Hi all! I've got a 93 SE that'* frankly getting very tired. I've been VERY happy with this car, and am strongly thinking about getting another Bonnie, but am on the fence, as part of me wants V8 power aka Aurora or STS/SLS type car.

Looking for a VERY quiet ride at 75-80 MPH, and a comfortable ride. Good handling is nice, but not mandatory. A fast 0-60 is nice, but I'm thinking a fast 50-70 might be more important.
If I go with another Bonnie, it'll definitely be the Supercharged one.

Are there any year Bonnie'* to avoid, or ones better? I'm thinking 98 or newer, same with Aurora or Caddys? Know the Northstar went to regular fuel in 2000, as well as getting a stiffer chassis in all 3 cars. Feedback welcome, and thanks for a great board!

Sid

95 and up N/A bonnies are to be avoided due to intake faliure they say that in 00 is was supposed to be fixed but i beg to differ

I prefer the 98-99 over the 00+ SC'd cars. They're quicker with the same motors, most would say they handle better, and they look like a car should IMO. More room inside too if it counts, and since they're not the newest generation, they'll be cheaper.

98-99 are very good years for an SC car, lots of mods for them, could find a low milage one in great shape too.

test drive the cars you're thinking about getting and decide for yourself what you like best. I'd have to disagree about the feel of the 00 compared to teh previous generation. The 00+ is much stiffer feeling and does have better handling. It is only heavier. Definately test drive the Aurora.. very nice cars definately.

Anyone with input comparing the Aurora to the Bonne in terms of quietness, comfort, speed & mileage? And how they compare to the Caddys?

I have an Oldsmobile LSS with the supercharged engine. Very fast in stoplight to stoplight. 0-60mph in the 6.8sec range stock. SSEi and LSS supercharged definatly worth a look from 96-99. They are reasonably light and very easy to mod. 2000+ SSEi'* look super nice but are quite heavy but just as easy to mod..

yea the 2000+ is about 400 lbs heavier on average

You need to be a little more specific my friend. Regarding Aurora, are you looking second generation (2001+) or Classic (95-99). If so, the Classic is comparible to the 2000+ Bonnevilles and the 2nd Gen is comparable more so to the STS in my opinion.

The Classic is only available in the 4.0L V8 however the second gen offers two powerplants (3.5L V6 and 4.0L V8 ). General rule of thumb, the SC'ed 3800 is faster stoplight to stoplight, but the Aurora is superior in the higher RPM/speed bands, plus the 4.0L generates 90% of its tq from 2000-5900 RPM...this is desirable.

As for build quality/ride quality. The Aurora is has better fit and finish qualities where the Bonneville is more sporty and offers the HUD...the Aurora counters with a very well equipped Driver Information Center.

I will continue the comparo once you reply with some more specifics into what you want to get.

Either way, both are incredible cars.

My mom once owned a 95 SSE, and now she has a 00 SSEi and I drive a 2001 Aurora so I can give you a pretty good comparison of them. The fit and finish of the Aurora definately is a whole lot better than the Bonneville. I really loved the interior of the Bonneville (2000+) but after driving the Aurora for a month then driving the Bonneville, it feels really cheap inside. The road noise is pretty much the same between the two cars. Both seem to have the same suspension too. Aurora handles better and has much firmer steering than both my mom'* 00 SSEi and my brother'* 00 SLE probably because it is somewhat lighter. The brakes are also somewhat more precise it seems like. I have the 3.5 aurora so that in part has to do with the reason why it might handle better. The SSEi gets better gas mileage than the 4.0 that'* in the Aurora but the 3.5 I have is getting 25.4 MPG average whereas my mom'* SSEi is getting 20.9 average in the exact same type of driving. You hear the engine less on the Bonneville than the aurora. I've heard that Oldsmobile engineers made the firewall with less sound deadening to give it a more European feel to it and so you can hear the engine more on the aurora. Let me tell you too that the engine sounds great! The Aurora will definately give you a European feel to it when you drive it. It drives a lot like my aunt'* 2004 BMW 330i. The Bonneville drives like a, well, American car... (not saying it drives bad.)

the previous generation bonneville 96-99 has a better interior build quality I think than the 2000+. They don't feel as cheap inside. The 2000+ have a better exterior sleek design to it though and look really aggressive.

I'd have to say the Bonneville belongs in a more sporty category whereas the Aurora is more of a entry level personal luxury car that belongs with the Cadillacs and lower end BMW'* and Mercedes. In my mind I thought of the 92-99 Bonnevilles as a luxury/sporty sedan but the 2000+ generation feels like it leans more toward sporty than luxury. Just my oppinion though.

Still, words cannot accurately describe their differences the only way to tell for yourself is to take each car you're looking at for a test drive.

Jim & others: Thanks for your responses, gives me food for thought.

Yes, I'll agree that I just need to go test drive all the models I'm considering and make a choice. I think the real issue is I haven't made up my mind about what kind of car I want, as in luxury v/* performance v/* blend of the two. Comfort will have to rate highly due to my 140 miles/day commute, and highway speed and manners will rate higher than stoplight to stoplight performance. Only drawback to the Aurora 4.0 I see is that there doensn't seem to be many cheap mods to improve performance v/* the 3.8 SC motors.

Thanks to all, and thanks for a great board. I've lurked here for a few years, but only recently posted. Great tech articles here.