Last post on Oct 23, 2010 at 9:30 AM
You are in the Saab 9-3
What is this discussion about?
Saab 9-3, Wagon
#158 of 214 Re: . [theeconomist]
Dec 19, 2006 (6:04 am)
We had a 2001 SE Convertible, 3 years one warranty claim. Now we have a 2004 Aero Convertible. So far, one warranty claim. About the same as my 2005 Infiniti G35. Saabs are wonderful for us. The best seat heaters on the planet, competent handling for everyday driving. I'm sure that if we mspent time on a track, there'd be better choices but realistically the handling is perfect for the street.
#159 of 214 Re: . [theeconomist]
Jan 03, 2007 (5:26 pm)
In fact, consumer reports said expected reliability is "very below average
My family currently owns two Saab 9-5s, which brings the total we have owned to four. I'd say that they won't beat Hondas (we also own one of those) on the reliability score, but disagree that their reliability is so irredeemably poor that buyers should stay away, particularly if they like the car and its price.
One question I've always had about CR reports, especially reliability, is this: What counts as 1?
For example, you have 1,000 miles on the odometer and in rapid succession a headlight bulb burns out and the serpentine belt fails.
Is that two? One? 1.575? Or what? If you don't know how they assign values it's hard to tell whether CR's predictions are a useful guide for future performance or not.
It seems to me that a reliability score should be based on a vehicles' propensity for dumping the owner at the side of the road and be built on a robust data base, not self reporting. In my opinion, cosmetic complaints may be very irritating to the person who writes a monthly check to the finance company, but do not rise to the level of reliability.
Jan 03, 2007 (6:18 pm)
An interesting question Saabgirl.
CR says they "weight" drive train issues higher, but won't say how much higher. Since I'm a subscriber, I was sent their survey and one of the questions is how many times to the dealer for warranty work... then they ask a series of questions designed to "categorize" the work.
They do note they are reported "averages" and clearly state that a car rated above average reliability may cause a particular owner serious problems and that a car rated below average might be problem free for a particular person. They also note the "variance" associated across dealers whose service practices are not alike. My current car that I'm very happy with (RX-8) is nevertheless rated below average reliability. I've had warranty work once in three years when the clutch wore out (it was only rattling) but the dealer was my total advocate and took great care of me.... hence I'm inclined to buy Mazda again and recommend them... but part of my positive experience is the dealer.
#161 of 214 Re: . [theeconomist]
Jan 04, 2007 (2:16 pm)
They do note they are reported "averages" and clearly state that a car rated above average reliability may cause a particular owner serious problems and that a car rated below average might be problem free for a particular person.
Aye, there's the rub, methinks. The info is presented as predictive, but it comes with a big caveat.
Personally, for reliability, I'd like to see a hard number that reports how often the cars dumped the driver at the side of the road a/o put the car out of service -- the automotive equivalent of placing a car on injured reserve. Then prospective buyers could simply compare numbers across brands and models and assess their odds.
My hypothesis is that the number difference between a car that CR currently rates as "reliable" and one that it rates as "unreliable" might not be all that big-- but the forced ranking requires that someone has to be below average.
Well, no, I dunno how the data would be collected to do this.
I completely agree with your comment that the dealer can take a lot of subjective frustration out of "reliability" problems which would lead to better customer satisfaction scores. A little empathy, a loaner car and getting the fix right the first time go a long way to putting the "positive" back in the experience.
#162 of 214 6-speed and ordering
Jan 09, 2007 (7:13 am)
I just testdrove an auto 2.0T SportCombi and came away fairly impressed. I found the Saab interior very enjoyable and comfortable to drive in.
I wanted to try the 6-speed manual but none were available. The automatic transmission mated to the 2.0T was very disappointing as expected. Automatics and turbo four cylinders do not mix. I am willing to give Saab the benefit of the doubt because the 2.0 turbo looks decent on paper. Has anyone else tried Saab's 2.0 turbo with a 6-speed manual? What are your impressions?
The manual SportCombi with the 2.0T is very hard to find. If I want to buy one, I would most likely have to order one. Is it a lot harder to negotiate the price if I order a car? I am pretty sure that I can get a 9-3 below invoice if it was on the dealer lot.
#163 of 214 Re: 6-speed and ordering [a10thunder]
Jan 09, 2007 (7:21 am)
I test drove a SportCombi 2.0T 5-Speed right after they came out a little over a year ago and thought that its power was adequate but hardly impressive. That said, while the Arc that I drove was certainly more spirited, inducing the dreaded torque steer monster was very easy to do. As much as I like Saab's individualism, I just couldn't bring myself to pull the trigger due to the driving dynamics.
#164 of 214 Re: 6-speed and ordering [shipo]
Jan 09, 2007 (1:31 pm)
My reply to both you guys:210 H.P.,221 LB./FT of torque,90% available from 1,800 r.p.m to 4,500 r.p.m....okay it's not a rocketship,but what are you both looking for? Go spend $50 K.and get an Audi S4 Avant.I honestly don't think 98% of the buying public including the majority of car enthusiasts will share your opinion after test driving the 2.0-T.However I do not concede to "opinion" on one point....After spending 36 months driving an '03 9-3 Vector I would be hard pressed to remember any occasion when I experienced any torque steer of ANY significance.Can you force the issue and induce it ...of course!Down shift into a hard uphill turn,flop the steering over ,load up the inside wheels and run it to red line...VOILA!TORQUE STEER! Well no s..t Sherlock!Allow me a direct quote from "European Car"magazine's 12 month long term test,Ahem!"rather than spike hard and leave you wrestling with the steering wheel the power comes on in a much more linear fashion.And there is no more torque steer.Period."
#165 of 214 Re: 6-speed and ordering [saablcp]
Jan 09, 2007 (5:35 pm)
Yo dude, take a chill pill. Torque steer, especially when accelerating through a turn was very evident in the 93 Arc that I drove. Personally I could care less whether a car magazine says it exists or not, I rely in my own experiences, and torque steer was what I experienced, like it or don't.
#166 of 214 Re: 6-speed and ordering [saablcp]
Jan 09, 2007 (7:26 pm)
I made no mention of torque steer. I simply said that the automatic transmission does not go well with the Saab 2.0L turbo. The 2007 9-3 comes with a 6-speed manual and I'm sure 2.0T's potential can be better explored with the manual transmission.
#167 of 214 Re: 6-speed and ordering [saablcp]
Jan 10, 2007 (8:42 am)
Well, it's not a rocketship, true, but saab does present itself as a sporting vehicle, and compared to other sporting cars in the range, the 2.0T is just OK. The 210/220 hp/torque are decent figures, but there is a little lag in the mix, which takes away somewhat from the sporting aspect. I'm used to being able to pass on the highway in top gear, but in that situation, the 2.0T seems to take well over a second to build some boost and start responding. However, you could always do a 6-4 shift and pass.
Audi's 2.0T, though slightly lower-powered, feels slightly more sprightly by comparison--no s4 needed.
I think a chip can boost saab's 2.0T to 247hp and 260lb-ft, which should make it into a pretty good mover, albeit with more noticeable lag.