Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 17:46:01 -0400 From: "quadrun1" <quadrun1_DELETE-THIS_nopsamnline.net> Subject: Re: Late-model 9000 or early 9-5?
"Paul Hudson" <phudsonnopsamx.com> wrote in message news:Xns92759F83F916Ephudsonpoboxcomnopsam0.0.1... > I've got a '94 9000 CSE 2.3t auto with 134k miles. I'm largely > very happy with it - but things are beginning to go wrong with > it (latest is a mostly-on ABS warning light that the dealer > can't identify). > > I'm thinking of replacing it with another Saab - either one of > the last 9000s (or a late-ish, low milage Aero if I can find > one) or a 9-5. I'd like at least 200bhp this time. > > Which should I choose, and why? It would be an auto again. I'd go with the 9-5 because it is likely to have less mileage... the automatic transmission in the 9000s is generally only good for around 100,000 miles, and it is very expensive to replace or overhaul. Plus the 9-5 has a more solid body structure, and if I'm not mistaken, 9-5 owners are reporting fewer problems that on the 9000 series. I do however miss the look of the 9000! It's a timeless classic, and the 9000 Aero is beautiful. Jason
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
