Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 00:50:21 -0000 From: "Dave G" <nospamnopsamom> Subject: Re: Best built recent Saab?
Maybe you need to go back to the older models-I'm a big big fan of the 900 "classics" and fully intend to replace my current 900 with another if/when the time comes! I reckon these models are amongst the best Saabs for build quality. "pablo" <pabloATsimplyhombreNOSPAMnet> wrote in message news:usoku5bo0l2rfdnopsam.supernews.com... > > "Sigurd Kallhovde" <sigurdkREMOVETHISnopsamo.com> wrote in message > news:5AXy9.1754$Aq5.195565nopsamread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net... > > > > > Which is the best built (assembly quality, reliability, durability) recent > > Saab model ... > > I am not an expert. What I can say is that I bought my first Saab a few > months back: a 2002 9-3 SE Convertible. Having been driving a '00 Jaguar XJR > until then, I am not comparing the two cars at all, and in fact I prefer the > more involving, somewhat more rugged 9-3 charm. I like the car a lot. That > said, I must say that the old reputation of Saab's being built like a safe > is not deserved: the car feels flimisy and does have intermittent squeals > and little rattles hare and there. Nothing too irritating, but neverthless > an indication improvement is possible - correction: improvement is an > imperative. A $25k Honda Accord will not have a single squeak inside. But a > $40k Saab does...? > > I still would pick the Saab: it has twice the charm, and here in California > it is the anti-Beemer and anti-Merc, which are the default choices and you > see everywhere. But "solid built" is not an adjective I would use. It's > merely "ok built" - passes the mark, but no excellence score. And before > someone says "but it's a convertible, and they're by nature etc etc", go > take a BMW 3 series convertible for a spin, a car that, in its 32x version, > is s few thou cheaper than the Saab. Or a Merc SLK or CLK convertible. > They're convertibles, and they're utterly solid. But I'd still pick the > Saab. > > ...pablo > >
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
