Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 21:40:02 GMT
From: hohnospamlid.invalid (Goran Larsson)
Subject: Re: 9-5 2.3lpt PCV/breather hose burst


In article <314062fd4c.Richardnospamard.ss.clear.net.nz>, Richard Sutherland-Smith <richard.ssnospamr.net.nz> wrote: > > Are you suggesting that I don't know what I write about? > > No, that's why my statement was not definitive. The word "Surely" surely indicated some level of certainty. You could have written "I didn't know the 9-5 had an AMM". > So if the MAP sensor replaced the AMM in the 9000, why did they have to > use both in the 9-5, "backward evolution?" Why is it a "backward evolution?" The MAP sensor is certainly cheaper than the AMM sensor, but Saab probably felt that using only the MAP sensor wasn't good enough. I don't know exactly why Saab decided to go for both a MAP sensor and an AMM sensor, but the fact is that Trionic 7 do use both of these sensors. -- G–ran Larsson http://www.nospam.com/saab/

Return to Main Index

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2020 - The Saab Network - saabnet.com.
For usage guidelines, see the Saabnet.com Mission and Purpose Page.
[Contact | Site Map | Saabnet.com on Facebook | Saabnet.com on Twitter | Shop Amazon via TSN | Site Donations]