Saab 9-5 3.0 V6 TiD Any owners here?
Discussion
I'm after a nice wafty diesel estate and have come across this 95 V6 TiD and was wondering if anybody here has any experience of them?
It seems that you can get some lower mileage ones and they seem to have plenty of toys for the money, http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2010...
It seems that you can get some lower mileage ones and they seem to have plenty of toys for the money, http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2010...
For the 35mpg that diesel does, I'd look for an Aero (petrol) estate which will do 32mpg, be a lot faster, not sound rotten when it's cold, have more toys and ride infinitely better - the Aero suspension is a lot, lot better than the rest of the range yet still as comfortable.
Edited by fathomfive on Sunday 28th March 19:20
No worries - I contemplated changing the Aero for a V6TiD a few weeks back and took a long drive in the one at my local indy. If it had had the Aero suspension setup and could muster more than 2 - 3mpg more than the Aero was doing at the time I might have done a deal. It just didn't stack up in the end.
They are pokey units though (the TiD) and not too loud once warmed up. I just couldn't live with the floatiness. Definitely take one out for a drive before you buy. Big, comfortable and good value for money.
They are pokey units though (the TiD) and not too loud once warmed up. I just couldn't live with the floatiness. Definitely take one out for a drive before you buy. Big, comfortable and good value for money.
well looked after 330d SE with sports suspension?
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/1548253.htm
(yep it is mine- but its a lovely car and we've done all the expensive bits for another 80k miles!)
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/1548253.htm
(yep it is mine- but its a lovely car and we've done all the expensive bits for another 80k miles!)
theboyfold said:
Any reason why that you know of?
Have a look over at Saabcentral or Uksaabs for more info on them. I can't remember the reasons offhand but my indy told me under no circumstances would he put me into a 2.2TiD when I asked about them. He used slightly more interesting language though.I had a 95 V6 diesel a few years ago - kept it for 3 yrs (company car) and did 90,000 odd miles in it. Had one problem in all that time when it had a problem with the air intake - easily fixed. They do have a reputation though for I believe, cracked blocks? I might have that detail wrong but there is definitely something they suffer from along those lines - I never knew of this until long after I'd got rid of it - do a search on a friendly Saab forum. I remember it having a fair amount of tranmission noise and being quite lumpy at low speeds. It was quite well equipped, though not overly so tbh, there are better cars out there if you're after all the toys.
Not sure I'd have another one - I'd had a string of petrol 900s and 93s up to that point, and didn't fancy the 1.9tdi that was on offer at the time - having been used to the Aeros I thought it would be somewhat gutless.
Not sure I'd have another one - I'd had a string of petrol 900s and 93s up to that point, and didn't fancy the 1.9tdi that was on offer at the time - having been used to the Aeros I thought it would be somewhat gutless.
Not sure about the 2.2tid, (although expect real slug like performance I guess), but about 3 years ago I had a Saab 9-3 and when in for service (or was that a repair, there were so many on the damn thing) I was lent a 9-5 1.9tid auto.
The accelerator pedal appeared not be connected in any way to the engine at first push. So, you’d push it a bit more, and then a bit more and then from nothing...... WOOOOOOOOOOW! We’re off, we’re into 2nd, we’re holding our hands over our ears because they’re bleeding with the engine noise......oops we’re out of power. Horrendous, just horrendous.
I had the same 1.9 diesel lump in my manual 9-3 and it was ok, if a little agricultural. But the manner in which it was set-up in auto 9-5 form was terrible.
You have no wafting from the 9-5 1.9 diesel, so avoid like a dose of the clap.
The accelerator pedal appeared not be connected in any way to the engine at first push. So, you’d push it a bit more, and then a bit more and then from nothing...... WOOOOOOOOOOW! We’re off, we’re into 2nd, we’re holding our hands over our ears because they’re bleeding with the engine noise......oops we’re out of power. Horrendous, just horrendous.
I had the same 1.9 diesel lump in my manual 9-3 and it was ok, if a little agricultural. But the manner in which it was set-up in auto 9-5 form was terrible.
You have no wafting from the 9-5 1.9 diesel, so avoid like a dose of the clap.
I think the 1.9 shares the same engine as the Vectra which I had as a courtesy car and I know what you mean. Hateful hateful thing, foot flat in 2nd.... Nothing.... Nothing.... then 2k worth of torque steer and noise...
I was wondering if the 2.2 was any better.
I think I'm going along the lines of a Passat 130, BMW 320d or Alfa 156
I was wondering if the 2.2 was any better.
I think I'm going along the lines of a Passat 130, BMW 320d or Alfa 156
2.2TiD is the old Opel built 2.2DTi as seen in a Vectra near you. 130hp, VP44 injection pump that dies at the hint of bad diesel.
3.0V6 diesel is an Isuzu lump, also seen in the Vectra, Renault Vel Satis and a few others. It's scary when you come to timing belt replacement, filters are £40 each, and the high pressure fuel pump is weak.
Both should be avoided if you're looking a long-termer.
3.0V6 diesel is an Isuzu lump, also seen in the Vectra, Renault Vel Satis and a few others. It's scary when you come to timing belt replacement, filters are £40 each, and the high pressure fuel pump is weak.
Both should be avoided if you're looking a long-termer.
theboyfold said:
I think the 1.9 shares the same engine as the Vectra which I had as a courtesy car and I know what you mean. Hateful hateful thing, foot flat in 2nd.... Nothing.... Nothing.... then 2k worth of torque steer and noise...
I was wondering if the 2.2 was any better.
I think I'm going along the lines of a Passat 130, BMW 320d or Alfa 156
In that case don't go for the 1.9 156 - I'm pretty sure it's the same Engine!I was wondering if the 2.2 was any better.
I think I'm going along the lines of a Passat 130, BMW 320d or Alfa 156
3ltr diesel has a reputaion for dropped liners from 80k miles onwards, effectively writes the car off as the cost to repair is huge
2.2 diesel sounds like a tractor
1.9 diesel has less issues (other than EGR valve), but really needs to have been Hirshed or BSRed to get a heavy 9-5 moving. Also problems with dual mass flywheel on manual cars
The Saab petrol engines are much better in the 9-5 and the Aero is the best (most reliable) of the lot. The only issue here is that all the autos are in the highest tax bracket.
davidy
2.2 diesel sounds like a tractor
1.9 diesel has less issues (other than EGR valve), but really needs to have been Hirshed or BSRed to get a heavy 9-5 moving. Also problems with dual mass flywheel on manual cars
The Saab petrol engines are much better in the 9-5 and the Aero is the best (most reliable) of the lot. The only issue here is that all the autos are in the highest tax bracket.
davidy
DavidY said:
3ltr diesel has a reputaion for dropped liners from 80k miles onwards, effectively writes the car off as the cost to repair is huge
80k miles.....if your really lucky 
Dropped liner issue can occur at any time. Saab have replaced engines under warrenty with cars that were under 20k miles.
The problem was fixed in 2004, at which point Saab dropped the engine. Most of the warrenty replacement engines should be these 2004 units.
If the car isn't a 2004MY or there is NO documentation that a warrenty replacement engine hasn't been fitted post 2004 by a Saab dealer I wouldn't touch a 3.0Tid with a barge pole.
A replacement engine is £7k+
DavidY said:
2.2 diesel sounds like a tractor
And performs like one too. Avoid.DavidY said:
1.9 diesel has less issues (other than EGR valve), but really needs to have been Hirshed or BSRed to get a heavy 9-5 moving. Also problems with dual mass flywheel on manual cars
If you must have an oil burner in a 9-5 then this is the only real choice. But, the 1.9 was only available from 2006 onwards IIRC, and as said needs the ECU tweeked to make it perform with any real gusto in a heavy 9-5.I've got a 3.0 TID Vector Sportwaggon
54 plate, fully loaded, dvd sat nav, cd multi changer, climate control, self levelling xenons, full leather elec memory seat, heated front and rear seats, auto dimming heated folding reverse tiliting mirrors, just about to put abbot springs on, can do 40+ mpg average but does drink it when you boot it, but then what doesn't? 350 NM torque, same as the Aero, might not be as quick 0-60 or top end but between 40 and a 100 it's as quick as an aero. I'm happy with mine!
54 plate, fully loaded, dvd sat nav, cd multi changer, climate control, self levelling xenons, full leather elec memory seat, heated front and rear seats, auto dimming heated folding reverse tiliting mirrors, just about to put abbot springs on, can do 40+ mpg average but does drink it when you boot it, but then what doesn't? 350 NM torque, same as the Aero, might not be as quick 0-60 or top end but between 40 and a 100 it's as quick as an aero. I'm happy with mine!
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff