So I went and took a look at a 2002 Aurora 3.5, bright electricish(?) green exterior with the tan/mint parfait interior (i know, rare color combo). I sat inside, and it felt SO much cheaper than even my old 1998 SE Bonneville! Everything had a brittle feel to it, the center console creaked really bad, and the fit and finish with the a, b, c pillars and etc were bad. The style was nice, I thought it would feel much better considering how nicely styled it is. The car was also way smaller inside than my '98 SE. Is it any wonder the foreign cars are more popular? I was very disappointed!

Sit in a Classic.

Most people won't echo your first impressions of the Aurora, its a fine interior.



I'm wondering, what were you expecting?

** I still owe you that night picture, I know **

I disagree, the Aurora interior LOOKS fine, but it sure feels like they cut corners. I sat in a few classics, they are better than the 2001 with nicer seats, and details, but they still have some ridiculously cheap parts (steering wheel buttons, center console, etc). If GM wanted to take import sales away, they should have made an interior with interior plastic that isn't creaky. It'* just my opinion.


and that interior night pic would be great! lol

half of the gm parts are made overseas anyways thats why they are cheap, haha and i also will agree i sat in my friends aura also, im 6'2 300lbs i felt like a bull in a china cabinet.

Those sentiments ring true for most North American GM cars made in the 80'* and 90'*.

Aurora was pretty good for GM, but the car wasn't promoted a lot.. GM is doing better now, but somethings still need a lot of work interior wise...

I invite you to come sit in an Intrigue instead, this will make your view of the Aurora much higher. Ive got more than my share of creaky plastic, not to mention a dash that has warped around the vents do to heat, but every car we have sits out in the heat and none of them have this problem save the Intrigue, not too mention those "sporty" seats, which translate to uncomfortable and uninviting. I have trouble riding in the car for more than 2-3 hours at a time without getting a bad case of butt pain.

Im honestly not a big fan of my car'* interior, or its comfort level. Its only saving grace is it is kinda fun to drive every now and then.

Rule of thumb, dont buy a car in a hurry.

I know you've been looking at the G/H bodies in general and I have to tell you, if you think the Aurora interior is cheap, you're definitely not going to like any of the car that share its chassis.

i think this must have been common with late 90'* early 00'* GMs, because now that i think of it, i drove a few 2000-2003 DeVilles, and they were also extremely cheap feeling inside. I was so disappointed, because the GM cars have a lot of style to them that the Japanese cars seem to lack. But I would choose quality over style anyday.

How can you say the Auroras cheap inside and the bonnevilles not? I could see if you said both felt cheap. I owned a 2005 Bonneville GXP and I thought the interior of my Aurora felt higher quality. I guess both cars have thier plus an minus

because i'm not talking about bonnevilles. My 1998, I will say, doesn't use the greatest materials in the world for sure, but things don't creak nearly as bad as in that aurora, and it'* 4 years older!

One of GM'* better quality interiors from the early 2000'* in terms of materials IMO is the Trailblazer/Bravada/Envoy. The pieces are much more sturdy. The new GMs are better yet, but sadly, the technology is not there. Also, a very underrated interior is from the 1995-1997 Cutlass Supreme. I thought the interior was very stylish and tight on that car. I have a friend with 250,000mi on her'* and absolutley NO squeaks, vibration or rattles! Even the 2000+ Impala, even though the interiors aren't really stylish at all, seem sturdier than the new Aurora/Bonneville/LeSabre.

I wish GM had released cars like the Lucerne and the new impala 8 years ago! The interior quality is so much better.