Opinions on 1995 Saab 900S V6 Standard

The V6 engines are largely regarded as junk, I would strongly suggest walking away from that car, find one with the Saab turbo 4 instead as it's a much better motor than the GM sourced V6.

I have a 1994 NG900 with the V6. I am selling the car because of the V6. Let count the reasons:

1. Timing belt either breaks or slips out of time - must replace before

1. AC tubing - there is one long piece that rubs on the engine. It develops a leak and is a major pain and expense to replace.
2. V6 design has flexible (read breaks from flexing) exhaust Y pipe - not expensive, but a poor design.
3. Oil cooler in built into the water jacket on top of the engine - a pain to replace and if it leaks . . .
4. Spark plug placement - major pain to reach the back 3, but not unique to Saab - common to GM engines, which this is . . .
5. DI Cassettes - two of them - twice the fun
6. Rough idle which could never be fixed - learn to live with it
7. Oil leaks . . . .

Non engine issues:

1. Automatic transmission has electrical issues - expensive control unit
2. AC control panel and AC air flow motor are common failures - and not inexpensive
3. Ignition switch fails - car act as if it was just turned off - more fun at night on the highway (no lights)
4. Water collects on the hatchback, so when you open the hatch the water drips into the trunk

PROs If you enjoy work> Thinking of buying one.

I have a 1995 900S 2.3L 4-cyl, non-turbo, standard. I've owned it since new, and it's now got 135k on it. The best car I've ever owned; my Toyotas and my Acura were rusted far beyond repair long before 10 years in New England. Maybe a few more minor mechanical issues in the Saab, but nothing major, and it doesn't feel like a P.O.S. after a few years.

I'd avoid the V-6 like the plague based on what I've read about it since it first came out. Look for a 4-cyl, get a turbo if you want more fun from the "GO" pedal. I find the non-turbo adequate, but certainly would have opted for the turbo if money wasn't such a consideration when I bought it. (and still is) I've done all my own work, and never had to touch the engine, clutch, or transmission on this car, except for normal maintainence items. I drive it hard and maintain it accordingly. You can change the air filter, dist. cap/rotor, and spark plugs in about 30 minutes total, and not even get dirty.

Con: V6 engines a dog. '95 has cable operated clutch probe to fail.

Pros: Find a '98 or later 4 cylinder

That would be " *prone* to fail"

To quote our Saab mechanic of 15 years, "well yes, of course I'll work on it, after all it's your money, but I'd still advise against it. If you're going for the GM, buy a 4, preferably a turbo, but better still buy a low mileage 9000 Anniversary."

He listed timing belt & head problems, plus excessive tyre and front end wear as common enough problems to be considered normal, so we didn't buy it. Immaculate car though! Cheers

I think the issue of the Vauxhall V6 engine being shitful is over stated. A family member has one in a car which has now clocked up over 350,000km. The engine has only ever had timing belt changes, plugs, radiator hoses, some suspension bushes and regular changes of dino oil. It still runs like a charm and uses no oil between changes.

The only problem issues with it have been rocker cover oil leaks (easily and cheaply fixed) and a fuel pump failure at 300,000km. The engine consistently produces excellent fuel economy and will usually see 7l/100 or less on the highway.

The oil coiler is a potential problem. It is supposed to be always fully immersed in coolant however people who don't religiously maintain the coolant level properly can experience corrosion. I understand that later versions use a stainless steel oil cooler which has fixed that weak point.

I can't say that excessive tyre wear has been a problem.

So GM made one good engine. I am working from personal experience and repair bills.

The GM V6 is a very expensive engine to maintain (how much did your family member pay for the timing belt changes?) compared to the Saab four cylinder. I have owned 8 valve and turbo charged four cylinder 16 valve Swedish Saabs. So I know what it cost to maintain these engines over decades. I curently drive a 1993 C900. It has more power and gets better gas mileage than the V6. It also handles much better. I have standing offers from other people to buy it from me any day. I cannot say the same thing about the NG 900 V6. The reason I am selling the GM