try to be nice-looking in my opinion.
One nice surprise: the glovebox was VW-quality plastic in my opinion. The textured dash material was good, too. If GM keeps refining the details they might get it right yet.
By jerrywimer
on August 18, 2006
10:08 AM
Love your comment about steering feel. Hard on the heels of a post I made elsewhere just yesterday about the strange idea most journalists seem to have that "heavy" feeling automatically equates to better (using the words "steering was light resulting in low levels of feedback".. usually). Glad to see at least one that doesn't automatically equate lighter steering with worse.
By andy1102
on August 18, 2006
12:58 PM
First the Sky, now this...I've seen a few on the road over the last couple weeks and I think it's a great looking car - inside and out. I haven't had the chance to sit in one yet, so I can't comment on the materials.
Regarding the steering, I wonder if it shares the same electric system as the base versions of the Malibu and G6 ... or if it's hydraulic?
Next up, they need to hurry on the Opel-based ION replacement.
By darmok
on August 18, 2006
01:16 PM
It's hydraulic on both the XE and the XR.
By editor_karl
on August 18, 2006
03:01 PM
Thanks for the answer on the steering system darmok. I should have specified it in my initial post, but as soon as I went aroud the first corner in the Aura I was like, "Oh, this ain't the same steering system as used in the wife's 2004 Malibu...THANK GOD!"
By hondacura4
on August 18, 2006
04:09 PM
I havent seen one of these cars yet but I do find them attractvie going by the pictures Ive seen. Ive never liked Saturns designs because they looked like they were designed by children (Ion). Odd shapes and huge panel gaps, you could almost see inside the car (joke). Does this car used the compostie body panels too?
This car looks promising as its sporty and has a bit of upscale flair. I can see a bit of Pontiac G6 in the rear but thats not a bad thing as the G6 looks very nice. Good design, decent interior design, if GM could give the powertrain a bit more refinement as well as the interior materials this could be a great car for Saturn.
By kurtamaxxxguy
on August 18, 2006
04:53 PM
The Aura sounds promising, if first-year unfinished (Oops, GM did it again!). Ironic that GM is using the Maxx chassis variant of Epsilon as the Maxx is going bye bye in '08.
Wrt the steering, GM has been improving/tweaking the electric steering of the Malibu/Maxx, but decided for '07 to ditch it on most models. A pity they cannot adopt the electro-hydraulic approach some foreign cars use to great success.
By darmok
on August 19, 2006
12:52 PM
Well, I got a call from the dealer yesterday that the XRs had arrived. Karl, you need to see an XR in the Morocco brown leather. It's so much more cohesive than the XE and really brings the interior design into focus. I still have a few problems with it, but they don't rise to the level of an issue that would prevent me from buying one.
hondacura4: no, the body panels are steel now. The overhead cam engine in the XR with the 6-speed auto is more refined than the XE.
By 1487
on August 19, 2006
05:37 PM
First of all, the locks on the Aura (and most GM models) are programmable so you dont have to have them set up in the manner of your test car.
as for materials, I sat in a pre-production Aura at the NY auto show and the interior is definitlely on par (if not better) than the 6, Sonata, Maxima, Fusion, '06 Altima and Accord. It may not be as nice as Passat, but it costs thousands less than a V6 Passat so I would hope the VW has some advantages. The other reviews I have seen had no such complaints about the interior, but you did. What a shock. Just because the Aura doesnt surpass the Passat in interior platic quality (a subjective issue which really cant be quantified) doesn't mean it has a cheap interior unworthy of the Japanese competition. Honestly, I dont even think the Accord's interior is anything special in 2006. It may have been when it came out, but it's just a regular interior at this point in time.
electronic steering hasnt really been praised in any cars except VWs. GM was one of the first to use it and obviously others have improved upon it with recent model launches. Now GM limits its use to lower end models like the Cobalt.
By billt9
on August 19, 2006
07:25 PM
interior looks about the same as a Mazda6.
I'll wait for the Altima.
By 1487
on August 20, 2006
04:11 PM
uh, no. The maxda 6's interior is very dull and econo class. I've been in the Aura and its not that bad. The 6 doesnt even have a concealed passenger side airbag cover which is something the old Impala had in 2000. The 6's interior isnt even a step up from the 3's interior.
Have you seen the new altima interior? It looks like the G6. If its better than the current car, you sure cant tell from the pics.
By carlisimo
on August 21, 2006
11:08 AM
Is it big?
If it's a rebadged Opel Vectra (which it certainly appears to be) then it'll be too small to really go up against the Camry, Accord, Altima, and Malibu.
By editor_karl
on August 21, 2006
12:04 PM
It's big enough. I don't know if I'd call it "roomy" but it certainly compares with the Accord/Camry, and rear seat room is definitely better than, say Mazda 6 (but as I mentioned, the rear seat design, especially the seat bottom, is weak -- too low and shallow).
By 1487
on August 21, 2006
04:56 PM
I would call it roomy compared to others in this class. The Aura's wheelbase is longer than any of the non-GM competition and it has more rear legroom than the Asians so I dont see why you wouldnt call it roomy. The G6 has great rear seat room, but it is compromised by the sloping rear window that limits headroom for taller people. I dont think the Aura has that same problem. If the Aura isnt roomy than the Accord and Camry must not be either.
By carlisimo
on August 21, 2006
05:44 PM
Okay, good to know. I remember seeing the concept a while back and thinking it looked narrow, and relatively small. So I figured it was an Opel Vectra clone, since I know 'midsized' in Europe is like TSX-sized. (And because it looks exactly like the Vectra.)
To me, the TSX is well sized and the Mazda6 is cavernous, yet neither will ever be volume sellers due to their size (something I have a tough time understanding). I thought the Aura would be in the same boat.
By editor_karl
on August 21, 2006
06:37 PM
To me, "roomy" is Chrysler 300 or Ford Five-Hundred. The Accord, Camry and Aura are "fine" in terms of space, but not "roomy." Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt I've ever referred to the Accord or Camry interiors as "roomy."
By 1487
on August 22, 2006
02:54 PM
I assumed the person that asked about the Aura being roomy was asking in terms of midsize cars. I think it's pretty obvious that full size cars like the 500 and 300 have more room than the Aura, Accord or Camry. My point was the Aura is roomy for a midsizer.
By gregg_vw
on March 13, 2007
09:02 AM
Weird comment re: the 500's styling (apparently Karl thinks you cannot like the Aura's AND dislike the 500's). I can and you can too. The 500 is bulbous, and emphasizes its lack of grace by putting a tall and long (201") body on a wheelbase that is actually shorter than the Aura's. The Aura's proportions are therefore better and present a better visual image and road presence. I also prefer the roofline to the clumsy way the Ford's rear window and pillars join the body.