SaabCentral Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,774 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Im a 900 Classic guy and drive an 89 spg but don't know much about the 92X, so I have some questions. A friend of mine has his eye on one and asked If I could find out any info on them if I could, so here it goes.
1- How reliable are they and are parts expensive or about the same as any saab?
2- What are the pro's and con's, known things to look out for?
3-Are they realy a saab or more a subaroooo?
4-Are they a good car for a small family?

The car is a 2005 aero and is supposed to have a 2.5 twin turbo in it.

Thanks for any help on this,
Dennis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,774 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
The car may be a 1995, again forgive me here, I clearly don't know anything about the 92X
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
429 Posts
More of a Subaru, IMO.

They started making them in 2005 and ended pretty much the same year (could be some 2006s, not too sure).

If the car is an Aero, it will have the 2.0L turbocharged Subaru motor with about 240hp (give or take).


The car itself was OK. I didn't like it much, but the winter weather was a breeze with the AWD system.

The Linear models are available with the 2.5L Subaru 4 cylinder motor. These have roughly 170hp.

I'm not an expert, but we did own the car for 3 years and 50k miles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,774 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
What was it that you didn't like about the car?

Anybody else?

How reliable are they, both motors or car in general?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
very reliable

spg1 said:
What was it that you didn't like about the car?

Anybody else?

How reliable are they, both motors or car in general?
I have had a 2005 9-2X Aero (5-speed) for nearly 4 years. It feels nothing like either of the other Saabs I've had (1986 900S, and a 2nd-generation 9000, can't recall the year). But I like this car better than either of those. Fast (probably faster than any stock equipped Swedish-made Saab), fun to drive, great in the winter, comfortable for long trips, good heating/AC. It's been VERY reliable, with one exception: The original tires were extremely noisy at all speeds. Lots of people complained about this issue. Saab replaced mine with a different brand at no charge; the problem went away.

The other problems I have had were trivial: The beeper for the keyless entry system was replaced under warranty. The paint peeled off the hood's Saab badge (replaced under warranty). The hooks attaching the front floor mats to the floor are cheaply made (replaced, but the replacements are still crummy). The latch for the hatchback needs repair (going in next week).

Besides the floor mats, the only things I don't like are the gas mileage (20 mpd in the city, 25 on the road and you need premium fuel), the poor radio sound, and the easily stained/hard-to-clean seat fabric. There isn't much torque until above 2000 rpm, although I hear that the 2006 engine is much better than the 2005. The Linear doesn't have the gas mileage problem and it has reasonable torque at low rpm's (although much less than the Aero).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,583 Posts
I'd say that the Subaru's relieability is average ,for a Japanese vehicle, but not at the Toyota and Honda level.

The WRX/9-2 is based on an inexpensive platform, explaning its cheapness in some areas..
The 9-2 is just another failed attempt in GM 's badge engineering....and they used to be so good at it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
earthworm said:
I'd say that the Subaru's relieability is average ,for a Japanese vehicle, but not at the Toyota and Honda level.

The WRX/9-2 is based on an inexpensive platform, explaning its cheapness in some areas..
The 9-2 is just another failed attempt in GM 's badge engineering....and they used to be so good at it...
Consumer Reports would disagree with you--their ratings show excellent reliability for the WRX's (and by extension for the 9-2x's that have 99% of the same parts and were built on the same production lines as the WRX's). Indisputably, all of the three Japanese brands you mention have much better reliability histories than Saab has ever had. In the 4/08 issue, Subaru WRX reliabilities for 2005 and 2006 are described as better than average or much better than average. In comparison, the reliability records of the "real Saabs" are much worse, particularly the 2005 9-3.

Yes, the 9-2x is cheap in some areas (e.g., thin sheet metal, crappy radio, seat design and fabric), and yes it isn't really a Saab--but its reliability is not an issue. A greater proportion of owners of "real Saabs" will have Saab stories.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,252 Posts
look at saab92x.com for your info, youll get much better results. but yes the saabaru is pretty solid and reliable. its kinda like the 9-5 its been here for a good 4-5 years and has all the bugs out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
my family had a subaru ipreza outback wagon... which is basically the same thing as the Saabaru 9-2X... and it was bulletproof. It wasnt untill some jerk plowed into the rear end of it that it started to have issues, but that was after 189K miles on the clock. Apart from regular maintanence the car never gave any problems. And anyone that says that subaru is behind the other big two japanese car makers in reliability is completely bonkers... there is a plethora of sources that show that Subaru is on par if not better than Toyota and Honda in that dept.

I thought about buying a 9-2x Aero in 05 but went with the 9-3 and have been regretting it ever since just becasue my current 9-3 really lives up to its SAAB logo... Swedish Automobile : Always Broken.

Look at it this way... its a subaru that has much more sound dampening than the typical "hear every dust particle that hits the undercarrige" subaru.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,252 Posts
cavedudejeff said:
my family had a subaru ipreza outback wagon... which is basically the same thing as the Saabaru 9-2X... and it was bulletproof. It wasnt untill some jerk plowed into the rear end of it that it started to have issues, but that was after 189K miles on the clock. Apart from regular maintanence the car never gave any problems. And anyone that says that subaru is behind the other big two japanese car makers in reliability is completely bonkers... there is a plethora of sources that show that Subaru is on par if not better than Toyota and Honda in that dept.

I thought about buying a 9-2x Aero in 05 but went with the 9-3 and have been regretting it ever since just becasue my current 9-3 really lives up to its SAAB logo... Swedish Automobile : Always Broken.

Look at it this way... its a subaru that has much more sound dampening than the typical "hear every dust particle that hits the undercarrige" subaru.
one thing i have learned as i was also to get a 9-2x is that the interior is mucho cheap and the paint on subarus is very cheap and thin.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
I have a Subaru outback with the 3.0 six engine. It has 135K on it, with NO problems, origional everything. It is my ninth subaru. The other subarus before this one have been just as reliable. The thing is an unstoppable tank in the snow and ice. I usuaully trade/sell when they get north of 200K on them.

I do have to say though, the steering wheel on a subaru feels like it is connected to the car with a soft rubber joint, the seats are very uncomfortable and the interior is a little on the cheap side. A saab it is not, especially the 92x, a poor attempt at best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,774 Posts
My family has owned Subarus for many years now (currently two Outbacks, one Impreza and a Forester). Pretty reliable except for the ****ing head gasket problems which are very expensive. It actually cost me less to keep my 9-5 running then it cost my mom for her Forester. A lot of stuff/service is dealer-only and quite expensive.

Tough to beat in bad weather and amazing with a manual gearbox.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,597 Posts
Here is my opinion and I have owned 4 Saab's now and 6 Subbie's. The 9-2x is super reliable like the Subbie's the only difference in two are the front end sheet metal, sound deadening and few small features. Everything is the same. The paint isn't the best neither as is the interior but this wasn't a super expensive car. The only issue I had with any of my older ones was the head gaskets. But things have changed since then. Also the AWD kicks butt. It isn't meant to be a 9-5 or 9-3 and that is what people are forgetting. They did super from some turbo lag on the 05' 2.0t but it is easy to fix. Good luck
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,637 Posts
Big problem is finding one. Especially if you want "the one to want" and that is alleged to be the 2006 Aero 5 speed.

05 Aero was the 2.0 motor while the 06 Aero was the 2.5 motor ... same horsepower so go figure?

Now contrast and compare ..

in 1966 there were 330,000 Corvairs made. :) I liked em'

in 2006 there were like 235 9-2 Aero 5 speeds imported to the US.

A few more went to Canada. Seems to be more of them up north but few here in New Jersey and I almost gave up my search. Those that come on the market are IMHO a lot of $$$ for what you get. To illustrate that, my new XWD was only about $5,000 more than an 06 with about 40,000 miles.

If I can find one cheap ... to replace my aging but still serviceable 98 XC Volvo, I'll grab it .... even a Linear. But it's like Unicorn hunting. I wanted the 06/2.5 just seems like a turbo with a larger engine = less strain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,774 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Funny thing, having so many different motors, the 2.0, 2.5 and 2.3. I just worked on a 2006 93 with a 2.0 and my question is, are these all saab motors and transmissions, or are they from different companies? The 2.0 has the oil filter on top of the motor under a cap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,637 Posts
I believe, and again I'll stand corrected by the "elders" (hey, I'm past 60 but with all this new fancy stuff, I'm way behind the power curve), the 9-2 motors are from the Fuji Heavy Industries line up.

I think the whole car is a "pig with lipstick" .... :cheesy: Kidding ..to a point. My understanding is that they did a lot of suspension tweaking to make it handle better, sound proofing a bit of interior and IMHO better looking sheet metal. But as the family Saab mech said ... the only place it says Saab on the car is on the badges. Even the motor.

The marketing was right and it was a shame that Saab fell behind and IMO, it may well have been the thing that killed Saab back then.

We had Saabs for quite some time but as a ski fanatic (yes in NJ we exist) and with a growing family we needed an AWD or 4X ... not wanted but needed. I was an instructor and in racing and spent like in excess of 60 "on snow" days a year. And I know FWD is good but AWD or 4X is way better when the going gets rough. In 1998 Saab had nothing to offer. Wife loved them and would never part with her 95 base .. but for the family the XC with the ski box did the job and for rough days the Toyota T-100 was excellent. Don't like the new huge Tundra but the early T-100 (same as first Tundra), was a real winner.

No, I think the 9-2 is pure Japanese. How much is "pure" today. My XC was made in Belgium and one of our "classic" 900's (the 1989?), was made in Finland. My wife is Norwegian and the Swede's are "The Evil Empire" ... but she got around that will pretty much only drive a Saab. :roll:

2005 Linear (non-turbo) is a 2.5 engine (165 hp) while the 2005 Aero (turbo @ 227hp) is a 2.0 ........... 2006 sees the Linear (173 hp) and Aero (230 hp), are both 2.5's ... all are called "boxer" engines as flat fours. Steering rack is quick on the Aero from the WRX.

Wiki has a nice and pretty accurate breakdown ..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
I have a Saab 9-3 Turbo. It developed an overheating problem (intermittent = thermostat). I tried the local parts stores for a thermostat (3) and Nobody had a x-ref listing for Saab. (?).
So late last night, I ordered one from the internet. This morning, I find out I have a 9-3 Turbo. I thought it was a 9-2! (Late night brain fart)
Question: Does the 9-3 with the 2.0 turbo take the same thermostat as a 9-2 (turbo. I'm not sure if it was for the Aero or not).
As it was shipped this morning, and is due the 20th, It would be nice if I could use it. Or do I need to go back to Rock Auto?
Any help here would be appreciated.
Thanx in advance.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top