Saturn releases Aura Green Line Pricing

[Flybrian]

Saturn Aura Green Line

• The Lowest Priced Hybrid; starts at $22,695
• Certified for $1,300 Tax Credit
• Receives official EPA ratings of 28 mpg city/35 mpg highway

Detroit -- Saturn announced today that the new 2007 Aura Green Line hybrid’s MSRP will start at $22,695 (including destination charge), making it the lowest-priced hybrid on the market for 2007.

In addition to its value-focused price, the Internal Revenue Service has certified that Aura Green Line buyers will qualify for a tax credit of $1,300.

“The Aura Green Line is a great value among the hybrids in the mid-size car segment,” said Saturn General Manager Jill Lajdziak. “With a starting sticker price over $2,000 less than any mid-sized hybrid sedan and a $1,300 tax credit, it makes true hybrid fuel savings available to more people than ever before.”

The Aura Green Line’s EPA fuel economy rating of 28 mpg in the city and 35 mpg on the highway represents up to a 30 percent improvement in EPA combined fuel economy compared to the non-hybrid Aura XE model (depending on driving conditions).

The Aura is assembled at the General Motors Fairfax Plant in Kansas City , Kan. , and Green Line hybrid models are beginning to arrive at Saturn retail facilities.

The hybrid system in the Aura combines sophisticated controls with a precise electric motor/generator mated to a 2.4-liter engine. The system delivers fuel economy gains by providing electric power assist during acceleration, through early fuel cut-off during deceleration with torque smoothing and by shutting the engine off at idle. The system also captures electrical energy through regenerative braking. The vehicle’s hybrid powertrain produces 164 horsepower (122 kW) at 6400 rpm and 159 lb.-ft. (215 Nm) of peak torque at 5000 rpm.

Saturn’s new hybrid sedan is based on the all-new Aura midsize sedan, which garnered the 2007 North American Car of the Year award. The Green Line features the same comprehensive safety package that earned Aura a full five stars in government frontal and side-impact crash tests, placing it among the safest vehicles available. (Visit safercar.gov for details.) Key standard features include dual-stage front, side head-curtain and front-seat thorax protection air bags; StabiliTrak electronic stability control; four-wheel disc brakes with ABS; and GM’s OnStar safety and security system.

The Aura Green Line is one of four hybrids that Saturn has announced. The 2007 Vue Green Line, which debuted last summer using the same hybrid technology as the Aura Green Line, provides the highest EPA estimated highway fuel economy of any SUV at 32 mpg.

In 2008, Saturn will offer the Vue Green Line with the first front-wheel-drive application of GM’s new, 2-mode hybrid system that is expected to deliver up to a 45-percent improvement in combined city and highway fuel economy compared with the non-hybrid Vue.

A plug-in hybrid that has the potential to achieve double the fuel efficiency of any current SUV, is also in development for the Vue. This hybrid SUV will use a modified version of GM’s 2-mode hybrid system and plug-in technology. A Lithium-ion battery pack, when ready, along with highly efficient electronics and powerful electric motors, will achieve even greater increases in fuel economy.

Complete information on the Aura Green Line and the rest of Saturn’s lineup can be found on the Web at www.saturn.com.

[loki]

isn't this system going into the malibu as well...

this is better mileage than the cobalt iirc....just looked, yes, that's correct.

[vrazzhledazzle]

Saturn Aura Green Line becomes lowest priced hybrid

General Motors today announced the 2007 Aura Green Line hybrid will start at $22,695 (including destination charge), making it the lowest-priced hybrid on the market for 2007. What's more, the IRS has certified that Aura Green Line buyers will qualify for a tax credit of $1,300.

“The Aura Green Line is a great value among the hybrids in the mid-size car segment,” said Saturn General Manager Jill Lajdziak. “With a starting sticker price over $2,000 less than any mid-sized hybrid sedan and a $1,300 tax credit, it makes true hybrid fuel savings available to more people than ever before.”

The Aura Green Line’s EPA fuel economy rating of 28 mpg in the city and 35 mpg on the highway represents up to a 30 percent improvement in EPA combined fuel economy compared to the non-hybrid Aura XE model (depending on driving conditions).

The Aura is assembled at the General Motors Fairfax Plant in Kansas City , Kan. , and Green Line hybrid models are beginning to arrive at Saturn retail facilities.

The hybrid system in the Aura combines sophisticated controls with a precise electric motor/generator mated to a 2.4-liter engine. The system delivers fuel economy gains by providing electric power assist during acceleration, through early fuel cut-off during deceleration with torque smoothing and by shutting the engine off at idle. The system also captures electrical energy through regenerative braking. The vehicle’s hybrid powertrain produces 164 horsepower (122 kW) at 6400 rpm and 159 lb.-ft. (215 Nm) of peak torque at 5000 rpm.

The reaction seems to be good... even on the import humper car sites

[siegen]

Mileage seems underwhelming for a hybrid, even if it is a mild hybrid. The Accord V6 hybrid is also rated to 28/35. It is a lot more expensive, but is also a mild hybrid system and performance oriented. The full hybrid Camry 2.4L is rated to 40/38. Is the Aura hybrid using the same EPA standards?

Unless the Aura hybrid is significantly faster than other mid-size 2.4L competition, I don't see a big reason to pay another $2-3k for a couple more MPG at best. For example, the Accord 2.4L regular model is rated to 24/34 with automatic transmission. Considering hybrids usually get less real world mileage, it's almost a wash.

[ellives]

The mileage numbers don't seem that impressive. How do they compare with other hybrids in its class?

[Flybrian]

Unless the Aura hybrid is significantly faster than other mid-size 2.4L competition, I don't see a big reason to pay another $2-3k for a couple more MPG at best.

Aura XE - $20,995

Aura GL - $22,695 (-$1300 credit) = $21,395

Factoring in the tax credit, its a $400 premium over the XE (if its equally-equipped).

[gm4life]

The tree huggers will be happy! Good job guys, those numbers might be with the new EPA rating right? Is it a 4 or 6 speed automatic?

Edited March 20, 2007 by gm4life

[pow]

Aura XE - $20,995

Aura GL - $22,695 (-$1300 credit) = $21,395

Factoring in the tax credit, its a $400 premium over the XE (if its equally-equipped).

It does lose 60 horsepower, though. A non-hybrid 2.4 (23/33 in the G6) would probably be ~$18,995.

FWIW, an Altima full-hybrid (42/36) is $24,400 - $2350 = $22,050

[caddycruiser]

Nice price, but the problem is, the mild Hybrid nature that allows it to hit that pricepoint doesn't allow it to get mileage numbers that are that great at all. And if the VUE GL is any indication, it isn't that great of a performing system in drive or mpg's.

I'll hold hope for it, but people who buy Hybrids want the highest achieving FULL systems they can get, and aren't really keen on the idea of a mild Hybrid that GM thinks is so great to allow a higher price point. They'd gladly spend the $25k (typical transaction price) for a Camry Hybrid that easily gets in the high 30's all day long, can run on pure electric, and is a generally more refined system.

So we'll see...but until GM gets full systems out, I don't see much for the mild systems, especially not with mpg numbers that are at typical 4-cyl levels for competitors.

[gm4life]

But when shopping for a car on a budget price plays a bigger role than you think and the Aura is very competive to the new Camry in all aspects. So I don't know maybe people figure if I drive hard the mpg won't be great anyways so it won't really matter.

[Farkas]

I like the fact that It's a hybrid, but if its using the old EPA regulations as opposed to the new ones, then I would not be surprised if the mileage goes down a couple more points. It will still be better that both of the other Aura's, but how will it stack up against the Camry and Altima hybrids?

People will compare the numbers and automatically gravitate towards the Camry and Altima because of the "better-looking" numbers.

Edited March 20, 2007 by Farkas

[rueben44]

Mileage seems underwhelming for a hybrid, even if it is a mild hybrid. The Accord V6 hybrid is also rated to 28/35. It is a lot more expensive, but is also a mild hybrid system and performance oriented. The full hybrid Camry 2.4L is rated to 40/38. Is the Aura hybrid using the same EPA standards?

Unless the Aura hybrid is significantly faster than other mid-size 2.4L competition, I don't see a big reason to pay another $2-3k for a couple more MPG at best. For example, the Accord 2.4L regular model is rated to 24/34 with automatic transmission. Considering hybrids usually get less real world mileage, it's almost a wash.

Something is wrong with this post!

First the author stated the mileage is underwhelming

Then states the Honda hybrid get the same mileage.

The Honda is faster or more performance oriented...right.

Then admit is cost way more (it should it is more performance oriented).

Then questions the logic of the price over a base Accord and ask why someone would pay the premium.

Well why would anyone buy the Accord hybrid?

The Aura will do well because it get a credit and is cheaper and get very good mileage. Just think once the two mode comes out this car will really be hitting the big time.

Sorry I was not making fun of the original post but the logic confused me.

[siegen]

Something is wrong with this post!

First the author stated the mileage is underwhelming

Then states the Honda hybrid get the same mileage.

The Honda is faster or more performance oriented...right.

Then admit is cost way more (it should it is more performance oriented).

Then questions the logic of the price over a base Accord and ask why someone would pay the premium.

Well why would anyone buy the Accord hybrid?

The Aura will do well because it get a credit and is cheaper and get very good mileage. Just think once the two mode comes out this car will really be hitting the big time.

Sorry I was not making fun of the original post but the logic confused me.

The Accord hybrid uses a much larger engine and still achieves the same mileage. Yes, it is more performance oriented.

Regardless of cost, the mileage in the Aura hybrid is underwhelming, even if it is so cheap. Why not just make a regular 2.4L Aura and call it the greenline? Then they could sell it for $16-17k and it would only get 1-2mpg less in the real world than this hybrid.

Why would anyone buy an Accord hybrid? I don't know, why would anybody buy any hybrid?

[siegen]

Aura XE - $20,995

Aura GL - $22,695 (-$1300 credit) = $21,395

Factoring in the tax credit, its a $400 premium over the XE (if its equally-equipped).

I was comparing it to its 2.4L 4cyl competition. Why pay $2-3k more when it's only going to get a couple more MPG?

[siegen]

Well why would anyone buy the Accord hybrid?

It gets better mileage than the 4cyl model, yet it's faster than the V6 model. It also comes fully loaded with everything already on the EX-L V-6 Accord, plus a lip kit and spoiler. Including the $1,300 tax credit, it's only $2k more than the EX-L V-6 model.

Does that make it worth it? I don't know, maybe. Again, hybrids aren't really worth it in my opinion.

[Northstar]

I was comparing it to its 2.4L 4cyl competition. Why pay $2-3k more when it's only going to get a couple more MPG?

Isn't this the question with all hybrids? Why pay quite a bit more money when you're going to have to keep the car forever to make up the cost difference in fuel?

[NOS2006]

Oooh, I might have to try to talk my mom into this! When will it be available?

[PurdueGuy]

...keep in mind that the hp difference won't matter to many hybrid buyers, as they'll baby every mpg they can out of it. Look at the hp levels Prius owners put up with. The Accord hybrid is kinda off on its own, being performance rather than mpg oriented. It's tough to compare anything to it, or it to anything...

[pow]

But when shopping for a car on a budget price plays a bigger role than you think and the Aura is very competive to the new Camry in all aspects. So I don't know maybe people figure if I drive hard the mpg won't be great anyways so it won't really matter.

People shopping on a budget aren't interested in hybrids, or even AURAs. Why spend $22K on a new car when you can buy a POS new Sebring or Sonata, both of which get similar mileage (24/34), for $15K?

Isn't this the question with all hybrids? Why pay quite a bit more money when you're going to have to keep the car forever to make up the cost difference in fuel?

There's isn't an economic incentive for buying any hybrid. People buy them because they find "MPG" analogous to "horsepower" or "acceleration." They want the most fuel economy possible. "What can she do? Sixty-slash-fifty-one?"

And for performance hybrids, people buy them for... performance, not economy.

I like the fact that It's a hybrid, but if its using the old EPA regulations as opposed to the new ones, then I would not be surprised if the mileage goes down a couple more points. It will still be better that both of the other Aura's, but how will it stack up against the Camry and Altima hybrids?

People will compare the numbers and automatically gravitate towards the Camry and Altima because of the "better-looking" numbers.

I'm worried that the effects of the light-hybrid system won't even register on the new EPA test procedures, which has proportionally less idling time, more full-blast A/C usage, and harder acceleration. Keep in mind the Green Line/BAS system saves fuel only on idle and deceleration, and it doesn't offer a smaller, lean-burn engine like all the other hybrids, because its weak electric motor doesn't provide enough assist.

Edited March 20, 2007 by empowah

[K-1]

Why spend $22K on a new car when you can buy a POS new Sebring or Sonata, both of which get similar mileage (24/34), for $15K?

Because they won't get similar mileage if you drive a lot of city miles. Sitting at a stoplight, the Sebring and Sonata are still burning gas.

With the tax credit, the upgrade from the XE to the GL is paid for, accounting for the additional equipment (StabiliTrak, auto-climate control). Which makes you wonder, why is the XE still around?

[rueben44]

It gets better mileage than the 4cyl model, yet it's faster than the V6 model. It also comes fully loaded with everything already on the EX-L V-6 Accord, plus a lip kit and spoiler. Including the $1,300 tax credit, it's only $2k more than the EX-L V-6 model.

Does that make it worth it? I don't know, maybe. Again, hybrids aren't really worth it in my opinion.

That was not a real question to be answered. My point was the Honda Hybrid which is 30K is very expensive and if you are trying to save gas then you need to think of the whole picture.

8-9K more than an Aura hybrid financed for say 5 years at say 12% and you are talking an addition what $2700 in finance charges. So you end up paying an addition 10K to get the same gas mileage but go a little faster? Please the Aura is a good deal to those who look at the bottom line and think sensibly. In today’s time most American are living check to check and have no savings. Perhaps it is because they do not look at the bottom line!

[dlight]

Everyone wants to compare the Aura to the Accord V6 Hybrids, or the other V6's because of the Hybrid name plate or it's big brother. However the Aura is more in line with the price point and trim levels of a 4cyl Accord / Camry, and has a lot more standard equipment to boot.

But since everyone wants to compare to the Accord V6, and Aura XE lets use some sixth grade math. At current gas prices, driving 15k per year, every 2 miles to the gallon = a 12 dollar a month savings. So a 5 gal. a month difference when compared to the standard XE would = a 30 dollar per month or 360 dollar per year savings. If you're doing primarily city driving the GL would offer a more substantial upgrade at 8 miles per gallon difference. That = $48 dollars per month or 576 dolars per year savings. With a $1300 dollar tax credit after two years you have a potential $2300+ savings or have reclaimed it towards the price of your car. Not to mention great emissions for the eco system. The Hybrid Accord cost approx 10k extra. And you get more stuff, but not 10k more stuff...

[Flybrian]

FWIW, an Altima full-hybrid (42/36) is $24,400 - $2350 = $22,050

You can only get the Altima Hybrid in like six states, so its a meaningless car for many people.

[Drew Dowdell]

Saturn has had one of the best customer retention rate of the domestics and is pretty high even industry wide. I'm sure there are a lot of SL, Ion sedan, and L-series owners out there that would love to trade up to an Aura Hybrid.

GM will sell every one they build.

[caddycruiser]

Still, in the meantime, I hope they get real Hybrids out in larger numbers soon, because these "bargain" ones GM thinks so highly of don't have the performance or mileage DEMANDED in the Hybrid market.

As I just saw on one site, "Unless you must have a Hybrid logo on your car.", is about all it's worth. Too bad, because the Aura is a wonderful car, and would likely do better just as as 4-cyl model alone, even though that was never it's key mission to start, offering an efficient V6 base at 4-cyl prices.

We shall see. Saturn people will buy them, but probably few others will, just like with the VUE GL which is nothing to write home about. Then again, maybe finally just having that Hybrid label on something for the masses will get some new interest, even if the benefits are nill.

Edited March 20, 2007 by caddycruiser

[thegriffon]

2008 Mileage ratings for comparison

Camry Hybrid-33/34

Altima Hybrid-35/33

Accord Hyrbid-24/32 (Ouch!)

[Drew Dowdell]

Still, in the meantime, I hope they get real Hybrids out in larger numbers soon, because these "bargain" ones GM thinks so highly of don't have the performance or mileage DEMANDED in the Hybrid market.

As I just saw on one site, "Unless you must have a Hybrid logo on your car.", is about all it's worth. Too bad, because the Aura is a wonderful car, and would likely do better just as as 4-cyl model alone, even though that was never it's key mission to start, offering an efficient V6 base at 4-cyl prices.

We shall see. Saturn people will buy them, but probably few others will, just like with the VUE GL which is nothing to write home about. Then again, maybe finally just having that Hybrid label on something for the masses will get some new interest, even if the benefits are nill.

I was just on here 8 months ago beating the drum for more premium 4-cylinder cars from the domestics. Right now the Milan and Aura Hybrid are it.

I'd buy an Aura Hybrid if I could load it out like a top of the line XR.

I'd buy a CTS-D if I can load it up good.

Just because I like to save fuel and help the ecosystem doesn't mean I want to drive an optionless, pregnant shoebox.

Edited March 20, 2007 by Oldsmoboi

[thegriffon]

A 2.4 L G6 is now rated 20/30, so 28/35 for the hybrid system is a nice jump.

[Drew Dowdell]

A 2.4 L G6 is now rated 20/30, so 28/35 for the hybrid system is a nice jump.

especially for a "mild" hybrid

[gm4life]

I agree with the two posts above. Is it 4 or 6 speed automatic anyone know?

[aaaantoine]

For $22k, 28/35 is pretty good. If those are 2008 numbers, even better.

I just wish that regular models could get fuel economy like this. If only there were a N/A near-midsizer that would get 30 mpg city vs the new EPA testing standards.

[GXT]

For $22k, 28/35 is pretty good. If those are 2008 numbers, even better.

I just wish that regular models could get fuel economy like this.

They can... you just need to buy a Honda with a manual

Accord 4cyl 5MT: 26/34

As it is not a hybrid it will not suffer from the "hybrid EPA drop" that this Aura will suffer from. And it is less expensive.

If those are the 2008 numbers for the Aura then things get a bit better for the Aura; for a 4cyl hybrid it would go from "brutal" to "not very good". We need some real-world numbers to get a better sense of how all of this compares... perhaps the GM system more closely hits the EPA numbers than Honda/Toyota's. Or perhaps we are seeing why GM has taken so long to get in the game. Or perhaps we are seeing what happens when you give your competitors a ~9 year lead in a tech.

Edited March 20, 2007 by GXT

[Northstar]

They can... you just need to buy a Honda with a manual

Accord 4cyl 5MT: 26/34

As it is not a hybrid it will not suffer from the "hybrid EPA drop" that this Aura will suffer from. And it is less expensive.

I wouldn't be so sure the Aura will have "hybrid EPA drop." I've read owner reviews at Edmunds of people actually getting better-than-advertised MPG on the VUE GL.

[gm4life]

Really Northie that is good news. Do you folks know how many gears are in the automatic tranny?

[Member55]

Why would anyone want a hybrid? It takes years to start saving money and then just about that time it's time for a new battery. Also, all these hybrid cars will be one day out of the warranty, do you really want to be stuck with paying for all the stuff that can go wrong with a hybrid car?

[Drew Dowdell]

Why would anyone want a hybrid? It takes years to start saving money and then just about that time it's time for a new battery. Also, all these hybrid cars will be one day out of the warranty, do you really want to be stuck with paying for all the stuff that can go wrong with a hybrid car?

As Fly already demonstrated:

Aura XE - $20,995

Aura GL - $22,695 (-$1300 credit) = $21,395

Factoring in the tax credit, its a $400 premium over the XE (if its equally-equipped).

[Member55]

As Fly already demonstrated:

If the fuel economy in a family car is what you really care about just get yourself a 4 cyl. Accord. A few grand cheaper with a slightly inferior mileage but there is no battery to replace down the road and no extra maintenance bills that you are almost guarantied to have with any hybrid car. IMO Over ~10 years of driving a 4 cyl. Accord will end up being cheaper than a hybrid Aura.

Edited March 21, 2007 by Member55

[pow]

A 2.4 L G6 is now rated 20/30, so 28/35 for the hybrid system is a nice jump.

28/35 is acheived using the old EPA test procedures. The Green Line is still MY 2007.

[gm4life]

GM will have the 5/100 on it! That is good news backing up your products!

[pow]

2008 Mileage ratings for comparison

Camry Hybrid-33/34

Altima Hybrid-35/33

Accord Hyrbid-24/32 (Ouch!)

Wonder what the AURA GL '08 ratings will be... 23/32? When you consider that the BAS system only saves fuel at idle and deceleration, which the new procedures have less of proportionally, I wonder if the benefits of the system will even show up on the results.

[pow]

GM will have the 5/100 on it! That is good news backing up your products!

All hybrids have an 8yr/100K warranty on hybrid components, and 10yr/150K in CA+4, I believe.

[Drew Dowdell]

If the fuel economy in a family car is what you really care about just get yourself a 4 cyl. Accord. A few grand cheaper with a slightly inferior mileage but there is no battery to replace down the road and no extra maintenance bills that you are almost guarantied to have with any hybrid car. IMO Over ~10 years of driving a 4 cyl. Accord will end up being cheaper than a hybrid Aura.

Cause I don't want a buck tooth wonder?

Again, I want a premium car with all the appointments that gets great gas mileage. As long as I can option out an Aura GL the same way I can an Aura XL, I'll bite.

[pow]

Cause I don't want a buck tooth wonder?

Again, I want a premium car with all the appointments that gets great gas mileage. As long as I can option out an Aura GL the same way I can an Aura XL, I'll bite.

You can get an Accord EX-L with a 4-banger and manual...

I just don't get the light-hybrid-at-a-marginally-lower-price strategy. If you're going to spend the bucks on a hybrid solely "for the environment", why not go all out? There isn't a strong economic incentive for any hybrid, so who cares if it's an extra $1-2K? The AURA GL would be even less attractive if there were a '07 $18,995 AURA 2.4 (24/34).

Edited March 21, 2007 by empowah

[siegen]

I wouldn't be so sure the Aura will have "hybrid EPA drop." I've read owner reviews at Edmunds of people actually getting better-than-advertised MPG on the VUE GL.

25mpg doesn't seem too good. That may not be very fair though, considering there are only 4 people who have submitted their mileage. If you're going to get a hybrid SUV, might as well go with the Escape hybrid, which averages 32mpg.

[Z-06]

It seems like GXT is a Horn-dawg and Toy evangelist coming here to convert the GM tribe.

[Northstar]

25mpg doesn't seem too good. That may not be very fair though, considering there are only 4 people who have submitted their mileage. If you're going to get a hybrid SUV, might as well go with the Escape hybrid, which averages 32mpg.

The posts I read on Edmunds claimed 29.5-30MPG.

[GXT]

It seems like GXT is a Horn-dawg and Toy evangelist coming here to convert the GM tribe.

I'm not a fan of Toyota. I'd never buy one. But I'm realistic. They are the leader in the area of hybrids. GM is the worst (of those that are in the game). As for Honda, they make a 4cyl that GM needs a hybrid just to match. Again, I am being realistic.

25MPG city is very poor for a hybrid. In the face of the other choices available, only the uninformed will buy this car.

But it is clear now why GM was downplaying hybrids. Even years later they still aren't yet able to make a good one. I hope those who though it had something to do with buses finally sees that as the PR that the rest of us saw it as from the beginning.

I hope the upcoming two-mode hybrids are at least competitive.

[PurdueGuy]

I'm not a fan of Toyota. I'd never buy one. But I'm realistic. They are the leader in the area of hybrids. GM is the worst (of those that are in the game). As for Honda, they make a 4cyl that GM needs a hybrid just to match. Again, I am being realistic.

25MPG city is very poor for a hybrid. In the face of the other choices available, only the uninformed will buy this car.

But it is clear now why GM was downplaying hybrids. Even years later they still aren't yet able to make a good one. I hope those who though it had something to do with buses finally sees that as the PR that the rest of us saw it as from the beginning.

I hope the upcoming two-mode hybrids are at least competitive.

It's important to realize that the 25mpg figure may be based on different testing procedures than other vehicles have been through. If you test car A through hills, and car B on flat land, can you compare the results? Give it time and see what real life shows...

[Drew Dowdell]

You can get an Accord EX-L with a 4-banger and manual...

I just don't get the light-hybrid-at-a-marginally-lower-price strategy. If you're going to spend the bucks on a hybrid solely "for the environment", why not go all out? There isn't a strong economic incentive for any hybrid, so who cares if it's an extra $1-2K? The AURA GL would be even less attractive if there were a '07 $18,995 AURA 2.4 (24/34).

Did you not read what I said? I don't want a buck tooth wonder <accord>. I want a premium midsizer with good mpg. I want something like an Aura XR.....loaded.... but with the GL powertrain.