HELP! Should I buy this SAAB?

If it's a good price and has good history, there's no reason to avoid it.

I've run several high mileage cars over the years - bizarrely it has been the lower mileage cars that have cost me (or my employers) the most money and hassle.

snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

What flavour of 900, and what price?

If it's an NG900 - 93-98, engine sideways across the car - then I'll let others answer.

If it's a c900 - 93 and earlier, engine lengthways - then 145k is nothing.

Well since you have not told year, or price, or location, it is hard to say.

Do your research, look at the service records and see what the current owner is doing for repairs and routine maintenance.

What do you want to do with the car? How many more miles are you going to drive?

Realize it is *not* a new car, it is a SE so basically it is a GM design.

If the price is well below market for a vehicle with this mileage and there were no other problems, why not buy it?

What you are not saying speaks volumes--I think there is more to the story than your short post.

PeterD gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Not necessarily.

There were "SE" versions of the c900 - in the UK at least.

Price is 3,300, which is Kelly private party price although it is being sold by a dealer. The engine is indeed mounted sideways. Are you saying the "SE" series was made by GM? Does that mean that I should treat it like an American car? I wouldn't dream of buying a GM car with 145,000 miles on it. I only considered it because I assumed it was made in Europe.

snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

3,300 _what_? US Dollars? Pounds Sterling? Euros? Japanese Yen? Magic Beans?

So it's an NG900, rather than a c900.

"SE" is just a trim level - a few more toys than "S".

Saab were 50% owned by GM after 1990 (100% from 2000 until last month) with a lot of shared technology - the NG900 uses a development of the originally Triumph-designed 99/c900/9000 engine (assuming it's a four-pot

- the v6 is an Opel engine), but it shares the Opel Vectra's platform.

The NG900 might not be one of Saab's high-points, but it's not _that_ bad a heap of s**te. Not quite, anyway.

Well, that depends.

If you're defining "Europe" by EU membership, then an early NG wouldn't be, since Sweden only joined the EU at the start of 1995. But I think that's probably a fairly irrelevant bit of pedantry in this context.

There's nothing really common between the 1.7 litre Triumph Slant-4 engine used in the early 99 models and the B204 engine in the NG900. Remember that they are about 25 years apart in development.

Europe is a well-defined geographical term basically covering all land between the Atlantic and the Ural mountains. EU is a political term which is less than 50 years old and there are large land masses of Europe that do not belong to EU, for instance all the European part of Russia. Sweden has always been part of Europe, like Alaska that has always been part of North America although it used to belong to Russia before it was bought by USA.

Big red flag IMHO, this has to be a corner lot, which specalizes in cars that have basic problems to people who have no money to pay. Most of these lots are not where you want to buy a car.

You have to ask, why is the dealer selling so cheap? I'd guess because no one wants it, and for some reason it is not viable on the wholesale market.

If you have not run a carfax on it, that could tell you much more, it may well have a salvage title, or some other title defect that makes it virtually valueless.

I think wondering about GM, engines and the like is secondary to what the true story is. Do a carfax next. If that comes back clean (bet it doesn't!) then have it checked out by an independent mechanic who knows later saabs.

PeterD gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

That's about three times as much as a mid-range tintop NG could possibly fetch here.

True - but for one detail. The "GM" question only came into it to identify if it was an NG or a c900. c900 prices - again, here in the UK - are above those for NGs now, and rising rapidly whilst NGs still bibble around "valueless". Tidy c900s are even outpricing early 9-3ss now.

But it's basically same engine... just turned around and tilted. My 9000 with this engine has done 178,000 miles and still running fine. It all depends on regular oil change and habits. However, any problems will be expensive to sort out, so it's not really worth looking for a high miler to start with, as savings could be eroded. Anything over 100,000 is bound to be cheap anyway.

A classic car with classic problems. For a daily driver I've had less issues with the 'crap' NG, then the C900. They're simply getting too old - I was a diehard C900 fan too.

Yes, and the NG900 is far better than die-hard Saabisti want to admit. It's not the best car ever, but it's pretty sturdy, and they still have the Triumph/Saab engines. It all comes down to decent maintanance. You cab buy a luxurious Turbo NG for very little money these days.