So 25% would take it to about 25 mpg city, 37.5 mpg highway (though the 25% is probably not split evenly between city and highway).

It should get 30 mpg combined, since the non-hybrid gets 24 mpg.

Granted, there might not be a 4-cylinder non-hybrid version to compare it to, but still, GM doesn't mention that most of the fuel-economy benefits of the hybrid Aura probably come from the downsized engine.

A Pontiac G6 has both engine configurations, and the fuel economy of the 6 cylinder is the same as the Aura -- 20/30/24. The 4 cylinder version of the G6 gets 23/33/27, so if the combined rating is 30 mpg (which we're estimating), then half of the extra 6 mpg are likely attributable to the fact it's a 4 cylinder instead of a 6 cylinder.

Unfortunately, the "hybrid" Aura has less horsepower and less torque than the 4 cylinder G6, so really all one gets is an 11% fuel economy improvement, with a performance penalty (which is counter to the usual case, where a hybrid boosts power and torque somewhat).

For a $2,500 premium, that's not too great. Simple payback from gas savings is around 165,000 miles.

No performance figures given but going by the size and a curb weight: 3647 lbs. this will be a loser. 164 hp (122 kW) at 6,400 rpm and 159 lb-ft (215 Nm) @ 5000 rpm is going to add up to weak 0-60.

Let's compare a Prius:
Curb Weight: 2932 lbs. and is down only 20 HP. giving a better HP/weight ratio. It's starting torque is much higher as well 295 from the electic motor.

The Prius is going to beat it on the MPG as well so nice try GM but you flunk this test.

Actually, they're also doing a bait-and-switch with the price premium. If you look again at the Pontiac G6, the 6 cylinder carries a price premium of $3,580, or 19%, above the price of the 4 cylinder version. Using those same numbers (either the dollar value or the percentage), the price of a theoretical 4 cylinder Aura XE would be around $16,365 to $16,745.

Taking the latter price as the basis, that would mean a $23,000 price for the "hybrid" would be a $6,255, or 37%, price premium.

With those numbers, the simple payback period for gasoline savings balloons to 415,000 miles -- which is far beyond the likely usable life of that vehicle.

I really see no reason why someone would choose that vehicle, given then many better options on the market with respect to price/performance/fuel economy/emissions/financial sense.

Two comments: first is that my 2003 Toyota Corolla (non-hyrid) gets between 39 and 41 mpg on the highway, even with three people and their luggage; second, I am astounded that a lead acid battery is still spec'd into the design. This seems to be a symbol either of stuck in the box mindset by engineers or of a willingness to let the propulsion battery pack to drain down fully before starting a recharge. Why else leave a 30 pound dead weight in place?

I could have used the Camary hybrid for an example but it also has more power on tap 187 total and 199 lb.-ft. @ 0-1500 rpm from the electic motor alone, the gas engine ads 138 lb.-ft. @ 4400 rpm but I'm not sure how this combines but it would beat the Saturn so it would have been totally no contest.

Just my views as a car guy who has seen the light on the environment.

This is kind of pathetic. It's good they're putting effort into this, but auto makers can do much better than a 25% increase in fuel efficiency. If they won't even take full advantage of current technologies, how can we expect them to push the boundaries and come up with something truly innovative? This is why American car companies are dying. They should expect no sympathy from us.

This is also called a partial hybrid and not the new 2 mode hybrid GM recently announced. Basically it's just a big alternator like the article said. And it shouldn't be confused with a full hybrid like the Prius.

The one thing that bugs me about this car is there is no instant fuel consumption display gauge on the dash. IMNSHO the IFCD is almost as important as having a hybrid powertrain. You have no idea how well you're driving fuel-economy-wise if you have no feedback. GM did the same thing for the Vue GreenLine. A shame.

Anonymous said:

I really see no reason why someone would choose that vehicle, given then many better options on the market with respect to price/performance/fuel economy/emissions/financial sense.

Agreed. In fact, I would extend that to the entire GM lineup, not just this embarrassment of a "hybrid".

I'm not even looking at any car that gets less than 30 mpg in the city.

Unfortunately, that doesn't leave very many vehicles, and even fewer in my price range.

However, biodiesel is available nearby, so a Golf TDI wouldn't be so bad.

Not likely that you will see a 'instant fuel consumption display' on a vehicle that gets average to poor gas milage. Using a gauge to advertise your poor performance is bad advertising.

Honest comparisons between the Aura would be made with the Camry Hybrid. Curb weight is 3600lb. Combined fuel economy is 39. Price is $26,200 MSRP for the Camry.

So do the math. $3600 price difference and only 5mpg penalty. Camry Hybrid owners would have to drive 500k miles to make up the cost difference at the current $2.50/gallon.

In my opinion, this further illustrates and solidifies the reasons General Motors is closing manufacturing facilities while Toyota is adding facilities.

GM is bringing to the marketplace a "half" product that will further drain their resources. Furthermore, the public's perception of GM will continue to deteriorate.

A four-speed transmission? It's as if they are trying to use outdated technology for every other part of the car. An aura four-cylinder with a modern six-speed transmission would probably get back half the hybrid's mileage advantage. Come on GM, you're brighter than that...

Man, GM moves slow, they partnered with Ford on 6-speed auto transmissions. Ford is using 5 and 6 speed autos in their production vehicles for the last 2-3 years now.

I don't think the Aura hybrid compairs with the Camry that well. While similar in size the Camry has it all over the Aura in performance, note the HP and torque numbers posted above. I know which car I'd rather be in when trying to merge on the highway.

Yet again this is considered a partial hybrid. Every one is comparing apples to oranges here.

Oh and GM is working on 8 speed transmissions.

"Oh and GM is working on 8 speed transmissions."

I don't think anybody's complaining about what GM is working on. They're always working on lots of good stuff.

But what they are releasing to market is another story...

I'm leasing a 2007 Aura XE and will be up for a new car at the end of 2010.

By then, that plug-in electric Saturn Vue should have been available for about a year and I *hope* a similar version will be available for the Aura in 2010. Because I'm not much interested in this "hybrid", which essentially just turns tself off instead of idling...

If the plug-in Vue can go on battery alone for up to 15 miles, then it'd likely be enough for my daily drive to work which would REALLY cut down my gas needs...

Before the cynics write the AURA Green Line off BEFORE it even hits the market, which is somewhat ignorant, let us not forget what happened with the VUE Green Line. The automotive press made all sorts of “GM’s Mickey Mouse hybrid couldn’t possibly work…” type comments BEFORE they road tested the thing. Six months later, they all one by one had to eat crow. When the vehicle was compared to the Toyota licensed technology found in the Ford Escape Full hybrid, their real world fuel economy tests indicated that the VUE could get about 94% of the fuel economy for thousands of dollars less than the full hybrid Escape. AMCI did a fuel economy test using a real world cycle and found the following:

• Ford Escape Hybrid FWD 31.6
• Toyota Highlander Hybrid 30.5
• Saturn VUE - Green Line 29.7
• Lexus RX 400h Hybrid 28.0

See more on this at:
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060531/FREE/60530006/1024

Why can GM’s BAS system come so close with so little technology? Because the full hybrids only work in the pure electric mode under light throttle at low speeds. This is the only time where the Escape had an advantage… I’ve driven the thing, and sure enough, if you drove like the little old lady going to church, you’re still driving it too hard to stay in the electric only mode.

They both turnoff at idle/stop… no advantage their for full Hybrid. Both use regenerative braking.

VUE has better highway ratings.

Escape’s superior city rating is a bogus number as the system is calibrated around the EPA’s test cycle, which itself was inspired by 1973 L.A. traffic patterns. Here’s what the Consumer’s Report People said about EPA ratings:

"The EPA sticker can help you evaluate relative gas mileage among vehicles, but not absolute mpg. Until the EPA ratings are made more realistic, discount the EPA sticker numbers for city travel as follows: conventional cars and trucks, 30 percent; larger hybrids, 35 percent; diesels, 36 percent; smaller hybrids, 42 percent.”

As I said, the system doesn’t stay in the pure electric mode unless you “bubble foot” the gas pedal. Once the gas motor kicks in, the Escape and the VUE systems provide similar results… except of course the VUE does it with a super duper alternator, a heavy duty belt, and a small battery. Saturn got a lot out of a simple system.

So the question is, what if the same thing applies to the Green Line Aura? I am not going to get fooled a second time on this one, instead I will wait and see how the thing performs in the real world.

Doug Hart

Before the cynics write the AURA Green Line off BEFORE it even hits the market, which is somewhat ignorant, let us not forget what happened with the VUE Green Line. The automotive press made all sorts of “GM’s Mickey Mouse hybrid couldn’t possibly work…” type comments BEFORE they road tested the thing. Six months later, they all one by one had to eat crow. When the vehicle was compared to the Toyota licensed technology found in the Ford Escape Full hybrid, their real world fuel economy tests indicated that the VUE could get about 94% of the fuel economy for thousands of dollars less than the full hybrid Escape. AMCI did a fuel economy test using a real world cycle and found the following:

• Ford Escape Hybrid FWD 31.6
• Toyota Highlander Hybrid 30.5
• Saturn VUE - Green Line 29.7
• Lexus RX 400h Hybrid 28.0

See more on this at:
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060531/FREE/60530006/1024

Why can GM’s BAS system come so close with so little technology? Because the full hybrids only work in the pure electric mode under light throttle at low speeds. This is the only time where the Escape had an advantage… I’ve driven the thing, and sure enough, if you drove like the little old lady going to church, you’re still driving it too hard to stay in the electric only mode.

They both turnoff at idle/stop… no advantage their for full Hybrid. Both use regenerative braking.

VUE has better highway ratings.

Escape’s superior city rating is a bogus number as the system is calibrated around the EPA’s test cycle, which itself was inspired by 1973 L.A. traffic patterns. Here’s what the Consumer’s Report People said about EPA ratings:

"The EPA sticker can help you evaluate relative gas mileage among vehicles, but not absolute mpg. Until the EPA ratings are made more realistic, discount the EPA sticker numbers for city travel as follows: conventional cars and trucks, 30 percent; larger hybrids, 35 percent; diesels, 36 percent; smaller hybrids, 42 percent.”

As I said, the system doesn’t stay in the pure electric mode unless you “bubble foot” the gas pedal. Once the gas motor kicks in, the Escape and the VUE systems provide similar results… except of course the VUE does it with a super duper alternator, a heavy duty belt, and a small battery. Saturn got a lot out of a simple system.

So the question is, what if the same thing applies to the Green Line Aura? I am not going to get fooled a second time on this one, instead I will wait and see how the thing performs in the real world.

Doug Hart

I recently purchased the Aura Green Line. Before my purchase, I test drove both the 2007 XE V-6 Aura, and the 2008 4 cyl Aura. I did an extensive test drive (close to one hour, approximately 25 - 30 miles of city and highway driving), driving the way I normally drive.

Using the on-board computer to calculate mileage, I achieved a city mileage of 17.5 mpg and highway mileage of 24 mpg with the XE V-6. In the 4 cyl Aura, the mileage was not much better, less than 20 mpg city, and 26.5 mpg hwy (with a noticeable drop in performance). In the Green Line, I achieved 26.5 mpg in the city, 34.5 mpg on the highway. The performance was better than the 4 cyl Aura, but not as good as the XE V-6.. All test drives were done back-to-back, same roads, same routes, same traffic. So, I chose to purchase the Green Line with the noticeable improvement in fuel economy cancelling out the loss in performance. We have had the car less than one week, and are very pleased with our purchase.

I thought you would like to see a "real world" comparison.