Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 18:40:45 +0100 From: Colin Stamp <col.dustbinnospamp.plus.com> Subject: Re: "Throttle body" on 9-5 -- why!?
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 17:52:08 -0400, Malt_Hound <Malt_Houndnospamm*yahoo.com> wrote: >Colin Stamp wrote: >> >> Are you sure your 9-3 had an electronic throttle? In the UK at least, >> the 2000 9-3 LPT had a cable throttle. I had one for about a year >> before getting a 2001 Aero (which does have an electronic throttle). >> Both are manual and I didn't notice that problem on either car. > >Yes, definitely. Mine was a '00 9-3SE convertible, which has a FPT (the >H.O.T. engine) Ah, all the SEs I've come across have had LPT engines. I don't think the HOT engine option sold at-all well on the SE. >Perhaps the LPT was a better bet in that regard. I have >a feeling the HOT engine (at least that year) would have been better >paired up with an automatic as it had that terrible trailing throttle >delay and also a tendency to break loose the drive wheels in 1st through >3rd gear under heavy acceleration. Then you get into the whole torque >steer thing... I haven't noticed the trailing throttle problem on mine. You're definitely right about the traction problems though. I always thought it was mad to fit an open diff on a 210 BHP FWD car! The other problem on the HOT engine is the turbo lag. It was hardly noticeable on the LPT, but it's quite annoying on the Aero. > >I currently own 2 1998 900's. An SE with a 5 speed and an S with Auto. > Neither has the annoying tendency. I'm sure it was somehow related to >the programming for that engine. Could still be. Perhaps there is some emissions requirement there that we don't have here or something. There might even have been something wrong with it. Cheers, Colin.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
