Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 14:58:37 -0700 From: Max Palmer <viggen0nopsamell.net> Subject: Re: Would Saabs be better as RWD?
--------------EAF099512EE67982D02300E4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If you noticed, you didn't post one thing in your reply that had to do with the subject? Jack wrote: > I have a BMW and am loyal to the Germans. I think Saab's (arguably) bad > handling is not as related to the mere fact it is FWD as you might think. I > have driven some FWD cars that handle GREAT (Volkswagen GTI!!!), but I have > also driven many Saabs that don't. I am not trying to be offensive (how am I > doing?) but I think anyone can put a performance spin on their car (so to > speak) when justifying its purchase. Saab's are great for alot of things, but > they will never outperform a BMW. Sure, some Saab's have faster specs than > some BMW's, but when it comes to *quality* in performance, BMW wins hands > down. I drive my friend's 93 9000 almost every other day,and I love driving > it, but not because it performs well. It has a lot of pickup (turbo), is > smooth, comfortable, and has more gadgets and doohickeys than you can shake a > stick at (I tried to shake a stick at them, but I couldn't!). Of course, the > 9000 is not meant to be a sports car. It is comparable to BMW's 5 series > cars. But from those I have driven, the 900's are worse! (go ahead, > disagree). The 900 is comparable to the 3-series BMW's but they don't come > close. The SPG, you remind me? Dont forget the SPG? OK, the SPG is the > equivalent of the BMW M3. No contest. I am sorry to point out the > disappointing truth. The faster Saab's rely on turbos for their speed, which > in my mind is almost like cheating, and is nowhere near the reliability or > quality in performance (there I go again) as a genuinely strong engine. So you > don't want performance? You thik Bimmer driving pricks like me outta be kept > off the road so we dont run over any more old ladies? Touche. Except, BMW > makes all the nice luxury cars too, and they are even classier (albeit > slightly more expensive too, but the huge cost of Saab repairs will even that > out soon enough) Mr. Winston's point, well taken, about not getting in any > trouble with their handling, is a further testament to their inferiority as a > driver's car. Bimmers and Porsches teach you how to be a good driver, if you > don't wreck it first. If you do wreck it off the bat, you go buy a Saab and > feel secure, but somehow empty inside. (That was a shot below the belt.) > Anyway, I welcome your respones, but please, no death threats. You can't help > it if you are wrong, or that your cars depreciate faster than anything else on > the road, even go carts. > > Jack > > Winston wrote: > > > > While RWD cars might be more fun to chuck around on a track, there are > > fewer people who take their cars onto racetracks than SUV owners who go > > four-wheeling in their new chromed $40k land monster. FWD is every bit as > > fast in normal street driving, and given the packaging benefits of FWD, it > > is also more efficient. > > > > Saabs are supposed to be fun, well-performing cars, but the design goal is > > completely different than that of a Porsche, which is supposed to be a > > performance car first and foremost. People buy Saabs because they have > > great utility, are great in adverse driving conditions, are safe AND are > > fun to drive. You might not be able to keep up with a BMW at 9/10ths on a > > twisty road, but then again you probably shouldn't be driving that fast on > > public streets anyway. > > > > The bottom line is that it is very tough to get yourself in trouble in a > > Saab when it comes to handling dynamics. Nobody has ever gone ass-end > > first into the woods in a Saab. While there is always room for > > improvement, it seems like a fundimental change to RWD would not be in > > keeping with the spirit of the car. > > > > In article <8d2dgi$29c$1nopsam1.deja.com>, Porsche_S2 > > <mavallarinonopsameja.com> wrote: > > > > > I do prefer RWD over FWD. I have a lot of Porsches and mercedes in the > > > past and now a Saab. My only complaints are too much understeer, bad > > > gauge cluster, it comes with cup-holders (blah, you wont see real cars > > > (MBZ/Porsche/BMW with them), and it is front wheel drive. Maybe I have > > > to get used to it, but it sure handles like crap. If only they could > > > make a decent handleing car, they would do so much better. And what's > > > the use of 194/fpt when it is FWD? When it is wet out I have no control > > > of the car. FWD does what it wants to do, and there is no correcting it > > > unless you punch-it hard. There is no "go-cart" feel to FWD cars > > > either. Whats the fun of that. You drive to drive and only drive. Why > > > can't cars be more like the Germans. > > > > > > Other than that, the car has been great (power, reliability etc...) > > > --------------EAF099512EE67982D02300E4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html> <font color="#FF0000">If you noticed, you didn't post one thing in your reply that had to do with the subject?</font> <p>Jack wrote: <blockquote TYPE=CITE>I have a BMW and am loyal to the Germans. I think Saab's (arguably) bad <br>handling is not as related to the mere fact it is FWD as you might think. I <br>have driven some FWD cars that handle GREAT (Volkswagen GTI!!!), but I have <br>also driven many Saabs that don't. I am not trying to be offensive (how am I <br>doing?) but I think anyone can put a performance spin on their car (so to <br>speak) when justifying its purchase. Saab's are great for alot of things, but <br>they will never outperform a BMW. Sure, some Saab's have faster specs than <br>some BMW's, but when it comes to *quality* in performance, BMW wins hands <br>down. I drive my friend's 93 9000 almost every other day,and I love driving <br>it, but not because it performs well. It has a lot of pickup (turbo), is <br>smooth, comfortable, and has more gadgets and doohickeys than you can shake a <br>stick at (I tried to shake a stick at them, but I couldn't!). Of course, the <br>9000 is not meant to be a sports car. It is comparable to BMW's 5 series <br>cars. But from those I have driven, the 900's are worse! (go ahead, <br>disagree). The 900 is comparable to the 3-series BMW's but they don't come <br>close. The SPG, you remind me? Dont forget the SPG? OK, the SPG is the <br>equivalent of the BMW M3. No contest. I am sorry to point out the <br>disappointing truth. The faster Saab's rely on turbos for their speed, which <br>in my mind is almost like cheating, and is nowhere near the reliability or <br>quality in performance (there I go again) as a genuinely strong engine. So you <br>don't want performance? You thik Bimmer driving pricks like me outta be kept <br>off the road so we dont run over any more old ladies? Touche. Except, BMW <br>makes all the nice luxury cars too, and they are even classier (albeit <br>slightly more expensive too, but the huge cost of Saab repairs will even that <br>out soon enough) Mr. Winston's point, well taken, about not getting in any <br>trouble with their handling, is a further testament to their inferiority as a <br>driver's car. Bimmers and Porsches teach you how to be a good driver, if you <br>don't wreck it first. If you do wreck it off the bat, you go buy a Saab and <br>feel secure, but somehow empty inside. (That was a shot below the belt.) <br>Anyway, I welcome your respones, but please, no death threats. You can't help <br>it if you are wrong, or that your cars depreciate faster than anything else on <br>the road, even go carts. <p> Jack <p>Winston wrote: <br>> <br>> While RWD cars might be more fun to chuck around on a track, there are <br>> fewer people who take their cars onto racetracks than SUV owners who go <br>> four-wheeling in their new chromed $40k land monster. FWD is every bit as <br>> fast in normal street driving, and given the packaging benefits of FWD, it <br>> is also more efficient. <br>> <br>> Saabs are supposed to be fun, well-performing cars, but the design goal is <br>> completely different than that of a Porsche, which is supposed to be a <br>> performance car first and foremost. People buy Saabs because they have <br>> great utility, are great in adverse driving conditions, are safe AND are <br>> fun to drive. You might not be able to keep up with a BMW at 9/10ths on a <br>> twisty road, but then again you probably shouldn't be driving that fast on <br>> public streets anyway. <br>> <br>> The bottom line is that it is very tough to get yourself in trouble in a <br>> Saab when it comes to handling dynamics. Nobody has ever gone ass-end <br>> first into the woods in a Saab. While there is always room for <br>> improvement, it seems like a fundimental change to RWD would not be in <br>> keeping with the spirit of the car. <br>> <br>> In article <8d2dgi$29c$1nopsam1.deja.com>, Porsche_S2 <br>> <mavallarinonopsameja.com> wrote: <br>> <br>> > I do prefer RWD over FWD. I have a lot of Porsches and mercedes in the <br>> > past and now a Saab. My only complaints are too much understeer, bad <br>> > gauge cluster, it comes with cup-holders (blah, you wont see real cars <br>> > (MBZ/Porsche/BMW with them), and it is front wheel drive. Maybe I have <br>> > to get used to it, but it sure handles like crap. If only they could <br>> > make a decent handleing car, they would do so much better. And what's <br>> > the use of 194/fpt when it is FWD? When it is wet out I have no control <br>> > of the car. FWD does what it wants to do, and there is no correcting it <br>> > unless you punch-it hard. There is no "go-cart" feel to FWD cars <br>> > either. Whats the fun of that. You drive to drive and only drive. Why <br>> > can't cars be more like the Germans. <br>> > <br>> > Other than that, the car has been great (power, reliability etc...) <br>> ></blockquote> </html> --------------EAF099512EE67982D02300E4--
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
