2009 Saturn Aura Xe Sedan 4-door 2.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Before Chevrolet's Redline, there was the Saturn Red Line

While Chevy rolls out Redline special editions across more of the lineup at this year's Chicago Auto Show, we've been eating some 'member berries and started thinking about the last time GM used the term. Back in 2004, Saturn rolled out Red Line (two words) editions of the Ion and Vue. The lineup was joined by the Sky Red Line in 2007, and the second-generation Vue kept the tradition going in 2008. This was in the heady days of the mid-2000s, before the financial crisis and GM's bankruptcy reorganization that saw the end of Saturn. The press release headline for the 2008 Sky is now cringe-worthy: "Hot-selling Sky helps drive Saturn product renaissance." Performance lineups were the hot new thing, as automakers attempted to cash in on the tuner trend popularized by The Fast and the Furious. Chevy had SS models, Pontiac had GXP, and Saturn had Red Line. Across the Detroit Metro area, Dodge had a slew of SRT models, and Ford's Special Vehicle Team brought us the SVT Lightning pickup, the SVT Focus, and a smattering of hopped-up Mustangs. The performance cred of Red Line models varied from car to car. The Ion Red Line shared the same engine as the original Chevy Cobalt SS, a 205-horsepower supercharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder, 65 hp more than stock. Car and Driver tested one with a 0-to-60-mph time of 6.1 seconds and said the Ion "tears down the wall that has separated enthusiasts from the Saturn brand for so long." The Vue Red Line, meanwhile, came with the same optional Honda-sourced 3.5-liter V6 you could get in the regular Vue, and added a stiffer, lower suspension, bigger wheels with more aggressive rubber, and recalibrated steering assist. When the Vue was redesigned for the 2008 model year, the Vue Red Line was a similar proposition. The engine was now from GM, and up 7 horsepower to 257, but you could get it in both Red Line and XE trim. Aside from the tire and suspension upgrades, Red Line models now came with a unique front fascia and rear exhaust cutouts. The most exciting Red Line, of course, was the high-performance version of the Sky roadster, which shared underpinnings with its Pontiac Solstice twin. This model came with GM's hot 2.0-liter Ecotec Turbo, good for 260 horsepower. The extra power was crucial in covering up the Sky's unfortunate manual gearbox ratios, which left the non-turbo model aching for torque in lower gears. As we all know, Saturn was taken by the grim reaper in 2009 after an attempt to sell the brand to the Penske Group.

Are orphan cars better deals?

Most folks don't know a Saturn Aura from an Oldsmobile Aurora. Those of you who are immersed in the labyrinth of automobilia know that both cars were testaments to the mediocrity that was pre-bankruptcy General Motors, and that both brands are now long gone. But everybody else? Not so much. By the same token, there are some excellent cars and trucks that don't raise an eyebrow simply because they were sold under brands that are no longer being marketed. Orphan brands no longer get any marketing love, and because of that they can be alarmingly cheap. Case in point, take a look at how a 2010 Saturn Outlook compares with its siblings, the GMC Acadia and Buick Enclave. According to the Manheim Market Report, the Saturn will sell at a wholesale auto auction for around $3,500 less than the comparably equipped Buick or GMC. Part of the reason for this price gap is that most large independent dealerships, such as Carmax, make it a point to avoid buying cars with orphaned badges. Right now if you go to Carmax's site, you'll find that there are more models from Toyota's Scion sub-brand than Mercury, Saab, Pontiac, Hummer, and Saturn combined. This despite the fact that these brands collectively sold in the millions over the last ten years while Scion has rarely been able to realize a six-figure annual sales figure for most of its history. That is the brutal truth of today's car market. When the chips are down, used-car shoppers are nearly as conservative as their new-car-buying counterparts. Unfamiliarity breeds contempt. Contempt leads to fear. Fear leads to anger, and pretty soon you wind up with an older, beat-up Mazda MX-5 in your driveway instead of looking up a newer Pontiac Solstice or Saturn Sky. There are tons of other reasons why orphan cars have trouble selling in today's market. Worries about the cost of repair and the availability of parts hang over the industry's lost toys like a cloud of dust over Pigpen. Yet any common diagnostic repair database, such as Alldata, will have a complete framework for your car's repair and maintenance, and everyone from junkyards to auto parts stores to eBay and Amazon stock tens of thousands of parts. This makes some orphan cars mindblowingly awesome deals if you're willing to shop in the bargain bins of the used-car market. Consider a Suzuki Kizashi with a manual transmission. No, really.

GM recalling over 243,000 crossovers over possible seat belt defect

2010 Buick Enclave - Click above for high-res image gallery
The summer of 2010's recall hit parade continues unabated today, with General Motors having just announced that it is asking 243,403 owners of its 2009-2010 Lambda crossovers to bring their three-row haulers in for inspection. The culprit? Second-row seat belts in select Buick Enclave, Chevrolet Traverse, GMC Acadia, and Saturn Outlook CUVs have "failed to perform properly in a crash."
According to GM, a second-row seat-side trim piece is to blame, as it can impede the upward rotation of the buckle after the seat is folded flat. As a result, if the buckle makes contact with the seat frame, cosmetic damage can occur, potentially requiring additional force to operate the buckle properly. So far, no great shakes, but in the process of applying that additional force, the occupant may push the buckle cover down to the strap, potentially revealing and depressing the red release button. As a result of this, the belt may not latch, or in certain cases, it may actually appear to be latched when, in fact, it isn't.