NextGen 900s, differences?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Anon-e-mouse - 27 Mar 2005 18:43 GMT

I am completely out of the loop when it comes to the new 900s (94+). I
know there is S and SE, 4 and 6 Cyl. engines. What is the mark for the 4
Cyl Turbo engine? I thought it was SE, but I see some SEs that are 6
cyl. Also, some listings are for SE turbo, and others not. Can someone
please clarify how I can identify a 4Cyl turbo.

The reason I ask, and correct me if I am wrong, is that I have heard
from several of the dealers here in Minnesota, US, that the GM
introduced 6 cyl was a very poor engine. I am in the market for a second
car and was curious to look at the NG Saabs.

Reply to this Message

James Sweet - 27 Mar 2005 20:10 GMT

> I am completely out of the loop when it comes to the new 900s (94+). I
> know there is S and SE, 4 and 6 Cyl. engines. What is the mark for the 4
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> introduced 6 cyl was a very poor engine. I am in the market for a second
> car and was curious to look at the NG Saabs.

The V6 was a lousy engine, as actually most V6's tend to be. The NG900's are
decent cars, but they don't really feel much like a Saab.

Reply to this Message

ma_twain - 28 Mar 2005 04:21 GMT

>>I am completely out of the loop when it comes to the new 900s (94+). I
>>know there is S and SE, 4 and 6 Cyl. engines. What is the mark for the 4
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> The V6 was a lousy engine, as actually most V6's tend to be. The NG900's are
> decent cars, but they don't really feel much like a Saab.

I second the motion. I drive a Classic 900 and I bought a car for my
daughter to learn to drive. I had a choice between a Classic 900 turbo
and a 1994 V6 900 SE. I bought the V6 NG 900 for two reasons. First, I
just could not see a Classic 900 Turbo sacrificed as a 'learning' car,
knowing it will be beat up and possibly totaled. Second, the newer NG
900 was less expensive, so it was more affordable as a sacrificial car.
With both cars being driven weekly, I can directly compare the two. The
NG900 is no comparison to the Classic 900. The V6 engine idles rough,
gets less mileage and has less power. The brakes and suspension are not
as responsive. The visibility is typical of most newer cars with a flat
windshield and thick A pillars - it is bad, but no worse than a Camry or
Accord. I bought the NG900 with a warranty and had it in the shop for
for electrical repairs for the warranty period. The only things that
need repair now are the power mirrors and the hatch hydraulic lifters.

Does anyone have any experience/comments on the MONROE Part # 901600
[MAX-LIFT GAS-CHARGED LIFT SUPPORT] HATCH;w/ Spoiler.

Reply to this Message

don_nk - 28 Mar 2005 06:40 GMT

As i understand it the Saab 3.0 V6's (9000 and 900) are basically the same
as that V6 in a Saturn L-series or a Catera
http://www.saabcentral.com/assets/downloads/engine_swap.pdf.
I'm sure there's a reason Saab kept the turbo four a its top of the line
car.

>>>I am completely out of the loop when it comes to the new 900s (94+). I
>>>know there is S and SE, 4 and 6 Cyl. engines. What is the mark for the 4
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> Does anyone have any experience/comments on the MONROE Part # 901600
> [MAX-LIFT GAS-CHARGED LIFT SUPPORT] HATCH;w/ Spoiler.

Reply to this Message

andrewunix - 29 Mar 2005 00:19 GMT

Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:43:34 -0600, JDOE@DOE.COM suggested:

: I am completely out of the loop when it comes to the new 900s (94+). I
: know there is S and SE, 4 and 6 Cyl. engines. What is the mark for the 4
: Cyl Turbo engine? I thought it was SE, but I see some SEs that are 6
: cyl. Also, some listings are for SE turbo, and others not. Can someone
: please clarify how I can identify a 4Cyl turbo.

If it's an SE Turbo, it's a 4-cyl. If it's a regular SE, then it's
probably a 6-cyl, depending on the year (I believe the V6 was discontinued
after 1997). The 2.5-liter is the V6. If I recall correctly, the V6 models
I've seen have had a little 'V6' on the grille (but not on the rear).

The S model is a non-turbo 2.3-liter 4-cylinder.
The turbo models are all 2.0-liter engines, I'm pretty sure.

: The reason I ask, and correct me if I am wrong, is that I have heard
: from several of the dealers here in Minnesota, US, that the GM
: introduced 6 cyl was a very poor engine. I am in the market for a second
: car and was curious to look at the NG Saabs.

I have a 1995 900 S, and while it's no Classic, it is still a pretty decent
car at 180,000 miles. I have been told, however, that my experience is the
exception.

Signature

agreenbu @ nyx . net andrew michael greenburg

Reply to this Message

Bob - 02 Apr 2005 16:04 GMT

>If it's an SE Turbo, it's a 4-cyl. If it's a regular SE, then it's
>probably a 6-cyl, depending on the year (I believe the V6 was discontinued
>after 1997). The 2.5-liter is the V6. If I recall correctly, the V6 models
>I've seen have had a little 'V6' on the grille (but not on the rear).

This is very country specific. The original poster needs to post where
he's at. What you posted is true for the USA I believe. The SE's are
mostly turbo's, but I have heard tell of SE V6's. Look for the "2.0
turbo" label on the back or just look under the hood.

>The S model is a non-turbo 2.3-liter 4-cylinder.
>The turbo models are all 2.0-liter engines, I'm pretty sure.

Yes.

>I have a 1995 900 S, and while it's no Classic, it is still a pretty decent
>car at 180,000 miles. I have been told, however, that my experience is the
>exception.

I have a '97 900Se turbo. A very nice car. A few things have gone
wrong, there are some things that could be better designed, but it is
still far ahead of other cars of the era. It is luxurious,
comfortable,
handles well with minor mods (which I do to every car I won), is very
powerful and easily increased in that area, and for the most part has
superior engineering to other makes. There are some engineering
missteps, not all of them can be blamed on GM. Not to mention, it is
much newer than any classic. Where I live, cars as old as the classics
will have rust problems. So, some of us like our NG900's very much.

I think we need to compare apples to apples. All cars underwent major
changes in the 70's, 80's, and 90's. We know for sure that what has
happened in the auto industry over the last decade has not been
pleasing to auto enthusiasts for the most part. Saab may almost be an
exception through the 90's... although the last few years have been
serious trouble.

Back on topic: If you buy an NG900, look for an SE turbo with all the
fixins, then come back here and we'll tell you how to make it handle
like a sporting machine should and how to pull some more power out of
the motor (as well as tell you what needs to be maintained).

Bob

Reply to this Message

ma_twain - 02 Apr 2005 20:52 GMT

>>If it's an SE Turbo, it's a 4-cyl. If it's a regular SE, then it's
>>probably a 6-cyl, depending on the year (I believe the V6 was discontinued
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> superior engineering to other makes. There are some engineering
> missteps, not all of them can be blamed on GM.

Any help on improving the AC/Heat system - specifically the weak fan? I
have been told this was fixed by going to the 9-3.

Not to mention, it is

> much newer than any classic. Where I live, cars as old as the classics
> will have rust problems.

Sometimes you get lucky and find a classic that was maintained and does
not have rust. The commemorative versions would have likely been garage
kept. My 1993 900 has very minor rust while my 94 NG900 is showing its
age with alot more rust.

So, some of us like our NG900's very much.

There is a difference between liking a car and being fanatical about a
car.

> I think we need to compare apples to apples. All cars underwent major
> changes in the 70's, 80's, and 90's. We know for sure that what has
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Bob

Reply to this Message

andrewunix - 03 Apr 2005 18:57 GMT

Sat, 02 Apr 2005 14:52:10 -0500, ma_twain@yahoo.com suggested:

: Any help on improving the AC/Heat system - specifically the weak fan? I
: have been told this was fixed by going to the 9-3.

Do a lot of people have a problem with this? It's always been sufficient for
my needs, but then I never sit in the back seat.

Signature

agreenbu @ nyx . net andrew michael greenburg

Reply to this Message

Bob - 08 Apr 2005 15:20 GMT

>Not to mention, it is
>> much newer than any classic. Where I live, cars as old as the classics
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>kept. My 1993 900 has very minor rust while my 94 NG900 is showing its
>age with alot more rust.

Very unusual in New England due to the salt issues... but it's
possible.

>So, some of us like our NG900's very much.
>There is a difference between liking a car and being fanatical about a
>car.

Agreed. My car is terrific... but I don't get fanatical for anything
that does not have "exotic" mentioned in the "for sale" description.

Reply to this Message

andrewunix - 03 Apr 2005 18:54 GMT

Sat, 02 Apr 2005 15:04:39 GMT, uctraing@ultranet.com suggested:

: This is very country specific. The original poster needs to post where
: he's at. What you posted is true for the USA I believe. The SE's are
: mostly turbo's, but I have heard tell of SE V6's. Look for the "2.0
: turbo" label on the back or just look under the hood.

He did, if you go back and read the original post. He's in Minnesota.

Signature

agreenbu @ nyx . net andrew michael greenburg

Reply to this Message

Bob - 08 Apr 2005 15:18 GMT

>He did, if you go back and read the original post. He's in Minnesota.

Missed that. So, unless he is looking at a car from Canada, the
statements apply.

Reply to this Message