So, would you say Saabs are reliable?

I'm tired of American cars and before I go Japanese I thought I'd look into Saab. Looks good but what about general reliability. Will I be in the shop for little annoying malfunctions like electric windows that don't work or small rain leaks, etc.

Reply to
Just Asking
Loading thread data ...

The V-6 engines weren't designed by Saab, and use timing belts rather than chains, so you'd do well to not buy the 6. The 4 has better performance and tune-ability anyway.

I'd suggest looking at a 3 year old lease return, it gives you the best price to longevity point. A 4-cyl Saab with 200,000 miles isn't remarkably high mileage, so you'll get plenty of years out of it by buying it with only 3 years use.

Other things to watch for will depend on specific model, but in general, the parts cost a bit more than Japanese cars, but normal wear items are usually what you'll be replacing.

Reply to
Dave Hinz

The 4cyl in the 9-5 has some very serious PCV and oil pump related issues resulting in sludging and rather short engine life. Exacerbated by careless leasees and a rather stupid oil change interval recommendation on Saab's part. Go to

formatting link
and do a search on sludge and you will be enlightened. Also extremely short-lived direct ignition cassettes. The v6, which is based on a GM-Europe engine, has very few problems in comparison. Yes, it has a timing belt (just like almost every Japanese v6). The belt needs to be changed every 60K miles, and Saab pays for the first one. If you don't change the belt and it breaks, you will cry, as the engine will be severely damaged. No different than a Honda.

Also it could be argued that Saab has NEVER had an engine that was designed completely in-house from a clean sheet of paper. The 4cyl is a continuous developement of the engine bought in from Triumph for the 99. Not that there is anything interchangable, but still...

I will agree that a 3-4 year old well-maintained low mileage car is the way to go regardless of brand. Saabs in particular suffer truly horrendous initial depreciation. My 9-5 cost $39K new in 2000, I paid $9000 for it last month with only 41K miles on it, and it is near perfect. That's $7500 per year in depreciation - crazy! I will admit that I got a serious steal on it, but even at a more usual $12-13K they are very good value. And frankly, a good friend has an 03 Honda Accord v6 that has had it's share of issues fixed under warranty, so Japanese cars are not perfect either. The Saab is 2X the car that Honda is - though of course new it cost nearly 2x as much too!

Kevin Rhodes '00 9-5 Wagon SE v6t

Reply to
Kevin Rhodes

In general terms, the pecking order of quality goes from highest, Japanese, then American, then European. However, that's only a general overview of quality. Over the past twenty years, most will agree that while the order hasn't changed, the general quality levels have come closer and closer together.

As with any generalizations, there will always be counter-cases that go against those very generalizations. E,g, you might find specific cases of really crappy Hondas or Toyotas, and near flawless examples of Jaguars or VWs. My parents recently bought a Honda and were amazed to discover their brakes were shot after just 31k miles (just slightly out of warranty coverage).

If you're buying new, and you have problems you at least have the umbrella protection of the manufacturers warranty.

These days, car problems shouldn't be your problem. If your car does require service, good dealers will either have loaner cars readily available to you or better yet provide at-home pickup (picking up your car and dropping off a loaner), saving you the hassle of driving to the dealership. Ask about this when purchasing the car.

As for the comments about the depreciation and buying a Saab roughly 3 years old, this is good and generally on-target advice. But if you're like me, and love the appeal of the new 9-3, then new is the way to go. Plus if you get a Saab, you get the added benefit of standing apart from the crowd with all their lame Maximas and G35s (yawn). ;-)

- tex

Reply to
Tex

Having owned American cars, and Saabs, I'd put the Saab reliability as higher than the American cars I've owned or been exposed to.

Reply to
Dave Hinz

Reply to
Tex

My response would be no. Not in the same way that Japanese or American cars are.

Since SAAB is a "cult car" such an opinion is considered heresy.

If you talk to independent repair shop owners you will likely find that that European cars as a group have a higher frequency of repair than Japanese. You may also find that Toyota tends to be about the best of the Japanese. This is precisely what I have found by asking a couple people I know who own independent repair shops.

One of whom has had my 93 SAAB for almost a month trying to diagnose an ignition problem. They are Bosche specialists, so they're not unknowledgeable about such systems.

Reply to
Mac Townsend

Actually I'm glad Dave posted this, because it leads to a more basic question. Do you value anecdotal evidence or survey type evidence to predict vehicle reliability? IMHO, anecdotal evidence leads to conflicting opinions. As Dave pointed out, he's owned both American cars and Saabs. As have I. But I, on the other hand, found American cars to be more reliable on average. But I still _much_ prefer Saabs despite their quirky issues.

Which particular Saab are you interested in (year and model)? There are variances in expected reliability between models and years (series runs). Telling us, exactly what you're considering purchasing will help to solicit more relevant replies.

Keep in mind, the newer Saabs have newer technology. And as cool as new technology can be, it also is the least tested and consequently is less reliable. This goes for any manufacturer stuffing the latest and greatest tech gear into their cars.

- tex

p s- Err...sorry about my blank post. Hit send before it was ready.

Reply to
Tex

The same can be said of any car - if it's properly looked after it will go the distance. Saab's are no different from Japenese 'rice-burner' cars in that regard. If you mistreat a Saab you'll get bitten.

But if you look after a Saab properly (especially the older pre-GM ones built before the mid-90's), you'll get superb value for money because those cars were built to be reliable.

Craig.

Reply to
Craig's Saab C900 Site

"Newer" technology as opposed to GM's...which is still using pushrod V-6's.

Reply to
WitchDr

I got a 2002 9-3 convertible to replace an expensive to maintain Jaguar XJR. I owned Japanese (Infiniti) and European (BMW) before.

I my opinion, one thing is build-to-last, the other is new-car-trouble-ticket-statistics. The two don't necessarily correlate, and many reliability reports in my opinion confuse the two.

That said, the 9-3 scores high on my reliability card. It's never had anything go wrong except minor anoyances. Only brought it in for service (every 10k miles), and nothing else. It seems a sturdy car. Which is why I bought it. I am happy with it. Given the current standing of Saab within GM, I would be careful to buy a Saab new and cash these days... it seems questionable whether you'll still have a well-trained service network 10 years down the line, sadly. That, and ot the quality of the product, is what would make me careful. The product is very good, and very differentiated.

...pablo

Reply to
pablo

Depends on what Saab you're looking at. Classic or modern? Series?

Reply to
James Sweet

I'd have to agree, my first car (well truck) was a Ford, my parents and grandparents always had domestic cars until the Volvo came into the family and I still have quite a few friends and relatives with them. Overall my 17 year old Volvo and 16 year old Saab have spent a lot more time on the road, and racked up a lot more miles than any of the domestic cars ever did between things breaking. That's not to say Saab didn't make a few turds and that the big three have never made anything good, but by and large the quality of the american stuff hasn't impressed me.

Reply to
James Sweet

Well, it is not so much that cars are "reliable" - as they are (or were) "maintainable". That quality really knows no nationality in my opinion.

I have a post floating around this newsgroup with advise to people buying a SAAB for the first time. Basically - you should calculate what the total cost of ownership is including financing and insurance assuming a minimum $1,500 for required service annually based on condition and model line as sold to you *against the potential lifetime of the car to you*.

It will get more expensive visits to the shop the longer you own it - but it will curve at several points so it happens less often.

It is a broader calculation than it appears as regards ROI (Return on Investment) because you need to factor things like it costs more to finance - which most people need when they get into second owner off lease/on warrantee $15,000+ pricing models. But in that range - you should be looking at something with a solid dealer issued extended warrantee, which makes it more predictable to operate for the first 3 or so years.

On the flip side - you don't want your car to be making statements about your lifestyle that you would not otherwise want assumed by your co-workers and neighbours. This is the jeopardy of the sub $10,000 car. It could sux - your boss gets wind of your questionable judgement come promotion time and the increasingly messy oil trail leads directly to your slip on your otherwise pristine home street.

With the exception of the Chanel cocktail dress of SAAB's, the 1993 through 1997 9000T series black ones, which I really think are iconic and relatively timeless style wise if left basically stock - older SAAB's benefit greatly, immensely in fact, from considered 'rally sport' type uprates. Newer ones seem to like better wheels and bigger tailpipe openings.

Older ones can be had very cheaply and made into real and very stylish street rods if that floats your boat. They are basically maintainable with the aid of most any respectable wreckers yard if you aren't really going for the heavy kit under the hood.

Newer ones have plug and play heavy stuff for under the hood that will see you smoking pretty much anything sort of a full kit M3 or hugely modified 'Toyondassan' of equal size and doors.

All of this goes to something SAAB (all major manufactors really) started loosing through the 90's.

They are sort of abandoning the premise that a more expensive mid-grade automobile would be maintained into the four and five hundred thousand kilometre range and often well beyond by families (mostly European) that would normally only buy 4 or 5 cars over a lifetime.

The premise is very different from the North American model where automobiles were overall less expensive to buy and run relative to earning power, where families would normally purchase new (well - extend financing to cover) every 3-5 years and whom could often rack up two hundred thousand kilometres in that time period. Hell, when I was kid, people started wondering if we were saving up for something if Dad didn't pick up a new car every other year.

Where repairs and replacements were smaller, often openable, systems on European cars - American cars saw you replacing whole assemblies with inexpensive crate parts from the dealer. Sometimes whole engines and transmissions as it was cheaper to buy new ones than to repair them.

Consider the McPherson strut as applied to most cars and all non-C900 SAAB's.

It is not the adjustable racing unit it is named for - it is a complete component that is largely non-repairable and usually requires a specified model only application. It is hugely expensive to replace considering it is a wear part. In application - it limits your ability to make adjustments to the alignment of the car. It is used on pretty much every other car brand on the road and is more or less equally model specific for all brands.

On the other hand - the old C900 had double a-arms which allowed you to apply a wide variety of relatively better and worse shocks by price and you had a great deal of latitude regarding alignment. People claim the strut is a better performer on the road over the double a-arm. I've driven both properly set-up and would say that is not true.

They are in fact mostly the same, except that the C900 forward suspension assembly is much more expensive overall to build as a manufacturer - but much less expensive to maintain and uprate as the owner.

Hence, you now have to buy whole control arm assemblies when all you have worn out is a ball joint. In fact - it is much cheaper to buy a whole new steering rack than to repair the one the car came with. And that is the same for any car brand - assuming you can find anyone still working who has ever done it.

As regards current SAAB models.

They are as reliable as pretty much anything else out there from any of the majors with equivalent kinds of performance and options. OEM parts are expensive like everyone else's, but they are easy to replace and hold up surprising well most of the time. They are not "maintainable" in the sense that you can rarely get at the worn 25 cent part within the item to fix just it.

They are however less expensive labour wise because it doesn't take as long for a pro tech to pop out a strut assembly and put a new one it as it does to pull apart the front assembly, apply a front shock, reassemble the a-arm and realign the wheel for the corrections (maintenance) made as the shock wore out.

Think of it all as burn rate. Where you spend less money monthly over a longer time or you spend more money in shorter bursts.

In my opinion, where SAAB under GM screwed the pooch was in not lowering the overall price of replacement parts to account for the less expensive engineering involved - instead - opting to increase margins at the parts counter.

This was/is exacerbated by the fact that there is not a real aftermarket for SAAB replacement parts and that that there is - is very high performance kit that is faster/stiffer than stock - but often not as long wearing.

Personally - I found a 1993 Aero turbo that needed someone to stop applying parts to it and figure out what was actually going wrong and fix it. As it turned out - I fixed a 10 cent connector and I haven't seen a TCS/O2/Fuel Air or ABS light since. I have also fixed and regained cruise control and am on the way to returning it to full 225hp mode shortly.

There is still much left to do - clutch, annoying aftermarket radio, ongoing wear stuff. But I bought it for not a lot and don't have a monthly for a car that should last me about 5 more years at least - at which point I may just restore her outright and get another 5 years.

It is not always so with used SAAB's - there are real lemons out there. But no more so than any other manufacturer if you ask me.

Reply to
Dexter J

Mac, just out of curiosity, what was the eventual solution to your ignition problem?

Reply to
Jef Gearhart

Reliability has more to do with production and quality control than design. Typically, rust starts at paint and treatment voids. Moisture enters at panel gaps. Improper assembly leads to rattles and wear. This also suggests that there might be good and bad model vintage. I remember that British Leyland cars were particular bad in strike years.

Reply to
Johannes

This is an *extremely* poignant statement. These two measurements are often mistaken, misused and misinterpreted as being synonymous, and they really are not. Personally, I would rather have a car with a larger number of infantile, niggling issues, but that was designed to go the long haul, than the inverse.

YMMV greatly...

-Fred W

Reply to
Malt_Hound

Yes!! I like that phrase. A maintainable car. Vs. a disposable one. SAABs (and certain other quality designed cars) were, and continue in their advanced years, to be maintainable.

-Fred W

Reply to
Malt_Hound

So far, none. After replacing *all* the ignition electronics the techs have given up. A guy is due back from vacation Monday who has the most experience with Bosche systems. Perhaps he'll find it.

Reply to
Mac Townsend

I have owned Fords, Volvos and Saabs. The Fords Ihad lived up to their reputation - Found on Road Dead, Fail On Race Day etc. On this basis I would say the Classic Saab 900 is better in terms of reliability than Fords. The 245 Volvo just won't die - It is so old I not longer need emissions tests, but it has passed every one with room to spare anyway. I own an NG 900 and it had many electrical problems. The Classic 900s I owned have all gone over 200,000 miles without any problems. I seriously question if the NG 900 will make 150,000 miles.

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.