[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
Re: Should my next Saab be a NG900/OG9-3...(long) Posted by Justin VanAbrahams [Email]  (#32) [Profile/Gallery]
(more from Justin VanAbrahams) on Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:01:12
In Reply to: Should my next Saab be a NG900/OG9-3...(long), decatursaab, Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:12:39 Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup |
I think this depends on what you want... I've had a ton of 900s, several 9000s, and currently have a '00 9-3 SEc... I've also spent a great deal of time in and working on my parents' '02 9-3 SE.
The OG9-3s seem to be very reliable, and they've aged mechanically and cosmetically very well. Shopping for a 6-year-old '02 was a lot easier than shopping for a 6-year-old '92 back in the day. Every car we looked at was in superb condition, with little to no wear anywhere. Better materials and arguably better design play a big part there. Mechanically, the engine are roughly the same old bullet-proof 2-litres, and the transmissions are better in every way (save maybe shift quality in the manuals). The automatics aren't even worth comparing...
Servicing an OG9-3 is an entirely different game - like most modern cars they were designed were quick servicing in mind. That generally means that the common tasks are done pretty easily. OTOH, the c900 like most old Saabs was (apparently) designed to be serviced by anyone. The more complex jobs are easier than an OG9-3. My thought is that with OG9-3s they are either easier or much harder than a c900, whereas c900s are universally "moderately tough" to deal with. Of course, very little on a c900 requires special tools or electronic gizmos, while the OG9-3 requires a fair number of unusual or special tools, and having quality electronic diagnostics is imperative. c900s are pretty simplistic, but there's a lot of black-box stuff in the newer cars.
Driving, there is no comparison, at all. I've owned and driven a fair number of stock and modified NG900s and OG9-3s, and none of them are as primal or involving as a c900. The newer cars are competent and fun compared to an Accord or Camry, but a c900 is a fantastic ride. There is something about the seating position, suspension design, and ergonomics of the c900 that just works... the OG9-3 simply lacks that je ne sais quoi. Commuting in the 9-3 is just fine - it's quiet, comfortable, and predictable - but there isn't a time or place I'd take it over my SPG.
Finally - let me throw this out - I've owned five or six c900 convertibles, and I prefer them to the new cars. The top is very nice on the new cars, but problematic at best and the motorized tonneau adds painful seconds to top opening/closing that I have a hard time tolerating. Also, the trunk in the c900 is superior - you actually have a fair amount of usable space, but the 9-3 is really worthless. The folding back seat on the 9-3 is really great, but doesn't make up for a complete lack of usable space back there. Rearward visibility is better on the c900, too. The 9-3 wins with fit & finish, cabin quietness, and chassis rigidity for sure but there are enough issues with it that I'd still prefer the c900 in convertible form. The hardtops are another ball of wax - a nice 9-3 SE 5-door is a really, really nice commuter - but I'm not sold on the convertibles. Point in fact, I'm selling mine. Heh.
posted by 12.71.42...
, Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:01:12 <-- Viewing This Message
, Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:13:10, Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:32:49
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.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
