Date: 21 Sep 1998 19:11:05 GMT From: morrnopsamu.caS* (Mark Orr) Subject: Re: Saab V-6 reputation
Saab's V6 is typical for a modern V6 of that capacity. Advantages of a V6 are supposedly a smoother engine, but really, its to accomodate the US market which tends to look down on 4 cyl engines. The Saab 4 is NOT a V4, but an L4 config. I can't think of any existing V4's in current production autos. Mark In article <01bde572$faa52000$8811410cnopsamnt.russell.com>, rbrentnwnopsamdnet.att.net says... > >The Saab V-6 non-turbo at 170 HP doesn't have more power than the 185 HP >V-4 turbo. This is some of the bad reputation, as some people wonder what >the point of owning a V-6 is when the V-4 turbo actually has more power. >Just a thought. > >Roman >----- >Advansys Technology Group <dberknopsamstreet.com> wrote in article ><0szM1.946$nR1.728840nopsam6>... >> Why do Saab's with a V-6 have such a horrible reputation?????? >> >> I currently own a '95 Saab SE convertible with a V-6 and have had no >> problems whatsoever. It runs and sounds great and obviously offers more >> power than the typical 4 banger. I also understand the V-6 is the only >line >> which offers a traction control system as standard. >> >> The first time I ever heard about the bad reputation of the V-6 was when >I >> attempted to trade my car in on a larger car last week. The lot I went >to >> called a couple of Saab dealerships here in the northwest and everyone >told >> them to stay away from the V-6 because they are trouble and difficult to >> sell. It was like my car had the plague! I was suspicious of this >> particular car lot until I heard the same thing from three completely >> separate sources. Even Saab dealerships in other states where telling >> people the same thing. >> >> What am I missing????? Do Saabs with the V-6 really suck this bad??? Did >I >> make a huge mistake when I bought what I thought was a great car?? >> Help!!! >> Damon B. >> >> >>
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
