Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 02:17:13 GMT From: Marc Escuro <mgescuronopsam.com> Subject: Re: Which 9-5??????
I can tell the difference between the V6 and the Aero. After driving my Aero and then driving the V6 loaner I got from the dealer while my car was getting it's 10K check-up, I felt the V6 was really sluggish and wasn't as solid feeling as the Aero. It also didn't corner as tight as the Aero. It's my understanding that the "more solid" body on the Arc and Linear 9-5's for 2002 use the same body as the Aero, so there's no change on the Aero's rigidity. I could be wrong tho. I REALLY like the new "upgrades" on the 2002 9-5's.... Stability control, extra power, torque, etc. I could do without the Xenon lamps, but I'm not complaining... I won't be on the receiving end of the lights!! haha On 10/9/01 3:20 AM, in article ilj5st4chugh91s3p2vd6m2hrr9r7dbaqrnopsamcom, "H." <musicboxnopsamrider.co.uk> wrote: > I'm thinking of chopping my 2000 9-3SE LPT convertible for a 9-5 - I > need more space for both people and luggage. > The question is, which one do I go for - having had a 185turbo 900 > before, I would like more power than the LPT engine, but I dont think > I can stretch to the Aero (250bhp..... <sob>.....) > What is the 2.3LPT engine in the 9-5 like? Most I have seen and all > the demonstrators I have come across here in the UK have been Auto, > but I would prefer manual. Anyone got any experience of the new > 5-speed auto? > Or should I go for a late second hand Aero, rather than the newer > model - though I have heard the newer 2002 9-5 handle better..... > > I'm being indecisive and vague at the moment. so any thoughts would be > appreciated! > > Thanks. > H. -- Marc Escuro mgescuronopsam.com "...when all hope is gone, you know sad songs say so much..."
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
