Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 01:03:48 -0000 From: "BarryG" <bgNOSPAMnopsamny.net> Subject: Re: used '96 vs '98 900's
Definitely go for the SE. Every single time you drive it, you'll be happy you went for it. If you can, I would test drive a bunch of different SE's, including different model years. Saab has been slowly "refining" the car over the years since '94, not always for the better. FYI, I don't really buy another poster's dissing of the turbo engine. 101K on mine, don't warm it up much at all, and it's been very reliable and runs like new. Totally fantastic car - hope you go for it and enjoy it! Barry Anand Modi <delockenopsamdnet.att.net> wrote in message news:38C6FE1C.263563EBnopsamdnet.att.net... > I'm looking for an opinion on what to buy-- i recently lost my beloved > 92 acura vigor in an accident. I loved that car because it was so unique > (2.5L inline-5 cylinder engine). So I started looking for a car that was > just as unique, and in the same general category as my vigor (compact > 4-door sport sedan). the search led me to my local saab dealer, and i > was presented with 2 options: > 1996 900S, ~37K miles, off a 48 month lease. 5 speed: $16,500, auto > $16,900 > 1998 900SE Turbo (w/ leather and the like), ~28K miles, off a 24 month > lease, includes 4 snow tires on rims in addition to normal street tires, > $21,000 > > which is a better deal? is there a substantial difference between the > turbo and the normally aspirated engines? are there any mechanical > issues inherent to either model that i should take into consideration? > thanks > > aj >
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
