[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
I'd say you'd be happier with the 9000. While a V6 5-speed will feel a bit quicker off the line than a NA 4-cyl, the auto will bog it down enough to offset the advantage.
In my own opinion (and as someone who has not actually owned one), that 900 is about as bad as you could do and still buy a Saab. It's a '94, the first year of production for that model. They had many problems with them, most of which are worked out, but it's more likely to have problems than later years. It's a V6, which is (arguably) the worst engine Saab's put out. There are many happy V6 owners out there, and the V6 doesn't always give trouble, but they're statistically worse in reliability than the 4-cylinders. It's an auto, which means it's going to be slow. Slower than a 5-speed non-turbo CSE? I don't know. The auto is, however, pretty reliable in those cars. Not nearly as bad as the 9000 auto as I understand it.
The 9000 is not without problems, however. There are many items that do not withstand the tests of time, but I can't say which would have the higher maintenance costs. I'd put my money on the 900 being more costly, especially if you plan to keep the car for more than a few years.
Get both examined by a good Saab mechanic if you can find one. If one is going to end up costing you a few thousand dollars in the next few months, you'd probably want to look elsewhere. Of course, a mechanic inspection is no guarantee.
My brother has a '96 900SE Turbo and I have a '95 9000 Aero so I've had plenty of chances to compare them. Personally, I like the feel of the 9000 (transmission, clutch, steering, interior space) better than the NG900.
I'd suggest you test-drive both in one day (if you haven't already) so you can really compare them straight across.
posted by 151.201.24...
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.