Are saabs good? - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Ara T. · #16 12-01-2006, 12:24 AM

Those old BMWs are nice enough, but the 80s ones felt like cheap hondas on the inside. The 70's cars I have a soft spot for. An E30 M3 is supposed to be a great drive though, very Miata like in its driving manners.. which is a good thing. They're valued pretty highly though so you have to pay to get a good one.

j.pelchat · #17 12-01-2006, 07:48 AM

I don't recall seeing many older Saabs on the road. Seems like they are too expensive to keep on the road

t walgamuth · #18 12-01-2006, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henrydupont

BMW 7 or 8????? they invested a lot more in the eighties and nineties though. I love benz, but for gas engines and overall road handling I prefer BMW no doubt. lift up a bmw at the front, that frame is so tight that the rear will come up as much as the front...
allignment is way better too.

my experience is based on owning a 74 bavaria and a 90 318 five speed. others may have other experiences.

my expereince is that the beemer is a little more fun to drive, too.

tom w

rg2098 · #19 12-01-2006, 08:09 AM

Considering the old 900 was in production from the 70's until 1993. It's a pretty good car. I'm looking at picking one up next May for my fiancee. The weak spot is widely considered the automatic trans. Although I have heard they toughened it up some towards the end.

Just because they did things differently doesn't mean there trash........

Graminal95 · #20 12-01-2006, 08:45 AM

Just so you guys know the position of the key has nothing to do with safety in a crash. The reason its there is that in the first Saabs (92 through 97) the shifter was on the steering column and so was the ignition. Saab though it dumb to lock to the steering wheel when you parkt he car, and so locked the shifter into Reverse. This way the car will not roll. The reason that the ignition in on the floor "so to say" on later cars (99 through 9^5) is that they wanted to keep that feature. That’s why you must put the car into reverse to get the key out (only manual trans. cars). I have had in my life lets see a 71' 95, 73" 96 rally car, 83' 900 turbo, 86' 900s, 91' 900 turbo, 94' 9000 turbo, and a 96' 900s. I love the old V4's because they are so unique and fun to drive, but I think for a modern feel the 91' turbo is the best.

The cars are very robust and have a wonderful build quality, much like my beloved 240D. The transmission is the thing to look out for, if they have been mistreated earlier in life then forget it, they cost a ton to rebuild, and take a good amount of time to put in. I would not buy a 900 with an auto tranny with that many miles, but a manual would be ok. The best way to test the tranny is to do a quick 1 to 2 shift in the first 5 min of driving the car. If its grinds, bad sign. Another thing to check is put it into reverse and do an aggressive movement, aka from a stop back up quite quickly, if the gear shifter pops out of reverse another bad sign.

Besides the transmission I think the cars are wonderful, Hope this helps.

rudolfgreen · #21 12-01-2006, 10:54 AM

owned a 87' 900s (16valve) and a '90 900turbo.. the s was a great car, the turbo, although fun, not so much.
the slushboxs were bad, both my 5spds pretty good.. the *new* series 900 post-'93 are AWFUL.
they are definitely cult type cars with all types of mods.. but if unless you are looking to get a 900 for those reasons,
would keep the old reliable that you already know and work on. $.02

EDIT: agreed, front wheel drive sucks

Stevo · #22 12-01-2006, 11:05 AM

My good buddy and long time import car shop owner HATES THEM, so thats been good enough to steer me away.

babymog · #23 12-01-2006, 11:06 AM

You couldn't give me a FWD car.
Had them, they suck for driving hard and real snow, AWD or RWD for me.

I used to sell Mercedes and Volvo (in the RWD days before Volvo got cheap). One demonstration we used to do was how well a RWD would climb a hill in snow compared to a SAAB. Kicked their butts. FWD is the easiest way to build a car cheaper, no other reason for its existance. Further, a tire only has a finite amount of traction available, the more you use for drive on the tire the less is left for handling, which is why they suck in corners and in deep snow. Further, the weight distribution is usually poor on FWD, which is why we see so many of them stuffed backwards in snowbanks in the winter.

Stick with Benz. RWD, like Mercedes, Porsche, BMW, Ferrari, Lamborghini, all F1 cars, all Busch series cars, basically anything known for handling that isn't AWD (or races in a FWD class against other FWD).

When I found myself unable to accelerate and pass traffic in a snowstorm in '80 with new Michelins on my '77 audi, I saw a used Fiat 124 (RWD) in a Ford dealer, bought it, and drove it for the rest of the snowstorm before returning to pick up the audi. At least I could steer without taking my foot off of the gas!!

The only place FWD has an advantage is in ice-racing where you can use the handbrake for turns with the power on, which BTW I used to do successfully in my original quattro with the handbrake on and center differential unlocked, ...

Oh, my FWD experience (personally owned): '75 Scirocco, '77 Audi Fox, '77 Dasher, '81 Accord '85 Jetta

As far as quality, wasn't too bad in the 99, seemed to slip in the 900 series, I sure see a lot of 900s and 900 turbo in the u-pick yard, makes me think something expensive goes wrong frequently or there is no resale value.

E320wagon'94 · #24 12-01-2006, 11:27 AM

A friend of min has a '02 9-3 SE. Pretty much pure garbage once they got past like 40K mi. Computer problems have left them stranded in the middle of I-95, the AC leaks water into the footwells. It's a GM engineered POS. The stylings still Saab, and the ignitions still on th console, but it's got the ecotec I-4 turbo, and a lot of other low grade stuff. The engines seems beefy, but the rest is just like any cavalier with some luxo options.
-Zach

Mr.Kenny · #25 12-01-2006, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ara T.

Those old BMWs are nice enough, but the 80s ones felt like cheap hondas on the inside. The 70's cars I have a soft spot for. An E30 M3 is supposed to be a great drive though, very Miata like in its driving manners.. which is a good thing. They're valued pretty highly though so you have to pay to get a good one.

Funny;...comparing an expensive BMW to a Miata.

I have a Miata; it's a blast to drive, "takes lickin and keeps on tickin", 164,000 miles on it and runs tight. Never apart. Just regular timing belt change & water pump while I was at it, Plug wires every 30,000. The Miata is the is the sports car Britian tried & tried to build.
Simple, fun, balanced, reliable, fun, oh yeah;...it's an economy car also.

lee polowczuk · #26 12-01-2006, 11:45 AM

friend of mine just bought a 2000 station wagon...

he immediately had some abs and computer issues... but he likes the car..and seems to think they are easier to work on.. this will be for his wife and newborn.

he has a 1998 M3 and a 1972 chevy pickup.

#27 12-01-2006, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by E320wagon'94

A friend of min has a '02 9-3 SE. Pretty much pure garbage once they got past like 40K mi. Computer problems have left them stranded in the middle of I-95, the AC leaks water into the footwells. It's a GM engineered POS. The stylings still Saab, and the ignitions still on th console, but it's got the ecotec I-4 turbo, and a lot of other low grade stuff. The engines seems beefy, but the rest is just like any cavalier with some luxo options.
-Zach

Not to pick nits, but the 2002 and prior Saab 9-3 has nothing to do with GM design.

The 2003 is a totally different matter and is the one that was GM-fied.

Jim B. · #28 12-01-2006, 12:36 PM

"The safest car made in Sweden, after the Volvo"

Probably OK if you live near the large coastal cities, SF, LA, Miami, NY, Seattle, Boston, where dealerships, support, parts should be accessible, but maybe not a good idea if you live in Kansas or North Dakota.

I personally don't care for fwd, and have no idea how build quality on them is, either before oor after GM bought them, but don't expect horizontal depreciation on them.

MercedesRover · #29 12-01-2006, 02:42 PM

I drove an '84 900 4-dr 5-speed turbo car for 250K miles. Best car I ever owned. At 150K I dropped in an '85 SPG 16-valve turbo engine in it. If it didn't rot out I'd still be driving it.

'93 or earlier car, you can't go wrong. After that they were junk. Saab is owned by GM now and shares an Opel platform if that tells you anything!!

t walgamuth · #30 12-01-2006, 06:51 PM

one of the saabs is now a saabaru, made here in lafayette indiana.

still owned by gm though, afik.

anytime gm or ford buys somehting they turn into gms and fords.....uuugh.

i prefer rear drive too.

but awd is ok. i am looking forward to driving my awd magnum in snow!

tom w