SW17LS

This is revisionist history here bent to suit your argument. For one, Oldsmobile sales had fallen 40% over the 10 years leading up to the release of the Aurora. You make it sound like Oldsmobile was on top of the world and the Aurora drug them down and that couldn't be further from the truth, sales were in a death spiral. Second, the 88 and 98 continued to be sold alongside the Aurora, the 98 until 1996 and the 88 until 1999. So, the Aurora did not replace those cars, they were dropped because nobody was buying them. What killed Oldsmobile was not doubling down on the concept of the Aurora, not the Aurora. Aurora was a last ditch effort to same Oldsmobile and like GM does, they sabotaged it themselves. Any desirable Cutlass was LONG, LONG gone from the brand by the time the Aurora came around.

The 88 and 98 were examples of why Oldsmobile was failing, cars that were too big and too bland for what modern buyers wanted, poorly made, and buyers just didnt want them anymore. The Aurora and later the Intrigue brought new life into Oldsmobile. Had it not been for it, Oldsmobile would have been folded far earlier than it was.

Remember, the Oldsmobile symbol was a rocket. The brand was never supposed to be about cars like the 88 and 98, thats what Buick was for.

When we were shopping for an Aurora, there was no no haggle pricing.

My father's Continental was a V6. In 1995 they put a transverse V8 in the Continental, which was not the power plant used in the Taurus SHO.

Byprodrive

iTrader: (1)

I belive most of the changes at Oldsmobile were due to John Rock, he was the guy that got Shelby to do the Series 1 project.

SW17LS

Yep, they were. When they lost Rock they lost their only shot at keeping Oldsmobile around.

Toys4RJill

I agree. There was plenty of offerings from GM at time. Aurora was a good effort. I liked them. 2nd gen as well. The idea was to bring new customers to the brand.

sadly, brands go...guaranteed that the name Aurora work in the modern era as a brand or trim level before Oldsmobile (if they were to return)

mmarshall

Not exactly, but there is a fair amount of truth that the Aurora didn't help the division any. John Rock may have had good intentions, but he also made some serious mistakes. The Aurora wasn't the only one. The attempted marriage of the Shelby organization and the Olds 4.0L V8 also turned out to be a flop.

Dropping both the FWD and RWD Cutlass, both of which sold hand over fist, may indeed have been a mistake. But another big problem with Olds (and most of GM, at the time) was the level of built-quality dropping into the toilet in the 80s.....the company still suffered from the effects of that in the 90s.


Both the 88 and Rocket names date from as far back as the late 1940s. They were not mutually exclusive.



I'm aware it was not the same V8. I used the comparison to refer to transverse-V8s in general.

SW17LS

Thats just not true Mike. The Aurora sold great, it got a ton of great press and good reviews, and it brought new interest and buyers into the brand. After Rock left they considerably raised its price, which reduced its sales, didnt surround it with any strong products and left it on an island, then the second gen Aurora didn't replicate any of its prior success.

Remember, in its first year the Aurora sold as well as the LS400 did in 1990.

Which again proved that the Aurora was not the issue, as it had much better build quality than other GM products at the time. The Olds 88 and 98 you think everybody wanted were the examples of poor build quality, not the Aurora. The RWD Cutlasses of the 80s were one thing, but FWD Cutlass models from the 90s were part of those dramatically declining sales we talked about.

What the 88 was and what it became were not the same thing. Oldsmobile was not historically a land yacht company is the point, they always were supposed to be a little more technologically advanced and more youthful than say Buick, and the examples of that are all throughout Oldsmobile's history. The Aurora actually made total sense as an Oldsmobile, moreso than the 88 and 98 of the 1990s.

The comparison doesnt make any sense then...

KayGee

Duplicate post

KayGee

That brought back memories. I still have every booklet from every car that I ever purchased, including my Aurora

Byprodrive

iTrader: (1)

Jay Leno has a Toronado with 1,000 Hp !

mmarshall

The 1966 Toronado/Eldorado was the first attempt by the Big Three at doing a modern FWD American car....the last attempts were the Cords/Auburns of the 1930s. It was, naturally, strongly front-end-heavy, especially with that long hood/front-overhang, big 425 V8 up front, and no drive-shafts or differential in the rear. That led, as you noted, to somewhat ponderous handling/braking due to most of the weight being concentrated up front, and then even more so when brakes were applied heavily. The relatively small bias-ply tires of the time didn't help much, either....and, with all that weight on them and the soft-rubber compound, they wore like crazy on the Toronados and Eldorados, especially up front.

geko29

Yeah, they weren't even close. The Continental had Ford's modular 4.6L--essentially a transverse variant of the engine from the Mustang GT. The Taurus SHO's 3.4L V8 engine wasn't even really a Ford at all, with blocks produced by Cosworth in Ontario and then shipped to Yamaha in Japan for assembly.

mmarshall

Yes, most of us are aware that the SHO's V8 was Yamaha-produced. I used it only as reference to one of the (relatively few) transverse-V8 vehicles to be put in production, mostly from Ford and GM.

AJT123

Yes, Bill is the best. Absolutely hilarious if you like dry humor. Love how he talks about storage for guns, etc. He really knows his stuff, too. Although I had to let him know via comments that the swinging vents in the LS430 are wayyyyy more than just side to side gimmick. He doesn’t seem to be a big Lexus guy and that’s cool but he respects the ones that deserve it.

I love the cars he reviews.

Re: Aurora those had terrible fit and finish and reliability. But they looked good inside and out.

I also remember the 4.0 in it, having the exact same specs as the LS400, down to peak revs for power and torque.

SW17LS

The Auroras had quite good fit and finish actually, for a GM vehicle.

Och

iTrader: (3)

Wasn't the Aurora very similar to the Pontiac Bonneville? The Aurora was never a big seller, but the Bonneville was very popular.