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
Pros and cons to everything! Posted by Snowmobile [Email]  (#686)  [Profile/Gallery]
(more from Snowmobile) on Tue, 10 Apr 2018 10:44:14
In Reply to: I also just found a super low mileage 99', Devin  [Profile/Gallery]
, Mon, 9 Apr 2018 14:09:42
Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup
|
There are 3 phases of 9-5 with 2 visible MCE's (Mid Cycle Enhancements) and a few other key year changes. I personally feel the cars got uglier with each successive MCE, so imho, the 1999-2001 is the best looking, though the 2002-2005 is similar, and 2006-2009 Dame Edna is not my cup of tea aesthetically... but of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder and there are other reasons to prefer the newer cars.
As saabsince93b points out, 2002 is when GM started cheapening the cars, eg going to plastic headlamps instead of glass. I have never had to polish the headlights of either of my c900's but on my 2004, I've done this 4 times now in less than a decade!!!
The other key model year shift, to me more important than the visible changes was 2003 to 2004 when they finally sorted out the damn PCV system. Which brings me to...
Be a little suspicious of low mileage pre-2004 9-5's!! If you find a crazy SAAB nut owner who was on to everything from the get-go, you may have found a cherry. HOWEVER... Check for sludge for sure. It may be no problem at all, but as Anders points out, the worst cases he has found in 9-5's were the cars that were just driven to church on Sunday, where the car never really gets a chance to warm up. That is considered "severe service" for the oil and unless the owner was meticulously early on the oil changes, and/or got the pcv system upgraded early on (look for pcv6) there could be issues.
I would ask about driving habits in general because there is a big difference between driving 100 high speed miles once a week, and putting along at low speed for a few miles several times every day for 20 years. 18 years old is about 6570 days, so at 80k miles, that's about 12 miles/day, or about 4500k/year. It is also possible that driving habits changed over time. It doesn't hurt a car to sit for some periods of time, as long as it is driven properly semi-regularly. My 1993 c900 has this usage pattern in recent years and sees no more than 4000 miles per year.
The 2006 will have more power and other refinements out of the box, particularly if the 1999 is not an aero (iirc aeros were introduced in 2000?). The earlier cars got a lighter turbo (garrett) vs the Mitsubishi TD04 in the aero and 2004+ cars.
Most of this info is searchable on this site including things to look for in the older 9-5's in a pre-purchase inspection. Overall the 9-5 is a great car, though I still love the c900's more from a driving fun perspective, the 9-5 is more practical these days and certainly an excellent long-haul car!
, Sun, 8 Apr 2018 16:50:59
, Mon, 9 Apr 2018 21:05:00, Mon, 9 Apr 2018 14:09:42, Tue, 10 Apr 2018 10:44:14 <-- Viewing This Message, Mon, 9 Apr 2018 05:20:14, Sun, 8 Apr 2018 20:21:16, Sun, 8 Apr 2018 18:10:08
, Mon, 9 Apr 2018 17:49:33, Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:21:01
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.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
