Edmunds CarPool

The voter might have let any panel issues slide once they compared it to this year's Camry. I've been in three, and every single one of them had a pretty big gap where the trim comes together around the radio. This was especially true at the one I saw at the autoshow (New York) where I would figure they would have one that's an example of their best work.

I don't find the Aura or Camry interior all that high quality feeling. I'll have to admit, I'm a little baffled when people say the Aura's interior is so nice and luxurious after having some seat and test drive time in the car. It's a nice design, but the materials are hard plastic. I know a lot of people are expecting a lot from the new Malibu but I can't help but be skeptic of its interior since it's built off the same epsilon platform. Both cars themselves are nice overall packages however.
 
Currently, the Accord gets my vote as best midsize interior and I think I actually prefer it (so far) to the spyshots of the next-gen Accord's interior.

"mismatch ... wraps around the doors and dashpad":
Honestly, Just about every car has this issue, so the Aura's on even ground with everyone else.
 
But the Aura does feel clostrophobic, having its hard, unfriendly plastic, and one of the smallest interiors in its class.
The Aura is barely larger than the outgoing Mazda6.
I wouldn't pick it, if one sees the Aura as an overpriced Civic/Sentra competitor.
Even the shrunken Altima still feels (and is) bigger.

The stitching is BAD. It is more than just the appearence or the "cheapness" of the molded stitches. It is that they HURT when you are wearing short sleave shirt. The damn mold scratches your forearm constantly.
 
Pathetic. Also the Door Panels. The entire panel is hard plastic, even on the XR. On the Accord, the LX gets cloth near the controls and where your arm rests, the EX-L of course gets leather. Aura, only hard plastic and hollow plastic.
 
I personally don't mind hard plastic if it is solid and not hollow sounding. Jeep actually does an "ok" job of this on the Grand Cherokee. Lots of Hard Plastic, but at least no hollow cheapness associated with it. (Notice I am not praising the GC, merely making a differentiation with other hard plastic interiors)

Do any of you guys remember the Camrys from the late 80's with the red or blue interior and the fake stiching on the dash?
Camry did i first. (20 yaers ago)
 
Perhaps the award was given to the saturn becuse of the huge leap in quality compared to older saturns, but not becuse it was actualy class leading. (it probably should have gotten - Most Improved)
 
O well. Maby this award will bolster Saturns sales for a while and help GM dig out of the grave.

Ah yes, more smoke and mirrors... I remember the concept car making the rounds with the dual exhaust outlets in the center of the rear fascia, the sexy 19 - 20 inch wheels, the fantastic looking interior materials. I remember reading Bob Putz or Mr. Wagger ( one of those goons) stating it was "Saturns' interpretation of the Acura TL" or something of the sort. The final product was also supposed to be 95% complete Man, did something get mis-interpreted along the way. The interior is all flash and no go. Not as bad as say, the gawd awful G6 sibling, but not great either.
 
It's as if GM decided that in order to convince everybody they can design a good interior, they just needed to experiement with colors like brown and orange. Then nobody would notice that Chevy Cavalier like quality to them. Hey, couldn't get near the show car, so maybe they were that cheap to begin with...

Maybe interior quality was not weighted heavily in the NORTH AMERICAN CAR OF THE YEAR competition.
 
Karl, you've raised great points, but my question is: if a car is not a luxury brand, why should relatively minor details like this considering interior quality matter at all? I'm just imagining me buying a car. If I'm getting a non-luxury brand, apart from styling, sportiness/fun-to-drive, safety, reliability, good power and good fuel economy, all that I care about is that the car's interior has the equipment I want, is comfortable and the interior items won't start getting loose for at least the first 10 years or so. Stitching and slight mismatch of panels are non issues. (Although I must say the plastic "stiches" are unacceptable in any car but a subcompact or a basic pickup.) Sure, I expect good quality interiors but.......
If I'm buying a BMW, I'll definitely be picky about stitching of the leather and stuff like that...
 
Since I've not driven or ridden in the Saturn Aura yet, I'm not defending this car. I'm simply questioning how important "quality" is when the car is not a luxury brand. I think expert reviewers make too much out of this. I remember one reviewer on MSN complaining about the gaps between the door panels on the Saturn LS series. She admits that those (relatively) large gaps are necessary for the dent-resistant material and then still complains they're too large. Who cares about large gaps when it is not an indicator of the cars quality? I'd rather have dent resistant doors with large gaps than dent-prone steel doors with small gaps.

I think Edmunds needs to give their long term Camry a better look at. I currently have an 07 and I've driven the Aura XR. Both are beautiful cars, but for two completely different types of people. The accord was nice but the road noise I heard from the EX wasn't too reassuring on how it would hold up, but it definitely had the better interior.
 
To comment on the interior of the Aura, I should post a picture of my Camry. It's 10x worse with gaps where the dash meets the doors. The drivers side is perfect, tight, clean, but then sit in the passenger seat, and I can fit my thumb in between the dash and door gap. Its terrible, and my dealer says he would have to take the entire dash and door apart to get it fixed, and even then one side will still have a larger gap than the other, and that having the dealer fix it would leave problems for the future.
 
The Aura though has a very basic interior, the ride is not as quiet and smooth as a Camry, but the Camry also can't take a turn at 5mph without feeling like its going to tip over from its overly soft suspension. It's a hard compromise to try to make, and there is definitely a lot of work left for automakers to do. The Accord is probably the better bet right now, but its interior is dated, its back seat is tight, and there's still the road noise issue. Hopefully someday one automaker will come out with the perfect car, safe, reliable, offers anything and everything a consumer could want, is both sporty and comfortable, and can start as low as 15 grand. But thats only a dream....

Re: importance of interior quality, the interior of the car forms your impression of the car's quality when you are actually driving it and riding in it. The little things out of place indicate a lack of attention to detail. If things are out of place in the interior, it's reasonable to believe the manufacturer did not pay attention to detail with the more "important" components such as the engine and drivetrain (regardless if it's true or not).

As someone who has had plenty of (pointless) “Ford vs. Chevy” arguments in the past I used to be kind of an anything but GM guy myself. But in recent years I have found myself rooting for the Big 3 across the board – call it patriotism I guess. Offerings like the Aura and Outlook catch my eye and make me think that strong gains are being made. I was interested to see both at the NY auto show and thought from the exterior that they were both good looking and competitive – especially the Outlook. I sat in both and walked away thinking that GM is close(r) but still no cigar. I thought the interior of the Outlook was nice – could have been nicer but passable given its SU….sorry CUV designation. The Aura was a different story, when I approached the car I noticed the two tone interior and thought it was different if not appealing. Once I opened the door and sat in it, I was really surprised at how the interior had a general cheapness to it. I’m not talking about relatively small details (IMO) that Karl pointed out here, I mean overall. That was March, it’s almost July and this is what comes immediately to mind on the subject of the Aura.
I agree with Kratas and Z4 – the Accord gets my vote for the interior quality in this segment. I can’t tell you what the materials are or how they stack up piece for piece with this car or the others but I know that for a long time now the Accord gives me the exact opposite (lasting) impression from the Aura. I hope that the companies that are still paying attention to this will continue to do so and aren’t forced by the bottom line to go along with the ever cheapening interior trend that seems to be happening.

A couple points I want to make here:
 
A. I was being sarcastic when I suggested the wood trim was off a bit in my original blog. I thought the pictures would make this clear, but I guess it didn't so here's my crystal clear remark: -- those alignment issues in the wood trim are atrocious. They are atrocious for two reasons. 1 -- They are in a HIGHLY visible area. Unlike the panel GAP between the dash and door panels, this is the ALIGNMENT of the bright wood grain against the dark plastic. You don't have to look closely or scrutinize the interior, this element is glaring and impossible NOT to notice. 2. -- The Aura is supposed to represent the "next generation" of GM interior quality. It has been touted as a vehicle that will stand toe-to-toe with the industry's best. I will fully agree that Toyota has slipped a bit in recent years regarding interior quality, but I've still never seen an issue this glaring in any of their products (and even if I did, it wouldn't annoy me as much unless Toyota had been touting the vehicle as the "new" reflection of their great interiors).
 
B. As some have noted, it's not that the Aura (as a car in general or with specific regard to overall interior quality) is horrible -- but it's not "leading the segment" or "establishing a new benchmark." It's basically competitive. I guess for Saturn that's actually a huge step forward, but there's a part of me that can't support the idea of celebrating a brand for finally catching up to (versus surpassing) the competition.
 
BTW, we have an Aura Hybrid right now (I'll blog about it soon) and the fake aluminum trim (which replaces the woodgrain trim on that model) is also out of alignment between the dash and doors, but less so than in our long-term car. Maybe they're getting better with each car that goes down the line...or maybe there's just no consistency whatsoever to this element of the build quality...

I guess for a brand that has been asleep for 17 years, any signs of life is a good one? I mean, we did lose Oldmobile so Saturn could survive...

Hey make a comparison test between the Aura Hybrid and the Altima Hybrid!
 
It's not fair, I know... =D

If we were going to do that wouldn't we throw in a Camry Hybrid, too...

I'm new car (actually small SUV) shopping and interior quality is VERY important to me. I have narrowed my list down and the Honda CRV and Toyota RAV4 are at the tope of the list but I keep hearing over and over about the road noise on Honda's. I'm also going to test drive the Ford Escape and Mazda Tribute. I drove a Tribute several years ago and the cheap plastic interior totally turned me off. Anyone know if they've improved any. On another note, my daughter drives a new Nissan Versa and I am TOTALLY impressed with the quality of the interior. The materials are pretty high-quality for such an inexpensive car and all of the reviews that I've read note that. However, after reading about misalignments, it leaves me wanting to go home and check her vehicle for this. I know there are no GLARING misalignments or I would have caught them, but the whole interior is black with no wood grain or other color to make any gaps really stand out. If you want an inexpensive vehicle, the Versa is well worth the look and the ride is great! You'll really be surprised.

I've driven an Aura and found the dash to door metal trim panel mismatch to be horrific. Like Karl said, forget the actual panel gap, the alignment was terrible. Yes it's very tough to get the dash and door panels to line up perfectly. So why would GM style the interior such that it's glaringly obvious when they don't line up? My sample's mismatch was even worse than in Karl's pics. Maybe mine was built in a magic fairyland assembly plant that builds rental Auras to a lower standard than non-fleet ones.
  
Rick - I agree with you on the Accord's interior quality. I took a co-worker car shopping awhile ago and drove a TSX and an Accord, among others. I expected the Accord to use some cheaper materials but it really held its own. Plus, I couldn't find a single flash line, misfit, uneven gap, or finish inconsistency... and I am PICKY.
  
Back to the Aura, Karl - does yours have matching climate and radio faceplate finishes? On mine I noticed they were slightly different, and were not aligned correctly.

I can't remember on the faceplates. I'll have to check.

Jay, I'm a tad on the picky side too - I second you on the TSX. I think the area where the Accord is lacking was mentioned above - exterior styling, it's out of gas. It is still a really nice car but when compared to the new Altima, Camry, Aura group it doesn't look substantial enough - especially in the rear of the car. If you see a loaded EX, it looks good except the cheap / light weight rear end trunk / bumper combo. The previous couple of versions looked better IMO, this one looks cheap. I hope the new design fixes this while maintaining the classy / quality interior. One thing that I saw recently that concerns me, and makes me think Honda/Acura may too be giving up their quality level was the RDX. My wife and I considered one of these in the fall and I saw more than a few things about the interior that appeared to be cheap both in material and fit. I was suprised - I really hope it's not the new direction for Honda.
 
I also had a similar thought on the Aura interior as it relates to the pictures above. Why design it so that everything has to line up right if you're not going to follow through and make sure it does?

Nissan Altima was rewarded NA COTY and it had cheap hard plastic interior, worse than in Aura, and had terrible torque steer to boot. How Altima was able to get COTY?

I guess I was wrong: buyers (and not just luxury car buyers) pay attention to interior quality! It has never been a factor for me....not so far!

Hey car, while we're talking about the NA car of the year, can we have a long tem NA Most significant car of the year? Yup u probablly guessed it. A long term GMC Acadia SLT2 maybe one with AWD. In case you don't see this, i'll it to your email.
 
-Cj

Hey Karl, maybe that "mismatch" on the wood trim is actually a purposely "offset" linear design that's some form of new styling cue by GM designers that's meant to revolutionize car interiors as we know it :-)

I can't believe it -- some rather harsh criticism of a GM product and 1487 isn't on this like a fly on fresh horse dung to set Karl and the rest of us straight!
 
What bothers me most for car interiors generally is the sickening trend toward hard plastics everywhere. We have a new Nissan Xterra and Pathfinder at work, and the entire dash is a sea of hard plastic. I drove a Toyota Tundra the other day, and the same thing is true. And if memory serves, on the all-new Edge, the only padding is on the door and center armrests -- all else (dash and door panels) are rock hard.
 
Makes me not want to give up my last-generation Camrys, with their nice padded dash tops, and even the middle section of the dash, above the glovebox, is nice and soft.
 
I will agree though about the Versa -- for what you pay for the car, you get a nice-looking interior, especially the substantial looking front AND rear seats.

210 - that apparent trend towards hard plastics is one of the things I was refering to also. I hope there are a couple of companies that resist this and give us an alternative, as well as maybe force (via competition) the ones that are downgrading the interiors to rethink things.

I was thinking the same thing 210delray. Where the heck is 1487 on this issue? Must be busy managing construction.

"The Aura is supposed to represent the "next generation" of GM interior quality. It has been touted as a vehicle that will stand toe-to-toe with the industry's best."
  
So let me get this straight, the entire reason for your beef is because of the false promises of marketing and press releases? Get a grip man. How many mainstream buyers will even be exposed to any car's media packet? Let's be realistic here. Auto enthusiasts especially should throw anything a manufacturer touts out of the door. Every new entry lux sport sedan is supposed to be a 3 series beater and exactly how many have been successful(in mag editors' opinions)? Absolutely none. Newflash, marketing hyperbole is mostly B.S. and I thought we all knew this. I thought the point of these long term tests was to evalutate these cars on their actual merits. It seems your concerned with verifying the press release material which is a complete waste of time. If/when GM ever produces and nicely constructed interior, the proof will be in the pudding, not in one of Bob Lutz's speeches. Also, if you want the future of GM interior quality, it would make sense to start at the top of the chain with Cadillac and work your way down.
  
My dad's '98 Olds Intrigue has soft touch plastic covering the entire dash as well as the door panels. My '05 Mazda3 is comprised entirely of rock hard black plastic but they did include one novel idea with regards to the door to dash alignment- the door trim slightly overlaps the dash trim so you cannot see where they meet. I just noticed this the other day after owning the car for 2.5 years. Regardless, I think hard plastics seem to be here to stay.
  
Bimmerjay- my cousin's TSX has large gaps between the door & dash and the faux aluminum is not perfect aligned either- did you notice this as well?? Also, keep in mind the TSX is not superior to the Accord in any fundamental way- it's simply the European Accord that's a shorter version of ours. I do agree however, that trying to align that strip of wood in the Aura wasn't a smart idea. Seems to difficult to execute consistantly.
  
It's summertime people, maybe 1487 is on vacation....

chavis,
 
First of all, I own a TSX. The only thing that even comes close to proving your impression of the car is the larger than average gaps between the door and dash panels. Even still, both gaps on either side are identically the same. It's not like you can fit half a finger in one side and two fingers on the other. They're even.
 
The "faux aluminum" is actually real metal, unlike the cheesy plastic "aluminum" on the Aura interior. The new Sentra wreaks of cheesy plastic "aluminum" as well. At least Honda has the sense to make their aluminum trim out of real metal. I also don't have any problems with misalignment of the trim pieces. They all look fine to me and I sit in the car every day, so I think I'd notice them if they existed.
 
Lastly, does the corporate norm for false advertising and misleading statements give GM a pass to continue to build sub-par interiors? I don't think so. Personally, I don't think it matters if Lutz said anything about the Aura's interior being above average. The fact still remains that it's not that great of an interior. Much better than most GM products, but still only par at best.

chavis, I didn't note an unusually large gap but the metal trim did line up correctly. I know the TSX is a Euro Accord, my comment was just an observation that the Accord did not appear to be a step down from the TSX- or the TL for that matter in terms of materials and finish quality. I actually stepped into the TSX expecting to be underwhelmed for the very reason that it was "just a Euro Accord" and instead walked away impressed. Its interior was asthetically beautiful (IMHO) and very well crafted.
  
The TSX is actually a good comparison to the Aura in this situation because the metal trim piece flows into the door panel in a similar fashion. I doubt a TSX could be found with a misalignment as bad as the Aura - the Aura's problem looks more like a fundamental design issue rather than poor manufacturing tolerances.

Flic- calm down, I wasn't even shooting negative attention towards your car. I actually like the interior of the TSX and TL (TL gets real aluminum instead of plastic). Also, I wasn't implying that the alignment was "as bad" as the Saturns, however the fact is that it's not aligned. Your panels are aligned, her's are not. Chalk that up to manufacturing process variations. Just as Karl said, the GreenLine panels aren't as bad as this long termer's so nothing is guaranteed. You don't have to justify your gaps to me, I'm just making a point since someone brought up the TSX. However, since we're praising Honda I wonder why they didn't include illuminated radio controls on the first run of TSXs? When I drove her car at night, I realized my econo car had a lit wheel while her $29k Acura did not. Luckily, this has since been rectified during the recent refresh for '06. According the Acura.com- that stuff is called "titanium finish" trim with "aluminum look" trim as an accessory. Real aluminum usually feels cooler or warmer to the touch compared to the surrounding materials. Sounds like "cheesy" plastic to me.
  
"The fact still remains that it's not that great of an interior. Much better than most GM products, but still only par at best."
  
For all of you saying the Aura is supposed LIGHT years ahead of any mainstream GM product ever- I simply do not agree. I think my pop's Olds has a nicer interior compared to the Aura. The doors have cloth inserts (or vinyl with leather seat option) and a leather covered center armrest. The Aura lacks these items. 90% of the dash/door material is soft touch with a flowing design style and everything is aligned save for the huge gap on the passenger door/dash meeting point. The material hasn't been faded by the sun either and he rarely cleans the interior at all. Yes, there is some flashing and some coarse material in the lower sections but sounds no worse than the Aura to me. People who've rode the bash-the-General Express for too long are becoming out of touch and have short memories. Oldsmobile from '98-death was GM's best recent effort in my opinion, not the Aura. Replacement models of the Intrigue, Alero and Aurora would've probably been the best cars the General ever made. Unfortunately, the brand couldn't last and here were are now...

chav,
 
I'm calm :-) no worries. Sorry if I came off otherwise.
 
I just thought I'd voice my opinion on the TSX since I own one. I'll chalk your cousins panel alignment issues up to inconsistencies in the manufacturing process as well. Mine is flawless however. I also don't really see a reason for illuminated wheel controls. Once you drive the car enough, your fingers go right for the controls without forgetting which ones do what. No need for illumination. If the aluminum trim is actually plastic, it's fooled me. I can't even tell.

Well we all know this is the moment Karl has been waiting for because he has had a problem with the Aura ever since it won NACY over his beloved Fit. Now we FINALLY have the pics to prove the Aura is as bad as he has been telling us for months. The door panel alignment doesnt look good to me but unless we can see some pics from competing models how can we say how bad the Aura is relative to its "superior" peers? I know for a fact I have been in several late model imports (G35, MDX come to mind) where the gaps between the door and dash are quite large and you can cram your finger into the gap. Never seen this mentioned, never saw any close up photos to point this out, etc. Its like no one has ever seen this before. Not surprising because it appears to me that auto journalists are out to prove their long held positions are correct and thus they do thorough investigations on GM interiors to make sure we all understand that GM sucks at interiors and they ingnore such matters on other brands. Either put everyone under the same scrutiny or dont even bother with the close up photos. Others have noted the less than stellar materials in the Camry and the lackluster fit and finish but I have yet to see Karl post any close ups of the Camry interiors.
 
Its quite obvious that the beef with the car is more about its winning of an Award than the car itself. The camry, nor FIt were quantum leaps over anything else on the market contrary to Karl's continued bitching about the Aura not deserving the award. The camry was merely surpassing the 2003 Accord (finally) and the Fit was yet another small car that just happened to be slightly sportier than the other options on the market. Neither was groundbreaking and just like the Aura, the 2007 Camry was merely "catching up" with faster, better equipped cars in the segment. It was no more deserving of the award than the Aura. At least the Aura offers disticntive exterior design and a lower price than the camry.

"How is that possible? How can this car, hailed as the ultimate proof that Saturn -- and GM -- have finally gotten serious about producing great vehicles, not completely knock me on my you-know-what with benchmark build quality and faultless execution? Glad you asked."
 
I find this interesting since the author has been generally positive about recent GM interiors- on vehicles that he likes. All of a sudden once the Aura comes into the Edmunds fleet seems to be saying GM is all talk and no execution on interiors. I'm also wondering where anyone (from GM or the press) claimed the Aura interior is the best GM ever did and is a world beater. I would say generally speaking the Aura interior is competitive with Nissan and Honda products, but not near VW quality. I think we can say that the Aura is proof that GM has yet to produce absolute knock out interiors on EVERY new product, although they seem to be getting close to that. The CTS, Vue, Silverado and Lambda interiors are definitely of a higher standard than the Aura interior.

"I'm also wondering where anyone (from GM or the press) claimed the Aura interior is the best GM ever did and is a world beater. I would say generally speaking the Aura interior is competitive with Nissan and Honda products, but not near VW quality."
 
Well, there's one person who claimed the Aura's interior (as well as every other aspect of it) was great. That person would be, uh, YOU! And I quote:
 
1487 - Aug 19, 2006 5:37 pm (#9 Total: 18)
  
  
"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."
 
And also: (this one was in CarSpace)
 
"R&T was very impressed with the car inside and out, they had no negative comments about the interior unlike C&D who said it was cheap AND poorly assembled. I dont really trust C&D that much so I wasnt surprised. No other magazine said the vehicle was poorly assembled and my experience supports that."
 
And also:
 
1487 - Nov 30, 2006 11:26 am (#18 Total: 45)
     
"MT's award is not strictly dedicated to enthusiast vehicles. They are very clear about what they are looking for; the most significant new vehicle in its segment. One could argue the Camry should've won this year but I am more inclined to think the Aura is more significant in this class because it is the equal of the Japanese class leaders."
  
 
 And also:
 
1487 - Dec 13, 2006 6:20 pm (#44 Total: 45)
  
 
"You cannot prove the Accord is better built or more reliable than the Aura so it's pointless to say that. If you buy an Aura you get more space, more power and better looks, plus a 6 speed auto for thousands less. That is fact. Unless you are prepared to prove that the tolerances on an Accord are tighter than the Saturn dont say the Honda is better built. Modern GM cars (all cars really) are built to the same standards of Honda in 2006."
 
  
I could find more examples, but the point is clear. For months we've heard 1487 talk about how great the Aura is and how it's fully competitive (if not superior to) other competitive models in EVERY area, including interior build quality.
 
Now his position is, "Well, yeah, the Aura's interior has issues, but so do all the other cars."
 
It's like his position changes to support his latest argument.
 
Hard to believe, I know.

Karl,
It's as though you were waiting... waiting......

Guilty as charged. Much more than any GM rep it's been 1487 touting the Aura as the final word on GM's great interiors. So yes, when I saw the woodgrain mismatch I thought of him first.

excellent research, but I am searching for the contradictions in my earlier statements. I did not see where I ever said anything that lines up with your assertions in the initial post. Furthermore, I do not work for GM and I am not a paid automotive journalists. Here's the deal, if you have a problem with what was said by your fellow auto writers I suggest you take it up with them, not me. There are reviews of the Aura that were positive with regards to the interior. Guess what, I didnt write any of them. If I'm not mistaken Dan Neil (a notorius GM hater of your ilk) had mostly positive things to say about the car, shoot him, send him a nasty email, do whatever. Just dont blame me.
 
I dont have a problem with the Aura's interior plastics, to me they are no worse than what you find the Altima or Accord. The door trim issue is worth noting however, but I dont see what that has do with the price of eggs in China, or my commentary on the Aura's interior plastics for that matter.
 
" could find more examples, but the point is clear. For months we've heard 1487 talk about how great the Aura is and how it's fully competitive (if not superior to) other competitive models in EVERY area, including interior build quality. "
 
Total lie, but desperate times call for desperate commentary on your part I see. I have never said the Aura is superior to every other competitive model in every way. Your extensive quoting did little to prove otherwise. I do feel the car is better looking and cheaper than its rivals and it offers peformance that meets or exceeds EVERY japanese V6 sedan in this class. That is fact. Never said it was the hands down choice in this class, but it is worthy of consideration.
 
Furthermore, if you are going to continue to debate me you need to learn the difference between production tolerances and poor build quality, they are not the same. The G35 has a gap between the dash and the door panel, this is obviously an acceptable production tolerance for the G35, but it doesnt mean the car is poorly built. It means the car is built to whatever standard Infinfiniti allows. The Aura has an issue with the door panels aligning and this means that for whatever reason they have a loose tolerance for those two panels. Its something that should be corrected in the future. This is not the same as the car being shoddily put together as you seem to be suggesting. A car that is poorly put together would have wildly varying gaps and aligniments on every car as well as parts of the dash being poorly installed. I have not seen this on the Aura, inside or out. You spent a lot of time researching quotes (that dont actually prove anything) but you didnt prove that my earlier statements about current GM build quality were inaccurate. Just look at the panel gaps on the average GM car and compare them to others. You dont mention the Aura's exterior fit and finish in your rant above so I assume you agree that the exterior has tight seams and looks good.
 
"I could find more examples, but the point is clear. For months we've heard 1487 talk about how great the Aura is and how it's fully competitive (if not superior to) other competitive models in EVERY area, including interior build quality. "
 
You can find more "examples" but your point is still lacking. BTW, are you somehow suggesting that the entire point of your picture show above was to prove to ME that the Aura is a piece of crap and not deserving of NACY? I hope that isnt the case. Nice way to put words in my mouth though. I just said the Aura isnt up to VW standards and then you go and find quotes from me essentially saying the same thing and pronounce "1487 changes his story depending on the time of day! He's inconsistent!" Forgive me if I dont quite feel "busted" by your aforementioned "proof".
 
Nice try though, you really put some time in on that response. Glad to know you pay so much attention to what I write here. Its good to be loved!
 
"Hard to believe, I know."
 

"Karl,
It's as though you were waiting... waiting......"
 
Yeah the quality of his post shows he was guided by anger and frustration as opposed to common sense. I guess he finally "got me" after all. Woe is me.

"I do feel the car is better looking and cheaper than its rivals and it offers peformance that meets or exceeds EVERY japanese V6 sedan in this class. That is fact."
 
Okay, you just said "that is a fact." So when we show it to be slower and/or less refined (through interior noise levels and/or editor commentary) than the Japanese competition what will your new position be?
 
Nevermind. I already know.
 
As far as "anger and frustration" go, only insofar as being this engaged in a pointless conversation. fin

"Guilty as charged. Much more than any GM rep it's been 1487 touting the Aura as the final word on GM's great interiors. So yes, when I saw the woodgrain mismatch I thought of him first."
 
Only problem is I never said this was the greatest GM interior ever or even the "final word". Other than that your statement is true. For the record I think the SRX is GM's best interior right now and if I'm not mistaken you liked that interior.
 
BTW, I find it interesting that you have yet to note that other people (namely well paid, respected auto journalists) have liked the Aura's interior. Your basic argument that I am the ONLY one who thinks the interior is competitive and I think that because I am hopelessly biased is clearly shot down by the fact that this is one of the most liked (by press) GM sedans of the last 10 years or so. If I was touting a car that was blasted by the press MAYBE you would be making some sense, but I'm not so your not.
 
If one interior gaffe disqualifies any car from being satisfactory in terms of build quality than I would think quite a few cars would have to be put into the Aura's "unacceptable" category. Dont you? Oh wait, that only applies to cars you dont like.

"Okay, you just said "that is a fact." So when we show it to be slower and/or less refined (through interior noise levels and/or editor commentary) than the Japanese competition what will your new position be? "
 
Based on all the test info I have seen the car is as fast as anything out there. 0-60 in 6.2secs beats the Accord, Sonata and altima (with CVT). The camry was clocked at 6.1 I believe by MT and that is slightly faster but for all intensive purposes is a tie. Actually, R&T clocked the XR at 5.9secs which still beats the camry. Havent seen anything from Edmunds touting the Aura's high noise levels, but everyone else has said the car is very quiet. Do you live in the real world or read any other publications? Just curious, because you continue to act like I am totally making this stuff up about the Aura. I do believe you are aware that the car got the NACY trophy and has been well liked by most reviewers. Now you are arguing the XR's performance isnt as good as the others in this class? If you have the facts to prove the Aura lags in performance and quietness let me know.
 
BTW, I dont count editor commentary when it comes to gauging refinement. Too subjective, lets just stick with the dB readings since they arent partial to different brands. Based on the C&D test a few months ago the Aura is not louder than its competitors. It matched the Camry in 70mph cruising and full throttle acceleration noise levels with the OHV V6. I would imagine the DOHC V6 is quieter. I'm sure you can find a way to disregard those numbers though. Let me guess your "instincts" tell you otherwise.

What's all the fuss about noise levels and "refinement"? Silent cars = boring cars. If there's one beef I have with the latest cars, it's that their engines are simply too quiet. So much so that as a driver I feel isolated from the car. What happened to cars with nice engine sounds that one enjoys listening to?

He's baaaaaaack!
 
Must have been a short vacation!

There goes our rational, logical discussion. I think it was our vacation that was short.

oofaa........ I thought the 4th was next week........

Maybe Lutz could hire a certain somebody as his "hatchet man." Then "Maximum Bob" can say all nicey-nice things, exit the stage, and send out his sidekick for the nasty stuff!

1487 - Just an FYI, I think its best to compare numbers within a comparo, or at worst from the same magazine/publication. I have not seen a C/D review of the Aura XR, but I remember reading recently in the letters to the editor that the Camry and Altima V6s that were tested for 10 Best ran 5.8 and 5.9 to 60.

Just a non-scientific stat that I've been doing on my own: I've been keeping track of how many XE's vs. XR's I've seen on the roads. Current count by me is 3 XE's and 1 XR. I've seen plenty more Aura's, it's just that I wasn't able to get a good look at the badge on the back to tell what trim it was.
 
IsaacL has also been doing the same thing. His count is 4 XE's vs. 1 XR.
 
Like I said, it's definitely not scientific, but I'm going to say that the majority of Aura buyers are going to opt for the 3.5L instead of the 3.6. At least those in the Harrisburg, PA area have been.
 
Anyone else take notice to this trend?

alpha,
 
I believe c&d had test results in their initial short test and the car was listed at 6.2 secs. C&D hasnt tested a V6 camry yet so we dont know what time they will get. The Altima was timed at 5.9secs with the stick, they havent tested the CVT V6 version yet. Other times I've seen are in the mid 6 second range. Bottom line is that the Aura is right on top of the fastest cars in this class. If you feel that .1 or .2 secs is a decisive victory for the Camry than that is your opinion. I would say that is basically a tie since .1 sec could easily be within a margin of error for the test equipment.
 
Bimmerjay,
 
"There goes our rational, logical discussion. I think it was our vacation that was short."
 
Nothing that was stated was illogical. Just say you dont want to read what I wrote. dont confuse a difference of opinion with being "irrational". I guess by rational you mean everyone was on the same page following the "official" positions that we are all supposed to subscribe to here. Those who dont want to read dissenting opinions or have their minds opened every once in a while probably shouldn't run a blog or visit one. Just my thoughts on the matter.

I have noticed that at least 2/3 of the Aura's I see are XE models. You dont need to see the badge to know which is which, the XR has the chrome trim and the distinctive 18" rims.

1487, you are incorrect. While C/D has not posted a full Camry V6 test, they clearly published the 0-60 time for both the V6 Camry and Altima in a recent letters to the editor column. I will look up the issue for you when I get home. I agree that .1 or .2 indicates the cars are similar speeds, I am just making the point its good to hold certain variables - like publication - constant, and that depending on who tests the vehilces, the Camry and Altima may be faster than the Aura.

1487,
 
Thanks for the tip on the chrome trim, but it's kinda hard to judge the wheel size/design when the vehicles moving.

"BTW, I dont count editor commentary when it comes to gauging refinement. Too subjective, lets just stick with the dB readings since they arent partial to different brands."
 
Classic 1487.
 
Editor comments are partial. dB ratings do nothing for demonstrating the quality of the sounds around you. Is it wind noise, tire pounding, rattling poor fitting plastics? dB ratings don't tell you. But they are impartial.
 
Objective ratings like 0-60, lateral g, dB, and "others" are a poor reflection on the qualities of a car. Yes they profide fodder for your ramblings, but in reality they don't translate in to "QUALITY" You can test cars all day long with the same objective findings and they would represent a world's difference in execution.
 
Another example is that gap tolerances show you nothing about the quality of materials in the interior.
 
I love that you only want Editor comments when they are supportive, but when C&D, Karl, Automobile or others comment on the relative lesser quality of the Aura interior, you want to keep to the objective findings.
 
I wonder if there is an objective finding on how sharp are the knives on the armrest? Or if there is an objective finding on the intermitten rattle that comes from the dash near the passenger side airbag? Is there an objective test for the hardness of the plastic on the door panel? By the way why is there no cloth or leather there? (Thought you may have been a part of the defense of GM meetings on that pathetic oversite)

Objective measures, holding publication constant:
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/12396/the-quickest-cars-of-2007-20000-to-25000.html

alpha,
 
got your point.
 
Brett,
 
Too little, too late. This ship has sailed.
 
"Objective ratings like 0-60, lateral g, dB, and "others" are a poor reflection on the qualities of a car."
 
that is one of the more ridiculous things you have said here. WHy dont we just abandon test numbers altogether? I mean what is the point of any instrumented testing if C&D lovers like yourself are going to say "numbers dont matter, its all about the editors opinion". This is typical garbage posted by people who dont like it when their fave imports dont dominate performance tests. Stop with the excuses. They do tests for a reason and they do count for something, at least amongst auto enthusiasts. A quiet car is a quiet car, lets not get into the specifics of what is making noise and what isnt. You just never give the exceptions and excuses a rest. When an American car is quiet you say "well it's quiet isnt as good because those dB ratings dont tell you the quality of that quiet". Some thing have to be looked at scientifically and this is one of them. I just let the dB ratings speak for themselves. Good thing you arent a lawyer with these suspect arguments.

So, 1487 says a dB is a dB no matter the source:
 
therefore, a baby crying at 90 dB is just as soothing as Barbara Striesand's (or insert your favorite singer here) singing at 90 dB.
Anyone agree with that?

I would find the baby and Barbara Striesand a wash (ha!), but I get your point. But then, you're assuming an automotive editor can discern a pleasing engine roar (i.e. Nissan Altima) from harsh, grinding engine noise (Saturn Aura). And as 1487 has pointed out, that's impossible.

I should have brought popcorn and a soundtrack to read those posts from Karl and 1487. Gosh, you two argue like a married couple!! lol j/k
 
So with all the "grinder noises" of the Aura's v6 and the ect, i'm guessing that the accord v6 is very fast considering it has 0-60 times very similar to those of cars more than .5liters greater... I wonder what the result will be when the new accord comes out. That old design is holding its own extremely well!
 
Finally i just want some opinions. Does the passat compete with the accord and others? And what happened to all the Sonata and fusion people? Its been a long time since i heard from that side of the fence. I think that was when the Midsize Sedan comparison "1.0" closed down...
 
I still hate seeing the "Fun to drive" AWD ford fusion commercials(cs FWD I4 cars...) and now the "Faster 0-60 than Acura TL... and better braking" altima commercials are starting to sting too... I'd like to see the Passat thrown into this. Then again, I knew VW wanted to leave this area when they introduced the Passat W8 awhile back. Maybe honda should make a 4.4l W8 from 2 S2000 I4s and get out of crossfires like these....
 
-Cj

"They do tests for a reason and they do count for something, at least amongst auto enthusiasts."
 
That statement lacks all credibility and logic to the point of being farce.
 
Those tests are the starting point for evaluation, not the deciding factor. If they were all "enthusiasts" would be driving the car that dominates the "objective" criteria. But is that what they are driving?
 
Seems to me most "enthusiasts" prefer the Mazda 6 to the Camry, but the Camry wins hands down in the objective tests. Why is that? Could it be that subjective feel has something to do with it?
 
For you it is ALL or NOTHING. Objective and No Subjective. But that is not real world. The BMW 328i is not "faster" than the competition, but a great number of people prefer its dynamics to that of the competition. NONE of those dynamics are represented in Objective numbers.
 
Your "enthusiasts" label seems to love RWD over FWD, but the objective tests don't always bear out the superiority. In fact, many times an AWD vehicle will objectively handle better, but the "enthusiasts" will still not line up.
 
Is that a better lawyer argument for you. It is pathetic that everyone has to be so express with you. But I guess subtlety is completely lost on you, and I didn't even think I was being that subtle the first time.

Enthusiasts apparently like RWD because it lets them steer the car from both ends. Can you "drift" a FWD car? On other hand, in really bad weather, guess who gets stuck, w/ or w/o traction control?
 
My visit to Saturn Auras' interior, while improved over the abysmal stuff Saturn used to call "interior trim", pretty much matching Karl's observations - bad fits, creaky bits, felt unfinished.
 
However, test driving a new '07 Camry revealed Toyota's pinching pennies too. Some door handle and dashboard trim fit was shoddy, while the interior door handles flexed like a willow wand. Does Toyota think this will make us buy Lexus instead?
 
As for Euros and Hondas, way overrated but better than many other brands.

"But then, you're assuming an automotive editor can discern a pleasing engine roar (i.e. Nissan Altima) from harsh, grinding engine noise (Saturn Aura). And as 1487 has pointed out, that's impossible."
 
Stop with the exaggeration please. I mean seriously, calling the 3.6L motor harsh really undermines your waning credibility. Even your buddies over at C&D like GM's 3.6L motor. Granted, I know its part of your job description (at least you think so) to classify anything and everything made by the General as inferior but the DOHC V6 has been well received by all the major mags and even Edmunds. Its funny that you would be praising the 3.5 VQ because that engine has been called unrefined at the upper end of its rev range by many editors. How ironic that you would suggest THAT engine is far more refined that one of GM's most refined engines. I've driven the STS and CTS with that motor and it is free revving and sounds good.

from edmunds review:
 
"As good as the Aura XR looks, the best part is the 24-valve DOHC 3.6-liter V6 under the hood. This all-aluminum V6 is thoroughly modern, and it produces 252 horsepower at 6,400 rpm and 251 pound-feet of peak torque at 3,200 rpm.
 
With the Accord's 3.0-liter V6 rated at 253 hp and the Camry's 3.5-liter V6 delivering 268 hp, the Aura V6's output might seem modest. But the Accord V6 only musters 232 lb-ft of peak torque and needs to rip to 5,000 rpm to do it, while the Camry's V6 also needs to spin hard to deliver 248 lb-ft at 4,700 rpm.
 
In comparison, the Aura XE's V6 makes its power in the GM fashion, emphasizing a broad power band at quieter, friendlier engine speeds than its Japanese-branded competitors. And the GM V6 is smooth, quiet and efficient, just like its competition from Toyota and Honda. Oh yeah, it also runs on affordable regular-grade gasoline."
 
In spite of the erroneous information about the Accord's V6 I think the quote is self explanatory. Coarse, unrefined and noisy? Sounds right to me.

The 3.6 has been well received in just about every review I've read. Look no further than the SRX long term blog here at Edmonds to find positive opinions. I sampled it in the STS and SRX (but never in an FWD application) and didn't find it harsh. 1487 raises a great point- the VQ has been lambasted more times than the 3.6 for NVH quality.
  
Every Toyota engine I've ever driven purrs as if it's frictionless. I won't argue that point but I do like to feel what's going on underneath the hood. Nissan's VQ has a distinctive growl but to say the 3.6 is unrefined compared to the Altima's 3.5 requires a child's wild imagination. It seems Karl's opinion always goes against the grain when GM receives any positive recognition.

brett8200,
 
"Is that a better lawyer argument for you. It is pathetic that everyone has to be so express with you. But I guess subtlety is completely lost on you, and I didn't even think I was being that subtle the first time."
 
Nothing was lost on me, I dont know what you are trying to prove and I doubt I ever will. You are simply arguing for the sake of seeing your text on the screen. You came to Karl's aide (again) and that is noble but I dont see why you are getting bent out of shape. anyone who doesnt believe that test data is valuable in comparing the capabilities of vehicles is a little of of touch with reality. I NEVER said that you need to ignore all subjective evaluations but I DID say that numbers to tell a story and sometimes you need to just accept them at face value. I find that people defending imports (that would be you) never run of of excuses when their favorite cars tie or lose to "lesser" vehicles. Interestingly enough, BMWS do well in most comparisons and the performance data usually backs up the assertion that BMW makes some of the best sports sedans/coupes on the market. Its amazing how numbers tell the story when the "right" car is shown to be the leader but they are to be disregarded when the "wrong" car is shown to be right up there with the supposed benchmarks. Since you like editorial comments so much read what Edmunds said about the 3.6 V6 in the Aura XR road test.
 
Back to engines, let's not forget that Honda engines are not known for isolation or quietness. Honda engines are known for being easily revved and smooth from idle to redline, but quiet refinement is rarely used to describe a Honda engine. I current (or any model) Accord has never been considered a class leader in quietness or ride quality.

the accord hasn't been a class leader but it is in the top 3 in terms ov overall refinement. Go and check. Either it won or it was in the top 3. In fact, it recently beat out the camry and altima and others on car and driver.
 
You would be a great lawer! You should try to defend the passat for a change. Its a great car but no one wants it because of PAST reliabillity history... Or cars like saab that are soo rare on the streets.
 
-Cj

I have nothing to "defend" when it comes to the Passat. It has a bland exterior and a nice interior. Performance is solid but it's pricier than most of its key competitors and VW doesnt have the rep to support the high prices of the Passat, especially the V6 version. I rarely see Passat's that arent 2.0T models. I'm not one for buying cars that everyone has so I can see the appeal of the Passat but I just dont like it's styling. Even the camry looks somewhat better than the Passat to me.

1487 you seem to think "quiet" and "refined" are the same thing when in fact they arent. Im not saying this because I enjoy Honda or Acura vehicles but they have some of the most refined V6 engines at any price. Butter smooth at any RPM with a refined snarl. My 2 V6 Honda vehicles, a 2005 Odyssey Touring and a 2003 Acura CL-S 6MT.
 
It doesnt have to be quiet to be considered refined!

"It doesnt have to be quiet to be considered refined!"
 
x2!

1487,a Porsche 911s flat 6 is "REFINED" but its cleary audiable. Im not saying the Aura does or doesnt have a refined drivetrain as Ive never been inside one. And regarding your fluff about Honda V6's, just about every comparison Ive read which involves a Honda V6 there is the word "REFINED". Even though the Honda J Series is old ( about 10 years +) they are still competitive. I believe I read an article a few months bag in some rag where the IS350, G35, and TL-S were compared. And even though the TL-S has the least amount of power it was considered to be the most refined engine of the 3.
 
Back to the Aura.... It seems to be a good car but I think GM needed this car to knock down the leaders (Accord/Camry) to really be considered class leading. But the major thing (to me) thats holding the car back isnt its engine its the fact that this car really has no history where as the Accord and Camry have proven themselves for the last 20+ years. Its going to take more than one genertation to get that kind of record and instant recognition.

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2007/saturn/aura/index.html#
 
This link has pictures of the Aura interior. The wood trim in some of these pictures is out of alignment ,nearly identical to the pictures with this article.
The interiors without wood trim look to be in perfect alignment.

I also checked out all "beauty” photos of Aura interior I have and all they have mentioned misalignment. But Aura concept photos show perfectly aligned interior. Therefore I conclude it is not by design but rather because of production process limitations (error pricey to fix).

"1487 you seem to think "quiet" and "refined" are the same thing when in fact they arent. Im not saying this because I enjoy Honda or Acura vehicles but they have some of the most refined V6 engines at any price. Butter smooth at any RPM with a refined snarl. My 2 V6 Honda vehicles, a 2005 Odyssey Touring and a 2003 Acura CL-S 6MT. "
 
They may not be one in the same, but noise levels are a clear measure of refinement when talking about engines. Reviewers often refer to NVH levels- if one engine has comparable or superior NVH levels to another its hard to say the former isnt "refined". Bottom line is that noise seems to be acceptable in Honda engines because of the type of noise being made, but generally speaking noisy engines are NOT considered refined. Karl and others can continue to whine about the 3.6 not being refined (for no other reason other than its a GM engine) but the question is how can one quantify that? If its not based on NVH levels than what is that opinion based on? Unlike some commenting here I have experienced the engine in several different vehicles and as far as I can tell it performs and sounds like an import DOHC V6. Many reviews back this up.

Had a chance to take a close look at the FJ Cruiser recently and the fit and finish was lacking. Actually I saw two and both had the same problems. Since Edmunds has a LT FJ I would love to see a Karl photo expose on the FJ's build quality. The gaps on the exterior panels were noticably large and you could see the hinges for the doors when looking in the gap between the door and front fender.

Tons of info and pictures:
 
Long Term Test:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/LongTerm/articleId=115586
 
Long Term Blog:
http://66.160.188.111/roadtests/!discloc=.ee91da4&nopopup=1&cat=2007ToyotaFJCruiser
 
1487, next time, maybe do some "investigatory journalism" (love Zoolander!) of your own, and take pics yourself if you want to expose other mfg's failings.

Hey Karl,
I was just wondering how come there haven't been any more updates to the Aura's log nor a Long Term Introduction on this site or Insideline?
 
Also I was wondering why there are sometimes big lapses in a vehicle log being updated? For example, it seems like a long time ago since the Cadillac SRX, Toyota Prius, or Lexus RX400h have been written about.
 
Just wondering......

I realize that people who drive all sorts of expensive cars for a living get a little jaded. After driving 3 BMW's over the last several years I realize that cars in this class won't compare. But I think perspective is needed.
 
1. Nobody ever got stranded on the side of the road due to misaligned interior trim.
 
2. These Saturns are $25,000 cars in the real world market of discounts and rebates that accelerate well, handle pretty well, and have numerous safety features and good crash test scores.
 
3. The "benchmark" Camry is a decent car, but all the fit n' finish in the world won't make it handle well or avoid an accident at 80mph like a better handling car.
 
4. If you really want to point out IMPORTANT disadvantages of such a vehicle, try looking more at depreciation when giving reports. Our loaded '03 Saab 9-3 Linear launch model, a nice safe comfortable car, if a bit unrefined for the class, had no takers at $11,000 with 60K miles. That's a $22,000 hit in 3 years. A BMW 5 series would have been cheaper to own. Ah, but then Edmunds' job is ultimately to help sell new cars, isn't it? Pointing out what bad uses of one's limited cash they are wouldn't help sell ads.

Karl, I understand your point, but have a bit more perception, please.
 
IMO it's unfair to judge Aura with the same criteria as Accord and Camry, as you have done. Yes, the Aura may not have an impeccable fit and finish to be qualified as an NACOTY, but you've got to give credits to Saturn as a company for general improvement. A subsidiary which is slowly but steadily starting to blossom and getting a grip of what "quality" is just can't meet the same expectations than the more experienced.
 
Le's put it this way: Fiat Panda, a supermini, won the European Car of the Year Award back in 2004. Though comparing the fit and finish of a supermini (a car that's supposed to be cheap) and a large family car isn't that fair, I bet very few started to compare Panda's quality and reliability with, say, Hondas, Veedubs and Toyotas and claim "de-thronement". Fiat just doesn't have a bright reputation. Also, Citroen, which suffers from reliability problems, too, has been 3 times in the Top3 since year 2000.
 
Fiat has improved a lot during the last few years and the development is altogether continuing, with such bella macchinas as Bravo and Nuova 500. It is still mostly considered as an alternative marque like Saturn in the U.S.A, though.
 
I'm guessing they awarded the Aura because honestly it's the first Saturn worth considering in years.