My 2002 Aurora

I

imported_Aurora40

New member
All of these were about 6 months ago. The car was new and had a coat of Meguiars Gold Class liquid wax. I've since switched to #7/MPPP/#26 and I like it better. I've also switched to taking pictures at a nearby golf-course as it is much more scenic. :)



These are all film pictures that have been scanned.



Here is the front of the car.
 
And, here is the engine. It isn't the best picture, but it's the one I have.



Edit: Hmm, the engine is a bit dusty there... I'd never cleaned it, but the car was pretty new. I wanted a picture of it when it was new. It's cleaner now than it was then (thanks to Autopia).
 
Thanks for the comments. Ejant, I really liked that front shot too, except for the crappy background. Our townhouse complex isn't the most scenic place. Frederf, the tires were dusty because they hadn't paved our street yet. It was big gravel and dust... I guess I could have cleaned them for the picture, but they wouldn't have kept the look (and I wasn't an autopian yet :) ). They'd be gray again by the time I got past my house. I didn't use anything on the front lower grills. They just look like that. I suppose I ought to so they stay looking like that. :doh Bretfraz, did you buy something else instead? If so, what? Or did you just want to try driving one?



I have a question. When I posted them, the pictures showed up as a link and had to be opened in another window. Now they are showing up in-line (which I prefer). What's the deal with that?
 
Here are some pictures when it had #7/#26 on it. I liked the depth and durability better than Gold Class. I've just recently put on BF polish and BF Protectant x2. It looks better than the #7/#26 did. It isn't night and day but it does look a lot better. It has a clearer reflection and looks wetter and deep. It also looks a bit darker and seems more metallic than before. I like the BF look. But I don't have picts yet (and really with a film camera, different lighting, and a scanner, you won't be able to tell).



pubimage.asp




pubimage.asp




P.S. If more than about 20-40 people view this per day they will probably start getting the red X. So just try it tomorrow if you get that. Sorry, but it's free...
 
Very nice car! I always thought that the Aurora 4.0 is probalby GM's second best car (behind the Corvette), and the second best engine (behind the LS-1). My third place engine would be the Supercharged 3800.



It's a shame that GM's killing off Olds. They have some of the best looking cars in GM's herd. Buick? C'mon. Pontiac? Too much plastic cladding. (although that's changing, thanks Mr. Lutz). Chevrolet? The Malibu, you gotta be kidding? Cadillac? Too "edgy" and "elderly" at the same time. What are they doing?



Keep that Olds looking like that as long as you can.:xyxthumbs
 
mmcclusk2 said:
Very nice car! I always thought that the Aurora 4.0 is probalby GM's second best car (behind the Corvette), and the second best engine (behind the LS-1). My third place engine would be the Supercharged 3800.



It's a shame that GM's killing off Olds. They have some of the best looking cars in GM's herd. Buick? C'mon. Pontiac? Too much plastic cladding. (although that's changing, thanks Mr. Lutz). Chevrolet? The Malibu, you gotta be kidding? Cadillac? Too "edgy" and "elderly" at the same time. What are they doing?



Keep that Olds looking like that as long as you can.:xyxthumbs
Click to expand...



I'd have to agree with you on all counts. I had a Corvette prior to the Aurora. The S/C 3800 is pretty impressive, but it's a little bit harsh. Actually, the 3.5 V6 has fewer problems per engine than the 3800's do, which is pretty impressive given the 3800's bulletproof rep. I wish they'd followed through with the S/C 3.5 as it would be an excellent replacement to the S/C 3800.



I too think it's a huge shame to kill Olds. They have great products and they are very attractive. Buick can't fill in for Olds because they have to still attract the LeSabre crowd. And Pontiac has to still attract the high-school crowd. I think Saturn is basically the Olds replacement which I find insane. Olds was just right. But they need time to turn around their stodgy image. Up until 1998 they still had cars like the 88 (which was nice and all, but it was pretty stodgy). The Alero/Intrigue/Aurora lineup is killer, but they'd only had it (exclusively) for about a year or two before the decision was made to axe them; not to mention that they hardly advertised for any of them. I've never seen a TV ad exclusively for the Aurora, and I can point you to the one Aurora print ad I've seen (it was in Motor Trend in 2000). Pontiac is changing for the better, but the direction they are headed is still racery. Just not with cladding. Better, but I'm not too interested. Olds was the best of all the GM worlds. Cadillac-like engines and solid structures (hell, Caddy stole the Aurora V8 and the Aurora chasis) but with better styling and more Pontiac-like handling without the cladding or red-lit interiors, and pricing that was quite Buick-like. I actually like the direction the CTS points to for Cadillac (although I don't understand the rush to RWD just because BMW does it). I like the Olds styling better, but at least the CTS is interesting unlike the rather plain Seville/Deville styling (although the Deville ought to stay somewhat conservative).



I too was rather surprised by the Malibu. I've never seen such a plain-looking American car. However, it does the job and gets around. Plus it has a V6 in a 4-banger class. Hopefully it will be a bit more exciting when it gets redone. I'll have to keep my Olds in good shape because I don't know what the heck I would replace it with.
 
Here's another shot. Again, if you get the red X, try another day, and sorry. :)



pubimage.asp




And here is my view:



pubimage.asp




Actually, this isn't a picture of my car as you can tell from the side-view mirror. But the interior color is exactly the same. My car looks exactly like this except the mirror would be red (and I have no idea how I'd get a shot like that. I guess recline the front seat, sit in back, and use a very wide-angle lens?).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top