How much of a tank is a Saab 9-3?

[freenote]

Hi all,

back in the UK in a couple of weeks and need a daily driver for 6 months or so.

I have up to £2k to spend and have been drawn to the 9-3T between about 70k - 100k miles. They seem like good value for their age and performance.

I have this vision that Saabs are pretty indestructible if they have a FSH.

Am I wrong? Anything obvious to look out for when I go to see a few later this month??

Any thoughts would be appreciated. I normally look to Jap cars for reliability but fancy a change.
Alternatives also welcome although I have thought about this extensively.

[Wadeski]

Hatchback (up to 2002) or saloon (2002-now)?

Personally i prefer the hatch - it drives "worse" but it feels much more Saab-like.

Weak points are:

Direct Ignition cassettes die, but arent too expensive to replace and its only every 40,000 or so.

Just like the Cavalier platform its based on, the front bulkead and steering rack flex. This is fine, but if the car has been driven hard, these can crack. A bulkhead brace is a really good mod that removes most of the flex, and also improves handling.

Luke any turbo car, watch for signs of turbo wear (poor boosting, mayo in oil cap, smoke from exhaust).

the pixels on the info display screen ALWAYS die. this used to be expensive to fix but these days lots of companies offer solutions.

I really liked mine. A 2001 or 2002 9-3T coupe, which came with the factory bodykit, with a steering rack brace and a remap (220bhp) is a really nice car.

[Biker's Nemesis]

I've driven a 2000 ish turbo model latley and my god they don't handle.

Quick but an acident waiting to happen if you push on a bit.

[aeropilot]

Wadeski said:

Hatchback (up to 2002) or saloon (2002-now)?

Personally i prefer the hatch - it drives "worse" but it feels much more Saab-like.

Weak points are:

Direct Ignition cassettes die, but arent too expensive to replace and its only every 40,000 or so.

Just like the Cavalier platform its based on, the front bulkead and steering rack flex. This is fine, but if the car has been driven hard, these can crack. A bulkhead brace is a really good mod that removes most of the flex, and also improves handling.

Luke any turbo car, watch for signs of turbo wear (poor boosting, mayo in oil cap, smoke from exhaust).

the pixels on the info display screen ALWAYS die. this used to be expensive to fix but these days lots of companies offer solutions.

I really liked mine. A 2001 or 2002 9-3T coupe, which came with the factory bodykit, with a steering rack brace and a remap (220bhp) is a really nice car.

Pretty much sums it up if you are talking pre-2002 9-3t.

For £2k, you should be able to get a nice late Aero HOT, as these have nice comfy sports seats and are 205hp standard, and better still have the much more robust and reliable Misti TD04 turbo.

The key to making 'good progress' with a powerfull fwd Saab is to drive smoothly using the huge amount of torque and not in a rev happy aggressive style as you would with a n/a hot hatch or such like.

Edited by aeropilot on Thursday 8th July 11:11

[freenote]

I've been looking at the hatchback -02 model. They seem the best value. I'll probably go for the 5-dr solely because there are more about in the price range.

I agree they do look good with the bodykit but I like to keep my cars as low key as possible given the amount of car crime on my road - local scrotes couldn't even leave my beaten up old Accord alone!

So It sounds like they're not all that pricey to fix and fairly reliable if not the best handling, but I knew that they can be a little dicey if pushed. I'll be doing most of my driving around London suburbs so it's not that important - I just like to have the power on tap.

Haven't seen any decent looking HOTs within 20 miles or so of where I live unless I go for 150k. Is that pushing it a bit do you think??

And do you think they're up there with Hondas for reliability? Or close to that anyway.

Appreciate the help.

[boomboompow]

TBH I think a 9-5 of the same vintage would be a safer bet; £2k will get you a decent model around 2001/2002 reg.

[freenote]

boomboompow said:

TBH I think a 9-5 of the same vintage would be a safer bet; £2k will get you a decent model around 2001/2002 reg.

I have thought about it but they look substantially larger and parking is at a premium unfortunately.
Out of interest, why would you go for the 9-5?

[JustDerv]

Looking at the title of this thread, I thought the OP was asking how strong they were in a crash. As I can vouch, they're very strong - I had a 70mph crash in a 2001 9-3 and walked away with just a scratched arm from the broken glass of the rear windscreen.

[J4CKO]

Have had both and agree with Wadeski, they dont handle but they arent as bad as some say, certainly in normal use it doesnt hampre you, just if you try anything "sporty" it all goes to pot, the engines are brilliant, I had the 150 LPT and I kid you not, it would match a Civic Type R for acceleration and also a Mini Cooper S, I dont think it had ben remapped but it was one of those cars that punched above its weight, mine was a dead basic one with no aircon (9-3 Club Sport ) so maybe it was a bit lighter. I replaced it with a 2003 9-3 Saloon Aero which despite its 210 didnt feel any/much faster, bit dissapointed really, hence why I got the BSR remap which made it quite fast, turned off at the moment as the clutch isnt so keen on nearly 300 lbs.ft, neither are my insurers !

The old one, in the wet, coming off a roundabout managed to sping its inside front wheel up to 80 mph, me just keeping my foot in to see what happened, inept chassis, open diff, a bit of poke and ropey tyres !

Also, thought the handling was poop on the old one, the new one is actually pretty talented considering its Vectra based, not very engaging but pretty effective, sometimes though the softly sprung old one was easier to make progress in as it rode so well and didnt get upset by mid corner bumps so much.

[vit4]

I've been half considering a 900 when my year's no claims arrives. Are they basically the same as the 9-3 model in question?

[freenote]

JustDerv said:

Looking at the title of this thread, I thought the OP was asking how strong they were in a crash. As I can vouch, they're very strong - I had a 70mph crash in a 2001 9-3 and walked away with just a scratched arm from the broken glass of the rear windscreen.

Jeez...well that's defo a +1 for the 9-3 given the amount of poor suburban drivers around my area.
Glad to hear you walked away unharmed though.

[freenote]

J4CKO said:

The old one, in the wet, coming off a roundabout managed to sping its inside front wheel up to 80 mph, me just keeping my foot in to see what happened, inept chassis, open diff, a bit of poke and ropey tyres !

So are you recommending a lsd and maybe the bulkhead brace then??

I've never modded a car before; would an insurer rape me for mods like that do you think??

[boomboompow]

freenote said:

boomboompow said:

TBH I think a 9-5 of the same vintage would be a safer bet; £2k will get you a decent model around 2001/2002 reg.

I have thought about it but they look substantially larger and parking is at a premium unfortunately.
Out of interest, why would you go for the 9-5?

A friend had a 1999 9-5 from new for about 6 years (and 200k plus miles) and nothing ever went wrong with it apart from a few minor/expected things that were a doddle to fix. Also if you plan to sell it on in 6 months time you should get what you paid for it whereas I think an old shape 9-3 might be quite hard to shift. I'm not knocking the 9-3 though, find a decent one and I'm sure it'll be just as reliable.

[J4CKO]

freenote said:

J4CKO said:

The old one, in the wet, coming off a roundabout managed to sping its inside front wheel up to 80 mph, me just keeping my foot in to see what happened, inept chassis, open diff, a bit of poke and ropey tyres !

So are you recommending a lsd and maybe the bulkhead brace then??

I've never modded a car before; would an insurer rape me for mods like that do you think??

Not accelerating like a tit off wet roundabouts would be a cheaper option !

I did like that car though, it was like comfy old slippers, the new one to be honest is kind of like trying to turn a Saab into a BMW and not succeeding, Saab should do Saab, not thrusty german wannabe's but that it seesm is what everyone (thinks) they want.

Never had a failure on it, just a coupel of clonks fromt he frotn when I sold it and a bit of water loss from the headgasket, solved as per a factory bulletin by re-torquing the head, superb engines !


Our neighbour just part exed her very tidy V reg 2.0 9-5 LPT for £300 !!! for a BMW 5 series, all new tyres, new DI cassette, wortha lot more than that.

[BlueEyedBoy]

I have a 9-3 aero hot 3 door coupe. Has had a remap and all adjustable konis. I can't bring myself to sell it, as it does everything ok. The boot is huge, bigger than most estates. It can out drag a lot of more obvious metal (can just about hang onto an e46 M3 in a straight line). Interior is ok, but even with the suspension, it will never be a good handling car, it made a massive difference and the stronger rear strut brace helped, but compared to say a e46 3 series, it was behind the times. Then again, it is a hell of a lot cheaper

Edit to note, if I drive like a saint I can see over 40mpg on a mix of 30/60 country roads, can get around 46mpg on the motorway at about 70mph. My average normal driving is around 28.

Edited by BlueEyedBoy on Thursday 8th July 13:16

[900T-R]

J4CKO said:

I did like that car though, it was like comfy old slippers, the new one to be honest is kind of like trying to turn a Saab into a BMW and not succeeding, Saab should do Saab, not thrusty german wannabe's but that it seesm is what everyone (thinks) they want.

Trouble is Saab turbos of old were a bit of a hooligan underneath once you got past the somewhat cumbersome feel when pootling so the Cavalier-based successors, though far more comfortable and refined, were always going to suffer in comparison.

[davemac250]

Have had a 900, 9-3 hatch, the 9-3 conv and currently a 9-5 estate.

The 9-3 is a decent car, just , as others have mentioned, do not expect the best in terms of handling.

I thought the conv suited it very well as you were always aware of its limitations in that earlier. The scuttle shake and flex sort of made me adopt a more relaxed approach. It could still crack on but was more suited to slow in slow out and boot it on the straight, rather than trying to carry corner speed.

The 900 was a tank, lovely car with some proper Saabness built in (was a pre-GM model)

My favourite has to be the estate though. Yep, it is a big old bus, but it has been ultra reliable, pulls really strongly and with £700 on lowered suspension and a proper set up handles way better than the others did.

It has got a great steering lock on it and I have found it easier to get in and out of parking spaces - especially more so that the conv which seemed to have a crap lock on it, I suspect the extra width Aero wheels were the problem

Try them all, you may surprise yourself and buy the larger one!

[J4CKO]

Yes, the 9-5 has more chassis ability, not being based on a Medeival Cavalier chassis.