1999-2009 [Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
 | [Main 95 Bulletin Board | BBFAQ |
Prev by Date | Next by Date | Post Followup ]
Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
Re: Interesting to hear you say this Posted by Snowmobile [Email]  (#686)  [Profile/Gallery]
(more from Snowmobile) on Sat, 8 Feb 2014 06:57:54
In Reply to: Interesting to hear you say this, Mike Johnson, Sat, 8 Feb 2014 04:57:25 Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup |
Interesting that you find the same with the 9000.
I'm trying to understand what might cause this... the differences:
1) Weight.
C900=2732-3011 lbs (mine is about 2900 if you don't count the tools etc in the trunk)
9000=3130-3340 lbs (if you drive a stick cse/aero, and don't have a dishwasher back there it's 3250 lbs)
9-5=3470-3730 lbs (mine is a automatic sedan so 3580 lbs)
So my 9-5 weighs 700 lbs more than the c900, so 23% heavier. That's quite a bit, and will make a difference in terms of stopping and starting.
2) Tire width. 185 vs 205 series. 20cm narrower is significant. Not sure how that translates in real world conditions. Can't get 185 for the 9-5, but maybe I should try 195?
3) Tire design. Both have Nokian winter tires.
The c900 has older ones (Hakka4), which are about 6mm deep, rubber should be stiffer and less grippy on ice by now. They also have fewer sipes and no studs (banned here), but have solid areas with holes to accept studs. This was a very good tire when new. It has lots of open area to expel snow and slush and is directional. They still work really well. Only wish that we were allowed studs. Studs are amazing!
The 9-5 has a season and a half on a set of new HakkaR's at almost the full tread depth. These are designed to be a full on winter tire in areas where studs are not an option. They are a modern, heavily siped, friction winter tire (like Blizzak, or XIce, or whatnot). They do however have less open area than the Hakka4, but are still a directional design.
Also note, previous very old goodyear studless tires worn to 5mm also outperformed the 9-5 with Michelin Primacy Alpins!
So I wonder if one component of this is simply that modern friction tires are going more for ice grip than snow expulsion? Lower rolling resistance (also at the expense of snow expulsion) seems to also be a consideration... The ice grip of the 9-5 with hakkaR's is not as good as the c900 with Haka4's... also the reduced tread depth on the 4's (and especially the goodyears that preceded them) would reduce the ability to expel snow vs the full depth R's...
4) ABS/TCS/ESP. The c900 I'm driving has none of these. Stops, starts, and turns better than the 9-5 at greater speeds in snow, slush, and ice. TCS comes on almost all the time in the 9-5. So I wondered if it is just turning on too easily and limiting input more than necessary? Turning it off really makes a difference, but not for the better. Much easier to lose control! and for me, not much faster to do stuff (if faster at all - mostly slower due to loss of control)...
So maybe I need to drive the 9-5 more in winter with Winter mode on and TCS/ESP off... Other than that, I bet it's mostly tire width and vehicle weight/driving dynamics that make it worse than the c900 in snow... still need to play with it more!
, Sat, 8 Feb 2014 03:58:41, Sat, 8 Feb 2014 06:57:54 <-- Viewing This Message
, Mon, 10 Feb 2014 12:51:03
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
