1979-1993 & 94 Conv [Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
[Main C900 Bulletin Board | BBFAQ |
Prev by Date | Next by Date | Post Followup ]
Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
Re: 2.0 versus 2.1 Posted by Saabu [Email] (#1133) [Profile/Gallery] (more from Saabu) on Sun, 9 Sep 2007 16:02:08 In Reply to: 2.0 versus 2.1, Glen in Montreal, Sun, 9 Sep 2007 15:29:26 Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup |
Hi Glen,
Wayne in Calgary here. I have a 91 2.1L 900 3 dr (my first of that engine) with a very good body and nice color (red). i bought the car for $300 and have put a lot of time fixing this and that to the point that its running well enough to drive regularily. the big problem is that it leaks oil like a seive thru i believe a blown front seal and/or oil pump o ring.
the engine has to be pulled as it probably needs a new timing chain as well.
anyway, i'm very torn about doing this job as i suspect with my luck right after i do it, the HG will go! a fella oughta just do a total teardown if one wants to keep the 2.1 engine....
However, i've got a parts car SPG that i'd love to use to convert the car to an LH 2.2 turbo car. i'd delete the ABS, swap entire dash and drop the turbo engine in with the 91 tranny. its a big but doable job if a guy wants a dependable engine with more power. So, just an idea for you.
personally i think the 2.0 NA engine is a step backwards - way less power although more dependable without the HG/block issues of the 2.1L.
Ciao,
Wayne
posted by 75.153.242...
_______________________________________ 1988 900 TC 2000 Viggen 1997 900 TC son has 2002 9-3 SET
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.