dave262

Not so sure how great that would look with the Aurions... projector headlamps are generally a little small to look really effective with angel eyes. Might work around the high beams though. Link to Youtube vids plz...

Any performance gains you are seeing are not completely outrageous, but there is some science in the intake system... V6 intakes are a complex configuration, as there are many tricks that have been developed over the years to try and blend fuel economy with performance. One such trick is a couple of valves within the air intake system that open and close at certain engine RPM points. One of these valves is the mod that has been mentioned numerous times on this site that involves the swapping of vacuum hoses. The theory is that by altering the length of the intake piping, different air resonance patterns can be created which have an effect on the flow of air into the engine. At low RPM points, you will find that both valves will be closed, allowing limited airflow through the intake system and a shorter path. This allows for the improved efficiency. At higher RPM's, one or both valves will open and vary the length of the intake system and allow greater flow of air through the system. This system has been around for many years, and has proven to be extremely effective in particular on V6 engines. It is very rarely seen on 4 cylinder engines. Something that many people don't realise is that those "resonators" (or so everyone calls them) that are removed going to a CAI actually have a purpose other than just reducing the intake noise. They serve as a "reserve" for additional air during the times where you might suddenly try to accelerate and a large amount of air is required quickly. As the air intake system generally does not have much vacuum at steady low RPM, when sudden acceleration occurs the engine will create a relatively large temporary vacuum within the intake. This causes a delay in the amount of air that is able to reach the engine and will cause a more "peaky" surge of acceleration due to the sudden surge of airflow and change of vacuum. By having a tank at the intermediary point, this can be reduced. With intakes as large as the Aurion has, airflow is already far slower than a smaller intake, which necessitates even more need for a surge tank or "resonator". With this in mind, by removing the resonators and adding a CAI, you will indeed obtain a far beefier sound to your intake, but you will not necessarily make any gains unless you are at high RPM. In addition, the length and diameter of the new intake can have an effect on performance that cannot reliably be predicted. Some engines perform better with longer intakes, and others perform better with shorter intakes. Also affected will be the responsiveness and the RPM point at which the CAI will start to make a difference. There is also the consideration about the air temperature which alters the density of the air, which in turn affects other parameters of the engine behavior. Short intakes will for obvious reasons suck air from hotter sections of the engine bay, while longer ones may be able to obtain cooler air. Different materials may also have an effect due to thermal properties and their behavior under vacuum. Finally, an intake modification alone may not necessarily make a huge difference unless you consider other aspects of the engine too. Some modifications may make a huge difference to the overall behavior of the engine and could even require something as significant as a new ECU to understand how to map the new intake behavior with fuel mappings. More free-flowing exhausts will have a larger impact than an intake also, as generally stock exhaust systems are designed for a cost rather than for great flow. Just a little "light" reading for those of u who can be bothered =P

I know that feeling all too well also, but from back on L's mostly, and occasionally on P's. Often I would be coming along to a merge lane (i would be in the lane that continues straight), and probably at least 1-2 days of the week I would be heading along straight, and I would have a full-license (typically ute driver oddly enough) who would purposely just sit equal with me right up till the merge, and gradually move closer and closer until i was forced into the next lane. It was always the same few cars too (I would drive the same way and park at the same station daily, so it was a regular route). I tried everything from absolutely flooring it trying to get ahead, but they would do the same, and at one stage i tried to brake hard and they would do the same too. Doesn't help that at the time I only had my old 1990 TP Magna, which although is decent with torque, has absolutely no power to get-up-and-go! I don't know why people can drive like this at times, but it is just dangerous and blatant disregard for common courtesy and safety. I would have driven in a different lane, except that the left turn was always shortly after there, so that was never an option. I ended up driving a different way every day instead just to avoid that situation. This alternative was to drive an extra 10 mins to the next station... Another strange experience I had as a P plater was driving along a freeway and having a bunch of trucks box me in the middle... I have to this day never worked out their motive for that, but it didn't really bother me too much as it was just a straight clear road. I could clearly see the drivers looking down at me and laugh... Nothing went wrong with that experience, but it does seem that in many cases, other drivers are just out to pick on u as a young driver sometimes... I think from all those strange experiences though, I have become more aware to watch other drivers and try to predict what will happen before it does. It is really the only way to feel safe on the roads, is to simply plan in advance I think.

Well, it's not a generalisation about p-platers, it is a story based on my experience with a number of them. Similar events do happen on occasion with full-licensed drivers, but almost 90% of the time it is a P-plater. I will agree that there are many p-platers out there who are good drivers, but when it comes to stuffing around and driving dangerously, it is almost every time that a p-plater is involved.

I think down here in Melbourne I am absolutely sick of having to even share the road with many P-platers... the amount of inconsideration, the consistent speeding and the constant tempting of fate absolute infuriates me sometimes! Numerous times heading home from a friends place at like 10pm along Princes Hwy I am just trying to have a casual drive, sticking to the speed limit etc, and then I get P-platers in a commodore or falcon filled with their mates speeding up next to me with an exhaust bigger than the bumper... sit equal with me and either try to drag me, cut me off, or in about 3 cases - I actually had them purposely trying to push me into the car in the lane across from me just so I will have to flog it to give them the sense that I am dragging!!! There are so many words I could use to describe my real thoughts on these types of people, but for the sake of the others here... I won't go that far! In short, I would love nothing more to see them wrap around a pole (which I laughed like crazy when I actually saw one of them who actually did this after harassing me just further up the road! They got what they deserved for that IMO)... better than somebody else like myself who is just trying to mind my own business and not be harassed by the absolute idiots on the road. I much prefer the L-platers, who I feel generally apart from lack of skills and generally driving slowly - they are at least careful and comparatively safe drivers. It's about time the rules were far stricter for this sort of behavior. Anybody who drives like this should have their car crushed just like the proposal put forward in NSW a while back.

Normal thing between 2nd and 3rd... not sure why it is only these gears, but guess it has something to do with the internal design. If you try to accelerate fast, does yours also have a really noticeable gear change lag between 1st and 2nd? I have yet to determine if it is just my trans or a common thing... gets really annoying because you get thrown forward, then back again during the change - which doesn't seem right to me...

I've been running E10 from United for about 5 years in all my cars here... Ranging from a 1990 Mitsubishi Magna, 2003 Honda Oddysey, 2006 Subaru Forester, 1999 Kia Rio, and a 2007 Toyota Aurion. None of the cars have had a single issue running it, and in most cases run consistently smooth, with low maintenance and good economy and performance. The Magna when it first started using it did not like it one bit, but after about 1 full tank, the improvement over the generic 91 octane was extremely noticeable. Fuel economy jumped from about 250km/tank all the way up to 450km/tank. The Aurion has loved using it since day one, and when I have normal 91 octane fuel in it, the performance and economy is rather poor. Currently I average around 11.5L/100km in city driving using ethanol as opposed to the 12.7L/100k average I get using 91 octane fuel. I service the Magna, Oddysey and Kia myself and have never come across any downsides to the fuel. If anything it makes the maintenance process easier as I never need to run injector cleaner through - although it does tend to require fuel filter replacement at regular intervals. Overall, I have never come across any reason why I would not use Ethanol fuels. You will find on occasion that you might get a bad batch of fuel (Ethanol fuels seem to have an expiry date on them...), but the best way is to choose a particular petrol station that you like, choose the day where the fuel quality and price are at the best point, and stick with it. I've been doing it for 5 years and will never go back to the old 91 octane generic fuels :D

Actually, that's not in every case true... You will find that the Aurion V6 is actually extremely efficient if you don't go flooring it everywhere. In general driving, I never go beyond 2500 RPM usually, and my fuel average in city driving is 11.5L/100k - yes it's above the stated 9.9L/100k (same as the Camry), but for city driving with an auto 3.5L V6... that is extremely good. On freeways I have had it down as low as 6L/100k (sounds impossible - but not when you include tailwinds hehehe). Another point to consider is that once you start to load down a Camry, the engine will begin to struggle with the load and you will tend to want to accelerate harder to get going - thus causing reduced fuel economy from higher RPM. The Aurion being a stronger engine, it doesn't have to work as hard to handle additional loads and will generally have about the same amount of power at lower RPM than what the Camry requires at high RPM with the same load. Just some food for thought ;)

Out of curiosity, why remove the carbon filter? I assume you are referring to the black canister that sits behind the engine, which is primarily designed to re-use vapor from the fuel? No, not the charcoal canister. Messing with that would also introduce a MIL (Malfunction Indicator Light). I've heard of the MIL coming on over something as simple as a loose fuel tank cap. If the system is that sensitive, I wouldn't want to mess with it. That system is still intact, and still vents into the intake through the larger hose in the photo below. In my post, I was referring to the activated carbon filter in the top of the air filter box (refer to picture below). That filter has the sole purpose of preventing any fuel vapor from exiting the intake and venting into the atmosphere. This filter only comes of use when the engine is off, so it plays no part in 'recycling' fuel vapors. According to the service manual: I see... I wasn't even aware that there was now a carbon filter in the intake system too. That would be a requirement to get the EURO4 emissions compliance I would imagine. Just shows that most my time working on cars has been with ancient things like Magna's that mostly don't even have a working catalytic converter any more!

Out of curiosity, why remove the carbon filter? I assume you are referring to the black canister that sits behind the engine, which is primarily designed to re-use vapor from the fuel?

Would be interesting to see how a CAI would actually alter the performance of an already well-tuned engine. Compared to many cars, the Aurion seems to have a rather well designed intake that is large enough to not restrict flow, but narrow enough to ensure fast airflow. I cannot see a CAI achieving much, if any advantage other than improving air intake resonance noise... With the filter and piping choices, keep in mind that going with a filter that is inside the engine bay, you will actually be sucking in hotter air than what would go through normally - which will hinder performance as it is less dense. Only performance gains that would occur from a CAI in general, as mentioned earlier - would be on the TRD where extra airflow will reduce the load on the charger. Just my two cents anyways.. :P

What would you change on the gauges? If they are the Optitron gauges I can't really imagine there being all that much u could change...

Compared to most Autos I have driven, I think the Aurion generally has a fairly good shift pattern that is tuned quite well for quick acceleration. The only reason for using the "sports mode" would be if you are towing something, going up a steep hill or descending a steep hill and don't want to either destroy the trans or wear the brakes. In sports mode, it seems that every setting you put it in alters the shift pattern and limits the highest gear. Compared to "true sequential" such as in a Honda, where it doesn't have a shift pattern, but instead acts like a clutch-less manual. I personally prefer the Honda's implementation of it, as it gives far more control. But then again... the Aurion is a family car and isn't designed to be for pure performance.

Thanks for all the interesting input all, I haven't had access to the computer for a while due to numerous other commitments, so am just catching up on the reading now. Good to hear that at least other people understand how annoying HID can be when retrofitted. I agree it may not be as much of an issue with the Aurion projector lamps, which I find actually light up the road quite well if it weren't for the weak stock bulbs. HID to me I think just has too many downsides in retrofitting - warranty, reliability, warmup time, bulb life etc. From what I can see, many recommendations for the Osram Nightbreakers. Once the weather improves a little I might look at changing the lamps. Thanks for the recommendations =)

I *had* not a single rattle or creak in mine until after a tree branch smashed the windscreen... since then and having windscreen replaced twice (insurance tried to skimp on glass quality), now i have constant rattles around the area of the dash that is near the windscreen... also has an exhaust rattle and clunk while idling and braking. Nowhere near as bad as my old car though!

I am actually not such a major fan of HID, especially when it comes to retro-fitting them in a car that didn't come with them. I get blinded while driving at night on numerous occasions thanks to retrofitted HID, so i don't want to be a culprit myself~ :P AcoustiK, I will take a look at those bulbs and see what I can find. Where do you source those from online? I wasn't even aware that Osram even made car headlights!

Hi all, I have been thinking for a little while, that it might be nice to get a little better light output from the standard Aurion (non-HID) headlamps. Currently it has the standard stock bulbs in it, which I have not even pulled out to check the connector just yet. I would like to upgrade the bulbs to something a bit brighter, and maybe slightly whiter (I do not want HID though). So far, the ones I have been looking at are things like the +50 series from Phillips and Narva, as I do a fair bit of night driving out in country areas also. Can anyone recommend any particular types or brands, or know of a site that has good comparisons?

I also get water marks under my doors else well? And the gear changes does take time to change? Are referring to the slow gear changes under operating temperature, such as when you put your foot down to make it drop a gear? In that case, that is part of the design of this car. I think it changes slower to give a smoother gear change, which I must admit is pretty damn smooth. I get the typical lag when dropping down a gear which from what i can tell is the ECU doing heaps of planning before doing significant acceleration... The lag I am referring to is between 1st and 2nd only when trying to accelerate quickly from slower speeds. It seems to take a good 2-3 seconds just to complete the shift between the two gears, but every other gear change after there is as smooth as silk :S

sure. http://www.lpgli.com/ is their official website. supplier is in melb. and the quote is from my e-mail conversation with the developer from lpgli.com "It will be 4-6 months before the kits are finally ready. Injectors are still giving us problems which we are overcoming. When the kits are ready they will be distributed through all the licensed convertors." Cheers :) Liquid injection systems do have significant advantages over the standard mixer systems, and it will definitely be interesting to see how the performance and economy turns out using the system mentioned above. As many of you will be aware, the concept of injection involves vaporising a liquid through a microscopic nozzle at high pressure, and is the same regardless whether it is gas or petrol injection. LPG in compressed form is actually a liquid so may therefore operate comparatively to petrol when injected. However, both fuels have different properties after leaving the injector nozzle, which I suspect is where the delays are with the aforementioned group. Comparing the systems, the old mixer-style systems are very similar to that of a carburettor in that a jet sprays fuel which is mixed with air going through the intake. It relies on low pressure gas flow effectively "floating" through the intake and is very inaccurate and unreliable, and poorly tuned; unstable. This system I would personally not recommend in any car that supports fuel injection as it is initially cheap, but is of high maintenance and poor reliability. Fuel injected cars where possible (and economical) an injected gas system is a much better choice. With these points in mind, there are far fewer disadvantages present with an injected system as opposed to the mixer-style systems. You MUST be aware however, that it is still a LPG system, and therefore still presents the same risk to the valves and heads. An interesting point to note however, is that the life of the engine may potentially be longer than mixer systems due to the more precise fuel control, although only time and testing will answer this one. Engines running off any form of LPG will still unlikely last as long as an engine running off petrol. If you are really keen on converting to gas, definitely look into the injected gas systems and let us know how it goes!

I need to get a significant number of creaks and noises fixed on mine... including that "leaf-rattle" sound from the center vent. Oddly enough though, I don't have any noise from the center console... only the dash. I do however have some significant gear-changing lag between 1-2 which drives me up the wall! It takes literally about 2 seconds under hard acceleration for it to change gears and makes a huge lurch after the change. Does anybody else have this happen too?

Where did you research this information? Some of those points defy the logic of physics... 1. LPG will cause a power and efficiency loss due to the lower density of the gas. LPG has a higher octane rating, which compensates for the lighter density and brings performance to a comparable point to petrol. The loss of efficiency still exists however and means that in a car that would typically make 10L/100km of petrol, will be closer to 15L/100k running on gas. This is going to be the case with comparing ANY gaseous fuel to a liquid fuel and is a scientific fact that cannot be debated. 2. Engine wear - this is a point to be argued. UNLESS additives are used in the gas to provide additional lubrication of which gas by itself lacks, valve seat wear WILL INCREASE. There is negligible impact to cylinder walls and rings. However, this may be compensated IF the engine is designed to run with gas (the Aurion is NOT designed to run with gas), which in that case will have compatible alloys and internal designs to be able to handle the significant reduction in lubrication. If you wander around wreckers and take a look at almost any car that has a gas system, you will find that the head is not in very good condition and will require either valve seat replacement and/or entire valve replacement. LPG does not have any lubrication at all by itself. 3. This is true for the most part, but is quickly compensated by the fact that additional tuning and maintenance is required in order to ensure the gas system is safe. This includes regular checks of emergency cutoff valves and testing of all fittings to ensure there are no leaks. In older systems that used an air intake mixer - this would also include replacement of diaphragm parts at regular intervals to ensure correct mixture. This is not the case with injection systems, although they must still be tuned on occasion to compensate for any variances introduced by various qualities of gas. Also note - the government has plans in the very near future to introduce additional excise tax to gas (approximately 60c/l has been suggested!), which will very, very quickly make any additional gains very minimal. 4. Yes this is true - only the old-style mixer systems had this issue due to incorrect mixtures from lack of tuning. Injected systems do not have this issue as an ECU is used. Do not believe everything gas fitters say, as they are all out there trying to make an easy sale!

When you are saying that you will break even in 2 or so years, also consider that there is an increase in maintenance costs with ANY LP-Gas car. This is due to the fact that gas does not have as much natural lubrication as there is in fuel, which therefore creates significant increase in wear and tear - particularly on the valve seats. There is also a difference in octane rating, and you will find that a direct comparison of the same volume of either fuel - petrol will actually have better economy. Another thing to consider is the type of technology used for the conversion, as there is the option of mixer-style (gas is mixed with air in the intake), or direct injection. Direct injection systems have significant advantages over standard mixer-style arrangements, including improved performance and reliability. They are however very expensive, and will usually require some form of custom ECU to be installed alongside the standard ECU. I am not sure whether it is even possible to run these setups in a dual-setup with fuel either, as I cannot see how the same injector could run both fuels (I could be wrong here though). The mixer-style is an old style of gas injection that is used in almost all existing (older) setups, and requires regular tuning to prevent air intake backfires (basically gas igniting back through the intake - very nasty!), and will require parts to be replaced every couple of years; as there are rubber diaphragms involved within the setup which deteriorate. If you skip out on these services, you risk significant damage to the intake and air metering systems. You will find in these systems also, you must start the car running from fuel as the gas will simply condensate on the cold fittings and will not vaporise until the engine is warm. The only advantage of these systems is they are cheap. With both forms of gas to help prevent valve wear, you will likely have to use some form of additive in the oil too. You will also void warranty if you do the conversion, as the engine components are not designed to be compatible with gas in the Aurion and it is not a factory-offered conversion. You must also ensure the gas tank is checked at regular intervals for leaks or damage. Personally, I would not go near gas with an Aurion, and as I am sure I have seen elsewhere in a post somewhere on this forum - there are numerous reasons why it is simply unnecessary. I drive around in the city all the time, and out in the inner suburbs, and I find I average about 11.5L/100km, which is very reasonable. I only fill up the car once every two weeks and the cost is not too bad, as there is usually enough fuel still in the tank anyway. I drive long distance on freeways sometimes too, and have found the economy to get around 6L/100km if I am careful. With these sort of ratings, compared to the cost of installing and maintaining a gas setup - the benefits of petrol quickly become obvious.

Have you been able to source a fixed version of the power steering section? btw - great work sourcing all this information! Very informative!

Would never happen... Importing a V6 in the size of a Corolla, with the same engine as the upper-class (and cost!) Lexus, it would simply be bad marketing. Aurion in an AWD however, would be an absolute winner - and is something I to this day cannot understand why they would have overlooked...

Mostly, you will find fuel economy is a function of not just the speed, but how much time is spent idling at lights. The ratings that are referred to on the car itself are the combined figures, which refer to the average over a combination of driving in city, suburbs and highway speeds. If you spend most the time running slow or stopped, you will get poorer economy than at higher speeds on freeways. Fuel economy you will find will be improved up until a point by increasing the octane, but usually much above 98 octane and economy will begin to reduce. I personally run 95 Octane Ethanol, and I average around 11.5, with mostly suburban and city driving. On freeways I have had it down to 6L/100k before. I am not really a lead-footed driver however, which does make a slight difference to economy. If you are getting really poor economy, try different fuels and different driving habits, and don't rely solely on the trip computer as a fuel economy reading, as it may not always be accurate. Check the economy when you fill up at the bowser. You may also find that the ECU may require a reset, as sometimes they can start running the engine a little inefficiently.