Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 14:49:16 -0500 From: "RobertZebracki" <tobyzebranopsamatanet.net> Subject: Re: Questions on 9-3 SE Convertible
I had an almost identical reaction. Used to own a '96 Miata and loved it. Owned a '96 900 convertible for about 6 months, but wasn't happy with the handling and ride. Recently test drove a 2002 9-3SE hard top and convertible and due to the same reaction, bought the hard top. I know the Saab and Miata are "apples and oranges" and I'm still a MAJOR fan of Saab, but for the money it seems the convertible should be "tighter"... regardless, love the hard top. "Lance" <lanceknopsamam.here.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:SApp8.7951$2O2.476475nopsam-binary.blueyonder.co.uk... > Hello all, > > I took a test drive in a 2000 model 9-3 SE LPT 2.0 convertible. I have had > two Saabs, (1985 900 Turbo and a 1996 900i). Unfortunately, I am limited to > getting an automatic for domestic reasons, so I wasn't too worried when the > Turbo aspirated engine, although seemingly smoother than my '96 non-turbo, > didn't seem to have the same responsiveness. But the steering was shocking. > It was very unresponsive (lots of understeer) and at around 40mph, shook > like a tin shack in an earthquake. I've never had a convertible before and > the salesman said it was a combination of the car requiring wheel > alignment/balancing and the fact that it is a convertible.. apparently > (according to the salesman), because it is minus a roof, its structural > integrity isn't so true and the steering is slightly compromised. The latter > may be true, but isn't part of the reason why convertibles cost so much more > partly because of the increased structural strength they have to build into > the body? > > In any case, the car had under 9000 miles (15,000kms) on the clock, so I > wouldn't have thought it would beed an alignment/balance so soon unless it > was either driven hard or had a bump (e.g. with a kerb or something). > > My questions are.. should the steering be a bit more warbled than the > non-convertible examples, and by how much? And is it normal for them to > require steering adjustments after 9000 miles? The braking also seemed less > responsive than my '96, but I'm also chalking that to the slush box rather > than the manual. > > As a side note, some time ago I drove an MX-5 Mazda.. About a '94 model.. As > I recall, its steering was far more responsive (so much for the structural > integrity stuff), although, I mainly drove large 4x4s back then as well as > an Aussie Commodore.. both not the best handling vehicles on the road... So > its not a fair comparison > > Thanks in advance, > Lance > > > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
