Bob Lutz reviews the new Saturn Aura and Chevy Impala

Here's Bob Lutz on the new Saturn Aura and Chevy Impala

Although I’ve been traveling extensively this month, I have found time to get behind the wheel of some of our vehicles. I’ve driven two recently that I’m quite excited about, because they really illustrate the progress we’ve been making in mid-size cars.

The first is the Saturn Aura, which goes on sale later this summer. Simply put, I enjoyed it very much. It’s a very refined, very civilized car, beautifully put together, with impressive levels of quiet, and wonderful handling.

I believe it’s a major milestone in terms of both refinement and vehicle dynamics, not only for the Saturn brand but also for GM, in the category of mid-size front-wheel-drive cars. Got lots of “what is THAT” looks while driving it, and people were invariably surprised to find out it’s a Saturn. It’s absolutely outstanding and a great value as well.

I’ve also driven an astonishing Impala with the soon-to-be-released 3.9L Active Fuel Management system, which runs on three cylinders a surprising amount of the time.

It switches off half the cylinders whenever the engine isn’t fully solicited. And because of the unique characteristic of the Impala, which for its size is a relatively lightweight and aerodynamic car, it’s ideally suited for Active Fuel Management with the 3.9L V6. You can even go slightly uphill on three cylinders.

On the fuel economy label, there won’t be a lot of difference, because the fuel economy label cycle calls for idle, for example, and on idle you have to run all six, otherwise you get a rough idle. So you don’t save anything there. And you don’t save anything at full acceleration and most of the other requirements they roll into the cycle procedure. But the way most people drive, as you know, can be considerably different from the fuel economy label cycle.

As a result, people are going to be pleasantly surprised; instead of getting worse mileage than the fuel economy label, they’re more often than not going to see better mileage. When I picked up the car it had several thousand miles on it. And the average fuel economy on the trip computer was 29.8 mpg! (We haven’t released final EPA numbers on the 2007 Impala yet, but the average won’t be that high…) I was amazed by that, and I’m sure anyone else who gets into one will be, too. It’s just the kind of thing we need to address the fuel cost issues, and when it’s available, rest assured we’ll aggressively put the word out about it.

Source: GM Fastlane blog

wwww - 6/20/2006 9:29:03 PM

+1 Boost

the aura has to be better than the american offerings cuz is rebadged Opel, I don't think is a bad thing, cuz as consumers you are getting better quality for the same price.

As for the cylinder deactivation tech, I believe the DTS was the first or one of the first to have that fuel saving goodie. It goes from 8 cylinder to 4 when idling and cruising at a constant speed. Correct me if anyone foudn another car with this tech before the DTS.

MercBasher - 6/21/2006 12:35:42 AM

+1 Boost

Impala:
I admit I have a fault, I actually like the Impala. The deactivation technology in this sedan is definitely interesting, and may in the real world be better than "hybrid" in a sedan - at least the Impalas keeps all the trunk space.

Aura:
How much money will GM make on each Saturn Aura? I'm not convinced that Saturn is a good place for GM to invest. The Aura is interesting, good looking and different from the typical GM model - which means its probably going to cost a lot to build, while not commanding a premium price!

Technology
Wasn't there a Cadillac "4,6,8" cylinder Seville or similar in the 1980s which, like GM diesel engines, was reliability challenged

PlanoA4 - 6/21/2006 10:21:13 AM

+1 Boost

You are right this was an innovation backin the 80's

Funny Honda uses that concept in the Pilot too.

Marvinlee - 6/22/2006 8:19:50 PM

+1 Boost

I went to a large "all the dealers" fairgrounds show the other week and started engines in several cars. The GM 3.9, which one magazine had criticized for idle roughness, sounded very smooth and quiet to me. The Avalon, often praised for engine silence, surprised me with noticeable vibration when I tipped the throttle pedal and brought the engine from idle up to the 3000 RPM range. So, for me the real world smoothness difference for low speed engine operation was in favor of the Impala. I suspect that on-the-road experience might well be different. Still, I was left with the feeling that GM cars might be better than I had been led to believe.

EnnNorak - 6/22/2006 10:53:47 PM

+1 Boost

In response to "M-B Basher", I had a 1981 Cadillac with the 4-6-8 engine and I promptly cut the wires off the high pressure switch on the transmission to fool the computer into thinking that the car never reached third gear. This disabled the 4-6-8 feature which was an abomination as the engine vibrated every time it went into the 6-cylinder mode. I lost only 3 m.p.g. on the highway but enjoyed a smooth engine that ran on 8 cylinders all the time. The 6-4-8 experience left a permanent bad taste in my mouth about cylinder deactivation technology. BTW, Chrysler's big "Hemi" currently has cylinder deactivation but they never proved to me that their design is fail-safe (I asked but got no reply).

Daytripper - 6/23/2006 4:46:25 AM

+1 Boost

That gas mileage for the Impala doesn't sound like anything special to me. It's about the same as what most owners of late-model Impalas with V-6s are getting now already on the highway. I don't see any signicant benefit to the added technology on the V-6 engine.

The Cadillac 6.0 Liter V-8-6-4 was first offered in the 1981 model year Cadillac Seville, Eldorado, Fleetwood Brougham, Coupe and Sedan DeVilles and the long wheel-base Fleetwood 75 Limousine. It was so bad that in 1982 it was replaced by the anemic Cadillac 4.1 Liter V-8 in most of these cars, with the exception being the Fleetwood 75 Limousine, where it continued on until 1984 or so. You could also buy these Cadillacs with an Oldsmobile diesel 5.7 Liter V-8 or a Buick 4.1 Liter V-6.