1985-1998 [Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
 | [Main 9000 Bulletin Board | BBFAQ |
Prev by Date | Next by Date | Post Followup ]
Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
Re: Ari-about those non-turbo 9000s? Posted by Ari [Email]  (#2847) [Profile/Gallery]
(more from Ari) on Tue, 16 Nov 2004 06:05:16
In Reply to: Ari-about those non-turbo 9000s?, paul de k, Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:31:00 Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup |
From the outset, we're not talking about a high-performance car. My '92 N/A has slightly higher horsepower (by about 4 hp) and is somewhat lighter than the '94 CSE. Not enough to make a big difference.
I find my N/A to be an incredibly competent car. Comfortable, quiet, and very good handling. That won't change between turbo or non-turbo. Get it up to speed on the highway, and you can easily find yourself way over the speed limit because of the smoothness.
The downside of the non-turbo is transient capability. You aren't going to bound onto the highway and 'merge with authority.' Your son will have to plan his merges. The 55 to 65 acceleration isn't great, so diving for holes in traffic takes a little more patience, and letting some opportunities go by because the gap isn't big enough.
What I'm saying is that unless you want to thrash the car unmercifully, it's a great somewhat sedate driver. The car doesn't promote aggresive driving.
I love my turbo cars, and I find them to be easier to drive in around-town and cut-and-thrust highway driving. "Easier?" I don't know how else to say it, but my wife and I agree that you don't work quite as hard when the car has a sensitive gas pedal and you've got plenty of acceleration on-tap. However, if we're picking a car to take the 300+ mile trip up to LLBean in Maine, we'll gladly pick the non-turbo. Get it up to speed on the highway, and cruise, cruise, cruise. The handling is very sweet, and the brakes work just fine.
When I get into my non-turbo, I miss the 50 fewer HP over my FPT CSE. Who wouldn't? But it's a great car.
If your son's commute involves lots of hills, or the highway traffic is the medium aggressive cut-and-thrust type, and you want him to join in, then a non-turbo automatic will be doggy. If traffic is light (and where is that these days?) you get up to speed and cruise just fine with the non-turbo. If traffic is heavy, then horsepower does you no good at a 12 mph crawl.
The acceleration will probably be on par with the 900S 5-speed - your 5-speed 9K turbo and 9-5 auto will blow the doors off. In terms of handling and braking, it should feel a lot like your 9K and 9-5. You don't mention the year of your 9000 - the '94 is the new body style (over the 92 and earlier) and there is a different feel. I find the newer 9000 to feel a lot like the 95 sedan, turbo or no (in terms of driving dynamics, not straight-line accleration).
posted by 192.249....
, Tue, 16 Nov 2004 08:12:50, Tue, 16 Nov 2004 06:05:16 <-- Viewing This Message
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.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
