Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 18:47:35 +1300 From: "Grand Poobah" <grandpoobahNOSPAMnopsamdise.net.nz> Subject: Re: What would you do, should I trade up my 9000?
"tom reingold" <trn244nopsamnline.net> wrote in message news:3E3BE880.4090101nopsamnline.net... > > > Grand Poobah wrote: > > Well, I own a fairly basic 1996 9000 CS, 2.3 LPT with 159,000km on the > > clock. Moon roof, velour trim, basic computer and basic air con. I've had an > > ABS sensor and a head gasket job in the last 16 months. The auto trannie > > still seems OK to me but I hear rumours that the box can go at any time and > > 100,000 miles is about the limit and I'm just about there right now. I do > > have a 10 CD stacker and Aero wheels though (which I think look fantastic). > > > > I've just seen a 1997 9000 CSI 2.3 LPT, auto, at a local mitsubishi dealer. > > After a bit of a haggle (I know way more about the car than they do), we are > > down to : give me your car and NZ $9000 (US $4,500) cash and the CSI is > > yours! The lot price is NZ $20,900. > > > > The CSI has the following stuff that my car doesn't: > > rear spoiler (looks cool) > > two tone leather interior (the seats have circular markings on the back > > rests- are these "Recaro seats"?) > > fancier trip computer > > climate air conditioning > > only 91,000 km on the clock (about 56,000 miles) > > Saab alloy wheels, but the dealer says I can swap for my Aero wheels if I > > want to! > > single CD player instead of stacker > > > > I wish it had electric memory seats, but hey I dream about finding a 1998 > > manual AERO (I don't think there are any in NZ) that I can afford. It does > > have a full service record and I think I'll give the previous owner a call > > to find the inside story. > > > > My wife thinks I'm nuts and obsessed about my 9000. Should I trade up? Do > > you think the deal is worth it? > > > > cheers, John > > > > > > I wouldn't do it, if this is the much more powerful car. No, they are both light pressure turbos 170bhp. > > I don't know about NZ, but in the US, insurance costs are higher for > fast cars that are marketed as fast cars. (Powerful land yachts like > Buicks are not marketed to speed demons, and their handling isn't good, > so they don't have the insurance premiums.) So that cost is one > consideration. > > Another is the fuel. Does the fancier car require more expensive fuel? I feed mine on premium 96 fuel anyway so no saving for me! I > don't remember, but I think so. I had a 1986 900T, and it preferred > premium fuel. Around here, the price difference is big, and I understand > most of the difference goes into profit, which made me angry. My car, > similar to yours, a 1995 9000CS 2.3LPT, uses cheap, standard fuel. > > The leather seats are more comfortable than velour, but they truly are > not as durable. I have experience with both. Saab's velour is amazingly > durable. thanks for this, the leather is of course the attraction for me since I don't have any! > > And then of course, there is the opportunity cost. What would you do > with the money if you spent it on something else or invested it? > Remember, it's not going to change your life radically. > > I test drove a 9000 CSE, and decided against it. The primary reason was > the price, but I also feared that with such a powerful car, I might > drive irresponsibly and either get into a collision or get expensive > traffic tickets. Those tickets do terrible things to insurance premiums > around here. A $100 ticket can end up costing $1,000 in insurance over > three years. > > On the other hand, the car you're looking at has far fewer km on the > clock, so it could be a good deal just for that! Yeah, the lower km's might mean it will liuve longer But I hadn't heard that > prediction that the autos go so easily at 100,000 miles. I hope I'm wrong but have seen this on at least one 9000 site, Quasimotors? > > > -- > Tom Reingold > Noo Joizy >
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
