Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 16:19:07 -0800 From: "pablo" <pabloATsimplyhombreNOSPAMnet> Subject: Re: Best built recent Saab?
"Sigurd Kallhovde" <sigurdkREMOVETHISnopsamo.com> wrote in message news:5AXy9.1754$Aq5.195565nopsamread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net... > > Which is the best built (assembly quality, reliability, durability) recent > Saab model ... I am not an expert. What I can say is that I bought my first Saab a few months back: a 2002 9-3 SE Convertible. Having been driving a '00 Jaguar XJR until then, I am not comparing the two cars at all, and in fact I prefer the more involving, somewhat more rugged 9-3 charm. I like the car a lot. That said, I must say that the old reputation of Saab's being built like a safe is not deserved: the car feels flimisy and does have intermittent squeals and little rattles hare and there. Nothing too irritating, but neverthless an indication improvement is possible - correction: improvement is an imperative. A $25k Honda Accord will not have a single squeak inside. But a $40k Saab does...? I still would pick the Saab: it has twice the charm, and here in California it is the anti-Beemer and anti-Merc, which are the default choices and you see everywhere. But "solid built" is not an adjective I would use. It's merely "ok built" - passes the mark, but no excellence score. And before someone says "but it's a convertible, and they're by nature etc etc", go take a BMW 3 series convertible for a spin, a car that, in its 32x version, is s few thou cheaper than the Saab. Or a Merc SLK or CLK convertible. They're convertibles, and they're utterly solid. But I'd still pick the Saab. ...pablo