Date: 16 Sep 2002 02:23:51 GMT From: davehinznopsamcop.net Subject: Re: Need help purchasing used Saab
Someone who looks an awful lot like Four Weis <mweinopsamcom> wrote: > Each model has its "quirks", which are viewed as good or bad, depending on > the person you ask. My bias is towards the Classic 900s - 1993 and older. ...agreed, and I'd say '89 and newer as well to avoid the pinion bearing problems (the bearings were updated then) > My reasons are as follows: > 1. The Classic (hardtops) have rain gutters which makes it easy to attach > affordable roof racks Keeps the rain from dripping on you when you get in & out of the car as well... > 2. The front to back engine layout with the wishbone suspension does very > well in the snow and ice -better than the 9000s, 9-3, and 9-5 I don't think the weight distribution and C.G. are any different than on the newer 900 or 9-3/9-5; it's still 60:40, isn't it? But yes, the double-wishbone suspension on the classic Saabs is fantastic in the winter. I don't yet know how the newer one behaves in the winter, but I would like to think they took that into consideration??? > 3. The hatchback model has NO lip - large, heavy object SLIDE in and out - > a feature which is currently available only on the high priced 9-5 wagon. Yes. The classic 900 with the hatch is the ultimate hauling machine. I brought my kitchen stove home in one, with the hatch closed even. > 4. The clutch is hydraulic - Saab tried a cable clutch for a few years > (1995-1997?) and went back to a hydraulic clutch Yes, avoid the cable clutch if you go with a manual. > 5. The front pillars are thinner - they don't block your vision as much as > the NG models and 9-3s That's another change I don't understand why they did. Strength I suppose, but it's not like the C900 was deficient in those regards... > 6. You an get a Classic 900 without a turbo - making it a slower car, > better for beginning driver Slow but not unacceptably so... even without the turbo, they're a blast to drive. Especially if you're lucky enough to live in snow country. (snip) > The 1986 900 was the last year of the "cheap headlights" - 6"x7" > rectangular. European Glass Cibie models with H4 bulbs could be had for > $30 each. After that year the plastic aerodynamic lights were used > starting at over $200 for the lens assembly. However, the parking brake > was on the front wheels for the 1986 year - no hand brake turns possible. > The next year the parking brake was moved to the rear wheels. Some time > before 1990, My '88 had them on the rear wheels, and I seem to recall that was the first year of the return to the rear axle. I know the pads & rotors changed for that year, so I am pretty comfortable that '88 was the first year for that. > the brakes used on the 9000 were put on the 900s. The older > 900 brakes required a tool to turn back the self adjusting pistons. Whatever model you get, ask here for the special instructions if you don't buy the manual right away. > The > 1986 900 had a traditional transmission dipstick. I know the 1990 model > and possibly earlier eliminated the traditional transmission dipstick and > you must use a 19 mm socket to loosen a bolt with a short dipstick to > check the transmission oil. Does anyone know of an after market > traditional dipstick tube that can be used to replace the bolt? Can you just put a dipstick from the older cars onto one? That having been said, in 247,000 miles, I never lost oil in my tranny, even though I checked it regularly, and changed it once in a while. Whatever you go with, let us know and we'll try to give you pointers. Or, if you find a specific car and would like some opinions, we've got plenty of those too. Dave Hinz
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
