Saab faster than 911 Turbo - Top gear claim
Discussion
The things I like about the 9000's are;
They a relatively quick, compared with boring cars
They are VERY cheap to buy if you look round and buy a old one.
They are very reliable as everyday transport.
They are very anonymous, no one ever notices them.
They are very comfortable for the drag to and from work.
They are not the best or fastest cars in the world but they are ok.
eddited to add, and they could not outpace a 911 unless the 911 was driven by a poor driver
>> Edited by richard sails on Thursday 13th November 08:07
They a relatively quick, compared with boring cars
They are VERY cheap to buy if you look round and buy a old one.
They are very reliable as everyday transport.
They are very anonymous, no one ever notices them.
They are very comfortable for the drag to and from work.
They are not the best or fastest cars in the world but they are ok.
eddited to add, and they could not outpace a 911 unless the 911 was driven by a poor driver
>> Edited by richard sails on Thursday 13th November 08:07
I think some folks here need to recalibrate their sense of proportion.
a) 'Normal' 911 versions are not that fast - just look at the lap times posted by the Evo folks (in the back of the mag), compared to say, a humble Evo VIII.
b) Same goes for Griff/Chim generation Tivs, but more so. I aspire to owning one in addition to my Saab, but I'd be deluding myself it I'd expect it to come anywhere near to the point-to-point ability of my (admittedly highly modified) Saab (or a modern major league sports saloon, for that matter) on give-or-take roads and weather conditions. I'll buy one for the driving sensations and sense of occasion it gives me whilst driving in traffic at lowish speeds, and keep the Saab for high speed blasts across the continent thakyouverymuch. Horses for courses and all. In a 2003 world, sports cars are not about speed in se, and if you lend your identity on the road to being faster than anything else, night I gently suggest an RS6 or E55 AMG?
c) A well sorted 9000 Aero is a crushingly fast cross country device and does kind of allright at the faster, more 'scary tracks (Goodwood et al), too. Another £2K on top of the purchase price will buy you big-league saloon performance. There's a good few examples out there sporting 300+ bhp with massive stacks of torque all over the rev band, and sorted handling. It's relatively cheap and easy - that's why they are so popular in Saab circles versus the nimbler and more charismatic old-style 900, which has ultimately more handling potential (longitudinal engine placed over the front wheels instead of all the weight hanging out in front of them, fully adjustable twin wishbone suspension) but is far more expensive to do properly by way of its engine controls/ancillaries and weaker drivetrain (which means you have to concentrate on making the b*st*rd rev instead of slugging out huge wads of torque). Furthermore, there is a Quaife LSD readily available for the 9000.
d) There's a Goodwood track video somewhere (it might be on performance-saab.com but I'm not sure) that shows Bill Jones p*ssing all over 911's and a 348 at Goodwood, in his 305 bhp 9000 Aero (the 'usual' stuff on his car - Maptun Stage 4 upgrade, springs, shocks, poly bushes, wheels, tyres).
'All down to the driver' you will say. Well, considering this was Bills second ever track day, all the other drivers must have been really incompetent, then... Oh, and he also commented how the Chimaeras on the same day were nowhere near the straight-line performance of his Saab. No matter, I still want one...
e) Which brings me to my last point. It is no good comparing even outright accelaration of different cars based on just peak hp, peak torque and vehicle weight, with a bit of philosophing and assuming about gear ratios thrown in for good measure. As we're accelerating through one or several gears instead of sitting at just one point in the rpm band (CVT-equipped cars need not apply), you need to know about the surface area below the lines on the torque/power graphs, which indicates how much or how little power you have over the operating range of the engine. Modern turbo road cars (especially non-modified ones] have torque curves like the Massif Central, with all of max torque available between for instance 1,800 and 5,000 rpm. Where a highly strung normally aspirated engine has a peak somewhere at the far right of the graph, and a line gradually rising from 'zero' at the left to said peak. Would anyone care to guess the difference in surface area between a rectangle and a triangle of the same length and height?
>> Edited by 900T-R on Thursday 13th November 08:56
a) 'Normal' 911 versions are not that fast - just look at the lap times posted by the Evo folks (in the back of the mag), compared to say, a humble Evo VIII.
b) Same goes for Griff/Chim generation Tivs, but more so. I aspire to owning one in addition to my Saab, but I'd be deluding myself it I'd expect it to come anywhere near to the point-to-point ability of my (admittedly highly modified) Saab (or a modern major league sports saloon, for that matter) on give-or-take roads and weather conditions. I'll buy one for the driving sensations and sense of occasion it gives me whilst driving in traffic at lowish speeds, and keep the Saab for high speed blasts across the continent thakyouverymuch. Horses for courses and all. In a 2003 world, sports cars are not about speed in se, and if you lend your identity on the road to being faster than anything else, night I gently suggest an RS6 or E55 AMG?
c) A well sorted 9000 Aero is a crushingly fast cross country device and does kind of allright at the faster, more 'scary tracks (Goodwood et al), too. Another £2K on top of the purchase price will buy you big-league saloon performance. There's a good few examples out there sporting 300+ bhp with massive stacks of torque all over the rev band, and sorted handling. It's relatively cheap and easy - that's why they are so popular in Saab circles versus the nimbler and more charismatic old-style 900, which has ultimately more handling potential (longitudinal engine placed over the front wheels instead of all the weight hanging out in front of them, fully adjustable twin wishbone suspension) but is far more expensive to do properly by way of its engine controls/ancillaries and weaker drivetrain (which means you have to concentrate on making the b*st*rd rev instead of slugging out huge wads of torque). Furthermore, there is a Quaife LSD readily available for the 9000.
d) There's a Goodwood track video somewhere (it might be on performance-saab.com but I'm not sure) that shows Bill Jones p*ssing all over 911's and a 348 at Goodwood, in his 305 bhp 9000 Aero (the 'usual' stuff on his car - Maptun Stage 4 upgrade, springs, shocks, poly bushes, wheels, tyres).
'All down to the driver' you will say. Well, considering this was Bills second ever track day, all the other drivers must have been really incompetent, then... Oh, and he also commented how the Chimaeras on the same day were nowhere near the straight-line performance of his Saab. No matter, I still want one...
e) Which brings me to my last point. It is no good comparing even outright accelaration of different cars based on just peak hp, peak torque and vehicle weight, with a bit of philosophing and assuming about gear ratios thrown in for good measure. As we're accelerating through one or several gears instead of sitting at just one point in the rpm band (CVT-equipped cars need not apply), you need to know about the surface area below the lines on the torque/power graphs, which indicates how much or how little power you have over the operating range of the engine. Modern turbo road cars (especially non-modified ones] have torque curves like the Massif Central, with all of max torque available between for instance 1,800 and 5,000 rpm. Where a highly strung normally aspirated engine has a peak somewhere at the far right of the graph, and a line gradually rising from 'zero' at the left to said peak. Would anyone care to guess the difference in surface area between a rectangle and a triangle of the same length and height?
>> Edited by 900T-R on Thursday 13th November 08:56
Not particularly relevant but fairly pertinent: Just wondering where the Saab would end up in this table? (never having driven the Saab, but some others from here)
0 - 100 - 0 from Autocar
Caterham Seven R500 11.44 secs
Pagani C12 S 11.84 secs
Porsche 911 turbo 13.02 secs
Radical SR3 13.20 secs
Lamborghini Murcielago 13.90 secs
Mercedes SL55 15.15 secs
TRV Tamora 15.20 secs
Evo RS Sprint 15.90 secs
Audi RS6 16.75 secs
Impreza STi 18.40 secs
>> Edited by getcarter on Thursday 13th November 09:16
0 - 100 - 0 from Autocar
Caterham Seven R500 11.44 secs
Pagani C12 S 11.84 secs
Porsche 911 turbo 13.02 secs
Radical SR3 13.20 secs
Lamborghini Murcielago 13.90 secs
Mercedes SL55 15.15 secs
TRV Tamora 15.20 secs
Evo RS Sprint 15.90 secs
Audi RS6 16.75 secs
Impreza STi 18.40 secs
>> Edited by getcarter on Thursday 13th November 09:16
[d) There's a Goodwood track video somewhere (it might be on performance-saab.com but I'm not sure) that shows Bill Jones p*ssing all over 911's and a 348 at Goodwood, in his 305 bhp 9000 Aero (the 'usual' stuff on his car - Maptun Stage 4 upgrade, springs, shocks, poly bushes, wheels, tyres).
'All down to the driver' you will say. Well, considering this was Bills second ever track day, all the other drivers must have been really incompetent, then... Oh, and he also commented how the Chimaeras on the same day were nowhere near the straight-line performance of his Saab. No matter, I still want one...
I am a fan of stealth modified Saabs, but I don't really get the comparison of a track modified Saab stage 4 upgrade,poly bushes etc...comparing to generic 911 ,maybe 204 bhp 911 SC or the boulevard cruiser that is a standard 348.
I would be very interested to see this Saab perform at Goodwood with a standard 964 RS on track with it's girlie 260bhp.The Saab would need to be very good to compensate for the excess weight it would need to cope with through the corners and under braking.
'All down to the driver' you will say. Well, considering this was Bills second ever track day, all the other drivers must have been really incompetent, then... Oh, and he also commented how the Chimaeras on the same day were nowhere near the straight-line performance of his Saab. No matter, I still want one...
I am a fan of stealth modified Saabs, but I don't really get the comparison of a track modified Saab stage 4 upgrade,poly bushes etc...comparing to generic 911 ,maybe 204 bhp 911 SC or the boulevard cruiser that is a standard 348.
I would be very interested to see this Saab perform at Goodwood with a standard 964 RS on track with it's girlie 260bhp.The Saab would need to be very good to compensate for the excess weight it would need to cope with through the corners and under braking.
Getcarter: Fairly low I guess (no matter which model you refer to), because of its standing start deficiency. Any FWD vehicle will be hard pressed to dip below 5.5 secs for the 0-60 dash on road tyres, even if it had 500 hp and weighed less than a ton. You might be going to make up for this by a blistering midrange performance in the remaining 40 mph against RWD/AWD vehicles that are up to a second faster on the 0-60, but that's about all you can do...
But we were talking 'real life' performance (the discussion being sparked by a claim about 40-70 mph acceleration, originally), not drag strip/traffic light antics...
>> Edited by 900T-R on Thursday 13th November 09:29
But we were talking 'real life' performance (the discussion being sparked by a claim about 40-70 mph acceleration, originally), not drag strip/traffic light antics...
>> Edited by 900T-R on Thursday 13th November 09:29
Ok my old 9000 2.3t was stonkingly quick low end mind you, they have small turbos. 1500rpm is almost maz torque. Torque * gearing, I assume the porker would be geared to 90mph in 2nd the saab to 70, thats a big difference.
However you try it up a snaky alpine pass or a roundabout exit, front wheel drive 250bhp 400ft lb of torque, absolute waste of time every time, you might as well have a diesel!
However you try it up a snaky alpine pass or a roundabout exit, front wheel drive 250bhp 400ft lb of torque, absolute waste of time every time, you might as well have a diesel!
Clubsport said:
[d)
I am a fan of stealth modified Saabs, but I don't really get the comparison of a track modified Saab stage 4 upgrade,poly bushes etc...comparing to generic 911 ,maybe 204 bhp 911 SC or the boulevard cruiser that is a standard 348.
I would be very interested to see this Saab perform at Goodwood with a standard 964 RS on track with it's girlie 260bhp.The Saab would need to be very good to compensate for the excess weight it would need to cope with through the corners and under braking.
Um, we're talking about a bl**dy chip and some bits 'n bobs, not a full bore trackday special! For the price of the Stage IV conversion, I bet you could not even get a tuner near the engine of a 911!! We're talking maybe £5K worth of Saab - 3 for the car, 2 for the mods - you can still put your grandma in the back and he has still air con, electric everything...
Now my old 900 is getting closer to a completely re-engineered purpose built machine (race built engine & turbo, 9000 brake conversion with DS3000 pads up front, anti-roll bar only at the rear, etc.) but this one, too, still is very much a road car with full interior. If you'd put the same mechanics into a caged, stripped, stiffened 2/3-door shell (a 900 T-RS...
) on a set of road legal track day tyres, then you would be comparing like for like. The only difference is that at Zuffenhausen, you can get such a single-minded machine from the factory - at a price...Clubsport said:
[d) There's a Goodwood track video somewhere (it might be on performance-saab.com but I'm not sure) that shows Bill Jones p*ssing all over 911's and a 348 at Goodwood, in his 305 bhp 9000 Aero (the 'usual' stuff on his car - Maptun Stage 4 upgrade, springs, shocks, poly bushes, wheels, tyres).
'All down to the driver' you will say. Well, considering this was Bills second ever track day, all the other drivers must have been really incompetent, then... Oh, and he also commented how the Chimaeras on the same day were nowhere near the straight-line performance of his Saab. No matter, I still want one...
I am a fan of stealth modified Saabs, but I don't really get the comparison of a track modified Saab stage 4 upgrade,poly bushes etc...comparing to generic 911 ,maybe 204 bhp 911 SC or the boulevard cruiser that is a standard 348.
I would be very interested to see this Saab perform at Goodwood with a standard 964 RS on track with it's girlie 260bhp.The Saab would need to be very good to compensate for the excess weight it would need to cope with through the corners and under braking.
LOL, this Saab quicker than a 911 stuff on track makes me laugh. I'd be quicker around Goodwood in wet conditions in my Golf GTi Mk2 than my sodding Porsche 964RS
Saabs are very different cars from Porsches.
It just happened to be a nice little piece of marketing trivia that over a certain increment a Saab is quicker than a Porsche.
Far from worrying Porsche drivers, it is doing a great job of massaging the ego of Saab drivers, and encouraging new sales of Saab turbos. Just as the marketing intended
You would have to be a *very* poorly endowed 911 driver to have sleepless nights about it I had a good night's kip, BTW
cptsideways said:
Ok my old 9000 2.3t was stonkingly quick low end mind you, they have small turbos. 1500rpm is almost maz torque. Torque * gearing, I assume the porker would be geared to 90mph in 2nd the saab to 70, thats a big difference.
However you try it up a snaky alpine pass or a roundabout exit, front wheel drive 250bhp 400ft lb of torque, absolute waste of time every time, you might as well have a diesel!
, he he, I wheel span about 200 yards up my road (was wet - honest) when I first bought my 95, I was just trying to get away a bit quick. Damm impressed with the power but not with the lack of traction 
. And don't start me on understear!!!, a certain roundabout in MK with full lock and we were still going straight 
domster said:
[LOL, this Saab quicker than a 911 stuff on track makes me laugh. I'd be quicker around Goodwood in wet conditions in my Golf GTi Mk2 than my sodding Porsche 964RS
So, what's the bl**dy point of owning a 964RS, then, in a country in which it rains on 225 days in an average year?
Smugness? 900T-R said:
[LOL, this Saab quicker than a 911 stuff on track makes me laugh. I'd be quicker around Goodwood in wet conditions in my Golf GTi Mk2 than my sodding Porsche 964RS
So, what's the bl**dy point of owning a 964RS, then, in a country in which it rains on 225 days in an average year?
No, the 140 days a year when it isn't raining
If you have driven/get to drive a 964RS on a dry track, you'll see exactly what I mean. It makes forfeiting Saab ownership worthwhile
Ehm, you're missing the point here - I don't just own a Saab, I practically built it. Exactly the way I wanted it to be. Just about everything I know about cars (and remember, I've driven just about everything in my motoring hack years) has flown into it. The basic engineering is Saab's (not GM's, luckily ) and for my intents and puropses it's bang on target - but the tuning philosphy applied to make it work for me and my driving, is all mine.
Sadly with all my mile-muching in the ZX going on for work, there's not as much time to properly finish the project off or to drive it as I'd like to, but the few occasions I find myself in the driver's seat more than make up for it. It's a sense of occasion I would never get from driving any 'off the shelf' car no matter how glamourous.
And unlike Barker's Capri, it didn't and won't cost £35K...
>> Edited by 900T-R on Thursday 13th November 10:29
) and for my intents and puropses it's bang on target - but the tuning philosphy applied to make it work for me and my driving, is all mine. Sadly with all my mile-muching in the ZX going on for work, there's not as much time to properly finish the project off or to drive it as I'd like to, but the few occasions I find myself in the driver's seat more than make up for it. It's a sense of occasion I would never get from driving any 'off the shelf' car no matter how glamourous.
And unlike Barker's Capri, it didn't and won't cost £35K...
>> Edited by 900T-R on Thursday 13th November 10:29
I'm not sure I'm missing any point - we are just talking at crossed purposes perhaps. The thread was about a production Saab beating a production Porsche.
I only mentioned the 964RS to show how silly any kind of track comparison is - if you have been to the 'ring and seen Achim's much modified ring mini you will see that it urinates on much more expensive and prestigious machinery.
As for making the car your own, I applaud you
Those principles are exactly why I am just about to start building an Ultima to my specifications (no cupholders and the engine in a better place than the behind the rear axle!).
As an aside, Saab have used the in gear acceleration figures for marketing purposes before.
Thank you for your interest in the new Saab 9-3 Aero, a car that sets new standards in the quest for performance, safety and sheer driving pleasure.
Effortless turbocharged performance from a 2.0T engine means a 0-60mph time of 7.5 seconds and mid-range overtaking performance (in top gear) to upstage a Ferrari Testarossa.
I felt compelled to contribute to this thread because I know how these analogies are used and to what purpose they are invented. Why? Well, I wrote the above copy for Saab.
I only mentioned the 964RS to show how silly any kind of track comparison is - if you have been to the 'ring and seen Achim's much modified ring mini you will see that it urinates on much more expensive and prestigious machinery.
As for making the car your own, I applaud you
Those principles are exactly why I am just about to start building an Ultima to my specifications (no cupholders and the engine in a better place than the behind the rear axle!).
As an aside, Saab have used the in gear acceleration figures for marketing purposes before.
Thank you for your interest in the new Saab 9-3 Aero, a car that sets new standards in the quest for performance, safety and sheer driving pleasure.
Effortless turbocharged performance from a 2.0T engine means a 0-60mph time of 7.5 seconds and mid-range overtaking performance (in top gear) to upstage a Ferrari Testarossa.
I felt compelled to contribute to this thread because I know how these analogies are used and to what purpose they are invented. Why? Well, I wrote the above copy for Saab.
I think it was Auto, Motor und Sport however, who first made this comparison in their road test of the 9000 2.3 Turbo.
To be fair to Saab, midrange overtaking capability (arguably the most realistic scenario for using a car's performance on public roads) did constitute an important point in their engineering philosophy when they first ventured in Forced Induction Land for a production model. Remember they were out of their own back then as all applications of turbochargers on road cars were race-derivied and focused on making quick cars even faster at the top end of the range. Not of much use when you're tring to make a 2 litre saloon car feel like it's go a bigger engine...
Me, I had to undo a fair bit of Saab's engineering in this regard - when you're on the limit of what torque the gearbox and front wheels can handle, you're more concerned about extending the torque curve towards the high end of the rpm range (as well as extending said range itself) than further fattening it...
To be fair to Saab, midrange overtaking capability (arguably the most realistic scenario for using a car's performance on public roads) did constitute an important point in their engineering philosophy when they first ventured in Forced Induction Land for a production model. Remember they were out of their own back then as all applications of turbochargers on road cars were race-derivied and focused on making quick cars even faster at the top end of the range. Not of much use when you're tring to make a 2 litre saloon car feel like it's go a bigger engine...
Me, I had to undo a fair bit of Saab's engineering in this regard - when you're on the limit of what torque the gearbox and front wheels can handle, you're more concerned about extending the torque curve towards the high end of the rpm range (as well as extending said range itself) than further fattening it...
Clubsport said:
I would be very interested to see this Saab perform at Goodwood with a standard 964 RS on track with it's girlie 260bhp.The Saab would need to be very good to compensate for the excess weight it would need to cope with through the corners and under braking.
Erm, both SAAB 9000 and 964 tip the scales at circa 1400kg...RS or Clubsport may be a bit lighter, but it's hardly a Bentley/Caterham kind of a difference, is it?
And the 9000 Aero has more (accessible) torque.
It may only have been marketing copy, but that has to have a basis in fact, else you're in the poo.
Nick.
900T-R said:
I think it was Auto, Motor und Sport however, who first made this comparison in their road test of the 9000 2.3 Turbo.
You are probably right - I seem to remember the hype at the time.
It is an advertising trick almost as old as the automobile itself, tho'.
A classic 2CV ad, years before the Saab, claimed that the car was faster than a Ferrari. "The Citroen 2CV has a top speed of 72mph, which makes it faster than a Ferrari travelling at 71mph."
I agree re midrange torque. For overtaking it is very important indeed. I think 3rd or 4th gear acceleration from 40-70mph would be the best increment to use.
Turbos are also relatively useless unless spooled up. I can remember my father driving my Lotus Carlton, and pulling out to the wrong side of the road at about 50mph to overtake... in fourth gear with the turbo asleep. It took the twin Garretts a worrying second or two to awake from their slumber and for the engine to come on song
Steve, I honestly don't think most people contributing to this have 'twitcy anuses', or at least I wasn't 'twitching my anus'. I think this discussion started in response to one of the many statements by Clarkson that seem to be well wide of the mark, eg Honda engines etc.
Whats interesting in what had come out so far are things like the questioning of what do we really mean by performance in real world driving, the tricks used by advertising folk (Domster I DO like your 2CV anecdote), and things to do in your spare time with Saabs.
It would serve you better Steve to keep the dicussion out of the personal. The usual slagging mathces between marques and their owners just get boring.
Whats interesting in what had come out so far are things like the questioning of what do we really mean by performance in real world driving, the tricks used by advertising folk (Domster I DO like your 2CV anecdote), and things to do in your spare time with Saabs.
It would serve you better Steve to keep the dicussion out of the personal. The usual slagging mathces between marques and their owners just get boring.
fatsteve said:
This thread is hilarious. There are 911 owners up and down the country with itchy sphyincters since Sunday's top gear. FFS guys it's a saab and it may accelerate slightly better in a given gear but that by no means puts it in a similar bracket to a 911 in terms of performance (overall) and general driving dynamics.
It's an outragously funny case of penis envy and 'my 911 is the best car in the world.. ever' mentality
I've got the de-tuned version of the 95 2.5T and sure it's rapid, it'll quite happily eat tosser waggens like Golf GIT's and alike, but it's not even close on the Chimaera let alone a 911.
They say 911 drivers are a bunch of small penis equipped bell-ends, and sadly some of you are doing a damn good job of proving them right.
My neighbour has a shitbox astra GTE that's tuned, it'll certainly give the TVR a run for it's money, but who cares; different car, different league etc, etc.
I've stopped laughin now..
Steve
Dom
I know of one car where it wasn't hype......LOL
Mind you not quite as reliable as a Ferrari but I guess we shouldn't go there ;-)
Cheers
Ian
domster said:
All these 'family saloon murders supercar' claims are great, but just marketing hype. I should know - I currently work for one of Saab's ad agencies
I know of one car where it wasn't hype......LOL
Mind you not quite as reliable as a Ferrari but I guess we shouldn't go there ;-)
Cheers
Ian
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff