[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
[Main General Bulletin Board | BBFAQ |
Prev by Date | Next by Date | Post Followup ]
Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
my 2 cents Posted by Daryle [Email] (#98) [Profile/Gallery] (more from Daryle) on Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:15:14 In Reply to: compare years: 96-98, 9k to 9-3/NG900, nt moore, Thu, 18 Dec 2003 23:15:08 Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup |
I just sold my '97 900 SE 5 speed with 75K in favor of a '93 9000 CSE 5 speed with 150K.....why? Well, for starters, the 9K is roomier. The 2.3 delivers noticeably more power than the 2.0. While the interiors of the New Gen was more "modern"....similar to the 9-3, I prefer the old school styling of the crappy Clarion radio, knobs, buttons, and dash control. I am now a realtor, and in the car constantly.......the 9000 is averaging 26.8 - 28 MPG around town.....unless the Info Display has totally crapped out. The 9000 has more cargo space than the New Gen did, and the seats fold COMPELTELY flat....vs the HUMP in the New Gen and I presume, 9-3.
If I had to replace this car.....I'd search high and low for another 9000 in just as clean of condition.
Daryle
Current fleet:
1993 9000 CSE
1992 900 Turbo Convert
1986 900 Notchback, turbo'd
1985 Notchback (parts)
1979 900 EMS
posted by 67.21.10...
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.