9-3 vs 9-5

[mike saunders]

Originally Posted by falcon21

I wish I could! I have a NG900 so if I got a 9-5 it would be like having one of each. From the NG900 to the 9-3 there were some 1500 changes, any of which would make me say "woah!" when driving a 9-3? I know a 9-5 feels more responsive then my NG900 but I never drove a 9-3.

There are scant few worthwhile differences between the NG900 and the 9-3, despite the marketing stuff about the "1,500 changes." Many of those were incremental changes from the 94 model year up that fixed some of the horrible handling (re-worked control arm geometry) or improved braking (different hubs, rotors and calipers from mid-96+)

The MY 2000+ 9-3 heads flow better...but that benefit is offset by weaker pistons and a less robust oil pump.

The 9-5 is more comfortable than the 9-3, handles better stock to stock, has a large enough trunk (and a fold down rear seat) and if the oil is changed regularly, can last just as long.

[bbernard]

I drive a 2002 9-3, and a good friend has a 2004 9-5. Here's how I think they compare.

The 9-5 has room for three adults in the back (or two car seats and one adult), and it's a little more luxurious with the dual-zone HVAC.
The 9-3 is lighter and better on gas.
Stock 9-5s are more comfortable than stock 9-3s (more space, slightly softer springs, more sound insulation), although both are great long distance cars. The 9-3 handles a little better because of lower mass.

One big advantage to the 9-5 is that you can get one that's less than 10 years old. Post-2003 9-5s have a bunch of structural improvements (stronger front subframe) and post-2006 9-5s have better breathing (more horsepower). I think that the final PCV mod (to prevent oil sludging) came out around 2004. This has been retrofitted to many earlier cars, but it's good to know that your car was delivered with the fix.

Good luck.

[falcon21]

I've been watching the KBB values of Saabs lately and they have been dropping. It might be a good time to buy one soon. Thanks to everyone for all the info!

[BobSaabit]

Originally Posted by falcon21

I've been watching the KBB values of Saabs lately and they have been dropping. It might be a good time to buy one soon. Thanks to everyone for all the info!

Don't wait too long - if the bankruptcy settles with someone picking up the company in TrollHatten and resuming production then values will rise.

[falcon21]

I have my eye on a 1999 9-5 SE. Do all the SE's have the V6 engine or did they also come in I4 for that year?

[falcon21]

They come in both so I hope it is an I4. I found my answer in the 9-5 FAQ, I probably should have checked there first.

[falcon21]

I saw a 1999 9-5 (non SE, 2.3t, 123,000 miles) on Craigslist today. When I looked up the KBB value the suggested retail value is only $2,009 and the private party value in excelent condition is $1,209. Is this right? If I can talk the dealer down to the KBB value I would buy it instantly, given that there are no problems with it of course.

[falcon21]

A '97 900 S convertible popped up for sale in my area. Is the non turbo version as fun to drive as the turbo ones? It looks pretty clean and has the complete maintenance history. The miles are higher then what I'm looking for at 170,000 miles but for the right price I would consider it.

[00AeroWag]

We have both, my wife has the 9-3SE Vert which is a more comfortable cruiser (softer springs and higher sidewall width) my Aero is a lot faster and definitely more luxurious feeling (quieter, spaciousness) there is a stiffer ride but still very comfortable.

For a single guy you'd probably prefer the 9-3 (especially a viggen if you can find one). I can't imagine driving one without the turbo as it greatly enhances the driving experience, even the Aero feels lackadaisical when not in sport mode.

[RBatsch]

IMO a SAAB's not a SAAB without a turbo......"cause mama, that's where the fun is"!!! Go turbo.... better yet, don't rely on us, drive an NA and a turbo (don't need to be CVs) and judge for yourself! I think you'll agree, especially on the highway, the turbo is way more fun and safer. Keep in mind that the CV is heavier so the NA will be more of a dog...yup, a dog!

[EdT]

Originally Posted by RBatsch

IMO a SAAB's not a SAAB without a turbo......"cause mama, that's where the fun is"!!! Go turbo.... better yet, don't rely on us, drive an NA and a turbo (don't need to be CVs) and judge for yourself! I think you'll agree, especially on the highway, the turbo is way more fun and safer. Keep in mind that the CV is heavier so the NA will be more of a dog...yup, a dog!

The 2.3 in my 900S coupe is happy to run me down the 401 or QEW at speeds that would definitely make the OPP talk to me, if not quite suspend my licence at the side of the road (just like all those signs say).

The turbo would be safer....only if it slowed me down!

[BobSaabit]

Originally Posted by EdT

The 2.3 in my 900S coupe is happy to run me down the 401 or QEW at speeds that would definitely make the OPP talk to me, if not quite suspend my licence at the side of the road (just like all those signs say).

The turbo would be safer....only if it slowed me down!

Reminds me of a buddy of mine... bought a Harley because he said "I'm gonna kill myself on this Japanese pocket rocket".

[RBatsch]

Originally Posted by EdT

The 2.3 in my 900S coupe is happy to run me down the 401 or QEW at speeds that would definitely make the OPP talk to me, if not quite suspend my licence at the side of the road (just like all those signs say).

The turbo would be safer....only if it slowed me down!

Too funny EdT....sorry, but it would only get you in trouble a whole lot faster ; )

[colonel666]

My '02 9-5 Aero got 26ish MPG, was much more comfortable than my "new" 03 9-3t. Needless to say the Harmon Kardon stereo was wonderful compared to the Pioneer crap in the 9-3. 9-5 was @ 400 lb.s heavier and felt it. That said, the 9-3 drives like a true sports sedan, it handles almost as well as an '84 porsche 944 I used to own. Despite my minor complaints with the 9-3, I really do enjoy it and am glad I bought it when the 02 was totaled on super night (legally parked and hit by a drugged driver).

[falcon21]

Originally Posted by colonel666

My '02 9-5 Aero got 26ish MPG, was much more comfortable than my "new" 03 9-3t. Needless to say the Harmon Kardon stereo was wonderful compared to the Pioneer crap in the 9-3. 9-5 was @ 400 lb.s heavier and felt it. That said, the 9-3 drives like a true sports sedan, it handles almost as well as an '84 porsche 944 I used to own. Despite my minor complaints with the 9-3, I really do enjoy it and am glad I bought it when the 02 was totaled on super night (legally parked and hit by a drugged driver).

I'm not sure if I would want a 9-3 SS, the early models seem to have cheap interior parts. I do like the 9-5's audio system, the base models even have better sound then the 9-3's. Right now I'm thinking of either a 9-3 hatchback or a 9-5 wagon, or a convertible.

[seabench]

93 (base) dash speakers are cheap, but they are a 5 minute job to swap them out, so I wouldn't base a decision on that.

The leg room in the 95 is much better both for driver + pass. (wider), and rear seats (wider and longer). Can't really compare quiteness, though my 93 is great, the difference is noticeable when I get into other (cheaper) cars.

Definitely get turbo, I've driven a few na models since buying mine and they feel like you're driving with a trailer...

[falcon21]

Hopefully I will be looking at a convertible this weekend. Here's my question, is it safe to open the top in freezing temps?

['97 Saab SE Turbo]

If it's a 2000 or later, check the Owners Manual. If you don't have one, download it here:

http://www.extendedgmwarranty.com/ow...r_manuals.html

... Ron

[falcon21]

What should I look for on a convertible? It is a 1999 so that means the top is hydraulic right? Are there any known problems with the 9-3 that wasn't an issue with the NG900?

[BobSaabit]

Don't operate the 9-3 top below 23 degrees according to the manual. As long as temps are high enough, run at least two complete cycles and make sure it operates smoothly. Top problems seem to mostly be leaks from the cyls... look for hydraulic fluid dripping from in front of the rear wheels after a couple opens and closes and sitting for a bit.

The 9-3 is about the same as the NG900 on what to look for. Check the SID and the ACC for pixel loss.

The big item is a sludge check. It's best to drop the pan and take a peek. Second best is detailed synthetic oil change records. Next in line is nice stories about maintenance.


I can't think of anything other than that besides the usual stuff on an NG900. But, it's late for me tonight and I am no doubt missing some points :-)