Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 14:02:23 GMT From: "pablo" <pablo.at.simplynospamre.dot.net> Subject: Re: Cost of repair Audi BMW Saab...(crossposting)
"JP Roberts" <1234nospamo.com> wrote in message news:c7qh6m$u9$1nospam.ya.com... > You're right. I've never driven a Saab, but I am totally confident that the > only turbo engine about with no real lag ... And you are wrong. You should drive a low pressure turbo. They develop very good get go off the line. I would not have bought a Saab if it had a peaky engine - I do not like engines that need to be trashed to develop momentum. I like effortless and relaxed power delivery. The Saab low pressure turbo does the part. That said, I agree the BMW I6 is more of a turbine. Having owned 2 BMW 3-series and currently owner of a '02 9-3 convertible (the 205HP version), and not being religious in car matters, I can make the following observations: (First and foremost) They are all great cars - count yourself blessed if you drive either. (1) Few engines out there match a BMW I6 for smoothness. Not even most V8 do (and I have owned a Jag XJR, too). (2) The Saab I4 turbo engine is different in character - it actually seems to get off the line with a bit more umph, but most certainly does not rev up with as much smooth dignity, getting a bit of an agricultural aural charm going at times. A very fun engine in its own way, but certainly not as refined. (3) Nor the BMW I6 nor the Saab 4turbo are fuel efficient when driven aggressively. They get quite thristy. (4) The Saab engine is awesome for USA type highway cruising at 70mph - gives you 30mpg with cruise control, and is extremely quiet. That said, aurally the I6 is a beautiful cruiser too. The only thing is that the Saab's becomes extremely quiet and smooth while cruising, shedding the somewhat trashier sound it had when accelerating hard, whereas the BMW sticks to character. (5) Saab builds the most comfortable seats around, in my opinion - I found the gaps in the BMW sport seats uncomfortable. That said, I have done joyful 14 hour drives in either car. (6) The BMW combines handling and comfort a bit better than the Saab does. My Saab tends to crash into potholes - the price for sports suspension and 17inch wheels, I assume. The BMW feels nimbler with the same package, though, not quite crashing as hard. (7) Either car can be driven very fast on windy roads, they have to be driven differently, however; but the absolute handling edge goes to the Beemer. (8) BMW 3 series are common as muck in Silicon Valley where I live. The Saab is the oddbal choice, and one with its very own charm. (8) is the main reason why I picked the Saab and why I am very happy with my choice. Technical reasons were not really what influenced my decision - I thought they both represented different, yet very nice to drive value propositions. (9) This is coincidental and does not represent any generic evidence: but both my Beemers needed extra-curricular visits to the dealer to fix stuff, 3 that I can remember (car was driveable, though). The Saab has had nothing go wrong in its first 25k miles. Nothing. (10) All in all, my score goes somethig like: Engineering and driving dynamics etc: BMW 10 - Saab 9. Character, charme and uniqueness: Saab 10 - BMW 8. The narrow winner this time around on my personal scoreboard was the Saab when compared to the topless Beemer alternative. (11) I have no experience whatsoever with Audis. They've always seemed a bit too clinically clean and lifeless to me, but there's no doubt they're also great cars. ...pablo
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
