In Reply to: Why not the 9-5?..., Mike Lynch [Profile/Gallery] , Fri, 6 May 2005 12:19:37

Well, I owned a 1964 96 when the 99 came out in 1969, and I thought the 99 was a great car, with many of the SAAB characteristics (practical, safe, fun to drive), and a much better highway/long trip car than the 96. It was also much quieter than the 96 with its Triumph in-line 4 cylinder engine compared to the three-cylinder two stroke and the V-4 Ford engine that the 96 had from 1967 on. On the negative side, the 99 was not as much fun to drive as the 96, and was not quite as good in the snow - snow traction was good, but there was more weight on the rear wheels, which meant it would fishtail on snow if pushed too hard. The 96 usually went exactly where you pointed it, whatever the road surface.

Overall, I thought the 99 was a great addition to the SAAB line, which up to that time had consisted of just the 96 sedan, the 95 station wagon, and the Sonett. The 99 was originally advertised as an addition to the SAAB line, not as a replacement for the 96, and the 96 continued to be imported to the U.S. until 1974. The 99 was the 9-5 of its day, and the 96 was the 9-3! In fact, I liked the 99 so much that I bought one the first year it was available (which turned out to be a mistake, but that's another story!). However, I did keep our 96 for three more years. No SAAB I've owned since that '64 96 has been as sure-footed in the snow as it was.

posted by 84.148.2...

• Spritiual descendant of classic 900? Discuss..., Fred, Fri, 6 May 2005 08:22:42
  • Why not the 9-5?..., Mike Lynch , Fri, 6 May 2005 12:19:37
    • What 96 owners thought of the 99, Steve L., Fri, 6 May 2005 15:38:19 <-- Viewing This Message
      • just had a long talk with a guy who used to work>, a prodigal son, Sat, 7 May 2005 18:22:23
      • Re: What 96 owners thought of the 99, Railhead , Fri, 6 May 2005 22:35:42
    • Agreed and interesting..., Scott Paterson , Fri, 6 May 2005 13:29:58
    • Mike, you have a fine eye for detail... n/m, Noel, Fri, 6 May 2005 12:42:43
  • Well maybe. But ..., Noel, Fri, 6 May 2005 11:28:44
    • seems like cars are more expensive there, TheKillerPenguin, Fri, 6 May 2005 12:14:26
      • True, TML , Fri, 6 May 2005 21:40:19
  • this is exactly what they need, but..., AndyR, Fri, 6 May 2005 09:53:32
  • If that's true, I think it's awesome>, PT, Fri, 6 May 2005 09:06:44
    • I agree with the pricing problem..., Josh91900, Fri, 6 May 2005 10:35:30
      • It was something else...., Mike Lynch , Fri, 6 May 2005 11:27:10
  • Very encouraging, if true...good stuff! n/m, Clay McNeely , Fri, 6 May 2005 08:27:18

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.

• Prev by Date: Re: OT - Physics of concrete...., Aero'ed, Fri, 6 May 2005 15:17:02
• Next by Date: Re: 96 differences, Steve L., Fri, 6 May 2005 15:59:24
• Main General Bulletin Board

StateOfNine.com

SaabClub.com

Jak Stoll Performance

M Car Covers

Ad Available

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2024 - The Saab Network - saabnet.com.
For usage guidelines, see the Mission & Privacy Notice.
[Contact | Site Map | Saabnet.com on Facebook | Saabnet.com on Twitter | Shop Amazon via TSN | Site Donations]

Random Saabnet.com Member Gallery Photos (Click Image)