I’ve almost completely forgotten about the Oldsmobile Aurora, but they’re still out there, even in salty Michigan. I’ll make any excuse to take a picture of my Riviera, but the similarities between the two cars pictured above bear pondering.
Both entered the market with a flourish, earning resounding accolades from the automotive press. Both were intended to bolster the reputation of their respective brands. Both could be considered “personal luxury” cars, although the Aurora gained a pair of doors. And although I prefer the Aurora’s platform mate (the Riviera, of course), the Aurora itself has not aged too badly, in my opinion. The ’63 Riviera has clearly stood the test of time, but what’s your opinion on the ’90s Aurora?
For a full Curbside Classic piece on the Aurora, click here.
For my most recent Riviera update, click here.
That’s a great shot! Made more appealing, and interest added to the scene, with them facing each other. Two of GM’s top 25 designs IMO. As much as I thought Chrysler’s LH cars raised the bar in domestic sedan styling, I felt Aurora design was more refined and sophisticated-looking. As attractive, or better looking than my favourite, the Eagle Vision. Both designs are winners!
As I’ve mentioned here before, GM retained some of the best design and styling talent in the world, through their worst decades. You can see it in their concept cars, and some production models. Some excellent prototype ideas, that never saw production. It was other influences, beyond stylists control, that led to some bad designs hitting the street. One of their best ’90s styling efforts.
Thanks for this great image, and comparison.
You can clearly see the strong styling influence on the ’96 Aurora, in the 1989 Oldsmobile ‘Tube Car’ concept. Confirming, that the Aurora is essentially, a 1980s design.
You’re welcome! I think a lot of ’90s cars have aged fairly well because they were relatively nondescript. I really thought the 1993-’97 Camaro was going to look terrible as it aged, but I find that they still look pretty good to me (if you like that kind of thing).
Wow, I don’t think I’ve come across an Eagle Vision in years! I do remember that when the Cab Forward Chryslers came out, they were a pretty big deal. My high school friend’s mom bought a new ’93 Intrepid SE (or whatever the top model was) in green with gray lower body cladding. It was a really, really nice car with lots of power, and it looked great.
Owned one, downshifting on any grade above 2%. Too heavy. Trunk very small for big car.
In real life the Riv is a winner – whole package stands the test of time. The Aurora not so much. I was very impressed when I drove one new, disappointed me as a used car 20 years later. The used example was ultra clean and well maintained but still had the overheating issue, a weird trunk opening and a long list of parts made of unobtainium. Even back in the day my friend the service manager saw a constant stream of first and second gen cars on the lifts at Reilly Oldsmobile for major issues. Very sad to say and that’s from someone who drives an Aztek!
That’s too bad about the Aurora. My ex cousin-in-law (is that a thing?) was an Olds salesman at the time, so I got to take a spin in one when it was new. It had decent power and sounded good. I guess the engine’s Northstar roots might have caused some problems.
“My ex cousin-in-law (is that a thing?)” – Yes. Yes Aaron it is. Mine owned a 1992 Toyota Celica. 😉
Good observations, I hadn’t thought about these cars in those terms really. There definitely is a parallel between these cars, separated by 30 years.
It’s a deep subject, a book could probably be written, or at least a lengthy CC article. I think the bottom line is that in 1963 GM was at their zenith and was about a decade from facing serious headwinds in the market. In 1994, GM was approaching their nadir, rounding the turn to the homestretch towards bankruptcy. By that point, few people were really interested in something new or different from GM, no matter how good it was (and as good as it looked and functioned, maybe not so reliable). Most of their business was from legacy buyers, which the 95 Riviera was aimed at and it sold well for one year.
Personally, I think the 1st gen Aurora was a great looking sedan while I’ve never cared much for the 95-99 Riviera. The platform’s proportions just don’t suit a coupe very well, especially one that has semi-retro styling that was historically associated with long hood/short deck design placed onto a front-drive cab-forward platform.
Very good points. I do like the ’95 Riv personally, although I see what you’re saying about the proportions. I miss a time when GM came out with cars I thought were kind of cool, although I did check out a new Colorado at the local dealer recently. Unfortunately, this is the panel gap on the fender. It was bad enough that I took a picture; I hope that’s not a harbinger of the kind of assembly we can expect on these things (because I like them a little).
That poor panel fit is surprising. These days, quality control from all automakers, GM included, is so much better than. It was in the old days (even 20 years ago). My non professional impression is that assembly goofs to that degree are pretty rare today.
Yeah, that’s why I was a little shocked to see it. It was way worse in person than in the picture – someone really dropped the ball on the line.
When the two were new I preferred the Aurora by far; simplest reasons were cohesive, better style and V-8 in the Olds.
But later, by the early 2000s I knew more. I had always liked big coupes and the Riv was one. The turbo V-6 was proven and credible. I bought a used ‘97 in pearl white with red interior and enjoyed the car for about three years. It was the better choice of the two for me.
The Riviera was pretty, good driving, and well-built (for its time). The Aurora was pretty, good driving, and poorly-built. For that reason alone, the Aurora will not stand the test of time, unfortunately.
The first-gen Aurora was a distinctive and elegant design, except for the squinty-looking lights and opening in the front end which I never cared for. I did like how the oval tailight and surrounding area recalled the first Toronado. The inside was elegant in appearance, but I found the seating less comfortable and more cramped than in the similarly-sized Park Avenue or 98, with those two older sedans having considerably better outward visibility, passenger room, ingress/egress, and cargo room. Better reliability too with the Buick 3800 V6 rather than the Northstar-based V8. So the Aurora is one of those pretty cars you probably don’t want to own. The second-gen Aurora was unfortunate, with all the style swept away (the reason for this is well-known – it was originally intended to be an 88 replacement called the Antares, not the 98/Toronado replacement the first-gen was, but the real second-gen Aurora was cancelled due to slumping big sedan sales and the Antares became the next Aurora). Even the first-gen car suffered a lack of confidence – no “Oldsmobile” badges other than the cassette door on the standard stereo unit. That’s how much self-doubt there was in Olds-land in 1995; could you imagine a BMW or Benz or Lexus with no brand logos or callouts? The car seemed embarrassed to be an Oldsmobile, which didn’t make me feel confident about buying and driving one.
The original Riviera holds up great style-wise and is reasonably easy to maintain for a car of its era. I liked the ’95 Riv too (if you want the optional supercharged engine, wait for a ’96 and the Series II motor), but it’s a bit big for a coupe and this is one of those cars that can look great or look malproportioned depending on angle. Interior looks great in pictures, less so up close and in the plastic.
Great discussion of these cars; I never noticed the similarity between the taillight panel of the Aurora and the original Toronado.
The Riv clearly has the edge in timeless styling and collector appeal, but I like the Aurora as well. A friend of mine had a black ’96 Aurora, kept in immaculate condition, as his daily driver for almost 15 years. It looked stunning in all black. He racked up nearly 200,000 miles and surprisingly never had any major mechanical issues. He did, however, have his fair share of electrical gremlins towards the end of his ownership – namely with the HVAC and stereo systems. Some parts were becoming difficult to obtain even 10 years ago, and I’d imagine even more so now.
Best “edition of the “Riv” , I’ve always thought!
I imagine a lack of parts for important systems is always going to be the challenge of owning a car with extensive electronics. How many good cars will end up salvaged because of something seemingly minor?
The First Gen Riviera was a fantastic design.It was originally Bill Mitchell’s design study for Cadillac. It didn’t share any design heritage with contemporary Buicks, it was quite unique for a production vehicle. In my opinion, the First Gen is similar to a coach built automobile like a Facel Vega.
I really liked the styling of the Aurora, outside and in. I liked the wrap around cockpit which reminded me of the ’69 Pontiac Grand Prix. I had considered it, but I chose to buy a three year old Cadillac Seville instead. A very nice car, but I didn’t escape some problems with the NorthStar engine.
The Aurora’s platform mate, the Riviera, was also not as popular as had been hoped for. The styling was polarizing, and was the most extreme model since the Boat tail. The period between 1974 to 1993 were Riviera’s more conservative Brougham years. Unfortunately the new Riv was released as the mass appeal of big luxury coupes was rapidly dwindling.
I had also considered the new Riv at the time I chose my Seville. (This was probably the best potential car buying time of my life!) and oddly enough, I just bought a ’97 Riviera.
I wasn’t the biggest fan, but after being around the car for several weeks I have come to appreciate more aspects of the car. It will probably never be hailed as a Classic. So Aaron, hold on to your ’63, they’re not building any more of those anymore!
I wanted to like the Riviera, but the styling always seemed a little off to me. The Aurora, however, was far more attractive. The problem is that as they aged, the Riviera was blessed with decent powertrains while the Auroras all turned into money pits. I cannot remember the last time I saw an Aurora.
And what a great photo!
What is off to me is the wheels are so far inboard of the fenders.
Thanks JP, I’m not sure what kept me from buying a ’90s Riviera as a daily driver in the 2000s; I guess I just never came across the right one. I never even considered an Aurora for whatever reason, but that Northstar mystique probably didn’t help. Whether their problems are overblown or not, I don’t know, but why tempt fate? 🙂
I used to be very much in love with the 1995-99 Aurora, and it remains one of the few cars from the modern era that really floats my boat. I never used to care much for the stock wheels, and was quite enamored with a black one in my area that had multi-spoked alloys shaped so that they appeared not to have as positive an offset, and had a tasteful decklid spoiler that followed the contours of the car. I once looked at a 1997 that was metallic green with a two tone emerald green interior (these cars were available with a wider array of colors than you’d imagine, yet the majority of them seemed to end up specified in “dealership lot friendly” hues that weren’t as polarizing), but it sold before I could try to make a business case for buying it.
The Aurora’s styling is very much a product of its era, but that’s long enough ago to play in its favor… Nobody’s going to squint and ask you if it’s electric or AWD, and how big the infotainment screen is. I could easily fall in love with one again if it stared me down without cataracts in its eyes and the disheveled look of an end stage beater. Northstars run pretty nice when they’re running. Probably have to search and hoard some Aurora specific parts for the future, though one probably should’ve started doing that a decade or more ago. Would be a neat fair weather cruiser that I’d be proud to seen in, and it’s a shame more haven’t survived.
You’d want to find one that had its coolant changed regularly based on elapsed time, not just miles driven. On the Cadillac owners forum, that was an important factor in head gasket life.
We drove an hour and a half up to Cleveland to the see auto show the year the Aurora appeared, which I think was 1994. The car was an absolute stunner and I thought Oldsmobile’s future was secured. But it turned out that over time, most people didn’t want extreme aerodynamics. The second gen Aurora stepped back a bit from the slippery shape though was in many respects a better looking car, one of GM’s best designs of the era imo. But then GM pulled the plug on Oldsmobile. Maybe the acquisition of Saab in 2000 was part of its reasoning.
I know I saw the ’95 Riv at that same show but I don’t remember it, and looking at pics of it today I can see why. The ’63 is kind of the same, today looking (to my eye) like just another American coupe of the era. The Aurora was something different, a really gutsy move on GM’s part. Olds had signaled its aero intentions several years earlier with the mid-engine Aerotech, so the Aurora was not entirely unexpected. And Saturn seemed to be its smaller, affordable version.
The Aerotech is still at the Olds Museum in Lansing, in case anyone wondered. 🙂
Bought my ’63 Riviera from my then girlfriend’s dad for $300 in 1973. Fun driver, I think it was a two speed Hydramatic with that insane premium gas guzzling 8MPG V8.
Giant drum brakes all around, interchangeable with the Wildcat, about as effective as my 10 speed bike brakes when used to slow down from the higher speeds.
Sure was a great looker though (the car, not the girl).
In college, it cost more for gas and maintenance than my bar tab + tuition at the time, so it went into storage.
Sold it in 1977 for $300.
To summarize the experience: Great looker and a nice embrace in its era; a grossly overweight, coil spring saggy gas hog in need of joint replacements and gastric bypass surgery in its old age.
Ha ha, it sounds like your relationship with the Riviera was one of convenience, while I actively pursued mine. I’ve been driving old stuff for most of my life, so I accept their vices with equanimity most of the time. I will say that the Riviera’s mileage has been pretty bad, around 10 mpg. That lines up with my ’63 Thunderbird’s average mileage, so I’d say that’s just the way it was.
The mid-sized Tube Car was an Advanced Studio design that was commandeered by Oldsmobile, which was looking to make a clean break with the past. Even with zero traditional Oldsmobile cues, the production Aurora does seem to fit with the brand. It is big- sitting on the full-sized C body platform. In any case, it became the new Oldsmobile look, especially the front facia. Variations on the Aurora look would filter down to lesser models, to better and worse effect. See Alero for worse effect.
I’m in no way shape or form a Buick man but that ’63 Riviera was so far ahead of it’s styling envelope it’s amazing .
You could show it to anyone who came later and claim it’s a ’72 and they’d never know .
-Nate