Cost of repair Audi BMW Saab...(crossposting)

Now you are none the wiser, you will see there are more saabies out here. Probably because SAAB being a smaller volumes manufacturer has more of cult following (and GM will screw this up soon).

Where will you do the servicing?

If at a dealer of local mechanic spend your time finding out about the quality of service you will get from them. (it will not be the same everywhere although it should be). My point being it does not (should not?) matter if one dealer/maker charges 100 USD more than another as long as you get what you pay for!

Repairs, concentrate your mind on which exact cars from each make you would like and then ask the questions. SAAB faults for example will affect one model of a particular year(s) not every car (unless it uses the v6 GM engine).

Regards Charles

9000 CSE 2.0 LPT 1997
Reply to
Charles Christacopoulos
Loading thread data ...

Of course so do BMWs, at least all the ones sold in the USA.

Matt O.

Reply to
Matt O'Toole

Not really the petrol, it was only high sulfer content fuel which was not used in all geographical areas. This also only applied to those engines with a nikasil bore treatment of aluminum engine blocks. This means it only applied to the 3.0 and 4.0 liter V8 engines in the US and to certain aluminum block 6 cylinder engines in the european market. No 6 cylinders in the US market ever had the problem. Here is a good synopsis of the issue:

formatting link

No more so than any other car's odometer. This is a non-issue IMO.

-Fred

Reply to
Fred W.

Why not call local mechanics (specialists in the brands, both dealer and non-dealer) to get price estimates for the scheduled maintenance intervals?

Reply to
Timothy J. Lee

Good start, but some cars (current Saabs for instance) have that as a free (well, included in the purchase price) service. Also, the planned service may be more comprehensive on one than anotther.

Bottom line - they're all fine cars, with enthusiastic owners. Decide what you want to spend, and then drive one of each at that price point. Buy the one you like the best.

Dave Hinz

Reply to
Dave Hinz

I think it is precisely BMW that produce the most efficient petrol engines available, given similar power figures. Turbos could arguably be driven more efficiently at low speeds, but then again, this is not so clear an argument under normal driving conditions. And everyone knows a nice torquey

6-cylinder or bigger engine is always preferable to a turbo engine, because of the inherent turbo lag and poor low-end performance. The problem with most BMWs is they are useless in bad weather and if you want to have fun on the dry you may want to spend big bucks on visiting the tyre shop as often as the filling station. This is why I am an Audi driver.
Reply to
JP Roberts

Your message proves that you know little about either SAAB turbos or BMWs and probably not much more about your Audi. SAAB 4 cylinder turbo engines are far more fuel efficient that a BMW 6 of similar displacement. The SAAB (when fitted with a full pressure turbo) also has more peak HP and torque than the BMW. Turbo lag is minimized in the SAAB ecopower designs as compared to most other turbocharged engines. Ecopower engines are designed specifically to provide best performace at relatively low rpms. SAAB low pressure turbo engines, which make somewhat lower hp and torque than the BMW six have *no* detectable turbolag. All BMW 6 cylinder engines (with the exception of the old ETA 2.7) are all designed to spin to much higher rpms to make their power. BMWs handle superbly in snow (when outfitted with proper snow tires) due to their optimum 50/50 weight distribution and rear wheel drive. BMWs by and large handle better than either Audi's or SAABs in dry conditions. Z rated tires for any of these cars cost the same amount of money and are available at reasonable prices. Tires for BMWs are no more expensive.

Apparently, you made your automobile choice by listening to other people's hype about SAAB's horrible turbo lag and BMW's rear wheel drive being bad in snow. Too bad for you. You probably have a single set of all-season radials on your Audi Quattro and think that you have the ultimate all weather machine.

I personally would rather have a BMW with a nice set of low profile wheels and Z rated summer tires and second set of wheels and winter snow tires. My second set of wheels and tires would cost what, $600? vs. buying an AWD car and being crippled in handling for 95% of the year? I can take my snow tires off in the summer. Can you take off your AWD hardware?

-Fred W

Reply to
Fred W.

[snipped]

If the above isn't the victim of a typo, I invite you to take a look at the torque vs rpm curves of biturbo 30v 2.7L audi engines and any straight-six NA bmw engine you care to examine.

Clearly, you will be surprised...

/daytripper '00 s4 6spd

Reply to
daytripper

Reply to
Imad Al-Ghouleh

Reply to
Imad Al-Ghouleh

If you compare equal power engine and you thrash the engine, the BMW will always give you better mileage, so obviously you know nothing about BMW engines.

And huge lag and less driveability and the BMW would still beat the SAAB on acceleration, which is what counts. Peak HP won't drive you anywhere.

Audi's 1.8T should not have any detectable turbo lag but I can spot that easily, now I can't think Saab turbos can be very different.

And their torque is way much linear, which makes them better all round. Their smoothness alone qualifies.

Your definition of handling superbly does not tally with the fact when I go skiing I can often find BMW drivers stranded or looking for their chains. I've driven RWD and can tell you again it's pretty close to useless in really bad weather. Think of slopes uphill. The proper tyres will give you more fun under very specific hyper-controlled conditions but can't do much in real life winter driving on icy roads.

Quite probably true, except for the by and large.

But you will need to replace the rear ones much more often, if you enjoy spirited driving on winding roads, that is. We all know it is winding roads that are good fun.

I have a set of fully dedicated winter Vredesteins to be able to enjoy my quattro in the winter, and a set of Sport Contact 2 that my car is already "wearing" now.

At the end of your BMW life you will probably have spent more money on tyres for your BMW than I will have on my Quattro gear. The difference is you'll have left your BMW parked when there was snow on the road, while I'll have been driving my Quattro all year round.

JP Roberts

Reply to
JP Roberts

Are they too common, or do you simply notice them more than other cars? Do a fun experiment and count the cars passing by on the freeway. Then provide some figures. I can't speak for other countries, but in the Netherlands you'd lose count of the Peugeots, VWs, Fords and Opels before you count a couple of BMWs. Yet, I *see* more BMWs (or expensive Mercs and Audis) simply because they stand out more in traffic.

Same thing for the "Get out of my way" thing: a Golf or Peugeot that's being pushy on the freeway would leave a less lasting impression on you than that one shiny BMW.

I can't remember all the Renaults and Volvos and VW driving up to my tailgate, probably thinking, "yeah, I'm gonna show this BMW my car's better/faster/whatever". Very occasionally I see a BMW or an A3 do the same. Yet *those* times I can remember.

People see what they wanna see.

Peter

Reply to
Peter Bozz

(someone wrote, but JP trimmed the address of,)

I've never seen the word "thrash" in a scientific analysis of engine output and fuel consumption. Perhaps you can point us to, you know, actual data to back up your claim?

You've never driven a Saab Turbo, have you. "huge lag"? Maybe in 1978...

Ah, so you _are_ talking about something you haven't driven. "Well, the engineers at Audi couldn't figure it out, so Saab must not have either"?, is that your thinking?

Please compare and contrast to, say, the 2.3Liter Turbo engine from Saab. Show your sources. (hint: flat is flat). For extra credit, show the shift points as they relate to the torque curve, per RPM.

Dave Hinz

Reply to
Dave Hinz

Boys, boys, this has turned into a pissing competition...

DAS

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling

At least in Germany seeing lots of BMWs and Mercs is no illusion! They are top sellers:

formatting link
In the Netherlands I seem to see Mercs on every corner...

DAS

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling

Dear Dave,

You're right. I've never driven a Saab, but I am totally confident that the only turbo engine about with no real lag is that which has the "bang-bang" system, and this, as far as I can remember is only in Subaru's and EVO's realm, never Saabs.

I could already tell turbo lag in my 1.8T even before it was chipped, and Audi's 1.8T can be made to give much higher peak power than any Saab can ever get, so I'm sure it's better engineered, even if it has less cubic room than the 2.3 Saab couterpart. According to non-biased owners who dare criticize their own marque, lag is even noticeable in the magnificient 2.7 Biturbo Audi engine, and that has two turbos precisely to avoid lag. The marvellous BMW 3.0d engine has its own share of lag according to most owners, and this is a 3 litre engine we're talking about. As yet, and according to my sources - correct me if I'm wrong, there is no "normal street" design that will be good enough for lag simply not to be there, which is only sad, given that in my opinion lag should now be a thing of the past.

The new S4 has no turbo, and while this is a pitty because then a chipped S4 would be a clear M3 beater, I'm sure it's also easier and more fun to drive than the stock old biturbo S4.

According to what I've read, it takes something like the RS6's 4.2 l engine for lag to be nearly unnoticeable, and that's a biturbo. But chip that and I'm sure lag is going to become more apparent.

JP Roberts.

"Dave H> >

Reply to
JP Roberts

Yes, I know about Germany. Germans know what to drive and how to make it. :-)

But I don't believe the OP was in Germany.

I wonder, what are the top selling cars in England? Do you know a site with stats?

The top selling cars in Holland in 2003 were: 1. Opel (55.698 nieuwe exepmplaren) 2. Peugeot (52.412 exemplaren) 3. Renault (47.159 nieuwe auto's) 4. Ford (42.146 nieuwe auto's) 5. Volkswagen (40.390 exemplaren)

Unfortunately, the list ends here.

formatting link

Do you count taxi cabs? That's not fair :-)

I'll make a short drive around my neighborhood, just for fun, and count the Mercs and BMWs I see. I'll post the results tomorrow or the day after. I'll also post the number of corners, and then we'll know.

Peter

Reply to
Peter Bozz

"JP Roberts" wrote

And the front-driver SAABs (and Audis, for that matter) will have to have their front tires replaced more often than their rears. Even.

And I have a set of Michelin Pilot Alpines for my 330xi for winter. A guy in an S4, parked next to me last winter, said he almost didn't make it up the ski hill's road. I said: "get rid of the PZeros."

Floyd

Reply to
fbloogyudsr

And you are wrong. You should drive a low pressure turbo. They develop very good get go off the line. I would not have bought a Saab if it had a peaky engine - I do not like engines that need to be trashed to develop momentum. I like effortless and relaxed power delivery. The Saab low pressure turbo does the part. That said, I agree the BMW I6 is more of a turbine.

Having owned 2 BMW 3-series and currently owner of a '02 9-3 convertible (the 205HP version), and not being religious in car matters, I can make the following observations:

(First and foremost) They are all great cars - count yourself blessed if you drive either. (1) Few engines out there match a BMW I6 for smoothness. Not even most V8 do (and I have owned a Jag XJR, too). (2) The Saab I4 turbo engine is different in character - it actually seems to get off the line with a bit more umph, but most certainly does not rev up with as much smooth dignity, getting a bit of an agricultural aural charm going at times. A very fun engine in its own way, but certainly not as refined. (3) Nor the BMW I6 nor the Saab 4turbo are fuel efficient when driven aggressively. They get quite thristy. (4) The Saab engine is awesome for USA type highway cruising at 70mph - gives you 30mpg with cruise control, and is extremely quiet. That said, aurally the I6 is a beautiful cruiser too. The only thing is that the Saab's becomes extremely quiet and smooth while cruising, shedding the somewhat trashier sound it had when accelerating hard, whereas the BMW sticks to character. (5) Saab builds the most comfortable seats around, in my opinion - I found the gaps in the BMW sport seats uncomfortable. That said, I have done joyful

14 hour drives in either car. (6) The BMW combines handling and comfort a bit better than the Saab does. My Saab tends to crash into potholes - the price for sports suspension and 17inch wheels, I assume. The BMW feels nimbler with the same package, though, not quite crashing as hard. (7) Either car can be driven very fast on windy roads, they have to be driven differently, however; but the absolute handling edge goes to the Beemer. (8) BMW 3 series are common as muck in Silicon Valley where I live. The Saab is the oddbal choice, and one with its very own charm. (8) is the main reason why I picked the Saab and why I am very happy with my choice. Technical reasons were not really what influenced my decision - I thought they both represented different, yet very nice to drive value propositions. (9) This is coincidental and does not represent any generic evidence: but both my Beemers needed extra-curricular visits to the dealer to fix stuff, 3 that I can remember (car was driveable, though). The Saab has had nothing go wrong in its first 25k miles. Nothing. (10) All in all, my score goes somethig like: Engineering and driving dynamics etc: BMW 10 - Saab 9. Character, charme and uniqueness: Saab 10 - BMW 8. The narrow winner this time around on my personal scoreboard was the Saab when compared to the topless Beemer alternative. (11) I have no experience whatsoever with Audis. They've always seemed a bit too clinically clean and lifeless to me, but there's no doubt they're also great cars.

...pablo

Reply to
pablo

How much do you know about Saab's Trionic engine management system?

Torque curves, son, torque curves. Post links to the graphs, otherwise it's just noise.

Not to be there? As in, unmeasurable? No. Until someone comes up with a turbo with a zero-mass impeller (physically impossible), it's not going to happen. Managed such that it's un-noticable? It's here today, just not in your car apparently.

Based on what specific data, please? All I see from you is speculation, and I'm not sure you're exhibiting clear understanding of what factors differentiate engine management systems from each other. Any turbo is going to have lag, which if you try hard enoug you're going to be able to notice. The lower the mass, the less the lag.

I still stand by my statement that all 3 are well-designed cars, cost about the same to fix, and that the original poster (who has, undoubtedly, long ago abandoned this thread) should try all 3 and buy the one he likes best.

Dave Hinz

Reply to
Dave Hinz

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.