Joined
·
296 Posts
I drove a 95 900 SE V6 Automatic for 10 years. I don't know how many people told me that I bought a Saab with the wrong engine. I had trouble with timing belts and oil leaks, but otherwise the engine was very reliable, and surprisingly economic. One thing in particular that I liked was how quickly it produced warm air for the heating system. I've never had any car that came remotely close to that.
So, after the V6 reached almost 150k miles, I felt it was time to upgrade to a newer model. The 9-3 SE had the larger wheels, better brakes, better stereo, better seats, side airbags, and a variety of other desirable features - including "THE" engine, the "better choice" (supposedly).
When I bought the 2000 9-3 SE, I was impressed by the additional torque. But coming from a V6, the engine sound was a bit disappointing. No big deal. Then I noticed it doesn't heat nearly as fast, and takes significantly more gas than the V6. This could be related to the "fun factor" with the additional power.
What I didn't expect is a whole slew of new potential issues with this engine: PCV upgrades, oil sludge, turbo failures,... requiring expensive measures like oil pan drop, frequent oil changes, etc. I thought these were THE engines, the ones that are reliable, that don't cause trouble like the V6.
Looking back, I think that V6 wasn't so bad after all. If the timing belt is properly taken care of, the main issue that remains are the oil leaks. I don't know, if there is a secret trick to stop those once and for all. But I would venture to say that fixing those leaks has not cost me more than the frequent oil changes, and the oil pan drop will add to the 9-3s cost of ownership.
So, why were people so hard on the V6 engine?
So, after the V6 reached almost 150k miles, I felt it was time to upgrade to a newer model. The 9-3 SE had the larger wheels, better brakes, better stereo, better seats, side airbags, and a variety of other desirable features - including "THE" engine, the "better choice" (supposedly).
When I bought the 2000 9-3 SE, I was impressed by the additional torque. But coming from a V6, the engine sound was a bit disappointing. No big deal. Then I noticed it doesn't heat nearly as fast, and takes significantly more gas than the V6. This could be related to the "fun factor" with the additional power.
What I didn't expect is a whole slew of new potential issues with this engine: PCV upgrades, oil sludge, turbo failures,... requiring expensive measures like oil pan drop, frequent oil changes, etc. I thought these were THE engines, the ones that are reliable, that don't cause trouble like the V6.
Looking back, I think that V6 wasn't so bad after all. If the timing belt is properly taken care of, the main issue that remains are the oil leaks. I don't know, if there is a secret trick to stop those once and for all. But I would venture to say that fixing those leaks has not cost me more than the frequent oil changes, and the oil pan drop will add to the 9-3s cost of ownership.
So, why were people so hard on the V6 engine?