Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 14:07:04 GMT From: Harvey White <madynnopsametcom.com> Subject: Re: 9-5 2000 Reliability
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:10:08 GMT, "Ed Korsberg" <nobodynopsamere.net> wrote: >I own a 9-5 SE 2000 (V6). >When I bought the car I had a slight preference for the V6 over the I4. >The V6 seemed a little smoother me but it may be my experience with >previous 4 cylinder engines. Previous 4 cylinder engines seemed just fine >during the test drives and initial owning period but after awhile they >seemed >noisy and weak. MY V6 experiences were more pleasant so I went for the >9-5 SE V6. > >In the 3 years I have owned the car, I've had the following done under >warrantee >1. engine starter replaced Same MY, 4 cyl. Starter replaced.. I think it must have been a bad run of starters... anybody with a 2000 MY 9-5 want to comment? >2. rear shock replaced unknown >3. instrument display SID replaced Ditto, and that's a known problem as well. >4. rear seat heater turnoff timer adjusted not mine. > >and then normal maintenance to replace tires and brakes and rotors and a >headlight bulb. about right, I suspect, depending on how you drive. >I also have an interior backlight on one of the panel controls that needs >replacement whenever >I bring the car in for service again. Interior backlights ought not to go out, but then again, they will fail as well. > >So is this good, bad, or normal? >PS I have 43,000 miles or roughly 68,000 km on it. > Roughly normal, afaik. Harvey >"Frederic Tremblay" <frederic.tremblaynopsaminal.com> wrote in message >news:273e16cf.0310150926.658d4c84nopsaming.google.com... >> 9-5 2000 Reliability >> >> Hi, >> i am looking for buying a 9-5 SE 2000 or 9-5 2000 with 60 000 km. >> They are the same price. Witch engine is the best? The V6 or I4. >> What is the reliability of these cars? >> >> Thanks! >
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
