Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 10:16:15 +0000 From: Johannes H Andersen <johsnopsamsizefitterzzzz.com> Subject: Re: Saab 93 Sports Saloon 2.2 Tid
DervMan wrote: > > "Rawnsley Charles" <charlie> wrote in message > news:3e44ef3e$1_1nopsam.vo.lu... > > Hi, > > > > Thinking of buying a Saab 93 Sports Saloon 2.2 Tid, however, looking at > the > > performance compared to an Audi A4 or a 320d BMW it looks a little on the > > sluggish side. Anyone out there got one and can tell me if it's got any > > poke? > > > > Thanks in advance. > > Interesting question! > > I'm guessing that you've looked and compared the 0 - 60 acceleration times? > To be blunt, these mean little other than the "my car's faster than yours" > argument, usually used by Citroen Saxo VTR drivers 'cos Citroen lengthened > the VTR's gearing to hit 60 in second (and thus robbed the car of a decent > response at low speed). > > What's more telling is the way the engine delivers it's performance, the > gearing, the mid-range acceleration, and the power and torque to weight > ratios of the bunch, but even this is only a base point: you need to drive > the cars! > > However. > > The BMW has the highest output, and that 2.0 litre donk is a peach. It's > more powerful than either the A4 TDI 130 and the 9-3, and - of greater > significance - it has more torque. 328 Nm of the stuff. > > The A4 and the 9-3 are closely matched, with the A4 having a small advantage > (130 PS, 284 Nm for the A4, 125 / 278 for the Saab). > > The BMW is the heaviest, the A4 the lightest. And on paper, the BMW is the > quickest. But comparing the BMW and the A4, in a straight line, I found the > A4 felt quicker. Which one would I have taken? Neither, actually, but > that's a long story. I would have been more inclined to take the BMW rather > than the Audi, but I'd not swap the Ka for it. > > I've not driven the current 9-3, and won't until the next colleague wants > something in this class! My Datasheet reckons the 9-3 will be slightly > slower than the other two, but it may not *feel* that way, and the datasheet > cannot take into account gear ratios and suchlike. > > You need to drive all three cars back to back! I'm not much for diesels; my 9000 CSE 2.0 LPT will do over 40 mpg on motorway driving if I don't drive like crazy. Anyway, the first I would look for in a diesel is differences in noise and vibration since this is the main bugbear and where I expect the technology is advancing. I don't quite believe it when people say that this problem has been completely eradicated. I can hear diesel cars clattering when stopping at traffic lights; these are modern diesel cars, not just the London taxis. I often get worried that something has got loose in my engine until I realise that it's caused by a diesel in front of me. I've read comparison tests between the three cars and the 2.2 diesel Saab came last this respect. Johannes