Which Aero to get? Please Help.

[EvanJ18]

Hey I'm new to the forums, mainly because I'm in the market for a new car and this long drawn out process has left me to one, 9-3 Aero. I love everything about them. but my question is, which year? I'm currently looking at an 05 and an 07. It would help me greatly if you could let me know the pro's and con's of each year, and how the engines compare. this may be stupid to ask but i have heard one is better than the other going both ways.

Thanks greatly
Evan

[cavedudejeff]

well the 05 gets better gas milage since its a 2.0 liter turbo inline 4 that makes 210 ponies... the 07 has a 2.8 liter turbo v6 that puts out 250 ponies but has crappier gas milage. the difference is about 8 MPG in both city and highway with the 05 being able to go 22/32 city/highway vs 14/24 for the 07. Both engines are pretty good so it really boils down to how much are you willing to pay at the pump on a regular basis to get those extra 40hp. There is a tuning company that a lot of people on this forum have used called BSR that tunes the 05 (commonly refered to as the 2.0T not to be confused with the 2.0t) to about 247 horsepower for about $850 from geniunesaab.com, the US distributor for them here. They also have a tune for the 07 aero (commonly reffered to as the 2.8) that pushes the ponies up to 285. Both of these tunes are reversible via a PPC (Portable Program Carrier) so you can go back to stock any time you want. Other than that the gearboxes are the same 6 speeds and pretty much so is the rest of the car with the exception of the radio and SID. The 07 comes with the GM black tie stereo which is a bit better than the older model... but, and this is why I refuse to trade up, it shows up in even budget econoboxes like the saturns, but if that does not bother you than you should be fine. The 05 on the other hand has a Saab proprietary radio that is a little worse than the black tie in terms of sound, but both are pretty bad to begin with, however it is unique to the saab and the 05's still have the SID display on top of the dash, which some members here absolutely love, I know I do. It basically is a second display that displays the time, what track is playing, radio station, and any alert messages such as headlamps burning out on the little screen that is a lot closer to your field of vision since it is on top of the dash than the "upgraded" (read cost cutting) SID that is intergrated into the odometer in the 07 models. apart from that everything else is pretty much the same for both years and on till present day models.

Hope that helps and if i missed anything Im pretty sure some other members will chime in.

[rogan]

Good post... just one minor error that I noticed, the US spec '05 Aero has a 5 speed, not a 6 speed like every other model year.

Personally, I'd go with the '05. Not only is it cheaper in the first place, it will be better on gas. The 2.0T has been called a more exciting engine by many people on this board and around, and it weighs less, which makes the car have a more even weight distribution and handle better. I also prefer the button dash on the '05 compared to the boring GM unit in the '07.

I'm sure you'll love either of the cars immensley. Enjoy!

-Rogan

[cavedudejeff]

I test drove an 05 aero before buying my little t and i was a 6 speed... wierd huh...

[JBob]

As is often the case, unfortunately you've both just assumed that the OP is in the US...

If we are talking Warwick in the UK then things are a little different. We still get the 2.0T Aero here (as well as the 2.8 V6 Aero, but that is a rare beast), so the differences are less between a 2005 and 2007 if we are talking the 2.0T.

The 2007 has the newer dash, as the others said with the GM stereo and the SID (information display) relocated to the speedo rather than in a pod under the windscreen. The earlier cars (pre-2006) had a more complex fibre optic stereo system which is more difficult to modify (basically unless you are very adventurous replacing the speakers is probably the only option). So, if buying the 2005 make sure you can live with the sound quality.

Sound deadening is also allegedly improved on the 2007 models, a bugbear on the older models as tyre noise (epsecially was they wear) is an issue for some.

As for the gearbox, I know the diesels got the 6-speed, but I'm not sure about the Aeros for 2005. It may have been optional. The 2007 came with the 6-speed as standard, but to be honest it's not much of a benefit, as there are numerous complaints of graunching between 1st and 2nd when cold on the 6-speed. These cars tend to have pretty high gearing even with the 5-speed, so economy on the motorway is pretty good for a car of it's size and performance.

Other than that, changes were pretty much cosmetic. I'd go with whichever you prefer to be honest, the differences are pretty minor.

[ANTMAR]

The 05 is lighter and a bit more nimble - you will also notice a rougher ride as the tires in 05 were lower profile and the P zero's not the higher profile conti's. If your roads are smooth it won't matter.

The 05 has the distinctive turbo whine on spool up - you won't hear it in the 2.8T version but the exhaust is better sounding with the 2.8T.

Why not consider an 06 Aero - you get the button dash - the SID and the V6 for somewhere in the middle of an 05 or 07.

I have owned an 05 aero for 12 months and now a 06 aero for 24 months. I like both cars very much - after driving the 2.8T I would say I prefer it to the 2.0T - it has more grunt - you really don't have to worry about rpm's and gears as much as the 2.0T and dealing with spool up times. 6th, 5th 4th or 3rd all are great and with just a flick of the accelerator you are off. I don't know if you have the opportunity to drive both before purchase but you should if you can - either way you can't go wrong and you should seriously weigh the warranty as a priority in making your decision.

I do not know the nuances of Euro compared to Usa versions and apologize for any discrepencies.

[LaserRed9-3Aero]

Excellent posts already, nothing more to add to them.

Except...

Originally Posted by cavedudejeff

..with the 05 being able to go 22/32 city/highway vs 14/24 for the 07.

I fully understand that these are the EPA ratings, but I've never seen real-world mileage that bad in my '06 Aero (automatic). In 100% around-town, 30mph, normal acceleration, stop-and-go traffic I get about 18-19 mpg. In 100%, 70mph flat interstate cruising, I get about 29mpg. The lowest (average)I've ever seen was 16.1mpg in town, during a bitterly cold (2-10 F) week. The best (average) I've ever seen was 30.8 mpg on a long highway trip from a combination of non-ethanol gas and my wife's slightly slower average speed due to heavy traffic. I do a mix of about 75% city, 25% highway driving on most tanks, and my MPG average is usually about 23-24mpg. Edit: These are American MPG ratings, not UK. YMMV.

I'm biased because I own an '06, but given the two choices I'd personally go for the '07. If you can afford it, newer is better simply because it may still have warranty coverage, it's two years younger, and it will have better resale value (ha!) down the road. The 2.8 V6 is a great engine. Though not to knock the 2.0T, because it's good too!

If fuel economy is important, then I'd suggest finding an '07 2.0T instead. If you're thinking of an '07 Aero, then you certainly ought to be able to find an '07 2.0T that will fit your budget. It will have almost as much power as the '05 Aero, but even better MPG ratings.

[LaserRed9-3Aero]

Originally Posted by ANTMAR

Why not consider an 06 Aero - you get the button dash - the SID and the V6 for somewhere in the middle of an 05 or 07.

There's your best advice. All of the cool people know that '06 Aero's are the best.

[EvanJ18]

wow i appreciate all the advice. and to clear something up im in Warwick, Rhode Island. the reason i limited it to the 07 and 05 is just for the simple fact that i haven't found an 06 yet. let me tell you, what originally got me into the saab's was their interior. i first sat in an 04 arc and it had everything i needed, i loved the SID and how you could customize everything. granted anything thing is better thean what im currently rolling around in (93 ford crown victoria, kill me). but i actually prefer the 05, 06 interior (controls, etc.) because i like how it is unlike anything other GM.

but when it comes down to it. my friend just got an 08 VW R32. so i want to be able to blow his doors off in whatever im in.

thanks again for all the advice. i didnt think i would have this feedback, this quick. it's awesome.

[cavedudejeff]

well in that case... skip saab... the aero... v6 or not isnt going to beat him in the 0-60 dept or the quater mile.

Saabs are quick... but not that quick.

[rogan]

If you want to beat an R32 you better be thinking about mods on either of the cars I'd say... The 2.8T, despite having the same power, probably won't be able to take it because of the VW's DSG gearbox and AWD...

Handling wise, suspension upgrades and an LSD will make it a more even match...

-Rogan

[EvanJ18]

no i know that stock it wont beat it. im prepared to do a good about of work on the car. that was going to be another thread but i guess i can just ask it here. now saab isnt a company ive looked into too many aftermarket upgrades. but what would you guys suggest for good engine modifications (intake etc.), exhaust, and suspension?

[cavedudejeff]

even with a LSD and a healthy horsie difference (assuming 35) id still put my money on the r32... We do have after all the worlds ****tiest manual gearboxes in the world... that and FWD is still FWD and FWD is poopoo of the line. Even though the r32 runs on the 3rd gen haldex system and it is pretty heavily front biased... even if only 35% is getting transferred to the rear at launch that is huge... while your aero is spilling smoke of the tires he's already inching forward.

But if hes got an autobox and you have a manual and know how to drive it... you should be handing him his ***.

[cavedudejeff]

engine modifications are pretty limited... our ecu's are notoriously overprotective of their craptacular factory tunes. going to stage 1 with BSR for example nets you a extra 35 horsies on the v6... but be prepared to drop about a grand on it.

exhaust, CAI's, etc don't do diddly squat with out a tune that allows for them since our ecu will adapt to the new tolerances pretty quickly and smack you back down to base horsie numbers.

[rogan]

The most popular modification on either of those cars by far is the BSR PPC. It's a little thing thats a little less than a grand, plugs into your diagnostic port, and remaps the 2.0T to 250 HP, 2.8T to 285 HP. GenuineSaab is the US dealer. There's another company that has a tune for the 2.0T called MP Performance that bumps the power up to 266 HP and is only 500 bucks...

BSR are popular for intakes (careful, as far as I know, the BSR and the Simota are the only intakes that work with the car. The K&N DOES NOT WORK, despite being advertised as such) and downpipes as well.

GenuineSaab is probably the best place to look for performance parts here in the US. They have a Quaife LSD that is supposed to help massivley with handling, as well as springs/damper kits etc. In short, there's a pretty good aftermarket following for the car, but it gets expensive fast.

-Rogan

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by JBob

As is often the case, unfortunately you've both just assumed that the OP is in the US...

Warwick, Rhode Island - now the OP could have changed that after your post but at least now we know which side of the pond he or she is on.

[cavedudejeff]

theres also Nordic, Maptun, and I have heard rumors that Jak Stoll has jumped on the SS bandwagon as well. Few others I can remeber.

The tried and tested ones so far are BSR, Nordic, and Maptun. I reserve a bit on the MPperformance tune since no well known members on this forum have really tried their products yet and they have been known to pump their products on this forum. So untill somebody known here on the forum like wtfwill takes the plunge on their stage 1 tune im sitting on the fence concerning them.

on the plus side... the 2.0T's LSD is a full $500 beans cheaper than the one for the six speed aero's... 06, 07, etc

Plus i regularly get 36 MPG on the highway on my 2.0 "little" t ... but Ive also had a few things done to my car. (ask me how I know the lsd is $500 cheaper on the 5 speed )

[LaserRed9-3Aero]

If your goal is to blow the doors off of his R32, I'd look into a used MazdaSpeed3. Much more comparable car, cheaper than a 9-3, and faster than his R32.

[rogan]

Definatley not cheaper than an '05 9-3.

EDIT: If all you want is to go fast, buy an '02 or '03 WRX for a little over 10k, get Cobb Tuning a Downpipe and new Turbo for like 2000 bucks, and you'll be walking all over an R32.

If you want to go pretty darn fast in an otherwise immensley superior car, buy the Saab.

Also, dunno if you like domestics... but check out the Pontiac GTO... you can get an '04 with 350 HP for less than 20k. Interior quality is in the same league as Saab.

I've seen lots of 2000 BMW M5's for less than 20k. Now that's a car.... 400 HP! Be prepared to spend though, it guzzles much worse than the GTO mentioned above, and repairs will be huge.

[EvanJ18]

you guys work quick. i appreciate all of this. ok so ive come to grips with the fact i wont be able to beat the r32, and im fine with that. but i will NEVER drive a mazda. and as far as a gto and m5 are concerned, ive thought of that but again, im tryin to save on gas so they arent the best option for me. i was also lookin into an 02 audi s4 but they are too difficult to find and repairs would be a *****, i also hear the twin turbo tends to lead to alotta oil leakin.

so basically the 9-3 aero has everything i have been lookin for and then some. ill take the hit on performance to be able to have a very nice car.

but another question, how are repair bills on a car like this (scheduled maintenance, tune-ups, etc.)?