 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Saab Cars / December 2006Lifetime of Saab
Hello! I just bought Saab 900i -91. It is former police car, so i guess all maintenances has done in time. There seems to be nothing wrong in car, its in good shape and no corrosion. 400 000 kilometres in kilometre counter. My question is: What is expected lifetime of car, assuming that i take good care of it... how many kilometres before engine is caputt / corrosion hits really? Thanks JJ > Hello! > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Thanks JJ What country, Finland, Sweden? When was it retired from the police? If it is in good shape then it is. The engines last forever, the gearboxes tend to die after a while. If it is good right now, then you should be good a long time. If you lose some coolant, you might have to replace headgasket soon. If the clutch slips, then clutch might need replacement soon (but VERY easy to fix on Saab 900), if the transmission makes noise in 5th gear it might need rebuilding soon. But that's about it. Corrosion will never happen if the car is kept clean, especially in the front suspension area like under the battery. >What country, Finland, Sweden? When was it retired from the police? > >If it is in good shape then it is. The engines last forever. . . No they don't. SAAB engines are no different from other engines in the category, and are subject to the same wear and failure modes as their counterparts. If anything, the turbocharged models run at typically higher IMEP and specific output, and should thus be subject to greater wear. I believe the reason behind the SAAB reputation for longevity is the pride in ownership that leads many owners to take excellent care of them, and as well to boast of their achievements in long-lasting reliability. After all, the 96 generation already had a reputation for fantastic longevity, yet they had a demonstrably inferior body design, leading to massive rust problems, and their engine was nothing other than a Ford V4, the same as used in the Taurus models, which did not benefit from any particular cult reputation. The gearboxes were notoriously short-lived, a tradition SAAB has unhappily managed to perpetuate through the model-years! Don't get me wrong, I have never owned anything other than Saabs, and I am as proud an owner as the next - but please don't expect your motor to last "forever". If it genuinely has 400,000 Km on it, you cannot reasonably expect that much more trouble-free operation out of it. How do you know the engine wasn't already replaced at 300K? GF >>If it is in good shape then it is. The engines last forever. . . > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the turbocharged models run at typically higher IMEP and specific output, and > should thus be subject to greater wear. You are vastly oversimplifying things, and quite honestly, you're dismissing careful engineering and lumping everyone's design criteria together. This is unfair to Saab's engineers, and incorrect. >>>If it is in good shape then it is. The engines last forever. . . >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >dismissing careful engineering and lumping everyone's design criteria >together. This is unfair to Saab's engineers, and incorrect. A single example would help your argument ever so much. . . Why should I not "lump everyone's design together" when that's exactly what GM (the manufacturer of SAAB) has been doing since 1994? >>> No they don't. >>> SAAB engines are no different from other engines in the category, >>You are vastly oversimplifying things, and quite honestly, you're >>dismissing careful engineering and lumping everyone's design criteria >>together. This is unfair to Saab's engineers, and incorrect. > A single example would help your argument ever so much. . . I'm having trouble with motivation on that one given your tone to those who have spent the time. > Why should I not "lump everyone's design together" when that's exactly what GM > (the manufacturer of SAAB) has been doing since 1994? Pardon, but you said "SAAB engines". You know, that would be the ones designed by the Saab engineers. >>>You are vastly oversimplifying things, and quite honestly, you're >>>dismissing careful engineering and lumping everyone's design criteria [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I'm having trouble with motivation on that one given your tone to those >who have spent the time. Yes I got that you were having trouble with it . . . >Pardon, but you said "SAAB engines". You know, that would be the ones >designed by the Saab engineers. Would it? There have not been very many of them. Ford, Triumph, Ricardo - perhaps you are referring to the 2-stroke, three cylinder models. Sorry - don't take it badly. I am as much the Saab enthusiast an anyone here, and have probably owned more of them than most. It's just that, as an engineer, I cannot accept the assertion that any mechanical device will last "forever". Even if we accept the implied hyperbole, it is just plain poor advice to suggest that an engine with 400,000 km on it still has a lot of useful life remaining. Saabs are pretty well made cars, and have attained near cult status amongst enthusiasts, where they enjoy fierce loyalty for their image and design features. Objectively, however, one can be proud of their spirit of innovation, while admitting they have really "invented" very little. Once they acquired the knowledge transfer for the Triumph OHC engine, they continued to develop it and refine it, but this is similar to what all of their competitors have done as well, and unless you can suggest otherwise, I see no reason to consider the product very differently from that of the competition. GF >>I'm having trouble with motivation on that one given your tone to those >>who have spent the time. > > Yes I got that you were having trouble with it . . . In other words, you're not worth wasting much time on, you see. I mean, I could go out and google _for_ you, but I really don't see what would be in it for me. Was it you who was wrong also about the balance shaft gear? >>Pardon, but you said "SAAB engines". You know, that would be the ones >>designed by the Saab engineers. > Would it? There have not been very many of them. Ford, Triumph, Ricardo - > perhaps you are referring to the 2-stroke, three cylinder models. No, those were designed by DKW, as you should know given your arrogant claims of expertise. And, while the 1.75 and 1.85 litre inline 4's could be considered the Triumph/Ricardo engines, and the "B" engine could marginally be, by the time of the H engine (as in the car the OP was asking about) it's been pretty much completely re-engineered. As you must know, of course. > Sorry - don't take it badly. I am as much the Saab enthusiast an anyone here, > and have probably owned more of them than most. It's just that, as an engineer, Hint: You're not the only engineer here, several of us on the board may have owned more types and examples than you have, and I know plenty of other engineers who try to talk with authority on situations they do not understand adequately. > I cannot accept the assertion that any mechanical device will last "forever". > Even if we accept the implied hyperbole, it is just plain poor advice to > suggest that an engine with 400,000 km on it still has a lot of useful life > remaining. Is it? http://www.saabnet.com/tsn/faq/miles/miles900.html Maybe all these people are just, you know, lying or something. > Saabs are pretty well made cars, and have attained near cult status amongst > enthusiasts, where they enjoy fierce loyalty for their image and design > features. Objectively, however, one can be proud of their spirit of innovation, > while admitting they have really "invented" very little. There you go again. Here let's pretend I researched and posted a laundry list of things Saab either did first, or made workable first, and you disregard them as trivial and/or not purely original. Then let's pretend that we played word games and bullshit over the definition of "invented" and got nowhere. (whew) just saved 3 iterations of posts. > Once they acquired the > knowledge transfer for the Triumph OHC engine, they continued to develop it and > refine it, but this is similar to what all of their competitors have done as > well, and unless you can suggest otherwise, I see no reason to consider the > product very differently from that of the competition. Yes, it's apparent that you don't see it. >There you go again. Here let's pretend I researched and posted a >laundry list of things Saab either did first, or made workable first, >and you disregard them as trivial and/or not purely original. Then >let's pretend that we played word games and bullshit over the definition >of "invented" and got nowhere. (whew) just saved 3 iterations of posts. Rather than prentending we did all kinds of reasearch we haven't really done, and came up with all kinds of astonishing results that are not really demonstrable, a more rational approach would be to look at the intentions and acheivements of the marque. Saab began as a diversification effort for an aircraft manufacturer who saw their market eroding at the end of WWII. Their intention was unabashedly to make the most economical car they could, and their model was the DKW. Through the 1960's their production could be compared with the most economical cars available on the market. As they sought to move their market to a more global stature, Saab, like other European maunfacturers, felt they needed to make a market shift upwards, partly to make more inroads on the US market. The 99 models had lots of teething problems, but did manage to move the car into the doctors' and lawyers' court, largely through a slightly "offbeat" design program that fit with Americans' taste for things European at that time, as well as a spirit of innovation and a demonstrable concern for safety features. They did a remarkably good job of maintaining this spirit and image through the 900 model years, but the iconoclast image increasingly became a "niche" market, unable to fulfill their global sales objectives. No longer able to subsist in a world market, on the basis of their sales alone, they were acquired by GM, who have until now striven to preserve the appeal of the marque whilst applying a "rational" program of supply, manufacture and distribution. Automobile manufacture today comprising very few real trade secrets, there is absolutely nothing wrong with an Opel Astra car and a Japanese engine with a slightly "remodeled" Saab exterior, even if, inevitably, the car begins to look more and more like the banal, mix-and-match production it has become. I don't see anything wrong with this story, except for the unhappy ending. I regret, as you probably do, that this slightly unusual, forward-looking approach could not, in today's market, be greeted with better success, but this is not sufficient for me to subscribe to every sort of mythology about the marque, or to ascribe to them all sorts of secret inventions, so sophisticated as to be as yet impenetrable to the rest of the industry, not the least of which is the reciprocating piston engine not subject to the types of wear their bretheren suffer, and thus capable of lasting "forever". GF >>There you go again. Here let's pretend I researched and posted a >>laundry list of things Saab either did first, or made workable first, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > demonstrable, a more rational approach would be to look at the intentions and > acheivements of the marque. You are again assuming you're the only one who knows about the topic. But by all means, do go on and on with your interpretation of that which some of us know possibly better than you; go ahead, we're all waiting with, um, varying degrees of interest I suppose. You're also apparently unaware that sometimes ones doesn't have to to "research" on a topic, if they already know about it. Do I have to "research" that a workable turbo went into production in 1977? (insert quibble about the word "production", go ahead if you must). > Saab began as a diversification effort for an > aircraft manufacturer who saw their market eroding at the end of WWII. Their > intention was unabashedly to make the most economical car they could, and their > model was the DKW. Wrong. So much for your "facts". Hint: there's this thing called "google", another called "wikipedia", and a third being direct personal experience. You would benefit from applying any of them. > I don't see anything wrong with this story, except for the unhappy ending. I > regret, as you probably do, that this slightly unusual, forward-looking [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > which is the reciprocating piston engine not subject to the types of wear their > bretheren suffer, and thus capable of lasting "forever". Wow. That was a really long sentence. You seem obsessed about this "forever" word. So what did you think about the high mileage listings? Yes, on a cosmic time scale, these cars don't last "forever", nobody has claimed otherwise. Did you have any facts to add to the discussion, or should I just expect you to come up with more errors like your claim about Saab making a model called the DKW... > Did you have any facts to add to the discussion, or should I just expect > you to come up with more errors like your claim about Saab making a > model called the DKW... DKW was the manufacturer of 2 & 3 cylinder 2 stroke engine which saab up to and including the 96 model Ken Saabfreak! 88 900T SportsPack 8v (Battleship Galactica) '72 99 2.0 CM4 (Old Git) '96 9000T CSE '93 900 16v SE LPT (F**king Shed!) '83 99 5spd >> Did you have any facts to add to the discussion, or should I just expect >> you to come up with more errors like your claim about Saab making a >> model called the DKW... > > DKW was the manufacturer of 2 & 3 cylinder 2 stroke engine which saab up to > and including the 96 model Sort of. They designed it originally but Saab modified the design significantly throughout the years, and manufactured it. >Did you have any facts to add to the discussion, or should I just expect >you to come up with more errors like your claim about Saab making a >model called the DKW... (slight chuckle) I admit my phrase was not well formulated. By "model" I meant "example" - the thing they were emulating! I actually saw the ambiguity, but out of laziness I decided to credit the reader with sufficient understanding - but then - need I say more? I do apologize for the ambiguity. Contrary to what you seem to think, I do not believe or profess to be any sort of expert on Saab automobiles. If you read the thread I don't think you'll find any assertion of the sort. In 1990, when I bought my 5th Saab, the company sent me a book, "The First Forty Years," and I read it. I'm sure many others here have as well. Not enough to make one an expert, but just enough to know that DKW (and BMW, and Volvo) are not Saab automobiles! >You're also apparently unaware that sometimes ones doesn't have to to >"research" on a topic, if they already know about it. Do I have to >"research" that a workable turbo went into production in 1977? >(insert quibble about the word "production", go ahead if you must). Do I detect a short-term memory failure? I was only responding to your own claim of "pretending" to do research! This was supposed to be so compelling as to preclude any possible rejoinder on my behalf! (A usenet classic - I'll have to remember that one!) For my part I have not done, or even pretended to do any research in the context of this discussion. >Wow. That was a really long sentence. You seem obsessed about this >"forever" word. Well, that -IS- the topic of this discussion. It would appear I need to remind you of your own argument. Your argument is in defense of the proposition that Saab engines last "forever". I know it was not you who made that claim, and I accept that the claim was made with some degree of hyperbole, but my objection to it is the basis of your reaction, and if one is to credit you with the least grain of sanity, it can only be that you believe this claim to be true. So what did you think about the high mileage >listings? I have an axe that's as old as me and will survive me. It has had three new heads and four new handles . . . I have also owned six Saabs, and changed out about that many engines and gearboxes. Those listings do not say anything about that. I do think it's interesting that many of the cars that have inspired the most boastful claims for longevity and reliability are those that were developed with no pretention other than to make the cheapest, most accessible transportation. The French 2CV. The Volkswagen Beetle. The early Saabs. The Mercedes, incontestably better engineered machines, do not have vociferous fan clubs in the background, measuring mileage statistics! GF Yes, on a cosmic time scale, these cars don't last "forever", >nobody has claimed otherwise. > Opel Astra car and a Japanese engine with a > slightly "remodeled" Saab exterior, even if, inevitably, the car > begins to look > more and more like the banal, mix-and-match production it has become. > > I don't see anything wrong with this story..... What Japanese engine? Do you mean the Australian V6?  SignatureRichard Sutherland-Smith New Zealand >> Opel Astra car and a Japanese engine with a >> slightly "remodeled" Saab exterior, even if, inevitably, the car [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >What Japanese engine? Do you mean the Australian V6? Nah, I think he is refering to the Scooby Dooby Impreza 9-2 Jap flat turbo and NA engine with 4wd (or AWD as they love to call it). SignatureCarl Robson Audio stream: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com:8000/samtest Homepage: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com Now Playing at home:The Bolshoi-Barrowlands >Why should I not "lump everyone's design together" when that's exactly what GM >(the manufacturer of SAAB) has been doing since 1994? Because this car does not belong in the post 94 GM world of one lump fits all. SignatureCarl Robson Audio stream: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com:8000/samtest Homepage: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com Now Playing at home:She Wants Revenge-these things (radio edit) >>Why should I not "lump everyone's design together" when that's exactly >>what GM >>(the manufacturer of SAAB) has been doing since 1994? >> > Because this car does not belong in the post 94 GM world of one lump > fits all. The later the Saab, the more generic - but that's not to say there are not still different and unique features in '94 onwards Saabs. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >>>Why should I not "lump everyone's design together" when that's exactly >>>what GM [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >The later the Saab, the more generic - but that's not to say there are not >still different and unique features in '94 onwards Saabs. Oh true. Very true. Infact, one of the possible options to replae the octie come change time is a GM Saab, although I might be tempted by a late 9000 2.3 FPT. SignatureCarl Robson Audio stream: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com:8000/samtest Homepage: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com Now Playing at home:Switchblade Symphony-Gutter Glitter >>>>Why should I not "lump everyone's design together" when that's exactly >>>>what GM [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Infact, one of the possible options to replae the octie come change time > is a GM Saab, although I might be tempted by a late 9000 2.3 FPT. A good choice. I've always liked certain Saab features, specifically the dashboard and interior comfort. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >A good choice. I've always liked certain Saab features, specifically the >dashboard and interior comfort. yea, except the part where you have to spend 4 hours changing a light bulb in the dash... I like them too. >>A good choice. I've always liked certain Saab features, specifically the >>dashboard and interior comfort. > > yea, except the part where you have to spend 4 hours changing a light > bulb in the dash... I like them too. Welcome to modern cars heh. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >>>A good choice. I've always liked certain Saab features, specifically the >>>dashboard and interior comfort. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Welcome to modern cars heh. Oh no, to change the dash lights in a Saab 900 (old fashioned one) you need to be a gynacologist. The quickest method is to open the window, then remove the drivers speaker cover, stand outside the car, reach in through the window, down the speaker hole while looking in through the windscreen, and locate the quarter turn bulb holder that has blown. Or the proper method which is to start by taking out the ash tray, then the lower center console, then the knee bolster than runs the length of the car, then it gets complicated. And they made them that way since 1979. SignatureCarl Robson Audio stream: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com:8000/samtest Homepage: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com Now Playing at home:Ghost Dance-Can the Can >>>> A good choice. I've always liked certain Saab features, specifically the >>>> dashboard and interior comfort. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > the speaker hole while looking in through the windscreen, and locate the > quarter turn bulb holder that has blown. Well, you can just remove the dash fascia and reach over the top of the main gauges, but yes, a lot of things are a lot easier with the speaker grilles removed. How long did I prod into the dark trying to fix my heater control arm back onto that little noggin buried deep inside the dash? Speaker grille out ... 5 seconds :o > Or the proper method which is to start by taking out the ash tray, then > the lower center console, then the knee bolster than runs the length of > the car, then it gets complicated. And they made them that way since > 1979. ... Or just remove the dash fascia :) Goatsdance, eh? Now there's a name from the past. 'River of No Return' ... What a song! I like the way they put oddball phrases on the spiral scratch run out, like the Sisters of Mercy did :) Paul 1989 900 Turbo S http://saab.go.dyndns.org/ >Well, you can just remove the dash fascia and reach over the top of the main >gauges, but yes, a lot of things are a lot easier with the speaker grilles >removed. How long did I prod into the dark trying to fix my heater control >arm back onto that little noggin buried deep inside the dash? Speaker grille >out ... 5 seconds :o The NG900's eliminated that option. It takes 3+ hours to get the instrument cluster in and out for any works (including a bulb change). >> [quoted text muted] >> Or the proper method which is to start by taking out the ash tray, then [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >... Or just remove the dash fascia :) I thought you had to pull the whole dash to get the instruments out? SignatureCarl Robson Audio stream: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com:8000/samtest Homepage: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com Now Playing at home:Johnny Cash-The Man Comes Around >>> [quoted text muted] >>> Or the proper method which is to start by taking out the ash tray, then [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> > I thought you had to pull the whole dash to get the instruments out? Maybe we're talking about the same thing here. Last time I had my instruments out (there a double-entendre in there for someone :) ), I removed the dash fascia by pulling the four long screws and unplugging/unclipping all the bits behind. Next, without removing the steering wheel (although it is a lot easier with the steering wheel removed, but the instrument panel does come out), I removed the two (or was it four?) screws holding the instrument panel and at that point, I could reach over and fiddle with the bulbs. In my case, I removed the speaker grille and unclipped the speedo cable because I wanted the instruments out to replace the plastic circuit board. No need to remove the knee bolster or any of the procedure for the lower dash up to that point - just the dash fascia. Once you've done that job once, you'll have placed stickers all over everything behind the dash fascia and made up a key sheet with diagrams which you keep in the car. I can be in and out in about 15 minutes now if I need to get at something behind the fascia. Paul 1989 900 Turbo S http://saab.go.dyndns.org/ >>What country, Finland, Sweden? When was it retired from the police? >> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > perpetuate > through the model-years! Well OK. volvo and saab were very solid long lasting vehicles in the 70's compared to most stuff. especially when the alternative was english or italian... If you bought one new you could expect 15 years of decent motoring....with a Fiat you'd be getting the filler out after 5.... >>>What country, Finland, Sweden? When was it retired from the police? >>> [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > If you bought one new you could expect 15 years of decent > motoring....with a Fiat you'd be getting the filler out after 5.... Months in many cases. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com > >>>What country, Finland, Sweden? When was it retired from the police? > >>> [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Months in many cases. Dunno, FIAT also uses galvanised rust free bodies these days. Fiats may brake down from mechanical reasons, however. My Croma (1987) was quite durable for 10 years. But window frames rusted and a clutch repair seems impossible to get right, Possibly due to incompetent main dealership. (Competent servicing means a lot for durability). Interior plastics was crappy as it warped and rattled, speedo and odometer stopped working. >> >>>What country, Finland, Sweden? When was it retired from the police? >> >>> [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > Dunno, FIAT also uses galvanised rust free bodies these days. We're discussing old ones, though, innit? > Fiats may > brake down from mechanical reasons, however. My Croma (1987) was quite > durable for 10 years. But window frames rusted and a clutch repair seems > impossible to get right, Possibly due to incompetent main dealership. > (Competent servicing means a lot for durability). Interior plastics was > crappy as it warped and rattled, speedo and odometer stopped working. By the same token my Dad bought a Fiat in '75 about two weeks after I was bought. Said it was a great engine, strange handling, but fell apart inside a couple of years. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >>>>>> What country, Finland, Sweden? When was it retired from the police? >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > bought. Said it was a great engine, strange handling, but fell apart inside > a couple of years. FIATs have come a long way since those dark days ... Our '99 Punto Sporting just refuses to do anything wrong or show signs of failing. True, it's getting on a little now but we've done nothing but normal maintenance and it's bailed us out a couple of times when the old SAAB has been a little reluctant :) That said, our son has one of those MK2 Selespeed time bombs (you know, with the Ferrari paddles) :( On the face of it, it seems okay, but it's going to go horribly wrong one day ... Paul 1989 900 Turbo S http://saab.go.dyndns.org/ >>>>>>> What country, Finland, Sweden? When was it retired from the police? >>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > > FIATs have come a long way since those dark days ... Yes - they have. Most manufacturers have too, I'm pleased to say. Some *cough Volkswagen cough* have not. > Our '99 Punto Sporting > just refuses to do anything wrong or show signs of failing. That's perfect, though. Oh, hold on, it's Italian: perfect-o, heh. :-p > True, it's > getting on a little now but we've done nothing but normal maintenance and > it's bailed us out a couple of times when the old SAAB has been a little > reluctant :) Yes. My Cinquecento was reliable. Okay except for the indicator stalk refusing to self correct, the rust that came up in the back and the tappets failing. It was great fun... > That said, our son has one of those MK2 Selespeed time bombs (you know, > with > the Ferrari paddles) :( On the face of it, it seems okay, but it's going > to > go horribly wrong one day ... :) SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com > >> >>>What country, Finland, Sweden? When was it retired from the police? > >> >>> [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > We're discussing old ones, though, innit? How old do u want them? The 1986 Croma had galvanised body. My 1987 model I had didn't rust on the body for 10 years, only the side window frames. >By the same token my Dad bought a Fiat in '75 about two weeks after I was >bought. Before Ebay banned the sale of organs, pets and children? SignatureCarl Robson Audio stream: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com:8000/samtest Homepage: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com Now Playing at home:She Wants Revenge-these things (radio edit) >>By the same token my Dad bought a Fiat in '75 about two weeks after I was >>bought. >> > Before Ebay banned the sale of organs, pets and children? I was wondering if anybody would spot that. Here it means "born" heh. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com >>> By the same token my Dad bought a Fiat in '75 about two weeks after I was >>> bought. >>> >> Before Ebay banned the sale of organs, pets and children? > > I was wondering if anybody would spot that. Here it means "born" heh. Ahhh you don't know your cars do you? You were bought around 9 months earlier. You came off the production line 2 weeks before the Fiat was bought. In your case your owners had to pre-order you, pay a deposit and then keep paying the installments for anything like the next 20-25 years. Had you been ordered in pink colour the installments could reappear 10-20 years after your owners thought they paid for you. And on it goes ... bottom line I don't like the 9-3 (too small) and the 9-5 is too big. So what am I going to do after the 9000. :-) Charles PS. Might as well contribute some complete and utter garbage to the discussion too. SignaturePlease remove _removeme_ to reply. >>>> By the same token my Dad bought a Fiat in '75 about two weeks after I >>>> was [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > And on it goes ... bottom line I don't like the 9-3 (too small) and the > 9-5 is too big. So what am I going to do after the 9000. Two 9-3s? > :-) > Charles > > PS. Might as well contribute some complete and utter garbage to the > discussion too. SignatureThe DervMan www.dervman.com > And on it goes ... bottom line I don't like the 9-3 (too small) and the > 9-5 is too big. So what am I going to do after the 9000. Have you looked closely at the newer 9-3 Sport Sedans yet? While the exterior dimensions have not changed greatly from the OG 9-3's, the interior room is quite a bit better. The back seat is actually usable by full size adults. Signature-Fred W >> And on it goes ... bottom line I don't like the 9-3 (too small) and the >> 9-5 is too big. So what am I going to do after the 9000. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > interior room is quite a bit better. The back seat is actually usable > by full size adults. I had one as a loan when mine was in for a service (yes I pay dealer prices ... getting old to get underneath the car on a gravel drive). When I am on the drivers seat you could only get a 10 year old behind me. Simply getting in/out of the car, reaching the controls etc. the 9-5 is more agreeable with me. Then I would like it in estate form (station wagon) but it could double up as an undertaker's car :-) I also had on loan a 9-5 estate diesel (2.2L engine yikes) which did nothing for me ... It was battleship gray outside and it was battleship gray inside. How interesting :-( Both cars made me appreciate the one I have. It is more fun, and if it is a bit short on the leg position for the driver it feels more vroom-vroom (if you know what i mean). Also if I go vroom-vroom I tend to sit more upright (as in the C900s). The newer SAABs give me the impression that the seat is lower (more like BMWs). All said and done a 9-5 aero wheel spinning and sliding a bit might put a smile on my face. The 9-3 I drove (also diesel 1.9 sport, and the 9-5 diesel) where a bad move from the dealer to give them to me as courtesy cars. For now I am staying with the 9000 for a while longer. It will soon mark 100k miles. :-) Charles SignaturePlease remove _removeme_ to reply. "Charles C." wrote <SNIP> > Both cars made me appreciate the one I have. It is more fun, and if it > is a bit short on the leg position for the driver it feels more [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > For now I am staying with the 9000 for a while longer. It will soon > mark 100k miles. Did you find the seat height adjustment? I personally like my 9-3 seat just above the lowest position to keep my head off the headliner. Seeing as you are under 100k, you got plenty of time to change driving styles before making a real decision. SignatureStephen B. To reply remove the first spam only > ... their engine was nothing other than a Ford V4, the same as used in the Taurus models, Taunus, not Taurus. A reliable engine if you replace the balance shaft bearings _every_ 100 000 km... SignatureMH '72 97 '77 96 '78 95 '79 96 '91 900i '95 900SE >> ... their engine was nothing other than a Ford V4, the same as used in the Taurus models, > >Taunus, not Taurus. >A reliable engine if you replace the balance shaft bearings _every_ 100 000 km... Thank you - I stand corrected. And I agree it was a reliable engine - even a very good one, considering the inherent difficulties in balancing a V4 design. Another weak point of this engine was the balance shaft drive gear. A "trivial" problem, except that whern it broke, the entire engine/transmission block had to be removed to replace it, because the oil pan had to be removed to remove the front cover. . ; For want of a nail . . . > Another weak point of this engine was the balance shaft drive gear. Only if the bearings are worn, the gear might loose its teeth... so, as long as you replace the bearings in time, there's no problem with the gear. SignatureMH '72 97 '77 96 '78 95 '79 96 '91 900i > > Another weak point of this engine was the balance shaft drive gear. > >Only if the bearings are worn, the gear might loose its teeth... so, as long as >you replace the bearings in time, there's no problem with the gear. I disagree. They used a fibre gear for noise limitation, but this came with a significant MTBF limitation as well. If "lose its teeth" means to you the same thing as "completely disintegrates every 60K/Mi" then we're talking the same language. The Ford design was just "OK" - remove the oil pan to remove the front cover to replace the gear. This, coupled with the SAAB design - disassemble the entire car, to remove the engine and transmission to remove the oil pan to remove the front cover to replace the gear,and we're well into the sub-optimal. GF > I disagree. They used a fibre gear for noise limitation, but this came with a > significant MTBF limitation as well. If "lose its teeth" means to you the > same thing as "completely disintegrates every 60K/Mi" then we're talking the > same language. No, 'loose its teeth' to me means that the teeth strip off the balance shaft gear, due to excessive play caused by worn balance shaft bearings. For stripped gear teeth see http://members.home.nl/saab96/techtip/balgear.jpg High mileage and an oil pressure indicator showing 0,5 -1 bar tell you it's time to replace the bearings... > The Ford design was just "OK" - remove the oil pan to remove the front cover > to replace the gear Actually you can remove the front cover without removing the oilpan or the engine. http://members.home.nl/saab96/techtip/front.jpg and with only loosening the oil pan, and some gentle force, you can replace the balance shaft (and camshaft) gear with the engine still in the car. > This, coupled with the SAAB design - disassemble the entire car, Taking off the hood, grille and radiator is just enough... > to remove the engine and transmission to remove the oil pan to remove the > front cover to replace the gear, and we're well into the sub-optimal. The balance shaft goes out the back of the engine. To take the balance shaft out, to replace its bearings, you do need to take the engine out of the car (be it a Ford or a SAAB) and remove the flywheel. You could even leave the oil pan in place, but once you've come this far you might as well take it off and clean out any bearing and valve stem seal remains... SignatureMH '72 97 '77 96 '78 95 '79 96 '91 900i '95 900SE >The balance shaft goes out the back of the engine. To take the balance shaft >out, to replace its bearings, you do need to take the engine out of the car (be it a >Ford or a SAAB) and remove the flywheel. You could even leave the oil pan in >place, but once you've come this far you might as well take it off and clean out >any bearing and valve stem seal remains... Sounds about right to me. I didn't say it, because I've never done it, but I was going to say replacing the balance shaft bearings every 60k/mi does not sound like a fun thing! There was another solution though - they did offer a steel replacement for the balance shaft gear. After getting stranded TWICE (in two different 96's) due to failure of this fibre gear, the steel gear was my solution to feel reasonably confident taking the car away from home. GF > Thank you - I stand corrected. > And I agree it was a reliable engine - even a very good one, considering the > inherent difficulties in balancing a V4 design. Another weak point of this > engine was the balance shaft drive gear. A "trivial" problem, except that whern > it broke, the entire engine/transmission block had to be removed to replace it, Nope... > because the oil pan had to be removed to remove the front cover. . ; > For want of a nail . . . Or a better procedure... >> Thank you - I stand corrected. >> And I agree it was a reliable engine - even a very good one, considering the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Or a better procedure... "Less work" is not necessarily "better". Breaking the oil pan seal should be followed by removal and cleaning of same, then replacing with a new gasket. The 'easy way out' tech tip is likely to produce leaks, as the crankcase often develops some static pressure. Of course you can continue to clean the garage floor and add more oil, if you find this better. GF >Hello! > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >care of it... how many kilometres before engine is caputt / corrosion hits >really? My answer, based on (since 1973) owning 5x99, 3x900 and currently a 9-5SE, is that it will last as long as you do, provided you do look after it. I generally kept each of my Saabs around 10 years, with the newer ones coming to me and the older ones migrating down the chain to the wife and kids. That's democracy at work. Most of them did around 160,000 miles before we sold them. Now I'm retired, and the kids have flown the nest, we just have a single 1998 9-5SE. I've never had any sort of engine problem with any of the cars, never any rust, and I live on the Sydney harbour waterfront. I had two automatic gearbox failures with 99's, both at around the 100,000 mile mark, and the headlining fell down on a couple of the 99's, easily fixed by an upholsterer. Only other major failure was a turbo in the 9-5, replaced under warranty, at around 50,000 Km (we've changed from Imperial to metric now) and two SID LCD display failures - both replaced under warranty. The 900's and the 9-5 are pretty heavy on discs and rotors - I generally have had the front rotors ground once and then replaced during ownership. As you may gather, I am a happy Saab owner! I hope you get lots of enjoyment with yours. SignatureRegards, Peter Wilkins > Hello! > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Thanks JJ Hi, For corrosion look at the front suspension wishbones (the Y arms that hold the suspension onto the body). Particularly the lower one. Regards Charles SignaturePlease remove _removeme_ to reply. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.