Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:40:51 GMT From: hohnopsamlid.invalid (Goran Larsson) Subject: Re: Opinions on the new 9-3 engine
In article <3E1198D1.D465CCE8nopsamsizefitterzzzz.com>, Johannes H Andersen <johsnopsamsizefitterzzzz.com> wrote: > There were some press reports around when the 9-5 was launched that the > engine block was 10% lighter. That was presented as a progression > (of course) as it saved fuel and made the handling better. How different > are the 9-5 engines from the 9000? What 9000 engine? The first 9000 had the same 2.0 engine as the classic 9000, but mounted the other way with the gearbox on the side. This engine was available both with injection only and with turbo. In the early 1990:ies the new 2.3 liter engine (the one with the straight block) was put in the 9000. This engine was also available with injection only and with turbo. The 2.3 liter engine was made shorter to fit the NG 900. The 2.3 liter engine was also available in a 2.0 liter version (shorter stroke). This engine is not the same as the old 2.0 liter engine. The 9000 was also available with a 3.0 liter V6 from Opel, but this engine is best forgotten. The 2.0 and 2.3 liter engines in the 9-5 is almost the same engine as found in the last 9000, but it was put on a diet. The block is lighter, some internal parts (like valve stems) are smaller, internal parts have lower friction, etc. The changes reduced fuel consumption but the engine is not as strong as the engine from the 9000. It is also noisier as there is less cast iron and water to contain the noise. It also uses the Trionic 7 system instead of the Trionic 5 system used on the latest 9000. The 9-5 is also available with a 3.0 liter V6, a 2.2 liter diesel, and a 3.0 liter diesel. The petrol V6 is not the same engine as the V6 from the 9000, the 9-5 V6 is based on a V6 from Vauxhall (the .uk side of Opel). -- G–ran Larsson http://www.nospam.com
