RE: Saab 9-5 HOT Aero Estate | Shed of the Week
Discussion
wormus said:
Except they weren’t and you are obviously wrong. Admittedly the last 93 and Dame Edna 9-5 weren’t the best but Saab made some really quirky, superbly engineered cars and had a rich motorsport history.
Posting misinformed drivel like “they’re crap” is the sort of thing only a petulant teenager would do.
The last superbly engineered and quirky Saab went out of production in 1994 though didn't it. Maybe 1998 if the rather less quirky 9000 is taken into consideration.Posting misinformed drivel like “they’re crap” is the sort of thing only a petulant teenager would do.
Everything after was a GM product with some Saab styling tropes thrown in. They even stripped out more and more of the quality as the years rolled on, and by the mid 00s they had absolutely no USP whatosever. As you have to keep repeating to Rover apologists "they didn't go bust because they made great cars that people wanted to buy".
stickleback123 said:
Everything after was a GM product with some Saab styling tropes thrown in.
GM did try to homogenize Saab and Vauxhall, instructing them to build the 9-3 on the Epsilon platform, shared with the Vectra but they made many changes including the wheelbase. Look in the early 9-5s, which were designed in the early 90s and you'll see lots of unique Saab design influences and on both the 9-5 and the 9-3, you'll see no GM parts - except the 9-5 cup holder which is shared with the Holden Monaro. The engines were different as was the clever Trionic engine management system that manages fuel, spark and boost in combination, unique at the time.On the most part, Saab engineers ignored their GM bosses. I do admit the 9-3s feel like cheap crap in comparison.
Edited by wormus on Saturday 30th November 10:32
They were very rationally engineered cars - perhaps they never did have a future in a society increasingly obsessed with the superficial.
The indignity of having to make silk purses out of the sow’s ears of a mass market brand has been suffered by other manufacturers. Maybe they should have focused more on making the interior trim look expensive.
The indignity of having to make silk purses out of the sow’s ears of a mass market brand has been suffered by other manufacturers. Maybe they should have focused more on making the interior trim look expensive.
pSyCoSiS said:
Great cars representing phenomenal value for money.
The tax completely murders any potential VFM. I would resent the car for costing so much just sitting there doing nothing. I wouldn't care if it were a stone cold classic, were incredibly entertaining or had the potential for appreciation but this is nothing other than a baggy old repair job.
stickleback123 said:
The last superbly engineered and quirky Saab went out of production in 1994 though didn't it. Maybe 1998 if the rather less quirky 9000 is taken into consideration.
Everything after was a GM product with some Saab styling tropes thrown in. They even stripped out more and more of the quality as the years rolled on, and by the mid 00s they had absolutely no USP whatosever. As you have to keep repeating to Rover apologists "they didn't go bust because they made great cars that people wanted to buy".
High mileage 9-5's are ten a penny so they obviously did something right. Plenty over 200k.Everything after was a GM product with some Saab styling tropes thrown in. They even stripped out more and more of the quality as the years rolled on, and by the mid 00s they had absolutely no USP whatosever. As you have to keep repeating to Rover apologists "they didn't go bust because they made great cars that people wanted to buy".
bluezedd said:
humphra said:
You could.... if you ignore depreciation.
Depends what you mean by modern. You realize it's 500 a year to tax right?I've never had one of these, but I have lost plenty to depreciation on newer cars .
muppet42 said:
Didn't happen to be in Scotland did it? Had my eye on a manual saloon of that description on Gumtree but waiting on funds to be freed up from my Panda HP (still for sale on Gumtree if anyone fancies it) and the ad went dark a short while ago so guessing I missed out
Oh man yeah I think I've nabbed that from you, I picked it up from Glasgow and I found it on Gumtree so I apologise for that!!Olivera said:
The VED rate is actually between £570 and £617 depending on how you pay for it.
Yeah, I rounded it down to £500, but potentially even higher tax at £600+ supports my point of the crazy costs.If someone offered me one for free I wouldn't take it. Rather let them decide to scrap it or let them have the karma to try and sell it to someone who doesn't realise the tax cost before buying.
Then again I guess the £500 tax could be considered as part of the purchase cost, driven for 1 year then scrapped. Wouldn't fancy it beyond 1 year ownership.
chazza114 said:
Oh man yeah I think I've nabbed that from you, I picked it up from Glasgow and I found it on Gumtree so I apologise for that!!
Auch no worries, finding it not to be the best time to sell my HP so a lot of decent looking cars are falling by the way side. Still on the look out for ANOTHER 9-5 though as an option.Hope the one you got serves you well
muppet42 said:
Auch no worries, finding it not to be the best time to sell my HP so a lot of decent looking cars are falling by the way side. Still on the look out for ANOTHER 9-5 though as an option.
Hope the one you got serves you well
Thanks my man! Keep looking, there's plenty of bargains out there, just takes time to find them! Hope the one you got serves you well
My grandfather imported one of these in RHD back in 1999, and kept it until earlier this year. Very comfy, very quirky, and an enjoyable place to cruise motorways (and that is coming out of an XJ6 and a Mustang!).
The fuel bills are unacceptably high for such little output, and I personally don't enjoy auto gearboxes, so I really don;t get on with the round town driving.
However, FSH and only 84k miles means that the only major expense is the tax and the fuel: cheaper than the maintenance on the Jag, and cheaper than the monthly payments on the Mustang.
I doubt it's a very long term keeper, but for the time being, with no requirement for a daily driver, it suits my part-time needs very well.
Good shed, but the tax is a killer. If only it were 3 years older...
The fuel bills are unacceptably high for such little output, and I personally don't enjoy auto gearboxes, so I really don;t get on with the round town driving.
However, FSH and only 84k miles means that the only major expense is the tax and the fuel: cheaper than the maintenance on the Jag, and cheaper than the monthly payments on the Mustang.
I doubt it's a very long term keeper, but for the time being, with no requirement for a daily driver, it suits my part-time needs very well.
Good shed, but the tax is a killer. If only it were 3 years older...
Cambs_Stuart said:
Looks like a good shed. From memory I think 99T had a 9-5 readers car thread. I was really impressed with the lack of rust and the general build quality.
Good wheels.
And does it have the heated and ventilated seats? They're fantastically comfortable and warm.
I found the heated seats in my 2006 Dame not as hot as other manufacturers and the ventilated seats were nigh on useless. Good wheels.
And does it have the heated and ventilated seats? They're fantastically comfortable and warm.
Very comfortable as always though, if not as supportive as you might hope.
Agreed the hammerhead wheels are from an older 9-5.
This example is an auto which blunts the Aero's performance quite a lot.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff