SaabCentral Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
ScoopSS said:
2004 Saab 9-3 Arc (6-Speed Man.) 7.2 15.40 7.2 = 0-60
15.4 = quarter mile
Where did you get this reference? C&D has the Vector at 0-60 in 7.3 and R&T has the Vector at 60 in 7.7 secs. I am not being confrontational, i just want another reliable source for these statistics b/c of the vast difference in all the mags.:) also if the arc is faster than the Aero then that might be the better pick for me. I also have read in Motor Trend that the Sentronic Aero hit 60 in 6.9secs. Is the Auto faster???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,228 Posts
Saabless said:
Where did you get this reference? C&D has the Vector at 0-60 in 7.3 and R&T has the Vector at 60 in 7.7 secs. I am not being confrontational, i just want another reliable source for these statistics b/c of the vast difference in all the mags.:) also if the arc is faster than the Aero then that might be the better pick for me. I also have read in Motor Trend that the Sentronic Aero hit 60 in 6.9secs. Is the Auto faster???
0-60 numbers vary depend on so many things that you really need to take an aggregate average to get an idea of what the car can do. What I don't get is that a .4 difference in time is enough to say that an Arc is better? Huh? Are you buying a car specifically for speed? The 9-3 is not for you then. What about the things that an Aero offers than an Arc does not?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
867 Posts
surely, those figures are too fast ? on the saab website the vector sport 175 bhp is rated at 8.0 secs (0-60), yet on that speedcomp page you have 7.3 secs. In fact, from memory the 9-3ss aero is rated at 7.3 secs (0-60) in the saab brochure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
JNGold said:
0-60 numbers vary depend on so many things that you really need to take an aggregate average to get an idea of what the car can do. What I don't get is that a .4 difference in time is enough to say that an Arc is better? Huh? Are you buying a car specifically for speed? The 9-3 is not for you then. What about the things that an Aero offers than an Arc does not?
No not at all. But if the premium of purchasing the aero for the larger output engine is significantly higher than for say an Arc then I would not be able to ignore the Arc in my choice. As for the speed thing, I don't base my purchase solely on speed. I do want, however, since I will be spending close to 40 grand on a car, the most performance possible. I think that the SAAB IS for me because of the fact that unlike the ubiquitous BMW's and Benzes, it stands out. I am specifically looking for a SAAB. I know there are faster cars out there but the SAAB is the one I have my heart set on. I was just trying to justify the difference between ARC and AERO.

That being said, however, I don't want just a nice looking car, if I am spending my hard earned money on a "High Performance" automobile like the SAAB ads state, then dammit, I want performance. I fell into the good-looker/can't dance thing before, that is why I drive a Jetta IV GLS and now want a SAAB. My old 900 SE was not the fastest to 60 but it hit 150 whenever i needed it. I just want a car that will be able to enjoy some great acceleration when warranted or when so desired.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
Saabless said:
No not at all. But if the premium of purchasing the aero for the larger output engine is significantly higher than for say an Arc then I would not be able to ignore the Arc in my choice. As for the speed thing, I don't base my purchase solely on speed.
If you're seriously researching the cars, I'm sure you realize that the Arc and the Aero have identical engine output.

There are some who say that the Aeros get the pick of the engine blocks making them more resilient to modding. But as for the Aero you're really paying for: sport kit, sport suspension, sport seats, sport exhaust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
PatrickLee said:
If you're seriously researching the cars, I'm sure you realize that the Arc and the Aero have identical engine output.

There are some who say that the Aeros get the pick of the engine blocks making them more resilient to modding. But as for the Aero you're really paying for: sport kit, sport suspension, sport seats, sport exhaust.
Yes I know this. I was referring to the premium for the larger engine (ARC or AERO) I didn't even consider the ARC. I guess I should've wrote that the premium you pay for the AERO might not be warranted b/c of the better performance of the ARC in the Acceleration department(according to the first post in this thread) I know the AERO has a much tauter suspension though and better appearance package.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,228 Posts
Saabless,

The best thing that anyone can tell you at this point is to go and test drive the cars. Sit in each (Linear, Arc, Aero) and if need be take each through it's t-drive paces.

Before my purchase, I was tossing around the idea of Arc/Vector for awhile. My first t-drive was a linear (that's all the dealer had for a t-drive at the time) Once my dealer got both an Arc and Vector, all it took was one seating in each to know the Vector was worth the premium.

Your mileage may vary (no pun intended).

Good luck in whatever you decide.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
JNGold said:
Saabless,

The best thing that anyone can tell you at this point is to go and test drive the cars. Sit in each (Linear, Arc, Aero) and if need be take each through it's t-drive paces.

Before my purchase, I was tossing around the idea of Arc/Vector for awhile. My first t-drive was a linear (that's all the dealer had for a t-drive at the time) Once my dealer got both an Arc and Vector, all it took was one seating in each to know the Vector was worth the premium.

Your mileage may vary (no pun intended).

Good luck in whatever you decide.
Thanks I actually plan on that this week.

I'll let you guys know

Joe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
635 Posts
smurkenstein said:
surely, those figures are too fast ? on the saab website the vector sport 175 bhp is rated at 8.0 secs (0-60), yet on that speedcomp page you have 7.3 secs. In fact, from memory the 9-3ss aero is rated at 7.3 secs (0-60) in the saab brochure.
that site is running the american vector...(which has the aero engine...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,160 Posts
saabless - you can always inquire into a slightly used '03 93SS Arc that goes slightly faster than the average car, and has a brand new motor installed in it (at 47000 miles) ...

thinking about posting it up on cars.com once I get off my dead rearend and snap a few photos.

[/end shameless plug]


(edited for content)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
mbodo said:
saabless - you can always inquire into a slightly used '03 93SS Arc that goes slightly faster than the average car, and has a brand new motor installed in it (at 47000 miles) ...

thinking about posting it up on cars.com once I get off my dead rearend and snap a few photos.

[/end shameless plug]


(edited for content)
LOL, I actually am looking for brand new or CPO for the warranty. Thanks though, I could've flew down to diego and drive the car up to the bay. BTW whut happened to your motor that you had to replace it at 47K???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Saabless said:
I also have read in Motor Trend that the Sentronic Aero hit 60 in 6.9secs. Is the Auto faster???
The Aero tested must have had an "enhanced" ECM. Hirsch quotes the 0-100km/h time as 6.6s for the 9-3 Aero "auto" when it has their 252HP upgrades fitted. Parts include software ECM upgrade, intercooler and sports exhaust. The 230HP upgrade is quoted at 7.1s for 0-100km/h and is only a software ECM upgrade.

NB: 100km/h = 62mph
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top