Saab Quick?

Time it out. I can't imagine what 20yr old V-8 is better than a 9-5/9-3 Turbo (maybe an old Buick Grand National w/Turbo V-6). A 98 9-5 is not going to be whiplash fast but it is pretty quick compared to a lot of stuff out there. Don't try going and blowing out 5L Mustangs, WRX's, and M3's though. I have a 97 SE Turbo that is reasonably fast. If you really want to increase quickness, when you decide you are going to want maximum accelleration, turn off the A/C compressor (go to ECON mode) . For some reason, the A/C compressor robs a lot of power from the 900.

If you want to beat up on Mustangs and WRX's, go get a Viggen, M3's are out of reach. I can humble my buddy's 645 with my 00 Viggen...though he has an AT so it's a bit bogged and I don't think he's smart enough to disengage the A/C compressor.

My 5L 1980 V8 Holden Statesman was infinately quicker than my 9-5. I just don't know if this is normal from what people are saying. My Statesman was quick though...

I drive a Magna for work and it is quicker - at least off the mark to around

100kmh anyway.

A 98 9-5 is not going

I always turn it off but seems to have little or no impact on acceleration.

I'm begining to wonder if there is something set too low in the chip. Is this possible?

Regards Starman from Oz

The ECU could have reduced the turbo pressure because it detected pre- detonation in the cylinders. This can happen if the wrong type of spark plugs are used. The Trionic ECU used in the 9-5 does use the direct ignition cartridge and the spark plugs to meassure the ionozation inside the cylinders after the combustion. A different spark plug can fool the system.

It is also possible for the waste gate arm to come loose from the control rod. If this happens the engine will only run on base boost and will be quite slow compared to other Saabs. This is not uncommon on early 9-5 turbos.

Define "quick". Are you timing 0-60, 50-70, etc or are you going by feel? A turbo will naturally feel a bit soft off the line, though this can help prevent wheelspin. The 9-5 should be fairly fast, it won't feel like a V8, it won't have that low end kick, but it should still fair pretty well against one.

The term "Saab" can cover many models from many years. I have an older Saab 900 turbo that can spin the wheels from 1st through 3rd on dry road. Obviously is not the fastest way to accelerate nor does this practice help with the life of the transmission, but it does indicate the amount of power available. The best part is the suspension is capable of handling this power, even in the turns:-)

I should add this car has the SPG package :-)

If you compare it with a V8 at 11,000 feet elevation, I think you will find it very quick!

Not many people pass my (lowly 160 hp) '86 900 T on the Eisenhower Tunnel approach. They pass me on the way down the other side, though!

Charles.

I'm going on feel. My Saab is 'reasonably' quick from say 70-160kmh, but from 0-70kmh most cars will at least keep pace. I will be timing it shortly and I'll post the results here.

Regards Starman from Oz

>

I get no wheel spin in 2nd or 3rd and only very jerky wheel spin on takeoff. I'm assuming that the later model 9-5 should be more powerful than the earlier models. Does the SPG pack include changing the ECU?

Regards Starman form Oz

>

Yes, the ECU is changed :-) I have driven other 900 Turbos without the SPG package and the power difference is very noticeable.

The later model 9-5 does have more power, but it carries more weight. Also, acceleration depends on more factors than just power and weight. The gearing of the transmission and transaxles, tire size and type, where the engine puts out the max torque, and emission control systems will impact 0-60 acceleration - not to mention driver skill.

The engine power listed on paper is just one way of advertising the car. The new Toyota Corolla XRS lists 170 Hp - at 7,600 RPMs but the max torque is only 127 lb/ft at 4,400 RPMs. This car sounds fast, but it probably has nothing out of a dead stop. I drove an Altima that listed

175 Hp, but it felt slower than a 1990 900S - both cars had manual transmissions.

In the real world, it's not the HP peak that matters, but the area under the curve.

Matt O.

I-70 west of Denver is fun place to race Mustang GT's with a small turbo car that looks like a family sedan :) :)

BR:Z

Ok just timed it from 0-60kmh = 5.06secs and 50-70kmh 3.15secs.

Does this sound about right? This was really pushing it too and with no wheel spin.

Regards Starman from Oz

I don't know, 0-60 in Kms is not a standard measurement, it's 0-60 mph, or

0-100 kmm.

I retested it from 0-100kmh = 9.78secs. I got slight wheel spin in first, so I could have maybe got it down to 9.5 or so. Anyone else done this test and if so how does it compare? (Don't know if I mentioned it before bt my car is a 5 speed manual).

Regards Starman from Oz

MaltHound

Thanks for that Malt Hound - I knew all that algebra at school would come in handy one day! I was hoping for a slightly less scientific response though. Anyone actually timed out their 9-5 5peed manual? Any range will do, in KMH or MPH so that I can compare.

Regards Starman from Oz