Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 11:52:59 -0400 From: "Alexander Popov" <no-spamnopsamse.com> Subject: Re: Help - motor crashed on 94 V6
"Henrik B." <saabnopsamlixnet._nospam_dk> wrote in message news:hEb_8.25424$Yf1.1082063nopsam010.worldonline.dk... > Alexander Popov wrote: > :: ... Fact? What 4 cylinder engine is that? More powerful with the > :: turbo pumping, maybe, although you have to keep the turbo boiling > :: above 3500 rpm for that statement to be true. > > That was 15 years ago! Today, the turbo-engines has all the power you'll > need, already above 2000 rpm! And when was it, your V6 starts to give it's > full torque!!?? :o) > > And the Saab 4-cyl is WAAAAYY more fuel-efficient than any V6! That's a > fact! > > Cheers! > I am getting about 8.5L/100km and that's fine with me since I am paying as average of $1.50 per gallon for 93 gas (135K miles on the car mind you). Low pressure turbo's do nothing for me personally. I've driven too many of those SAAB and Volvo engines and you can keep your graphs. I would buy a 9-3 Viggen or a 9-5 Aero Wagon (love those) for myself in a heartbeat, but my wife wouldn't know how to drive properly such a car. However I am curious to find out what would the fuel mileage be on a Viggen after a good session of heel-toe shifting on the Catskills mountain roads? How about it chef? Do you think it would be much better than my V6? By the way I am not having an argument with anyone, just voicing my opinion which is based on my personal experience. I like turbos but not for everyday NYC traffic, once I even installed a Callaway turbo with a 14 psi wastegate on a VW Scirocco (trashed the clutch in less than 10000 miles, but I loved every minute of it). Thanks awfully myself mate. ;-)~ Alex
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
