SaabCentral Forums banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,841 Posts
Why would you say your 900 is unreliable?

have you had major problems with it or just the odd daft repair that happens?

I think my brothers Honda Accord is bullet proof! and i kid you not, he bought it from new and he drives it hard all the time and now it has 80K miles plus and not a single thing has gone wrong with it, I mean nothing!

When i walk around the scrap yards i noticed that the only reason the Hondas are in there is because there written off by the insurance companies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
275 Posts
how reliable is the 99 saab 93? hehe....i just got one about 3 weeks now...so far serpentine belt's got some issue with it (makeing noise, atleast i think is the belt...)..but this problem was there since the day i bought it...so..hehe

its got 70000km on it..so,,,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,596 Posts
Interesting link! It's worth clicking on the rating number and sorting the reviews from worst to best.

Personally, I think I agree with the folks who say SAABs are durable, but finicky and expensive to keep up. I've had my ng900 a year and a half, and have replaced the transmission, clutch cable, struts and mounts, and then some minor stuff like the flex pipe, rear brakes etc. And the previous owner was spending well over 2K a year in repairs. Sooo, a fairly expensive machine to keep up.

On the other hand, it's got 140K on it and is 11 or 12 years old :D . There aren't many 12 year old cars that a grown-up would drive around in cheerfully. And most of my friends think it's far newer than it is. Sure, Honda's are more reliable, and probably much cheaper to own (I really wanna check out the accord hybrid), but they are rusted out after a decade. I'll keep fixing my SAAB until it gets to the point where a repair can't make it a 100% functional car again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,583 Posts
As with JD Powers , Consumers reports, now this "reliability ratings" - for all three - what is the source of their data and how accurate is it...??
I do think that very few men keep any accurate,complete records on this - so no conclusion of value can be drawn...

"No one ever asked me".

CU subscribers do receive a survey, but, even when fully filled out, proves precious little - and is primarily for new cars anyway...
Nevertheless American and European cars do have quality problems,IMO, maybe they are not being improved fast enough ?

My '79 900 was a much more durable and reliable car than the '64 96, and the '96 is generally better than the '79...
But all this is from memory(most fallible), and only three cars are considered..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,348 Posts
MSN Autos' Reliability Ratings Come From Experts Determining vehicle reliability is an exacting task requiring professional skills, knowledge, and a wealth of information. That’s why MSN Autos partners with industry-leading Automotive Information Systems (AIS) for top-notch reliability data on all listed automobiles.


Founded in 1987, Automotive Information Systems (AIS), headquartered in St. Paul, MN, is the nation's largest and most comprehensive source of automotive repair knowledge regarding vehicle parts that break, model lines affected, and how best to make repairs. The company operates primarily as a technical support service for professional automotive technicians—service-station operators, independent garage owners, and even dealership mechanics. Subscribers to AIS may telephone the company's specialists for immediate assistance whenever stumped by any automotive diagnostic or repair problem.

Thirty-one automotive specialists make up the core staff at AIS. Each is a factory-trained ASE Certified Master Technician with years of professional field experience performing vehicle diagnostics and repairs. Combined, these specialists bring to the company 550 years of automotive repair experience.


Source


The 98 would be the same on that chart if not for the DI. The X under Engine is for te DI.
Guess the DI in 96 was the one to have, as they aparently don't go bad?!?!
:cheesy:


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,596 Posts
:nono; Ah, but look more closely mr Moderator :D

Earthworm makes an excellent point.

For the 96 anyway, those MSN experts had NOTHING to do with the rating (another example of a site looking authoratative, but it really isn't). The score was entirely based on owner self-reports, for some reason these Microsoft-contracted experts with their quarter million calls a year were silent. While it's worth reading through these, especially if you are looking to buy, they aren't really an unbiased sample. Mostly you'll get car geeks self-reporting, I suspect.

What we really need to do is get SAAB to release its data! They keep track of every repair they do, so it would tell us a lot about what fails, especially while under warranty.

Actually, I've got another thought - I think that the Consumer reports style might be a more accurate RELATIVE estimator. That's because they average over all cars, so you can tell if cars are better or worse than most other cars (even though the survey is based on self-reports). This seems better than the MSN site which just asks your opinion on a scale of 1-10. The only problem with the CR style is that "average" is a moving target. A car that's below average relability today is probably still far superior to a car made 15 years ago that rated above average. Nevertheless, if you're looking at cars within a couple years of each other it's probably one of the better ways of assessing relaiblilty. Durability is another issue since CR only goes back a decade or so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
ShadowWorks said:
Why would you say your 900 is unreliable?

have you had major problems with it or just the odd daft repair that happens?

.
yeah you could say that, i just replaced my engine myselft after only putting 800 miles on the thing! timming chain balancer broke cloging my oil sump......good thing i bought the car for $1200, when i sell it, ill still make profit.

the information seem pritty reliable on the site. my friend just toasted his engine in his 2000 1.8t passat with around 100k miiles, msn warns of the sludging problem with these engine and how his failed is exactly how msn auto said it might.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,596 Posts
yeah you could say that, i just replaced my engine myselft after only putting 800 miles on the thing! timming chain balancer broke cloging my oil sump......good thing i bought the car for $1200, when i sell it, ill still make profit.

:eek: I'd say that counts as "unreliable" and more. Just curious, how many miles on it, which engine (turbo or n.a.?), and any evidence of sludge. We have sludge issues with our cars too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
JMarkert said:
:eek: I'd say that counts as "unreliable" and more. Just curious, how many miles on it, which engine (turbo or n.a.?), and any evidence of sludge. We have sludge issues with our cars too.
132,000 miles, 900se (turbo). my engine was one of the cleanest 100k+ engines i have ever seen internally, there was no sign of sludging or anything like that. very clean except for the peaces of the spun bearing after the low oil pressure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,293 Posts
jonus079 said:
132,000 miles, 900se (turbo). my engine was one of the cleanest 100k+ engines i have ever seen internally, there was no sign of sludging or anything like that. very clean except for the peaces of the spun bearing after the low oil pressure.
Is that the new/used engine from the '98 where you swapped oil pumps because the timing cover was damaged... :eek: :eek: ? Or are you referring to the old engine now?
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top