You are here: Forums Sedans Saab 9-3 Saab 9-3 Reliability?

Saab 9-3 Reliability?

17 messages,  Last post on Mar 06, 2009 at 11:25 AM

You are in the Saab 9-3 Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Convertible, Sedan, Wagon

Messages Page 2 of 3 1 2 3 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#6 of 17 Re: I tried to switch but I failed [r34] by autoedu Feb 26, 2007 (9:57 pm)
Replying to: r34 (Feb 23, 2007 8:54 pm) Saab safety is legendary. The 9-3 and 9-5 didn't win 5-Stars top Safety award from IIHS for nothing...it is truely the safest car on the road money can buy...   As far as the 9-3 reliability is concerned Model Year 2002 is the safest bet. 2002 is the last model year for the old style hatch and 02-03 for the convertible. 2002 is the most refined 93 of the classic body style. For 03 or newer I would go with the 9-5 instead of the 9-3   9-5 2002 onward are extremely reliable, in fact the 9-5 wagon made Edmund's top list for lowest cost to own vehicle(avoid the V6 if possible, it can be a money pit)
#7 of 17 more reliability questions, and price too. by zeroice Mar 03, 2007 (1:04 pm)
I've been reading so many conflicting opinions on the reliability since I started researching, and it seems to be all love it or hate it. It's nice to see some good discussion on here, so thanks for that. I found a really nice one while searching online listed at $13500. It's a black 2004 Linear with 49,000 miles. Is this pretty reasonable? Will I have some bargaining power due to the reliability issues? It's about 160 miles away so I haven't seen it in person yet. They have about 60 pictures on the web site covering every possible angle and it looks near perfect. There's also an 03 with 45000 miles asking $11900. With the price that low, should I assume it's had some problems? Of course I'll get a carfax if I seriously look into them, but wanted to get some opinions.
#8 of 17 Very BAD!!! by cobus Aug 16, 2007 (3:58 am)
The 1998-2003 Saab 93's are the worst cars in the world! The maintenance will cost you more than the bond, the car rattles, makes noises and squeeks etc. the brakes are bad, the engine and gearbox mountings fail, the serpentine belts and timing chains brake, the car is just a nightmare. And to top it all, Saab garages doesn't care about the customers, they are a bunch of snobs and think you owe them something, they will help you if you pay them thousands, this is the LAST!!! Saab I'll ever drive. Actually, I will go so far to say, this is the last General Motors product that I'll own. Rather buy Mercedes or something French like Peugeot which is good quality. No, I made the biggest mistake ever to buy a Saab
#9 of 17 2001 & 2002 9-3 by r34 Aug 18, 2007 (9:20 pm)
I bought my 2001 9-3 base new and it was hit by a big truck at 46K. It didn't have major problems. Yes, it got rattle noise.   I bought a 2002 CPO 9-3 SE at 42K. I am still driving it. It has 70K now. It didn't have any rattle noise. It had much fewer issues than my 2001 9-3. I guess it is a better car. All pre-2003 9-3 had much better leather seats.   I heard many bad 2003 9-3 stories. People told me 2005 and up 9-3 are much better.
#10 of 17 shift handle falling off while shifting by shihanb Sep 25, 2007 (4:27 pm)
Has anyone had this problem? The shift ball fell off the shifter on my 2005 linear. I put it back on and, after that, no reverse. bringing it in on thursday, i just hope i don't have to back up.   This happened once with a ford pinto where ther entire shift lever came out in my hand, but who would expect it from a SAAB
#11 of 17 Re: Saab 9-3 Reliability? [wayland1985] by baldnj Oct 22, 2007 (10:30 am)
Replying to: wayland1985 (Feb 08, 2007 6:11 pm) It unfortunately depends on the model year. The first year of the last generation 9-3 is 2003 (2003-2007). That year in particular had a number of electrical problems experienced by many owners, as this one did. Not all the problems always stay fixed, so there is risk involved in this purchase. As time passed the problems were fixed. My 2006 Saab 9-3 with luxury package and moon roof has had zero problems in 18 months at nearly 17,000 miles. But by that point the car had been built for over 5 years and the problems were worked out. The point is if you like the car enough and want to take a chance, buy it. I previously owned brand new Toyota Camry (1999) and Acura TL (2001). The Camry blew its engine at 21K while the TL blew its transmission at 31K. The point is, no car company is perfect, and all have their warts. You are just more or less likely to suffer problems depending on the model year and brand. Good luck.
#12 of 17 Warning! Change belt tensioner on Saabs by kherrick Dec 26, 2007 (8:32 am)
Have owned a SAAB 9-5 2000 wagon since 2002. Have just suffered catastrophic engine failure at 90k miles due to a failed belt tensioner. Dealer replaced timing belt at 60K and did not suggest that tensioner is just as likely to fail with same result.   We would not buy a SAAB again. It's a part time job keeping this car on the road and the quality level is miserable. Seat belts fall apart. SAAB Logo on hood completely worn away, driver passenger visor fails and good luck finding a replacement part. We have replaced two DI Cassettes and even though they were recalled in a number of early 2000 vehicles SAAB would not provide any relief. Also car is undriveable without snow tires in the slightest bit of snow.
#13 of 17 My Experience by waterdr Dec 27, 2007 (7:26 pm)
I have a 2003 9-3 with 50k on it (CPO car). I bought it at 22k 18 months ago.   When driving it home, the engine light came on. Turned out to be a smog pump and was replaced under warranty with no issues.   When taking it in for an oil change, I mentioned that the door handles were fading and the sun roof squeaked. They sent me home with a loaner and fixed everything. including finding a cracked coil spring. They replaced both under warranty.   Then one day a headlight went out. I drove it to the dealer and they replaced both under warranty.   Overall, my experience has been great. While it has been to the shop more times in 18 months then my Suburban saw in 6 years (lol), they have always taken care of everything.   I am glad to have a CPO car, BTW. Anyone looking for a used Saab, I would strongly recomend not buying private party and instead buy one from a dealer so they can certify it.
#14 of 17 Brake pad life by shihanb Jan 04, 2008 (3:33 pm)
Replying to: r34 (Feb 23, 2007 8:54 pm) I have a 2005 9-3 linear (manual) with 28K miles and the rear brakes needed replacement which is almost unheard of. One would expect the front brakes to go before the rear brakes. I complained to SAAB and the dealer explained that SAAB did that so that the front brakes would have less "dust" on them. HUH? EXCUSE ME? How about equipping the factory cars with ceramic brake pads. If this is the same people who make planes, their pilots are in trouble.
#15 of 17 9-3 2005 ARC or 2006 Sport Sedan? by swink Jan 05, 2008 (11:15 am)
2006 has low mileage (19k) and under factory warranty. 2005 has 39k miles and is CPO. Which is better?   I put LOTS of miles on the car (around 19k / yr)

Messages Page 2 of 3 1 2 3 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Sedans Saab 9-3 Saab 9-3 Reliability?