12-04-02, 06:20 PM
Hi, I'm new to this site i just wondered if anyone could tell me what M.P.G. i can expect to get from a 9000 or a 900 as i've always liked them and have decided to sell my MK2 Golf and buy one .
But i would like to know what i should be looking out for so that i don't end up with a lemon.
any advice you can give would be great.
I get between low 20's and low 30's in my T16S depending on traffic conditions and the way I drive! and probably not much more in my N/A 900 Convertible. On a recent 480 mile round trip to Wales in the T16S I averaged 33 mpg cruising at around 90mph all the way with cruise control engaged most of the time. I find that cruise helps fuel consumption a lot on long journey's.
I would have thought 9000's would share simular fuel economy.
1991 900i 16V Convertible
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Simon on Apr 14, 2002 5:13pm ]</font>
15-04-02, 07:28 PM
Thanks for letting me know your m.p.g. this will help me a lot in deciding which to go for 900/9000.
i drive a mk2 golf at the minute and think it's time to grow up.
16-04-02, 05:58 AM
rabtmac - as far as the 9000's go, you won't get much worse mpg going for the Turbo as opposed to the non-turbo.
My current car (2.3T Carlsson) averages around 25mpg, though can get 30 on a run if I try. My old 2.0 LPT 9000CS averaged just over 30mpg over 20,000 miles - could get 35mpg without trying too hard on a long run. About the same for the 9000i, though everything is more work - the Light Pressure Turbo being effortless.
I know of people with 9000 Aero's who are averaging in the high 30's, though no idea how they manage that.
9000's do significantly better MPG than 900's. They shouldn't but they do!
I was just looking for backup on this on the Parker's guide website, but they seem to have removed the classic 900 now :sad:
I think it's the upright screen on the 900 that scuppers it, and I think the 9000 may also be lighter...
The figures I remember for the 2.0 turbo were about:
28mpg average classic 900
32mpg average 9000
16-04-02, 02:38 PM
Whichever model you go for, try to ensure it has a Saab or Saab Specialist history. Obviously this doesn't guarantee the car is any good, but usually the service history reflects the care the car has had.
You would be better buying off an enthusiast (for example off an advert on these pages), though beware they may want a high price for their pride and joy :wink:
There are specific things to look out for on 900's and 9000's, and on different engine variants, though let us know what you are looking at, and we can advise what to look for more specifically, as opposed to generalising accross the Saab range.
The 900's are arguably more stylish, but are thus in more demand, so the 9000's tend to be better value.
If it was a 900, I'd go for a 3 door T16s (if you can find one), and a 9000 I'd go for any of the Full Pressure Turbos.
Let us know how you get on.
16-04-02, 05:39 PM
Just bought a 9000 Aero. I returned 33.4 mpg driving over 200 miles back from Bristol at between 80-90 and was stuck in traffic a few times. Around town (Brighton is fairly hilly) I have been doing 30mpg - amazing, considering that I have not been light on the throttle. I have recently sold a 2.0TS Alfa 156 and the economy was dreadful by comarison. Porshe performance with Fiesta economy. Buy one!!
16-04-02, 05:54 PM
Thanks to everyone for the details
i will be getting rid if my mk2 golf shortly and have decided to go for the 9000.
i really like the look of the 900 but with two kids and only two doors it would drive me mad so i'm going for the four door 9000.
i'll post again before i buy i hope you guys can give me some tips as to what to look out for in the 9000 range .
17-04-02, 07:06 AM
Rabtmac - don't forget that you can get 4 and 5 door classic 900's. They have pretty big boots too.
As for the 9000's they are very spacious, and are very pratical for ferrying the kids about (I have two boys, aged 5 and 3).
I would only go for one of the Turbo models - I have seen far too many posts from non-Turbo owners asking how to get more performance out of their cars, and the only cost effective way would be to change the car for a Turbo model!
Don't know what age you're looking at, but all Turbo 9000's before 1991 will be Full Pressure Turbo's (FPT), wheras a Light Pressure Turbo (LPT) engine was available around 1992 on the CS range. The older front (CC) was around on the 4 door CD models until about 1994 - I'm not so sure on the engine variants on these - they adopted the CS style front after that.
I used to own a 2.0LPT CS 9000 which had good mid range, and was an excellent all rounder. However, I now have a 220BHP 9000 which is quicker still, though not as practical when it comes to insurance and mpg!
The biggest cost items on 9000's are Timing Chains and Gearboxes. Check that work has been carried out on these if the car has over 100,000 miles, as they can give trouble around then. However, my 9000 is on its original Timing Chain (I think) at 160,000 miles. I know of a 1989 9000 that is for sale currently at 340,000 miles, so these cars can take the miles if they're taken care of.
Best bet would be get any prospective purchase seen to by a mechanic (preferable Saab Specialist who'll know what to look for).
Other Common problems on 9000's are:
People will tell you to avoid early installations of TCS (i.e. 1991) as they can be difficult and very expensive to fix when they go wrong. Mine is a 1991 vintage with the dreaded TCS, though I have had no problems, and would wonder how the car could handle 220BHP through the front wheels without it!
If you have £4 - £5k to spend, I would go for a 9000 Aero - understated power house of a car!
As with 900's, you'll get the safety as well as the style and comfort.
PS. Are you thinking of a manual or auto?
Hope this helps...