Actually I'm glad Dave posted this, because it leads to a more basic
question.  Do you value anecdotal evidence or survey type evidence to
predict vehicle reliability?  IMHO, anecdotal evidence leads to conflicting
opinions.  As Dave pointed out, he's owned both American cars and Saabs.  As
have I.  But I, on the other hand, found American cars to be more reliable
on average.  But I still _much_ prefer Saabs despite their quirky issues.

Which particular Saab are you interested in (year and model)?  There are
variances in expected reliability between models and years (series runs).
Telling us, exactly what you're considering purchasing will help to solicit
more relevant replies.

Keep in mind, the newer Saabs have newer technology.  And as cool as new
technology can be, it also is the least tested and consequently is less
reliable.  This goes for any manufacturer stuffing the latest and greatest
tech gear into their cars.

- tex

p s- Err...sorry about my blank post.  Hit send before it was ready.

I'd have to agree, my first car (well truck) was a Ford, my parents and
grandparents always had domestic cars until the Volvo came into the family
and I still have quite a few friends and relatives with them. Overall my 17
year old Volvo and 16 year old Saab have spent a lot more time on the road,
and racked up a lot more miles than any of the domestic cars ever did
between things breaking. That's not to say Saab didn't make a few turds and
that the big three have never made anything good, but by and large the
quality of the american stuff hasn't impressed me.

Salutations:

Well, it is not so much that cars are "reliable" - as they are (or were)  
"maintainable". That quality really knows no nationality in my opinion.

I have a post floating around this newsgroup with advise to people buying  
a SAAB for the first time. Basically - you should calculate what the total  
cost of ownership is including financing and insurance assuming a minimum  
$1,500 for required service annually based on condition and model line as  
sold to you *against the potential lifetime of the car to you*.

It will get more expensive visits to the shop the longer you own it - but  
it will curve at several points so it happens less often.

It is a broader calculation than it appears as regards ROI (Return on  
Investment) because you need to factor things like it costs more to  
finance - which most people need when they get into second owner off  
lease/on warrantee $15,000+ pricing models. But in that range - you should  
be looking at something with a solid dealer issued extended warrantee,  
which makes it more predictable to operate for the first 3 or so years.

On the flip side - you don't want your car to be making statements about  
your lifestyle that you would not otherwise want assumed by your  
co-workers and neighbours. This is the jeopardy of the sub $10,000 car. It  
could sux - your boss gets wind of your questionable judgement come  
promotion time and the increasingly messy oil trail leads directly to your  
slip on your otherwise pristine home street.

With the exception of the Chanel cocktail dress of SAAB's, the 1993  
through 1997 9000T series black ones, which I really think are iconic and  
relatively timeless style wise if left basically stock - older SAAB's  
benefit greatly, immensely in fact, from considered 'rally sport' type  
uprates. Newer ones seem to like better wheels and bigger tailpipe  
openings.

Older ones can be had very cheaply and made into real and very stylish  
street rods if that floats your boat. They are basically maintainable with  
the aid of most any respectable wreckers yard if you aren't really going  
for the heavy kit under the hood.

Newer ones have plug and play heavy stuff for under the hood that will see  
you smoking pretty much anything sort of a full kit M3 or hugely modified  
'Toyondassan' of equal size and doors.

All of this goes to something SAAB (all major manufactors really) started  
loosing through the 90's.

They are sort of abandoning the premise that a more expensive mid-grade  
automobile would be maintained into the four and five hundred thousand  
kilometre range and often well beyond by families (mostly European) that  
would normally only buy 4 or 5 cars over a lifetime.

The premise is very different from the North American model where  
automobiles were overall less expensive to buy and run relative to earning  
power, where families would normally purchase new (well - extend financing  
to cover) every 3-5 years and whom could often rack up two hundred  
thousand kilometres in that time period. Hell, when I was kid, people  
started wondering if we were saving up for something if Dad didn't pick up  
a new car every other year.

Where repairs and replacements were smaller, often openable, systems on  
European cars - American cars saw you replacing whole assemblies with  
inexpensive crate parts from the dealer. Sometimes whole engines and  
transmissions as it was cheaper to buy new ones than to repair them.

Consider the McPherson strut as applied to most cars and all non-C900  
SAAB's.

It is not the adjustable racing unit it is named for - it is a complete  
component that is largely non-repairable and usually requires a specified  
model only application. It is hugely expensive to replace considering it  
is a wear part. In application - it limits your ability to make  
adjustments to the alignment of the car. It is used on pretty much every  
other car brand on the road and is more or less equally model specific for  
all brands.

On the other hand - the old C900 had double a-arms which allowed you to  
apply a wide variety of relatively better and worse shocks by price and  
you had a great deal of latitude regarding alignment. People claim the  
strut is a better performer on the road over the double a-arm. I've driven  
both properly set-up and would say that is not true.

They are in fact mostly the same, except that the C900 forward suspension  
assembly is much more expensive overall to build as a manufacturer - but  
much less expensive to maintain and uprate as the owner.

Hence, you now have to buy whole control arm assemblies when all you have  
worn out is a ball joint. In fact - it is much cheaper to buy a whole new  
steering rack than to repair the one the car came with. And that is the  
same for any car brand - assuming you can find anyone still working who  
has ever done it.

As regards current SAAB models.

They are as reliable as pretty much anything else out there from any of  
the majors with equivalent kinds of performance and options. OEM parts are  
expensive like everyone else's, but they are easy to replace and hold up  
surprising well most of the time. They are not "maintainable" in the sense  
that you can rarely get at the worn 25 cent part within the item to fix  
just it.

They are however less expensive labour wise because it doesn't take as  
long for a pro tech to pop out a strut assembly and put a new one it as it  
does to pull apart the front assembly, apply a front shock, reassemble the  
a-arm and realign the wheel for the corrections (maintenance) made as the  
shock wore out.

Think of it all as burn rate. Where you spend less money monthly over a  
longer time or you spend more money in shorter bursts.

In my opinion, where SAAB under GM screwed the pooch was in not lowering  
the overall price of replacement parts to account for the less expensive  
engineering involved - instead - opting to increase margins at the parts  
counter.

This was/is exacerbated by the fact that there is not a real aftermarket  
for SAAB replacement parts and that that there is - is very high  
performance kit that is faster/stiffer than stock - but often not as long  
wearing.

Personally - I found a 1993 Aero turbo that needed someone to stop  
applying parts to it and figure out what was actually going wrong and fix  
it. As it turned out - I fixed a 10 cent connector and I haven't seen a  
TCS/O2/Fuel Air or ABS light since. I have also fixed and regained cruise  
control and am on the way to returning it to full 225hp mode shortly.

There is still much left to do - clutch, annoying aftermarket radio,  
ongoing wear stuff. But I bought it for not a lot and don't have a monthly  
for a car that should last me about 5 more years at least - at which point  
I may just restore her outright and get another 5 years.

It is not always so with used SAAB's - there are real lemons out there.  
But no more so than any other manufacturer if you ask me.

--

Radio Free Dexterdyne Top Tune o'be-do-da-day
Sinatra Martin Davis - When You are Smiling
http://www.dexterdyne.org/888/035.RAM

all tunes - no cookies no subscription no weather no ads
no news no phone in no sign up required - all the Time

So far, none. After replacing *all* the ignition electronics the techs
have given up. A guy is due back from vacation Monday who has the most
experience with Bosche systems. Perhaps he'll find it.

Hmmm...this is a good basic question.  It narrows down what you value more
in a car.  However, it leads to the more relevant question...how long do you
expect to drive a vehicle?  If you don't expect to drive a car for more than
say 50k miles (common these days), then long term reliability is probably
not so important (unless of course you're buying a _really_ used car..say
one w/125k miles+ on the odometer).  But if you dont expect to log more than
50k miles, then those little nagging issues become all the more relevant (as
those are more likely to be the issues the driver faces everyday).

Getting back to the original post, I get the impression that the guy won't
be logging anywhere near 200k miles on the car.  In which case, his concerns
over the nagging little day-to-day issues are warranted.

As for me, I bought a new 9-3 three months ago.  It has been in the shop
four times for major defects (brakes, struts, various rattling noises, radio
problems, esp issues, broken seat, broken undercarriage cabling, and about a
half dozen other minor but annoying issues).  While I love the car, these
little issues are _very_ annoying and detract from the overall experience
with the car.  I'm guessing/hoping my experience is not typical.  But from
what I've read, the initial quality reports on the new 9-3 series is not
favorable...that is, achieving just barely above average results.

- tex

Right.  Also, when you buy an econo-crapbox, you _expect_ little things
to be wrong with it, and tolerate that.  Or, they're design and
servicability problems that you might not know or care about.  
That sliding wedge abomination in Ford front disk brake caliper
assemblies, for instance...mild steel, won't slide when it gets
rusty.  Now, when would a mild steel part, on a brake assembly
get rusty?  Oh yeah, any time after the day it's built. Gosh...
But, people don't look at that until it's time to (have someone)
do the brakes.  

The superficial problems (rattles, squeaks) are probably present on
pretty much any production model.  The fundamental design decisions
are what differentiate a good car, from a bad car.

Its certainly nice to know that no present day manufacturer is selling
unreliable
junk and that most mass produced cars are all very similar. Including Saab.