Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 17:38:53 GMT From: jtmavnopsametway.com (JTMav) Subject: Re: Saab 9-5 or Volvo S80 ?
On Wed, 26 Jan 2000 06:19:32 GMT, rdollienopsameja.com wrote: Check out this month's Road and Track. There is a comparison of the 9-5 Aero and the Volvo S-80 T6. Both the reviewers picked the Saab. In a nutshell the Saab was a true sports sedan made luxurious and the Volvo was a luxury car trying to be sporty. I own both a Saab 9000 CSE Turbo and a Volvo V70. The Saab is a superior car both in design and overall fit and finish. Volvo has co-opted many of Saab's innovations: front wheel drive, turbo charging, heated seats, etc. etc. I like my wife's V70 but I LOVE my 9k. I will be taking delivery of a new 9-5 Aero someime next month. I can't wait. Remove the NSP for email >Hello, what color is the sky in your world? While we can all espouse >opinions and preferences lets be careful about the facts please. For >example, the cupholder in the 9-5. Sure it's nifty but it also blocks >some of the ventilation as I recall. By contrast the Volvo S80 has 8 >cupholders - some functional some not. > > >Powerful smooth turbo engines - sure after you get past the turbo lag. >Volvo also uses turbos but the turbo lag is much less noticable. In >the case of the S80 it is probably because they used two small twin >turbo chargers. > >Ergonomics - both Saab and Volvo excel here. I personally don't care >for the boat plane interior design but it is very functional in the >Saab. It is also very functional in the Volvo. The S80 has the only >safely designed navigation system where the eyes remain on the horizon >and the hands on the wheel to operate the system; it has a dash face >angled to mimic the angle used when reading a book; it has a powerful >and simple environmental control system due to the large pictogram; >etc. etc. > > >Safety - you're really playing with fire here. Saab, Volvo, and >Mercedes are all well established safety leaders. The Volvo S80 has >the best neck and spine protection ratings ever recorded in rear-impact >crash tests due to the WHIPs anti-whiplash seats (found on all new >Volvos). The S80 is also the only car to ever score 5-stars for BOTH >front and rear seat passengers in side-impact crash test done by the >NHTSA. How can you possibly say the Volvo can't dream of matching >Saab's safety? In Europe, the S40 is the only car in its class to >score 4-stars in FIA NCAP crash tests. > > >Edgy old-fashioned monster under the skin? Well I know there are more >engine options in other parts of the world but here in the U.S. all >Volvos are powered by the same family of modular inline engines Volvo >developed with Porsche. Back in 1994, Car and Driver said the Volvo >850 Turbo was the fastest mass-produced sedan in the world. Since that >period Volvo has added more horses and torque to their engines. Their >high-pressure turbo cars are all (S70 T5, S80 T6) faster than Saabs. >If you are passing Volvos it's because their owners either want to let >you or because they have one of the diminuitive engine options. I can >assure you that in the U.S. when a Volvo and a Saab meet, if both >drivers are determined to hurry it along it will be the Volvo in the >front. > >Saab has done some nice work with the Viggen and 9-5 Aero. However, if >you read the summary data from Road & Track you will realize that the >S80 T6 they tested against the 9-5 Aero didn't have the performance >tire option that was used when R&T did their full review of the T6 >earlier. In the earlier review, the T6 matched the BMW 540 in the >corners (grip) in large part due to the aggressive tires. In the 9-5 >Aero comparison the 9-5 did better in part because of tires and in part >because of suspension setup (the Aero is a limited production >performance tuned car unlike the T6.) The more appropriate comparison >for an Aero would be a S80 R which would feature the same tricked-out >suspension approach or at a minimum a T6 with performance tires (which >ties the Aero for grip according to the numbers in R&T). > >Jeroen, I respect your opinion and preference for the Saab but I did >want to give a more fact based comparison which I hope I have done. > >Thanks. > >-rdo >russell.ollienopsamnet > >In article <86kl0j$n3p$1nopsamel.civ.utwente.nl>, > "Jeroen Lugtenberg" <j.lugtenbergnopsament.utwente.nl> wrote: >> Saab is always the better choice certainly when it is compared to >aVolvo. >> Why, because a Volvo is a car for the great public. Not for a >connoisseur >> like the Saab driver. When you look at the details of a Saab you know >what I >> mean. For example the great design of the cup-holder in the dash of >the 9-5 >> and it's powerfull smooth turbo-engines. Or the ergonomic >> door-handles of the Saab. And of cours it's huge safety, safety of >which a >> Volvo only can dream. When I drive a Saab and I pass a Volvo, I >always smile >> and pity the poor man who has made just another wrong choice in his >life. I >> hope that this is of some help to you! My message; Keep away from >Volvo's >> because underneath their new rounded skin there's still that edgy >> old-fashioned monster of the old days!!!! >> >> Jeroen >> <engine1665nopsamnet> wrote in message >news:388db10anopsamws.webzone.net... >> > >> > I've driven the 9-5 turbo 2.3 auto trans, has lots of turbo lag, >otherwise >> great >> > car with unknown reliability and resale. >> > Don >> > hanley <fsnmnopsam.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > >Stephen Dewart wrote: >> > > >> > >> What do you think? Saab 9-5 or Volvo S80? >> > > >> > >The last road and track compared the 9-5 areo with the >> > >s-80 T6. They liked the 9-5 areo better. They said this >> > >9-5 was like a swedish bmw ( drivers car ) while the >> > >s-80 was more like a mercedes ( cushy ). >> > > >> > >dave >> > > >> > >> >> > > >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ >Before you buy. JTMav Remove the NSP for email
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
