SaabCentral Forums banner
1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,190 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
We have two Saabs both are 2009's Sport Combis. My wife has the 9 3 and I have the 9 5. We bought them when GM was tossing money at the dealers to get them off the lot. What we paid was so ridiculously low I dare not to mention, however, I do notice a significant difference between the two on rapid acceleration.
The 9 3 jumps like a rabbit and any speed with virtually no discernable lag. The 9 5, on the other hand, seems to take a full second to find the kick. My wife drove it to Va. last week and needed to get out of the way of another car trying to share a one lane merging ramp. She said it scared her and the car just sat there when she hit the pedal.
So I went out and tested it and yep, the lag seems dangerously long and even when it does kick, it is not nearly as responsive as the 9 3.
As we are both new to Saab I would appreciate some input on this.
Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,621 Posts
you may or may not have a problem, and i say that because you said the 9-3 kicks harder. I'm pretty sure that even the newer model 9-3's have a significantly smaller turbocharger than the 9-5.

for this reason, there is an increased amount of lag in spool up time. But, once the 9-5 turbo has generated full boost, it really should hit pretty hard. I hit full spool at about 2700-2800rpm, but when it does the thing is a rocket ship. it isn't a "city turbo", if you know what i mean.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,299 Posts
Are we talking AUto Transmission cars? Yes the 2.3 has a bigger turbo and a bit more lag but it sounds liek you are describing a transmission kick down issue there may be a problem with the software for th etrans. Does it have the same problem in sport mode?

NIce buys, I considered buying gone of those that they were giving away as well but am holding tight I think for the new 9-5
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,190 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
The transmission are each an automatic. I am not talking about the kick down, but an almost on second lag between a hard press on the pedal and turbo engagement and even then it's not nearly as responsive as the 9 3.
 
G

·
I found there is a big difference in engine feel with Sport mode turned on and off on the 9-5 Auto. When it's off, the engine almost feels a bit sluggish. But when you turn it on, downshifts are immediate and the engine feels much more responsive. Did you try the Sport button? :)

The Sport mode was actually something I was missing on my 9-3 2.0T and Aero 2.8T.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
831 Posts
I've got a 2005 9-5 Arc and my mom has a 2006 9-3 Aero, both with autos. The 9-3 is significantly quicker from about 45 to 60, and still quicker from there up. But the 9-5 seems to absolutely toast it off the line; the 9-3 will barely chirp the tires whereas I can leave a couple of stripes in the 9-5 with ESP off.

The thing absolutely PLANTS you from a standing start - though only in manual shift mode or sport mode. And this is despite being 30hp down and 300lb heavier than the 9-3! And sport mode definitely makes a massive difference, both to transmission behavior and to throttle response.

That said, the 06+ 9-5s have a different engine setup, so I'm not sure that this experience would compare to yours. And I don't know how the 9-5 Arc compares to the Aero in terms of around-town response.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,299 Posts
Are we talking AUto Transmission cars? Yes the 2.3 has a bigger turbo and a bit more lag but it sounds liek you are describing a transmission kick down issue there may be a problem with the software for th etrans. Does it have the same problem in sport mode?

NIce buys, I considered buying gone of those that they were giving away as well but am holding tight I think for the new 9-5
The transmission are each an automatic. I am not talking about the kick down, but an almost on second lag between a hard press on the pedal and turbo engagement and even then it's not nearly as responsive as the 9 3.
SPORT MODE?

I found there is a big difference in engine feel with Sport mode turned on and off on the 9-5 Auto. When it's off, the engine almost feels a bit sluggish. But when you turn it on, downshifts are immediate and the engine feels much more responsive. Did you try the Sport button? :)

The Sport mode was actually something I was missing on my 9-3 2.0T and Aero 2.8T.
I've got a 2005 9-5 Arc and my mom has a 2006 9-3 Aero, both with autos. The 9-3 is significantly quicker from about 45 to 60, and still quicker from there up. But the 9-5 seems to absolutely toast it off the line; the 9-3 will barely chirp the tires whereas I can leave a couple of stripes in the 9-5 with ESP off.

The thing absolutely PLANTS you from a standing start - though only in manual shift mode or sport mode. And this is despite being 30hp down and 300lb heavier than the 9-3! And sport mode definitely makes a massive difference, both to transmission behavior and to throttle response.

That said, the 06+ 9-5s have a different engine setup, so I'm not sure that this experience would compare to yours. And I don't know how the 9-5 Arc compares to the Aero in terms of around-town response.
SHOULD I SHOUT???

Did you try it in sport mode?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,754 Posts
I don't experience much noticeable Turbo lag in the AERO LP9, it pulls like a freight train with a very light load in all gears and it don't stop 'till the speed governor kicks in I imagine, so far I've not quite hit 155 or 153 whatever it is in the Sentronic LP9s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,196 Posts
What grade fuel are you running?

I notice the acceleration lag only when accelerating from a stop in hot weather. Hot weather here in Michigan being 85 degrees F and higher.

Running premium fuel, 93 octane or higher, diminishes the lag noticeably! I have never noticed turbo lag when accelerating from speed.

Plus, my 9-5 get sufficiently higher MPG on the 93 octane premium that it actually is a cost savings over running 89 octane mid-grade. I have tested several tanks of fuel over the years and always get the same results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,190 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 · (Edited)
No. I did not try the sport mode, but that's not the point. I don't want to be in Sport mode, I just wanna know if the variation between the two is normal. My 9 5 is clearly less responsive than the 9 3. I use 93 octane
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,190 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
And, by the way, you Areo guys with your V6's offing input on your experiences with your cars aren't really helping much here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,621 Posts
And, by the way, you Areo guys with your V6's offing input on your experiences with your cars aren't really helping much here.
well i have an aero, but it most definitely is not a v6 :lol:. i assumed since you had both combis they were both the same variant, or trim level. Even if they are both arc, the 9-5 is still going to have more hp than the 9-3, more torque as well.

the question is: Does that extra hp of the non-aero trim levels make up for the added 200-300lbs of the 9-5? the 9-3 is quick at first, but cannot come close to matching the 9-5 mid-range acceleration, at least for older models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,196 Posts
Other free suggestions....

A couple of other items which are free:
  1. I also noticed reduced turbo lag after installing the larger air inlet snorkel on my 2000 model. This larger diameter plastic inlet tube was made standard on all cars after after 2004, IIRC, but you may want to open the air filter cannister just to make sure there isn't a piece of paper or roadway debris blanking off a significant portion of your air filter. Being slightly starved for air might be the problem.
  2. While under the car look for paper or debris blanking off part of the A/C system condensor. The intercooler sits behind the condensor and higher temps for the intercooler will drop your performance too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,299 Posts
No. I did not try the sport mode, but that's not the point. I don't want to be in Sport mode, I just wanna know if the variation between the two is normal. My 9 5 is clearly less responsive than the 9 3. I use 93 octane
It is not "the Point" if you try sport mode and see significanlty reduced lag, then I will tell you that its how the software is telling your car to work, if it stays the same, I will tell you something is kooked ( and you donl;t care about that you just wnat to drive in normal mode)

You need to realize, as you said you are not used to Saabs or a turbo car in general, that the car needs to spool at the RIGHT time for you to get acceleration. If the trans is kicking down ( or not kicking down at the RIGHT time) then you will not spool and get turbo lag that is unacceptable and I woudl say have your trans checked.

You must also realize in the auto trans cars, when the trans is tryign to run in "standard" mode and is trying to move your car that is much bigger than the 9-3 and still save gas, so it will LIMIT your acceleration.

So I guess the short answer, and I asked so I would not need to type so much, is that you are seeing lag becasue you WANT to see lag, becasue you WANT to dirve in standard mode, because you care MORE about keeeping it in standard mode than about the turbo lag .. which you said your wife felt was "dangersous".

Additiaonlly I will need to check but in normal mode on the latest cars, I thinnk the trans does not downshift as mush as you slow down so potentially your wife was in a much higher gear and unless she floored it ( and not many wives would do that) it was not gong to shift down.

So once again, try Sport mode and report back the results ( pretty please) so we can more adequately tell you if the car is acting normally and you just need to learn to drive differntly ( no offense, I have trouble in normally aspirated cars since I have only daily driven 12 Saabs over 20 years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,299 Posts
A couple of other items which are free:
  1. I also noticed reduced turbo lag after installing the larger air inlet snorkel on my 2000 model. This larger diameter plastic inlet tube was made standard on all cars after after 2004, IIRC, but you may want to open the air filter cannister just to make sure there isn't a piece of paper or roadway debris blanking off a significant portion of your air filter. Being slightly starved for air might be the problem.
  2. While under the car look for paper or debris blanking off part of the A/C system condensor. The intercooler sits behind the condensor and higher temps for the intercooler will drop your performance too.
well i have an aero, but it most definitely is not a v6 :lol:. i assumed since you had both combis they were both the same variant, or trim level. Even if they are both arc, the 9-5 is still going to have more hp than the 9-3, more torque as well.

the question is: Does that extra hp of the non-aero trim levels make up for the added 200-300lbs of the 9-5? the 9-3 is quick at first, but cannot come close to matching the 9-5 mid-range acceleration, at least for older models.
He is confused ( as he said he is not a Saab guy ---yet) because the Aero was only a V6 9-3 in 09. His 09 9-5 Arc was the only 9-5 model available, ( Sedan or Combi) and had all the big everything TD04 turbo, snorkle, king cobra intake 260HP
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,243 Posts
well i have an aero, but it most definitely is not a v6 :lol:. i assumed since you had both combis they were both the same variant, or trim level. Even if they are both arc, the 9-5 is still going to have more hp than the 9-3, more torque as well.

the question is: Does that extra hp of the non-aero trim levels make up for the added 200-300lbs of the 9-5? the 9-3 is quick at first, but cannot come close to matching the 9-5 mid-range acceleration, at least for older models.
my aero beat on se models <02 9-3 and even the new 9-3s
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,754 Posts
And, by the way, you Areo guys with your V6's offing input on your experiences with your cars aren't really helping much here.
Apologies, thought this was the lounge;oops:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,190 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 · (Edited)
Ok fellas: Look, all I am saying (..give peace a chance......), oh no, another time; anyway, back to the original point. The 93 on forceful acceleration just soars up to speed. By forceful I mean solid acceleration but way short of kick down and any rpm level or any gear. The 95 seems slow by comparison.
You guys have given me some good input on turbos and my expectations, which were none. I will try the sport mode tomorrow. I just might be that in regular mode the car is not going to perform the way the light 93 does, although with a bigger motor and more hp to compensate for the added weight I don see why there should be some difference.
Right now I don't feel any further along than when I started, but then again how many of us have a 93 and a 95 in the garage. We feel so damn lucky to have come across these cars when we did, they are really great. After we bought them we came back and I sold my collection of old Mercedes on Craigs list and her Volvo S-80 and got enough money to pay for them both. My old 450SE was 39 years old and I kind of hated to see it go, but what the hell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,380 Posts
I have a 2004 9-5 Aero. Engine and performance-wise it may as well be identical to your 2009. It IS quite lethargic in normal Drive. Like I'll hit the gas and it kicks down quickly but it just sort of chugs and feels way underpowered for the car that it is. Hit the sport Sport button though and it kicks down and can snap necks. :eek:
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top