SaabCentral Forums banner

Save a Saab

5K views 31 replies 16 participants last post by  woywitka 
#1 ·
I have a 1993 turbo convertible in excellent condition but the tran is slipping bad (AT). This is my only transportation and I live in Arlington Texas (the largest city in the world without public transportation) I am turning it in to the dump (crasher) this coming week, so I can buy a car with the Obama down payment. If anyone would rescue it, I would appreciate. Just can't afford to keep it, but it breaks my heart to send it that road. It has no rust, no body damage of any kind, engine runs strong, new tires, new brakes and rotors, front end was completly rebuild 1 1/2 year ago by a certified Saab. 4500$ is what I get for trashing it. Tan leather interior, parade top cover, original owner's manual, complete tool kit, alarm, original premium radio, spare, all lining in good condition. Back window panel is not leaking, but is need of replacement (fabric is worn out, top was probably replaced omiting that panel) Has normal road wear on original paint.

Lynn 817-719-1079
Don't know how to post pictures here, but will send on request
 
#2 ·
Nobody will pay you 4500 for that, but would you get that much from Obama either?
 
#3 ·
The Cash for Clunkers program (is that really what it's called?) allows you to get $4500 for a car IF you get a new car with some better mileage rating, IIRC. I thought the rules went something like, "Junk a car that gets 20mpg or less, and we'll give you $4500 toward a new car that gets 10mpg better than what you threw out."
 
#5 ·
Well it works for lots of Americans. Made my parents ditch their minivan, which is more than I can say I've done for their sorry automotive situation. (I was pushing for my father to install a 9000 2.3t engine and gearbox in it):cheesy:

Maybe the turbo autobox cars got lower than 18 :eek:
 
#10 ·
This really isn't the right place for this, but since it's such a serious issue I'm going to leave it alone for a bit. You also posted your other post in the wrong for sale forum, you need the one below that, the first one is for our friends on the other side of the pond. ;)

A bit of clarification though, are you looking for a buyer at $4500, or someone to rescue it from the salvage?

I don't see anyone buying it at $4500, not when they can buy nice examples of C900 verts for less than it would cost them to replace the trans on yours. Sad but true. Your car is looking at $4500 + $2-3000 to replace the trans, which is just more than people are going to pay.

On the other hand, inquire about buying the car back after it's scrapped. The dealer probably doesn't give a rip, all they care is that they are making money and selling cars. Say you want it for parts or something. It will have a Salvage title, but that can be changed to a Rebuilt title at a later date. Resale value will be worthless as everyone will assume it was totaled, flooded, or somehow ruined and pieced back together, but, for an enthusiast who's in the known it wouldn't be a big deal since they would simply be driving the vehicle.

Personally I've made the Fort Worth run several times, but I have cars coming out my ears and I'm running out of room and inclination to fiddle with the things. ;)

Aside from that, they may not allow you to buy it back.
 
#11 · (Edited)
I believe the EPA changed their mileage ratings to be more "realistic" (read: using more lead-footed and pig-headed driving style) than they used to be. I believe we car enthusiasts drive quite efficiently, on account of being in tune with our machines and so forth. The EPA ratings used to reflect use by fairly good drivers, but most drivers just don't take the time to understand their cars' operation. I've ridden with quite a few who just don't pay any attention at all to their machines, and it is exasperating! So the EPA lowered their mileage ratings to reflect these people. It's probably a more equitable assessment of the way the average person drives.

To illustrate, the minivan my parents are trading in gets 17mpg EPA revised rating, or 21mpg old rating. My dad and I can get it to do 25mpg. Mom gets about 21. Grandpa gets 18.:lol:

EDIT: Thanks Matt, for keeping this topic open. I agree it's a serious issue--this new program, which I personally think is pretty cool on the whole, has the potentially disastrous side effect of wiping out a fair chunk of all the autobox 900s in the USA.
 
#13 ·
I believe the EPA changed their mileage ratings to be more "realistic" (read: using more lead-footed and pig-headed driving style) than they used to be. I believe we car enthusiasts drive quite efficiently, on account of being in tune with our machines and so forth. The EPA ratings used to reflect use by fairly good drivers, but most drivers just don't take the time to understand their cars' operation. I've ridden with quite a few who just don't pay any attention at all to their machines, and it is exasperating! So the EPA lowered their mileage ratings to reflect these people. It's probably a more equitable assessment of the way the average person drives.
I think we can sometimes manage it, but our English friends seem to drive and get 15 mpg (US) all the time :lol:
 
#15 ·
Personally what I wonder is just how much are we saving the planet by scrapping an already made car for one that gets only 5-9 MPG better. On my automatic I get basically 21 mpg. In city, on the highway, combined, doesn't matter, 21mph period.

So a person trades their car in, gets a car that does 26 mpg driving in the city, they have gained 5mpg. How many years do they have to drive that vehicle before they overcome all the pollution that was put out having to manufacture an entire vehicle? How much immediate pollution would have been saved had the person with the 21mpg vehicle simply kept maintaining and driving their current vehicle?

I just don't see the value in going out and buying the latest and greatest in fuel economic vehicles. Maintain what you have, drive what you have, make what you have last.

A properly sorted C900 5spd should get 28-32mpg. They were built in the 80's. Maintained they will go many hundreds of miles, and are highly practical and versatile vehicles.

It would seem, if anyone was concerned with reducing pollution and saving the planet and all, that the best way would be to build quality cars that are practical, get good fuel economy, haul well, and last for 20-30 years without a hiccup.

But wait, what would that do to the new car market? And of course everyone knows the only important commodity is oil, the rest of the earths resources aren't important. :roll: Just oil.
 
#16 ·
Dude it has nothing to do with the environment, it has nothing to do with the economy, it is supposed to do some things like this, but as Bastiat wrote hundreds of years ago, it is all BS :lol:
 
#18 ·
For what it's worth, your actual gas mileage is irrelevant. Cash for Clunkers only uses the government rating (www.fueleconomy.gov) to determine whether a car qualifies for the incentive.

I work for a Ford dealer, and I can tell you that we have some serious concerns about this program. Not so much for the crap that may or may not qualify, but because desirable older cars like this '93 convertible may have to be scrapped. Having said that, I completely understand the fact that this owner will not get $3,500-$4,500 any other way. Financially it makes sense to scrap the car and take the money. Emotionally is sucks.

While many newer cars will give the owner improved gas mileage, I can aso tell you that a vast majority of todays newer engines are much cleaner burning than what was out there 15-20 years ago.
 
#21 ·
While many newer cars will give the owner improved gas mileage, I can aso tell you that a vast majority of todays newer engines are much cleaner burning than what was out there 15-20 years ago.
Not even "vast", it is "all" :lol:

The amount that the pollution levels have been reduced is simply remarkable. And it is also worth noting that the newer car is newer and hasn't worn to increase the pollution levels vis-a-vis a new car from 1990. And the durability (e.g. time the pollution level must be maintained) on newer cars is much longer.

But I really doubt a small amount of CO, NOx, unburned gasoline over a few miles makes up for the various emissions of building a new car, e.g. the VOC's from painting, the CO from steelmaking... hell even if they want to reduce CO2 for silly reasons, the steelmaking is surely putting out more than could ever be saved within a few years, to save oil, there is more oil in plastic...

and anyway there doesn't seem to be any environmental problem with the emissions of regulated pollutants in most parts of North America, aside from certain large cities where the levels are slightly above what is considered "perfectly healthy". If you drive in the country, who cares it doesnotta matta :lol:
 
#20 ·
:roll: I agree - this all sucks. It might be wise in economic terms but then you`re crushing perfect car, a late c900 convertible, zero rust etc. ... OK, it need a trans, maybe just adjusting, if not, good used replacement. Remember that it`s value (if kept :cheesy:) will definately be going up, it`s 100% certain. And in years time you`ll get 2x 4500 $.
If it`s really good, send it over to Europe (repaired), and you`ll get anything from 5000 EUR up. I`ve bought an `88 `vert a year ago paying 6000 EUR and it`s not the best shape although has airflow kit, `16 aero wheels, new turbo ...
Just think twice before sending this car off to crusher .

Pics would be great to see (you just need to upload them to photobucket.com or similar, copy tabs and paste them in using

button.
 
#23 ·
Checked out the cash for clunkers program. You have to buy a new car to get the rebate. Your old Saab 900 definately will qualify (18 mpg overall rating according to the government site). Looks like a good program, though I can't see how it will be paid for (but how can you put a cost on the environment?)

Its a shame that such great cars will be crushed out of existence, though.

I've seem a lot a similar cars for 1200 to 2000 dollars... even less sometimes.
 
#24 ·
I just read through some details of the program. Apparently the dealer is required to drain the oil, replace it with a sodium silicate fluid and run the engine until it seizes. :eek: :eek:

Titles have to be stamped "Junk Automobile, Cars.gov" and although parts, excluding the engine and drivetrain, may be sold the car itself cannot ever make it back onto the road.

This is horrible. To all of you who opt for this, May you hear your faithful beasts death screams in your dreams forever. :confused:

Of course this whole program has nothing to do with emissions or whatnot, but it's not even the engines fault, strap a 5spd to it and you'd have a 30mpg vehicle. :evil:
 
#25 ·
I just read through some details of the program. Apparently the dealer is required to drain the oil, replace it with a sodium silicate fluid and run the engine until it seizes. :eek: :eek:
details?:eek:
 
#26 ·
Wow, That's harsh. The site just says the car will be scrapped and the engine cannot be resold even if in parts. The bodyshell will not make it back onto the road, but I imagine if it's sitting in a yard somewhere SOME parts will eventually make its way back onto the road.
 
#27 ·
what is the point of emtying the oil out and using sodium silicate(liquid glass) yes it will block up the oilways etc, but I expect there is something on the market what will dissolve/ eataway at it, but then probably damage the metal as well, but if they want to f*** the engine why not just drain all fluids out and rev it like hell till it seizes anyway,save wasting/ poluting with sodium silicate. but apparently if a car is bought into the country (UK anyway) and has'nt been used on the raod here since 1989 it's not eligble anyway, as someone is selling a 1983 900 8vturbo on the bay who now lives back in uk and took it to Norway 20yrs ago and bought it back but it has not been used/registered since return, and he states it's not eligble, but you have to own the car a year anyway, and probably by then they will have stopped the sheme
 
#28 ·
From the American cars.gov:

The CARS Act requires that the trade-in vehicle be crushed or shredded so that it will not be resold for use in the United States or elsewhere as an automobile. The entity crushing or shredding the vehicles in this manner will be allowed to sell some parts of the vehicle prior to crushing or shredding it, but these parts cannot include the engine or the drive train.
despicable :(
 
#29 ·
#32 · (Edited)
Only a complete idiot would think that buying a new car will put you out ahead. Only in extreme cases will you save money. This program requires you to buy a brand new car.

To buy a decent new car to even try to compete with any level of performance, comfort, style, and safety as the C900 you will spend AT LEAST $15,000-$20,000 USD. Even with the money for your "clunker" you will never ever come out ahead financially.

I talk to people about this all the time. They want to buy a new car because they are afraid their current car might require a big repair. Somehow making $500 a month payments for 6 years is cheaper than replacing a $2,000-$3,000 transaxle on a car they currently own.

That said, if one is buying a new car for other reasons, then yeah go for it.

Too bad cool cars like the C900 will be crushed over such a thing.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top