I find myself contemplating a 2004 or newer Saab 9-3 convertible as a daily driver. Those of you here with Saab experience, how dumb an idea would you consider that?
The 04 is when they got the roll over protection and a stiffer frame. Sadly, I know they also got the water pump from hell to go with it.
I'm not vehemently opposed to earlier ones, even all the way back to a 900. Just don't find older ones, especially 900's, in good shape. Most are beat and rusted.
I'll be curiously watching this thread, as I'm light on Saab knowledge, and I see those turbo convertibles for sale all over the place---in seemingly good condition, for next to nothing.
They were well-built, quick, solid and safe cars when new........why such drastic depreciation? I don't think it's because Saab has become extinct, as used prices were super low--even when they were still in production. Hmmmmm.....
My Dad has an 06 that he got used about 7 years ago and it has been a solid car so far. I am not sure of the mileage on it but there have been many trips to Florida and back from Ohio and aside from the normal maintenance stuff he has not had to do anything to it as far as I know.
I think one of the reasons SAAB's in general have a poor resale value is that when they were being sold new you could get big rebates on them so why buy a used one.
I think theone to get would be a 2.0T with a stick. The uppercase T denotes more power but not the V6 so you should get good mileage and are a tune away from good times.
lurking
I have no first hand experience with the Saab but have you considered a comparable Volvo c70 T5?
I would guess it would be a bit quicker than the Saab and they are quite reliable and easy to work on.
I know nothing about the New Gen 9-3, but have been enjoying playing with my Old Gen. saabcentral seems to be a good resource for these cars.
In reply to nokincy:
I'd be really surprised if the C70 in any guise is quicker than a turbo 9-3, stock vs stock.
In reply to pres589:
C70 LPT is actually slower and auto only. They made only a handful of HPT convertibles with a manual, whereas Saabs are easy to find.
Also, as someone who has owned both P80 Volvos and a handful of Saabs, I ABSOLUTELY call BS on the Volvo being easier to work on. No berkeleying way.
Only a limited bit of Saab convertible vs Volvo convertible experience so far. But at this point, the Saab came up the winner in a battle between the two. The Volvo flexing was much greater. It was also a more blubbery feeling car. The Saab was much tighter and brighter to drive. And that was a T5 Volvo
Besides, I've already got a Volvo. Never had a Saab!
Like I said I've never owned a Saab. But my p80 car is cake to work on. Timing belt is a walk in the park and everything else is logically laid out and designed to be serviced.
Anyone who thinks the Volvo is tough to wrench on must be doing something wrong.
nokincy wrote: Like I said I've never owned a Saab. But my p80 car is cake to work on. Timing belt is a walk in the park and everything else is logically laid out and designed to be serviced. Anyone who thinks the Volvo is tough to wrench on must be doing something wrong.
Timing belt is easy. PVC on the other hand, dang! And then there's the fun of the rusty fuel line/pump above the gas tank on the V70XC's. I gave that job to the shop.
In reply to foxtrapper:
I daily a 2003 9-3 Sedan, and like it a fair bit. I have some overly detailed comments in the thread linked below. Super easy to work on, cheap parts. The convertibles are mostly identical mechanically, the only reason I didn't get one was the need for larger rear seats (kids...)
http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/saab-9-3-ng-gurus/97262/page1/
A former co-worker owns a 9-3 'vert. "Aero" model. Manual trans even. Not a bad car, although stiff it was not and the cowl-shake was surprising - especially compared to the '07 MINI vert we had around the same time (this was about 5 years ago).
He's not the DIY type, so anytime it needed work he took it to a local indie shop (long out of warranty - not that it matters now). It's along my drive to work, so I used to pick him up there. This happened probably 3-4 times a year. He often joked, "$1000. Every time something breaks, it's $1000..."
Personally, I'd keep the Miata. 
My girlfriend has an 06 9-3 aero and it's been a wonderful car. No issues out of it yet aside from replacing the alternator. Nice to drive and the turbo v6 is pretty darn quick.
In reply to nokincy:
Bear in mind, I didn't say the Volvo was HARD, but the Saab is MUCH easier. That PCV system is ridiculous compared to every other car I've touched. The ETM problems are extremely prevalent, kind of a pain in the ass, and very expen$ive to sort properly. P80 dash rattle is an issue that has nearly scared me away from ever owning one again, after going through that repair process, because they all seem to do it eventually. And the timing belt? Saab is way easier, because, well, there isn't one. I've owned both and liked both but having worked on many of both the Saab is easier, hands down.
In reply to Ian F:
Is anything cheap if you're not the DIY type? You could say the same thing about ANY European car.
SlickDizzy wrote: In reply to nokincy: Bear in mind, I didn't say the Volvo was HARD, but the Saab is MUCH easier. That PCV system is ridiculous compared to every other car I've touched. The ETM problems are extremely prevalent, kind of a pain in the ass, and very expen$ive to sort properly. P80 dash rattle is an issue that has nearly scared me away from ever owning one again, after going through that repair process, because they all seem to do it eventually. And the timing belt? Saab is way easier, because, well, there isn't one. I've owned both and liked both but having worked on many of both the Saab is easier, hands down. In reply to Ian F: Is anything cheap if you're not the DIY type? You could say the same thing about ANY European car.
Fair enough. I wouldn't call the PCV difficult as much as it is time consuming, but this thread isn't about Volvos I guess. However since this is GRM the Volvo DOES sound better and you can't argue that one.
Maybe we just got a bad one, but my wife's DD for some years now is a 2007 9-3 2.0T, and i don't like it. She loves it, but it just seems crappy to me. The car just seems cheaply made and flimsy. It's a six speed manual, and the shift knob has fallen off and need fixed several times. The drivers seating material wore out while still under warranty and was replaced. It is now worn out again (at 85K miles). It seems to pop lightbulbs like no other car I've ever owned. A huge heatshield fell off last month and now the fuel gauge stopped working when it is full a week ago. It's also had a "clunking" sound over low speed bumps that nobody can quite figure out and seems like a "well, we can start replacing suspension parts if you want us to" type deal.
Edit to add: The chevy Cavalier is much maligned for it's E36 M3 materials and quality. I've owned both, don't expect the SAAB to be any better... It reminds me a lot of my old Cavalier.
clunking.. I would check the bolts to the subframe
Man, my experience with Saab is exactly the opposite of WiLDs...
I find my wife's 2007 Aero Wagon to be rock solid. It's picky on what fuel we use (Shell/Texaco Premium) or else it will shudder when it starts. Otherwise the build quality is very much the same as our Audi A4 we had in Europe, the steering/brakes/suspension are confidence inspiring and the turbocharged 2.8l pulls like a friggin... well something that pulls like the dickens! This thing'll easily get up to (if not past) 100mph by the end of an on-ramp and the torque steer is surprisingly manageable.
I also think the cockpit is extremely well thought out and we haven't had a single problem with the exception of a check engine light that popped up when the commanded fuel pressure wasn't exactly the same as the fuel pressure delivered by the fuel pump (most likely a new pump will fix it) but it hasn't caused any drivability problems so it's on the "meh... later" list.
If I'm in need of a super reliable, safe, and practical car REAL cheap, the first search on craigslist is for Saab. It seems like people "expect" these to go bad, so when something minor pops up they go "oh my god! that damn Saab is being a Saab again"
and that's when I swoop in
In reply to Hungary Bill:
My 03 9-5 Aero with 225K miles on it has been the most reliable car I have ever owned, and that includes a Toyota and a Honda.
WilD wrote: Maybe we just got a bad one, but my wife's DD for some years now is a 2007 9-3 2.0T, and i don't like it. She loves it, but it just seems crappy to me. The car just seems cheaply made and flimsy. It's a six speed manual, and the shift knob has fallen off and need fixed several times. The drivers seating material wore out while still under warranty and was replaced. It is now worn out again (at 85K miles). It seems to pop lightbulbs like no other car I've ever owned. A huge heatshield fell off last month and now the fuel gauge stopped working when it is full a week ago. It's also had a "clunking" sound over low speed bumps that nobody can quite figure out and seems like a "well, we can start replacing suspension parts if you want us to" type deal. Edit to add: The chevy Cavalier is much maligned for it's E36 M3 materials and quality. I've owned both, don't expect the SAAB to be any better... It reminds me a lot of my old Cavalier.
Very typical Saab complaints. Next up is the ignition module. Your clunk is likely the sway bar bushing. Then there are the dash squeeks. That said I really likely my 07 wagon. I think the 2005 Aero manual convertible is the sweet one to get. All the bells and whistles with the more reliable 2.0l engine and 6 speed trans.
You'll need to log in to post.
