Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 09:31:48 -0500 From: "EricL" <elaw-NO-SPAM-nopsamsinc.com> Subject: Re: 9000 vs. 9-5
A little longer, but you'd hardly notice. I've got my '97 Aero, the wife's '99 9-5, and my old '86 9KT in the driveway. The 9-5's "trunk" (comparing to the hatchbacks w/seats up and parcel shelf in place) seems larger - 20-30% maybe?. Not that the 9000's cargo space is exactly small! It's all I can do to keep from laughing when I look at the trunk on my brother's Corolla. But that's ok, his car gets 32 MPG and mine only gets 30 :^) Eric Law "Johannes H Andersen" <johsnopsamanytime.co.uk> wrote in message news:3C7CE2C0.BCC9DCA9nopsamanytime.co.uk... > > > EricL wrote: > > > > Tod, > > > > Gotta disagree with you on only one point: the glovebox. Any 9000 with a > > passenger airbag (93? & up) has no glovebox at all! Although they've > > created a few new storage spots here and there, it doesn't really > > compensate. I just replaced my '86 9K with a '97 Aero and that's the only > > thing that's significantly worse about the newer car. > > > > BTW, when I had to make the same decision recently (9K vs. 9-5), it was the > > "hatchback thing" that decided it for me - the ability to carry large items > > when necessary is a big plus. OTOH, the 9-5 seems to have a considerably > > larger cargo space when the rear seats are up. > > > > Eric Law > > The 9k CS models from 92 on have longer cargo space than previous models. > > Johannes