Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 22:22:54 -0400 From: Four Weis <mweinopsamcom> Subject: Re: That GM difference?
You have just opened up Pandora's Box. There are some who will claim the New Generation (NG) Saabs are better. There are other yet who will say that GM has not owned Saab long enough to influence the design or materials used in the new Saabs. Then, you have the people who have driven their old classic Saabs for decades and hundred of thousands of miles and swear by them, sometimes at them, but not too often. I personally, like the older classic Saabs for the following reasons: 1. They are inexpensive to buy as they have a general reputation of not holding their value at resale time. 2. They are easy to find in a parking lot, with their distinct shape. There are many more old Volvo wagons are still on the road and in parking lots. 3. The inexpensive classic 900 has no lip at the rear bumper, making it easy to slide heavy objects in and out. This is advertised as a "special feature" of the upscale 9-5 wagon and is not available on the 9-3. It was standard for decades and now it is "special"? 4. You can buy, as an extra expense option, an exhaust system to make your new Saab sound like the classic. Again, it was standard for decades and now you have to spend extra money to get what was once standard. What else will you have to pay extra money for, on top of the higher base price, to get what was once a standard feature? I guess that is why the older Saabs are called "classics". John Higham wrote: > Hello, > > I'm new here, so I hope my question has not already been debated to > death prior to my finding this group. > > I'm considering purchasing a Saab and I'm wondering if owners think the > GM models are better (in terms of reliability, handling, comfort) than > the pre-GM models. Of course, I know that a used car can be a good or > bad thing depending on the previous owner's attention to maintenance. > But, all things being equal in that area, would you think a > well-maintained used Saab from the pre-GM days is the same, better, or > worse than one from the GM era (in regard to the three areas I > mentioned)? And, against a new one? > > I ask because I've suffered at the hands of GM, experiencing the thrill > of rust on a three month old truck only to be told by the dealer, "They > all do that." The same vehicle experienced repeated ABS failure, water > leaks, and body molding falling off. The dealer did fix everything > (except the rust), but I traded it. > > I also have a friend who worked in the service department at a Saab > dealership in the late 80's and she often told me that (then) new Saabs > were frequent and repeat visitors for repair work. In the area I live, > very few people own Saabs, so I haven't much to go on as far as asking > them. There is a dealership 55 miles away, but they only carry the GM > era cars (their used lot is filled with Mazdas and such). > > Your thoughts? > > Thanks. > John