1998 GM 900 vs. C900

I'm back to SAAB after 2 years away driving Japanese cars.. can't say I miss them. I had an '84 & '89 900 & I'm finally beyond the Classic 900.

The transmission feel, suspension, & interior noise I think are all WAY better in the NG900. Having a remote and Alarm system is taking some getting used to but I think this is an improvement. I'm really missing the ability to open the back hatch using a latch where it should be like the C900's (and our 02 Subaru!)

Is there supposed to be a piece of plywood under the carpet in the trunk!!?? The C900's had a wonderful trunk floor and I'm wondering if my

900 is not quite all there.

It looks like the oil filter position is fixed in the '98. The C900 with that odd angle was always a mess.

I'm not convinced that I miss the curved windshield! The wipers left this huge unswept area, that is so thankfully gone. I used to joke that the engineers picked the windshield and then said Oh-NO! we forgot that have to get wipers to work on here!

And from 84 to 89 SAAB messed up the dome light, I was glad to see that the '98 has this very much improved with two dome lights and the back one recessed into the ceiling. This is great for kids.

Feels good to be back,

-D

Reply to
meld_b
Loading thread data ...

meld_b said on 11/28/2003 10:59 PM:

I hope they would have made SOME improvements in 9 years!

cm

Reply to
cm

I like the location of the oil filter in the Classic - no need to get under the car for the filter.

Just my opinion - I will take the much better visibility of the curved windshield, even if the wiper does not clear the lower righthand corner. The NG900 has the big, wide front pillars - wide enough to block my view a car coming from the front/side. I had to play "bobble head" to make sure there was no oncoming car in this blind spot. By the way, other cars like the Camry, Accord, and Altima all have this large blind spot as well, so it is not just Saab.

Reply to
ma_twain

Some of us don't think they are improvements - but then that is only our opinion. Now, the 740 was an improvement over the 240.

Reply to
ma_twain

I realized after I wrote about improvments that someone might not think they were better... I know I'm supposed to like wishbones over struts...but when going over bumps - I'll take the struts.

In order to get my C900 to shift I put RedLine MTL in the transmission. Without that I think it was almost unshiftable when cold.

Are you talking Volvo?!!???

-D

Reply to
meld_b

Am I guessing your C900 was an automatic? All of mine were/are manuals and there is no need for special lubricants to get them to shift. I will agree that a C900 with an automatic is not that great, but try one with a manual :-)

Yes - I am talk> I realized after I wrote about improvments that someone might not think

Reply to
ma_twain

No - it was a manual. I had an '84 900 that with the 8valve engine and me being young I wasn't good to the transmission (rev to 6K & shift!) so I had to buy a syncro and a fork at 90K miles or so. So when I got my '89 900 I listened to advice that was around and put MTL in the tranny from the beginning. The shifting was MUCH smoother. I think about 2 sec in a C900 would reaffirm my opinions...Yes maybe the C900 was more FUN, but then again so was the Sonnett I got to drive once, with that wonderful freewheeling clutch! Actually, I think you can't beat the feel of a Honda gearbox.

Wow from Sonnetts to Volvo's we've strayed a bit from the Subject huh!

-D

ma_twa> Am I guessing your C900 was an automatic? All of mine were/are manuals

Reply to
meld_b

Reply to
ma_twain

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.