Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 17:37:21 -0500 From: "BL" <brianlevernospamatico.ca> Subject: Re: Which SAAB?
I had a '94 900S and it ran well ( however, non turbo = no fun) with very few repairs.... though GM's influence was apparent on that car ( inferior struts etc.). In spite of what I read in this news group, and I'm a past owner of five 900C's including an SPG, I like the newer NG or 9-3 better ( with the exception of the SPG which I still wish I had). The 900C was a great car, but it was time for Saab to update it, and I think they did a good job all things considered. I now drive a 9-5 wagon ( with some upgrades) as an alternative to an SUV or mini van. It's been a great car so far typical of most of my Saabs .If I was looking for a car, I would buy a 9-3 with no hesitation. "ma_twain" <ma_twainnospamo.com> wrote in message news:41EDEDBB.4080706nospamo.com... > Bengt ÷sterdahl wrote: > >> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:27:44 GMT, "Al" <alistairdorenospamo.com> wrote: >> >> >>>I fancy a 93, but the pennies won't stretch, maybe a late NG900XS? (what >>>does NG stand for? I know it refers to the newer GM shape, but what do >>>the letters stand for!) >>> >> >> NG = New Generation; not an official SAAB designation. > > You could say NG means "No Good" :-) We could beat this like a "Found On > Road Dead" FORD. Been there and done that with both a Ford and NG900. > > >> >> >>>I don't want to get hit with 9000 bills again, so the only alternative is >>>a good C900, but it would have to last me three years without any major >>>rebuilds, on about 10,000miles a year. I used to own a C900 8v, and I do >>>miss her... >>> >> >> C = Classic; also not an official SAAB designation. > > Classic may not be official, but it fits! > > >> >> NB: There was (at least in Sweden) a C900 sold with the marking 900C, >> where >> C means Carburator. >> >> /Bengt >> > >
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
