"mkbruin, Atlas VP" (mkbruin)
12/09/2013 at 06:57 • Filed to: None
0
4|
"mkbruin, Atlas VP" (mkbruin)
12/09/2013 at 06:57 • Filed to: None | 0
| 4 |
Driving home last Friday evening, it struck me.... the M45 I love so much, is really just a slightly better Aurora.
Both are fullsize v8 luxury sedans, both relatively rare with limited production years, both are widely underappreciated; plus the M looks like an aurora with a crossfit membership. Extremely similar body lines.
itschrome
> mkbruin, Atlas VP
12/09/2013 at 07:03 |
|
not even remotely.. I'm sorry...
MooseKnuckles
> mkbruin, Atlas VP
12/09/2013 at 08:59 |
|
My buddy bought an M45, not sure which year, there are only two so I guess it doesn't matter. The exrerior styling definitely isn't my thing, maybe if I were 70. If I were wanting a large, rwd, luxo-barge I would have gone with an STS or maybe even STS-V for the price my friend paid. The interior is nice, very well appointed and nice fit and finish, but again the styling of it all isn't my thing. It also doesn't seem much bigger than an Accord inside, and looking at the thing from outside, it seems like it would offer huge cabin space, but it just isn't.
STS or STS-V with Northstar would have certainly gotten my money, produced more smiles, and looked better doing it.
phenotyp
> mkbruin, Atlas VP
12/09/2013 at 09:16 |
|
Not remotely the same. I had an M45 briefly last month— it's very much like a precise, posh Crown Vic cop car. Nothing at all like a FWD GM car.
AMC/Renauledge
> mkbruin, Atlas VP
12/09/2013 at 09:27 |
|
Not really. The Aurora was a FWD V6 or v8 full size with rounded, bloated styling and an Infiniti G price.
The M45 was a RWD V8 midsize luxury sedan with crisp, angular styling and a price more like the BMW 5's.
But yes, both are rare and under appreciated.