DecodedCarsSaturn Aura
4 model years from 2007 to 2010, compared on size, efficiency, safety and reliability.
- Model years
- 2007–2010
- Class
- Midsize Cars
- Latest engines
- 2.4L 4-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl
- Best MPG
- 26–29 combined, by year
- Latest rating
- Not rated
- Recalls
- 4 campaigns, all years
- Most complaints
- 2009 (287)
The 2010 Aura in brief
The 2010 Saturn Aura is a midsize car offered with 2 engines (2.4L 4-cyl and 3.6L 6-cyl) and front-wheel drive.
EPA rates its most efficient version at 26 MPG combined (22 city / 33 highway), 17% better than the 2010 midsize car average of 22.2 MPG, for an estimated $2,600 a year in fuel.
It has 2 recall campaigns on file and owners have filed 1 complaint with NHTSA since 2015, most often about the air bags.
The Saturn Aura has 4 model years in our data, from 2007 to 2010.
Its most efficient year was 2009 at 29 MPG combined; across all years the best version ranged from 26 to 29 MPG.
Owners most often report problems with the steering (261), power train (139), electrical system (130).
2008 has the most recalls (4); all years together count 4 campaigns and 692 owner complaints.
How the 2007 Aura compares
The 2007 Saturn Aura is a midsize car offered with 3 engines (2.4L 4-cyl, 3.5L 6-cyl and 3.6L 6-cyl), including a hybrid version and front-wheel drive.
It measures about 191 inches long and 71 inches wide on a 112-inch wheelbase, with a curb weight of roughly 3,530 lb (4dr Sedan FWD /Xe/Green Line).
2010 Aura pros & cons
Full 2010 details →What's good
- Excellent fuel economyUp to 26 MPG combined — 17% better than the average 2010 midsize car (22.2 MPG).
- Few owner complaints1 complaints filed with NHTSA versus about 140 for similar models.
Watch out for
No weak spots against similar models in the data.
Aura changes by model year
- 2010
- No hybrid version any more
- Best combined MPG down from 29 to 26
- 2009
- Engine dropped: 3.5L 6-cyl
- Best combined MPG up from 27 to 29
Years without a measurable change are left out.
Show all 4 model years side by side
| Year | Latest engines | Best MPG / range | Length | Weight | Overall | Recalls | Complaints |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 2.4L 4-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl | 26 MPG | – | – | Not rated | 2 | 1 |
| 2009 | 2.4L 4-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl | 29 MPG | 190.9 in | 3,530 lb | Not rated | 3 | 287 |
| 2008 | 2.4L 4-cyl, 3.5L 6-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl | 27 MPG | 190.9 in | 3,530 lb | Not rated | 4 | 203 |
| 2007 | 2.4L 4-cyl, 3.5L 6-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl | 27 MPG | 190.9 in | 3,530 lb | Not rated | 3 | 201 |
Alternatives to the 2010 Aura
| Model | Best MPG / range | NHTSA overall | Recalls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 Toyota Camry | 34 MPG | Not rated | 8 |
| 2010 Toyota Prius | 50 MPG | Not rated | 10 |
| 2010 Hyundai Elantra | 29 MPG | Not rated | 4 |
| 2010 Chevrolet Malibu | 29 MPG | Not rated | 3 |
| 2010 Volkswagen Passat | 25 MPG | Not rated | 4 |
| 2010 Nissan Altima | 34 MPG | Not rated | 2 |
Most common owner-reported problems
Sources: EPA, NHTSA, Transport Canada, Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons. Not affiliated with NHTSA, the EPA or Saturn. How we calculate this →