Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 18:24:10 GMT From: "Kyclist" <kyclistnopsamme.rr.com> Subject: Re: 9000 vs. 9-5
Thank you all for the great responses!! Lurching and rolling? It seemed to me when I drove a 9000 it took the corners with a lot less of the "luxury roll" let's call it, the leaning on a car that the suspension is set up for a more comfortable ride. Even the 9-5 with the IRS I thought had a lot more of this leaning, and therefore didn't take the corners as neatly as a 9000. I could be wrong on this. I have driven each of these, but not nearly long enough at any point to make a final decision, or REALLY learn how to drive a turbo ;) "Lineone" <adriannopsamone.org> wrote in message news:Aj8f8.57923$Ah1.7249661nopsam2-win.server.ntlworld.com... > For me the big difference is the Independent Rear Suspension (IRS) on the > 9-5 vs. live rear axle on the 9K. > > With IRS, cornering is at least theoretically better - and this is borne out > by many reports. If I could convert my 9K to IRS at a reasonable price I > would. (This is purely academic as nobody offer a kit - unless someone knows > different!) I would love to go round corners like other cars - without > lurching and rolling all over the place. Apart from that the 9K is a super > car. > > And then there's the Hatch vs. Estate (aka "Wagon" for some reason) > issue..... > > Adrian > 1992 9000 CS 2.3-16i (rare non turbo) > > > > > "Kyclist" <kyclistnopsamme.rr.com> wrote in message > news:3CQe8.137529$dh.36792711nopsamoon.nyroc.rr.com... > > Does anyone have any opinions on the 9000 vs. the 9-5? Specifically an > Aero > > vs. a 9-5SE 5pd. I know the performance of the Aero, which is why I am > > interested, and of course there is the hatchback. Any other pros or cons > > either way? Thanks. > > > > > >
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
