Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 12:39:37 -0400
From: Four Weis <mweinopsamcom>
Subject: Re: Sat it in and.......


How did you get the invite to meet the Saab executives? I would like to do meet with them and have my opinion heard by more than this group and the person reading e-mails at Saab. You said you had the chance to "sit" in the new 9-3, no test drives :-( The unfortunate thing about the Saab 9-3 has been the long term experience by people at the office where I work. My manager had nothing but bad things to say about his 9-3, which he replaced with a Jetta when the Saab lease was up. The tires were expensive, $400 each, so much for any comments about "cheap" tires being put on by Saab at the factory. He also had the turbo replaced 3 times in under 30,000 miles - granted it was replace at no cost under the warranty, free except for his time. This left the big question of quality and how expensive the Saab would be to maintain after the warranty, with turbos lasting only 7,500 miles and tires costing $400 each. You may say he had a lemon, but 3 turbo replacements?? Perhaps he should have tried a new shop. I told him my Saabs, 1986 900 and 1990 900S were far more reliable and less costly to maintain than his 9-3, but then mine are Classics :-) James Eckles wrote: > Not to sound too negative, but I find it ironic that you're complaining > about the build quality of the 9-3 and 9-5 while your car's in the shop all > the time. > > Look at the latest edition of Consumer Reports and notice SAAB's reliability > ratings for the past 8 years or so - they've done nothing but get better and > better each year, and that means POST 9000 and 900. > > I sat in the new 9-3 on August 10th while at the Viggen Flight Academy in GA > and I must say I'm impressed. The fact that it shares a platform with other > cars has absolutely no impact on its build quality. The new 9-3 is 100% > Swedish engineered and manufactured. GM writes the checks and leaves the > rest to the Swedes (while still demanding sales and quality-related results > mind you - it's not just a bank!). This is what I was told by the SAAB > execs at dinner that same night. > > The interior's materials on the new 9-3 appeared solid, classy and well put > together. While the Vector's HP will only be 210, there WILL be higher HP, > all-wheel drive versions coming out in the next couple of years. > > I've been completely happy with my '01 Viggen convertible's build quality > and reliability, although I've only done 10k in it. Fit and finish is > superb in my opinion. > > Thoughts? > > J. Kent > > "Lee Marshall" <leenopsamvespamenigma-it.com> wrote in message > news:umc284sdje5pe0nopsam.supernews.com... > > As some of you may be aware from reading my posts elsewhere in this group, > I > > am the (mostly) proud owner of a '97 9000 Aero. Due to some ongoing > problems > > with my car, I have been fortunate to have been able to test most of the > > current Saab range as courtesy cars. Although to be honest, I have not > been > > too impressed. > > > > I have found that the build quality across the whole range has been > totally > > sub-standard for the market in which Saabs compete, especially compared to > > my 9k. > > > > The current 9-3 has typically great engines, apart from the awful 2.2 > Turbo > > Diesel. This is without doubt the worst diesel car I have ever driven > (maybe > > excluding a Peugeot 106 1.5D), although the engine was quite powerful the > > noise and vibration (particulary through the clutch pedal) was > unacceptable. > > The 2.0 LPT is the best engine in the range, the full blown turbo being > too > > powerful for the chassis. The sound system on the coupe was exceptional > > though. > > > > My current courtesy car is a brand new 9-5 Linear 2.0 LPT, but this too > has > > many faults. Again the build quality is poor (particularly the lid on the > > cubby hole between the front seats). There is also a general lack of > storage > > space, the door pockets are far too small and there is only one cupholder, > > albeit a very nice one. However the main problem with the 9-5 is again the > > chassis. Even with the base 150bhp engine, you can lose traction pulling > out > > of junctions and going around roundabouts. I admit my 9000 doesn't have > > wonderful traction but it is better than 9-5, even with 75bhp more. I have > > also found the 9-5 to be "loose" and prone to lift-off oversteer, not nice > > in a car this big. > > > > I have high hopes for the 9-3, although being based on the new Vectra > > (Epsilon) platform isn't going to help (if past experience is anything to > go > > by). If Saab can improve the build quality and find a way of taming > 200+bhp > > I sure it will sell well. My other immediate concern for the new 9-3 is a > > lack of what Saabs usually have, excess power. The new 9-3 is going to be > a > > heavy car and I think the new Aero will not have the power to compete with > > it's main competitor, the BMW 330. It seems to me that Volvo is taking the > > lead in the Swedish power stakes, and that can only be bad for Saab. > > > > Sorry if I have droned on too much about this, but this has been burning > > away inside for some time. > > > > I welcome your counter-comments! > > > > Lee > > > > > > --- > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.384 / Virus Database: 216 - Release Date: 21/08/2002 > > > > > >

Return to Main Index

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2019 - The Saab Network - saabnet.com.
For usage guidelines, see the Saabnet.com Mission and Purpose Page.
[Contact | Site Map | Saabnet.com on Facebook | Saabnet.com on Twitter | Shop Amazon via TSN | Site Donations]